The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology

T h e Ticklish 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 T h e m o r a l rights o f t h e a u t h o r have b e e n asserted 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 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A c a t a l o g u e r e c o r d f o r this b o o k is available from t h e British Library' Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A c a t a l o g r e c o r d f o r this b o o k is available f r o m t h e Library of C o n g r e s s T y p e s e t by SetSystems L t d , Saffron W a l d e n , Essex P r i n t e d by Biddies L t d , G u i l d f o r d a n d King's L y n n

WO ES WAR

A series f r o m V e r s o e d i t e d by Slavoj Zizek

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

L a c a n i a n psychoanalysis a n d Marxist tradition detonates a d y n a m i c

of

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. In the same S l a v o j Z i z e k , The Metastases

series:

of Enjoyment:

J e r e m y B e n t h a m , The Panopticon

Six Essays

Writings.

on Woman

and

Causality

E d i t e d a n d i n t r o d u c e d by M i r a n

Bozovic S l a v o j Z i z e k , The Indivisible

Remainder:

An

Essay

on Schelling

and

Related

of the East.

Trans­

Matters A l a i n G r o s r i c h a r d , The Sultan's

Court:

European

Fantasies

lated by Liz H e r o n a n d i n t r o d u c e d by M l a d e n D o l a r S l a v o j Z i z e k , The Plague R e n a t a S a l e c l , (Per)Versions

of

Fantasies of Love

and.

Hate

Forthcoming: A l e n k a Z u p a n c i c , Ethics Alain Badiou,

Ethics

of the Real:

Kant,

Lacan

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 . . .

Part I 1

1

T h e 'Night o f the World'

The Deadlock as a Reader

of Transcendental

7

Imagination,

or, Martin

Heidegger

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

2

The Hegelian

Ticklish

Subject

70

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

P a r t II 3

T h e Split Universality

The Politics

of Truth,

or, Alain

125 Badiou

as a Reader

of St Paul

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

127 and

I d e o l o g y - St Paul with B a d i o u - B e t w e e n the T w o D e a t h s T h e L a c a n i a n S u b j e c t - T h e Master o r the Analyst?

4

Political

Subjectivization

and Its Vicissitudes

171

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

-

Enter the Subject - W h y Are Ruling Ideas Not the Ideas o f 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 Progressive Eurocentrism? - T h e T h r e e Universals Multiculturalism - F o r a Leftist S u s p e n s i o n o f the Law - T h e Ambiguity o f Excremental Identification - Embracing the Act

Part III 5

F r o m S u b j e c t i o n to Subjective Destitution

Passionate

(Dis)Attachments,

or, Judith

Butler

as a Reader

245 of Freud

247

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 - F r o m Resistance to the Act - 'Traversing the Fantasy' - T h e Melancholic Double-Bind - T h e Real o f Sexual Difference 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

6

Whither

Oedipus?

313

T h e T h r e e Fathers - T h e Demise o f Symbolic Efficiency - T h e R i s k S o c i e t y a n d Its E n e m i e s - T h e Unbehagen S o c i e t y - I t ' s t h e PoliticalEconomy,

in the Risk

S t u p i d ! - R e t u r n s in t h e

R e a l - T h e E m p t y L a w - F r o m Phallus to t h e A c t - B e y o n d t h e Good

Index

401

Introduction: A Spectre Is Haunting Western Academia . . .

. . . the s p e c t r e o f t h e Cartesian subject. All a c a d e m i c powers have e n t e r e d i n t o a h o l y a l l i a n c e to e x o r c i z e this s p e c t r e : t h e N e w A g e

obscurantist

( w h o wants to s u p e r s e d e t h e ' C a r t e s i a n p a r a d i g m ' towards a n e w holistic approach)

and the postmodern

s i a n s u b j e c t is a d i s c u r s i v e

deconstructionist

fiction,

(for w h o m the Carte­

an effect o f d e c e n t r e d textual m e c h a n ­

i s m s ) ; t h e H a b e r m a s i a n t h e o r i s t o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( w h o insists o n a shift f r o m Cartesian m o n o l o g i c a l subjectivity to discursive intersubjectivity) a n d the Heideggerian proponent need

to

current prove

'traverse' ravaging

the

nihilism); the

empirically that

pandemonium

o f the t h o u g h t o f B e i n g ( w h o stresses the

horizon there

subjectivity c u l m i n a t i n g

in

cognitive scientist (who endeavours

of modern

to

is n o

unique

scene

o f the

Self, j u s t

a

o f c o m p e t i n g forces) and the D e e p Ecologist (who blames

Cartesian mechanicist materialism for providing the philosophical

foun­

dation for the ruthless exploitation o f n a t u r e ) ; the critical (post-)Marxist ( w h o insists t h a t t h e i l l u s o r y f r e e d o m o f t h e b o u r g e o i s t h i n k i n g s u b j e c t is rooted

in

class division)

a l l e g e d l y s e x l e s s cogito

and

the

feminist

(who

emphasizes

that

the

is i n f a c t a m a l e p a t r i a r c h a l f o r m a t i o n ) . W h e r e is

t h e a c a d e m i c o r i e n t a t i o n w h i c h h a s n o t b e e n a c c u s e d b y its o p p o n e n t s o f n o t yet properly disowning hurled back the branding

the Cartesian heritage? A n d which has reproach

not

o f C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y a g a i n s t its

m o r e ' r a d i c a l ' c r i t i c s , as w e l l as its ' r e a c t i o n a r y ' a d v e r s a r i e s ? T w o things r e s u l t f r o m this: 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. This

book

thus

endeavours

to

reassert

the

Cartesian

r e j e c t i o n f o r m s t h e s i l e n t p a c t o f all t h e s t r u g g l i n g

subject,

parties

whose

of

today's

a c a d e m i a : a l t h o u g h all t h e s e o r i e n t a t i o n s a r e o f f i c i a l l y i n v o l v e d i n a d e a d l y battle ( H a b e r m a s i a n s versus deconstrucdonists; cognitive scientists versus N e w A g e o b s c u r a n t i s t s . . . ) , t h e y a r e all u n i t e d i n t h e i r r e j e c t i o n o f t h e C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t . T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is n o t t o r e t u r n t o t h e cogito i n t h e guise in w h i c h

this n o t i o n

has d o m i n a t e d

modern

thought

(the

t r a n s p a r e n t t h i n k i n g s u b j e c t ) , b u t t o b r i n g t o l i g h t its f o r g o t t e n t h e e x c e s s i v e , u n a c k n o w l e d g e d k e r n e l o f t h e cogito,

self-

obverse,

w h i c h is f a r f r o m

the

pacifying i m a g e o f t h e t r a n s p a r e n t Self. T h e t h r e e parts o f t h e b o o k focus o n t o d a y ' s t h r e e m a i n f i e l d s i n w h i c h s u b j e c t i v i t y is at s t a k e : t h e of German

Idealism; post-Althusserian

structionist'

shift f r o m

positions

and

tradition

political philosophy; the

'decon-

S u b j e c t to the p r o b l e m a t i c o f multiple

subject-

subjectivizations.

1

E a c h p a r t starts with

a chapter

on

a

crucial a u t h o r whose work r e p r e s e n t s an e x e m p l a r y critique o f Cartesian subjectivity;

a second

fundamental

chapter

then

deals with

the

vicissitudes o f

the

n o t i o n that underlies the p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r (subjectivity in

G e r m a n I d e a l i s m ; 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 ; t h e ' O e d i p u s c o m p l e x ' as t h e psychoanalytic a c c o u n t o f the e m e r g e n c e o f the subject).P a r t I b e g i n s w i t h a d e t a i l e d confrontation traverse

the horizon

inherent

of modern

Cartesian

logic o f their philosophical

with

subjectivity.

Heidegger's

endeavour

to

again,

the

Again and

project compelled

the

authentic

p h i l o s o p h e r s o f subjectivity to articulate a certain excessive m o m e n t o f ' m a d n e s s ' i n h e r e n t t o cogito, w h i c h t h e y t h e n i m m e d i a t e l y e n d e a v o u r e d

to

'renormalizc'

in

Hegel,

etc.).

( t h e d i a b o l i c a l Evil i n K a n t , t h e And

the

problem

with

Heidegger

night o f the world' is t h a t

his

notion

of

m o d e r n subjectivity d o e s n o t a c c o u n t f o r this i n h e r e n t e x c e s s - it 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 cogi.to o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h L a c a n c l a i m s that

cogilo

is t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e

Unconscious. Heidegger's

f a t a l flaw is

clearly d i s c e r n i b l e in t h e failure o f his r e a d i n g o f K a n t : in his f o c u s o n transcendental

imagination,

Heidegger

misses

the

key

dimension

i m a g i n a t i o n : its d i s r u p t i v e , a n t i - s y n t h e t i c a s p e c t , w h i c h is a n o t h e r for

the

abyss o f f r e e d o m ;

this failure

also casts n e w light o n

q u e s t i o n o f H e i d e g g e r ' s Nazi e n g a g e m e n t . S o , after this the second chapter endeavours

of

name

the

old

confrontation,

t o e l a b o r a t e t h e s t a t u s o f s u b j e c t i v i t y in

3

I i \ l K U J L » U < - I H J . N

H e g e l , focusing on the link b e t w e e n the p h i l o s o p h i c a l n o t i o n o f reflexivity a n d the reflexive turn that characterizes the

(hysterical) subject o f the

Unconscious. P a r t II c o n t a i n s a systematic c o n f r o n t a t i o n with t h e f o u r

philosophers

w h o , i n o n e way o r a n o t h e r , t o o k A l t h u s s e r as t h e i r s t a r t i n g p o i n t ,

but

l a t e r , via a c r i t i c i s m o f A l t h u s s e r , d e v e l o p e d t h e i r o w n t h e o r y o f p o l i t i c a l subjectivity: L a c l a u ' s t h e o r y o f h e g e m o n y , B a l i b a r ' s t h e o r y o f R a n c i e r e ' s t h e o r y o f mesentente,

egaliberte,

B a d i o u ' s t h e o r y o f s u b j e c t i v i t y as f i d e l i t y t o

t h e T r u t h - E v e n t . T h e first c h a p t e r f o c u s e s o n B a d i o u ' s a t t e m p t t o f o r m u ­ late a 'politics o f truth' that could u n d e r m i n e

today's

deconstructionist

a n d / o r p o s t m o d e r n i s t s t a n c e , with a s p e c i a l e m p h a s i s o n his p a t h b r e a k i n g r e a d i n g o f S t Paul. A l t h o u g h I a m in solidarity with B a d i o u ' s a t t e m p t to r e a s s e r t 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 as t h e t r u e o p p o s i t e o f c a p i t a l i s t g l o b a l i s m , I r e j e c t h i s c r i t i c i s m o f L a c a n - t h a t is, h i s t h e s i s t h a t p s y c h o a ­ nalysis is n o t a b l e t o p r o v i d e t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f a n e w p o l i t i c a l p r a c t i c e . The

n e x t c h a p t e r a n a l y s e s t h e ways in w h i c h t h e f o u r a u t h o r s t a c k l e t h e

predominant

' p o s t - p o l i t i c a l ' l i b e r a l - d e m o c r a t i c s t a n c e w h i c h is t h e p o l i t i ­

cal m o d e o f today's g l o b a l capitalism, e a c h o f t h e m d e p l o y i n g his o w n version o f political subjectivization. P a r t I I I d e a l s with t h o s e t e n d e n c i e s o f t o d a y ' s ' p o s t m o d e r n ' thought

which,

against

the

spectre

of

the

political

(transcendental)

Subject,

e n d e a v o u r to assert the liberating proliferation o f t h e m u l t i p l e f o r m s o f s u b j e c t i v i t y - f e m i n i n e , gay, e t h n i c . . . . A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s o r i e n t a t i o n , o n e should a b a n d o n the impossible goal o f global social transformation

and,

instead, focus a t t e n t i o n o n the diverse forms o f asserting o n e ' s particular subjectivity in o u r c o m p l e x a n d d i s p e r s e d p o s t m o d e r n universe, in w h i c h c u l t u r a l r e c o g n i t i o n m a t t e r s m o r e t h a n s o c i o e c o n o m i c s t r u g g l e — t h a t is t o say, i n w h i c h c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s h a v e r e p l a c e d t h e c r i t i q u e o f p o l i t i c a l e c o n o m y . T h e most representative and persuasive version o f these

the­

o r i e s , w h o s e p r a c t i c a l e x p r e s s i o n is m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t ' i d e n t i t y p o l i t i e s ' , is Judith

Butler's performative

theory o f gender

formation.

^ c h a p t e r o f this p a r t e n g a g e s in a d e t a i l e d c o n f r o n t a t i o n

So the with

first

Butler's

w o r k , f o c u s i n g o n t h o s e o f its a s p e c t s w h i c h m a k e p o s s i b l e a p r o d u c t i v e d i a l o g u e with L a c a n i a n psychoanalysis ( h e r n o t i o n s o f ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h ­ m e n t s ' a n d t h e reflexive t u r n constitutive o f subjectivity). T h e last c h a p t e r t h e n d i r e c t l y c o n f r o n t s t h e k e y i s s u e o f ' O e d i p u s today'', is t h e s o - c a l l e d Oedipal m o d e o f subjectivization (the e m e r g e n c e o f the subject t h r o u g h the integration o f the symbolic prohibition Law)

embodied

in the

paternal

t o d a y r e a l l y in d e c l i n e ? A n d i f s o , w h a t is r e p l a c i n g it? I n a c o n ­

f r o n t a t i o n with the p r o p o n e n t s o f t h e ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i z a t i o n '

(Giddens,

THE TICKLISH

4

SUBJECT

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 multic 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 Capital,

or

is t h i s l o g i c j u s t

the

m e r e l y with

predominant

thrust

the

o f the

logic

of

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, mate

expression, the

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 ­

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 .

In h e r careful editing o f m y manuscripts for Verso, Gillian B e a u m o n t regularly c a t c h e s m e with m y (intellectual) pants down: h e r gaze u n e r r ­ ingly discerns repetitions in t h e line o f t h o u g h t , m o r o n i c i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s

INTRODUCTION of the argumentation,

false a t t r i b u t i o n s

5

a n d r e f e r e n c e s that display

lack o f g e n e r a l e d u c a t i o n , n o t to m e n t i o n h o w c a n I n o t f e e l a s h a m e d , a n d t h u s hate

the awkwardness

my

o f style

her? O n the other hand,

she

h a s e v e r y r e a s o n t o h a t e me. I c o n s t a n t l y b o m b a r d h e r w i t h l a t e i n s e r t i o n s a n d c h a n g e s o f t h e m a n u s c r i p t , so that I c a n easily i m a g i n e h e r possessing a v o o d o o doll o f m e a n d p i e r c i n g it in t h e e v e n i n g s with a g i g a n t i c n e e d l e . This mutual

h a t r e d , as t h e y w o u l d h a v e p u t it i n t h e g o o d o l d d a y s o f

classic Hollywood, signals t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a beautiful

friendship,

so I

d e d i c a t e this b o o k to h e r .

Notes 1. F o r a detailed c o n f r o n t a t i o n with t h e critical rejection o f the Cartesian subjectivity in cognitive sciences, see Slavoj Zizek, ' T h e Cartesian Subject versus t h e Cartesian T h e a t r e ' , in Cogito and the. Unroturious, eel. Slavoj Ziiek, D u r h a m , NC: D u k e University Press 1 9 9 8 . 2. Interestingly e n o u g h , t h e t h r e e p a r t s also c o r r e s p o n d to t h e g e o g r a p h i c triad o f G e r m a n / F r e n c h / A n g l o - A m e r i c a n tradition: G o r m a n Idealism, F r e n c h political philosophy, A n g l o - A m e r i c a n cultural studies.

The 'Night of the World'

1

The Deadlock of Transcendental Imagination, or, Martin Heidegger as a Reader of Kant

One

o f the enigmatic features

o f 'progressive' postmodernist

thought,

f r o m D e r r i d a t o F r e d r i c J a m e s o n , lies i n its a m b i g u o u s r e l a t i o n s h i p Heidegger's philosophy.

H e i d e g g e r is t r e a t e d

with

due

respect,

to

often

r e f e r r e d t o i n a n o n c o m m i t t a l way, t h e way o n e r e f e r s t o a n u n d i s p u t e d a u t h o r i t y ; y e t , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , a n u n e a s e , n e v e r fully e x p l i c a t e d , p r e v e n t s full e n d o r s e m e n t o f h i s p o s i t i o n , as i f a k i n d o f i n v i s i b l e p r o h i b i t i o n t e l l s us that s o m e t h i n g m u s t b e f u n d a m e n t a l l y w r o n g with H e i d e g g e r , a l t h o u g h w e a r e n o t ( y e t ) i n a p o s i t i o n t o d e t e r m i n e w h a t t h i s is. E v e n w h e n a u t h o r s d o r i s k a full c o n f r o n t a t i o n with H e i d e g g e r ( a s D e r r i d a d o e s i n On 1

Spirit ),

t h e r e s u l t is, as a r u l e , a m b i g u o u s ; o n e e n d e a v o u r s

d i s t a n c e f r o m H e i d e g g e r while s o m e h o w staying o n his p a t h

the

to gain

a

(Heidegger

still r e m a i n s a p h i l o s o p h e r o f O r i g i n s a n d a u t h e n t i c P r e s e n c e , a l t h o u g h h e did the m o s t to ' d e c o n s t r u c t ' the metaphysical logic o f Origins . . . ) . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h o s e w h o a d o p t o n e o f t h e two e x t r e m e p o s i t i o n s , a n d e i t h e r e n g a g e in a desperate appropriation

of Heidegger

2

ing ) or propose a thorough

attempt

at a politically 'progressive'

(like R e i n e r S c h u m a n n ' s r e j e c t i o n o f his t h o u g h t

'anarchic'

4

L y o t a r d ) , c a n b e c o n v i n c i n g l y d i s m i s s e d as d e a l i n g w i t h image

of Heidegger

that

does

not

live u p

to his

read­

(like A d o r n o own

a

3

or

simplified

philosophical

s t r i n g e n c y . T h e e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l r o o t s o f this d e a d l o c k o f t h e d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t r e f e r e n c e t o H e i d e g g e r w e r e p e r h a p s b e s t f o r m u l a t e d by D c r r i d a in his interview with J e a n - L u c Nancy: I believe in the force and the necessity (and t h e r e f o r e in a certain irreversibility) o f the act by which H e i d e g g e r substitutes a certain c o n c e p t o f Dasein for a c o n c e p t o f subject still t o o m a r k e d by the traits o f the b e i n g as vorhanden. and

10

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

h e n c e by an interpretation o f time, a n d insufficiently q u e s t i o n e d in its ontological structure . . . T h e time a n d space o f this d i s p l a c e m e n t o p e n e d up a gap, m a r k e d a gap, they left fragile, o r r e c a l l e d the essential o n t o l o g i c a l fragility of, the ethical, j u r i d i c a l , and political foundations o f d e m o c r a c y a n d o f every discourse that o n e can o p p o s e to National Socialism in all its forms ( t h e 'worst' ones, or those that H e i d e g g e r and o t h e r s m i g h t have t h o u g h t o f o p p o s i n g ) . T h e s e foundations were and remain essentially sealed within a philosophy o f the subject. O n e can quickly perceive the question, which might also b e the task: can o n e take into a c c o u n t the necessity o f the existential analytic and what it shatters in the subject a n d fcan o n e l turn towards an ethics, a politics (are these words still a p p r o p r i a t e ? ) , i n d e e d an ' o t h e r ' d e m o c r a c y (would it still be a d e m o c r a c y ? ) , in any case towards a n o t h e r type o f responsibility that safeguards against what a m o m e n t ago I very quickly called the 'worst'? . . . 1 think that there arc a certain n u m b e r o f us who are working for just this, a n d it can only take place byway o f a long and slow trajectory/' 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 Heideggerians, o f course, would

Enlightenment.

retort that o n e c a n n o t simply

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 '

oppose

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 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 wholly freed o f the t r a n s c e n d e n t a l The

same

ambiguity

also

and

Time

Nazi

was n o t y e t

approach.)

seems

to

determine

Lacan's

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

own

(often

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 external and

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

didactic). Against the b a c k g r o u n d

as

purely

o f this i m b r o g l i o ,

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 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

our

'defenders (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

o f H e i d e g g e r ' s n o t i o n o f t h e nihilism i n h e r e n t to m o d e r n subjectivity, b u t also to l o c a t e t h e p o i n t o f t h e i n h e r e n t failure o f H e i d e g g e r ' s p h i l o s o p h i ­ cal edifice, up to die often-discussed q u e s t i o n o f the eventual philosophi­ cal r o o t s o f his Nazi e n g a g e m e n t .

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 L e t us t a k e as o u r

starting point

Nietzsche's critique o f Wagner:

this

c r i t i q u e was a p p r o p r i a t e d b y H e i d e g g e r as t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e j e c t i o n o f all c r i t i q u e s o f s u b j e c t i v i s m t h a t r e m a i n w i t h i n t h e h o r i z o n o f C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y (say, o f t h e l i b e r a l - d e m o c r a t i c c r i t i c i s m s o f t h e excess

o f subjectivity). Nietzsche

possessed

an

unerring

'totalitarian' instinct

that

e n a b l e d h i m to d i s c e r n , b e h i n d t h e sage w h o p r e a c h e s t h e d e n i a l o f the W i l l t o L i f e , t h e resseritiment

o f t h e t h w a r t e d will: S c h o p e n h a u e r a n d

his

l i k e a r e c o m i c a l figures w h o c o n v e r t e d a n d e l e v a t e d t h e i r i m p o t e n t e n v y , t h e i r lack o f life-asserting creativity, i n t o t h e p o s e o f r e s i g n e d

wisdom.

( D o e s n o t N i e t z s c h e ' s diagnosis also h o l d for today's a t t e m p t s to 'over­ c o m e ' t h e C a r t e s i a n p a r a d i g m o f d o m i n a t i o n by m e a n s o f a n e w h o l i s t i c attitude

of renouncing

anthropocentrism,

of

humbly

learning

from

ancient cultures, etc.?) I n h i s p r o j e c t o f ' o v e r c o m i n g ' m e t a p h y s i c s , H e i d e g g e r fully e n d o r s e s this N i e t z s c h e a n dismissal o f q u i c k a n d easy exits f r o m m e t a p h y s i c s : the o n l y r e a l way t o b r e a k t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l c l o s u r e is t o ' p a s s t h r o u g h it' i n its m o s t d a n g e r o u s f o r m , to e n d u r e t h e p a i n o f m e t a p h y s i c a l n i h i l i s m a t its m o s t e x t r e m e , w h i c h m e a n s t h a t o n e s h o u l d r e j e c t as f u t i l e all f a l s e s e d a t i v e s , all d i r e c t a t t e m p t s t o s u s p e n d t h e m a d v i c i o u s c y c l e o f m o d e r n t e c h n o l o g y by m e a n s o f a return to p r e m o d c r n traditional W i s d o m (from C h r i s t i a n i t y to O r i e n t a l t h o u g h t ) , all a t t e m p t s t o r e d u c e modern

the threat o f

t e c h n o l o g y to the effect o f s o m e o n l i c social wrong

(capitalist

exploitation, patriarchal domination, 'mechanicist paradigm' . . . ) . These a t t e m p t s a r e n o t o n l y i n e f f e c t u a l : t h e t r u e p r o b l e m w i t h t h e m is t h a t , o n a d e e p e r l e v e l , t h e y i n c i t e t h e evil t h e y a r e f i g h t i n g e v e n f u r t h e r .

An

e x c e l l e n t e x a m p l e h e r e is t h e e c o l o g i c a l c r i s i s : t h e m o m e n t we r e d u c e it to disturbances p r o v o k e d by o u r excessive t e c h n o l o g i c a l exploitation o f n a t u r e , w e s i l e n t l y a l r e a d y s u r m i s e t h a t t h e s o l u t i o n is t o r e l y a g a i n t e c h n o l o g i c a l i n n o v a t i o n s : n e w ' g r e e n ' t e c h n o l o g y , more efficient in

its control

of natural

processes

and, human

resources.

and

on global

. . . Every-" c o n c r e t e

e c o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n a n d p r o j e c t to c h a n g e t e c h n o l o g y i n o r d e r t o i m p r o v e

THE TICKLISH

12

SUBJECT

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 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 t h e r e is another

0

p o l i t i c a l f o r m w h i c h suits t h i s

n o n e t h e less suggests

ecological e s s e n c e

that

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 mobilization'

(but,

significantly, never

in

Communism,

13

which

always

r e m a i n s f o r h i m e p o c h a l l y t h e s a m e as A m e r i c a n i s m . . . ) . H e i d e g g e r , o f course, emphasizes again and again how the ontological dimension o f N a z i s m is n o t t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h N a z i s m as a n o n t i c i d e o l o g i c o - p o l i t i c a l o r d e r ; i n t h e w e l l - k n o w n p a s s a g e f r o m An Introduction

to Metaphysics,

for

e x a m p l e , h e r e p u d i a t e s t h e N a z i b i o l o g i s t r a c e i d e o l o g y as s o m e t h i n g t h a t totally misses t h e ' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' o f t h e Nazi m o v e m e n t , w h i c h lies in 7

t h e e n c o u n t e r b e t w e e n m o d e r n m a n a n d t e c h n o l o g y . N o n e t h e less, t h e fact r e m a i n s

that H e i d e g g e r

never

speaks o f the

'inner

greatness'

of,

say, l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y - as i f l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y is j u s t t h a t , a s u p e r f i c i a l w o r l d - v i e w with

no

underlying

dimension

o f assuming

one's

epochal

Destiny. . . . " A p r o p o s o f t h i s p r e c i s e p o i n t , I m y s e l f r u n i n t o m y first t r o u b l e w i t h H e i d e g g e r ( s i n c e I b e g a n as a H e i d e g g e r i a n - m y first p u b l i s h e d b o o k was o n H e i d e g g e r a n d l a n g u a g e ) . W h e n , in m y y o u t h , I was b o m b a r d e d

by

t h e official C o m m u n i s t p h i l o s o p h e r s ' stories o f H e i d e g g e r ' s Nazi e n g a g e ­ m e n t , they left m e r a t h e r c o l d ; I was definitely m o r e o n t h e side o f t h e Y u g o s l a v H e i d e g g e r i a n s . All o f a s u d d e n , h o w e v e r , I b e c a m e a w a r e o f how these Yugoslav Heideggerians were doing

exactly the same

thing

w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e Y u g o s l a v i d e o l o g y o f s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t as H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f d i d with r e s p e c t to N a z i s m : in ex-Yugoslavia, H e i d e g g e r i a n s e n t e r ­ t a i n e d t h e s a m e a m b i g u o u s l y a s s e r t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p t o w a r d s S o c i a l i s t selfm a n a g e m e n t , the official i d e o l o g y o f t h e C o m m u n i s t r e g i m e - in e y e s , t h e e s s e n c e o f s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t was t h e v e r y e s s e n c e o f

their

modern

m a n , w h i c h is w h y t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l n o t i o n o f s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t s u i t s t h e ontological essence o f o u r e p o c h , while the standard political ideology o f L

the r e g i m e misses this ' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' o f s e l f m a n a g e m e n t . . . H e i d e g ­ g e r i a n s are thus e t e r n a l l y in s e a r c h o f a positive, o n t i c political systenTtEat would c o m e closest to the e p o c h a l o n t o l o g i c a l truth, a strategy which i n e v i t a b l y l e a d s t o e r r o r ( w h i c h , o f c o u r s e , is always a c k n o w l e d g e d o n l y r e t r o a c t i v e l y , post factum,

after the disastrous o u t c o m e o f o n e ' s e n g a g e m e n t ) .

A s H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f p u t it, t h o s e w h o c a m e c l o s e s t t o t h e o n t o l o g i c a l T r u t h a r e c o n d e m n e d to e r r at t h e o n t i c level . . . e r r a b o u t what? P r e c i s e l y about the line o f separation between ontic and ontological. T h e p a r a d o x n o t to b e u n d e r e s t i m a t e d

is t h a t t h e v e r y p h i l o s o p h e r w h o f o c u s e d h i s

interest on the e n i g m a o f ontological difference - who warned again and again against the metaphysical mistake o f c o n f e r r i n g ontological dignity Qji s o m e o n t i c c o n t e n t ( G o d as t h e h i g h e s t E n t i t y , f o r e x a m p l e ) - fell i n t o the trap o f conferring o n Nazism the ontological dignity o f suiting

the

essence o f m o d e r n m a n . T h e standard defence o f H e i d e g g e r against the

THE TICKLISH

14

SUBJECT

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]', 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

as H e i d e g ­

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

totalitariarnsm.

us

to

discern

the

However, what remains

true

epochal

roots

unthought here

of

is t h e

modern 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

horizon

universe

o f t e c h n o l o g y are

already

embedded

in

the

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 , because

but

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

|

recognize that the gap separating the direct ideological legitimization o f

itself p r o f o u n d l y

metaphysical, in

so far

as i t fails

to

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 that, far f r o m

'science doesn't

scientific progress.)

and of

In o t h e r words, what H e i d e g g e r seems u n a b l e

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 constitutive

think'

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

blindness

-

as i f t h e

moment

we

to

its n e c e s s a r y ,

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 t o p r e s e n t - a t - h a n d i n Being

and Time.

ready-at-hand

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

derivative m o d e

'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

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

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

a

the

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

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

becomes and

Time

somewhat 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 simply overlap: when a p r e m o d e r n

not

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 'representations'?

It seems

as i f t h i s

'authentic'

tension

between

in 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'

o n t o l o g y . S o we

have

p a i r o f das Man

four

positions: the

and traditional tension

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,

in

metaphysical

e v e r y d a y life

as w e l l as t h e

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

of

traditional

things,

authentic

existential resoluteness

and

the

be­

tension run

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'

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

dimension

is

thus

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 H e i d e g g e r ' s n a m e f o r 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 ! Ent-Wurfi

17

indicates

the f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy by m e a n s o f which the s u b j e c t ' m a k e s sense o f acquires the [geworfen],

co-ordinates o f -

in w h i c h h e

problematic

here

finds

is t h a t

the

situation

into which

he

is

himself, disorientated and lost.

Heidegger

uses

the

notion

1 0

of

-

thrown W h a t is

Geuiorfeniieit,

' t h r o w n n e s s ' , i n t o a f i n i t e c o n t i n g e n t s i t u a t i o n , a n d t h e n o f Entwurf,

the

a c T o f a u t h e n t i c a l l y c h o o s i n g o n e ' s way, o n t w o l e v e l s w h o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p is not t h o u g h t o u t : t h e i n d i v i d u a l a n d t h e c o l l e c t i v e o n e . O n t h e i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l , t h e a u t h e n t i c e n c o u n t e r w i t h d e a t h , w h i c h is 'always o n l y m i n e ' , 'enables m e to p r o j e c t m y future in an authentic act o f choice; b u t then, a c o m m u n i t y is a l s o d e t e r m i n e d as b e i n g t h r o w n i n t o a c o n t i n g e n t s i t u a t i o n ' w i t h i n w h i c h it m u s t c h o o s e - a s s u m e its d e s t i n y . H e i d e g g e r p a s s e s the individual to the s o c i e t a l level by m e a n s o f t h e n o t i o n o f

from

repetition::.

' T h e a u t h e n t i c repetition o f a possibility o f e x i s t e n c e that has b e e n p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t Dasein

the

m a y c h o o s e its h e r o - is g r o u n d e d e x i s t e n t i a l l y i n

anticipatory resoluteness.'

1 1

T h e b a c k g r o u n d h e r e is u n m i s t a k a b l y K i e r k e -

g a a r d i a n : a t r u e C h r i s t i a n c o m m u n i t y is g r o u n d e d i n t h e f a c t t h a t e a c h o f its m e m b e r s h a s t o r e p e a t t h e m o d e o f e x i s t e n c e f r e e l y a s s u m e d b y C h r i s t , their hero. T h i s p a s s a g e f r o m t h e ' t h r o w n p r o j e c t i o n ' o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l Dasein

who,

in a n a c t o f a n t i c i p a t o r y d e c i s i o n , a c h i e v e s a n a u t h e n t i c m o d e o f b e i n g , 'freely c h o o s e s h i s f a t e , ' t o a h u m a n c o m m u n i t y o f a P e o p l e w h i c h a l s o , in

a

collective act o f anticipatory

decision

qua

repetition

of a

past

p o s s i b i l i t y , a u t h e n t i c a l l y a s s u m e s its h i s t o r i a l D e s t i n y , is n o t p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l l y g r o u n d e d i n a n a d e q u a t e way. T h e medium

o f collective (societal)

b e i n g - t h e r e is n o t p r o p e r l y d e p l o y e d : w h a t H e i d e g g e r s e e m s to b e m i s s i n g is s i m p l y t h a t w h i c h H e g e l d e s i g n a t e d as ' o b j e c t i v e S p i r i t ' , t h e s y m b o l i c big O t h e r , t h e

'objectified' domain

o f symbolic mandates, a n d so

""winch is not yet t h e ' i m p e r s o n a l ' das Man, immersion

in

a traditional

b u t a l s o no longer

the

on,

premodern

way o f life. T h i s i l l e g i t i m a t e s h o r t

circuit

\ B e t w e e n i n d i v i d u a l a n d c o l l e c t i v e l e v e l is a t t h e r o o t o f H e i d e g g e r ' s ' F a s c i s t 'j t e m p t a t i o n ' ; a t t h i s p o i n t , t h e i m p l i c i t p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f Being

and Time is a t

t its s t r o n g e s t : d o e s n o t t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m o d e r n d i s p e r s e d s o c i e t y o f das Man,

anonymous

with p e o p l e busy following t h e i r everyday

p r e o c c u p a t i o n s , a n d t h e P e o p l e a u t h e n t i c a l l y a s s u m i n g its D e s t i n y , r e s o n ­ ate w i t h t h e o p p o s i t i o n civilization

o f frenetic

between the decadent modern false

activity a n d

the

'Americanized'

conservative

'authentic'

r e s p o n s e t o it? T h i s is n o t t o c l a i m t h a t H e i d e g g e r ' s n o t i o n o f h i s t o r i c a l r e p e t i t i o n as c o i n c i d i n g w i t h a u t h e n t i c a n t i c i p a t o r y p r o j e c t i o n is n o t a n e x e m p l a r y c a s e

18

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

o f analysis. T h e key p o i n t n o t to b e m i s s e d in H e i d e g g e r ' s analysis o f h i s t o r i c i t y p r o p e r is t h e i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n o f t h e t h r e e t e m p o r a l e x t a s e s o f t i m e : w h e n h e s p e a k s o f ' t h r o w n p r o j e c t i o n ' , this d o e s n o t s i m p l y m e a n t h a t a f i n i t e a g e n t f i n d s i t s e l f in a s i t u a t i o n t h a t l i m i t s its o p t i o n s ; t h a t i t t h e n a n a l y s e s t h e p o t e n t i a l i t i e s a l l o w e d f o r b y t h i s f i n i t e s i t u a t i o n , b y its c o n d i t i o n , c h o o s e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y w h i c h b e s t fits its i n t e r e s t s a n d a s s u m e s it as its p r o j e c t . T h e p o i n t is t h a t t h e f u t u r e h a s a p r i m a c y : t o b e a b l e to d i s c e r n t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o p e n e d u p b y t h e t r a d i t i o n i n t o w h i c h a n a g e n t is thrown, o n e m u s t already a c k n o w l e d g e o n e ' s e n g a g e m e n t in a p r o j e c t t h a t is t o s a y , ( t h e m o v e m e n t o f r e p e t i t i o n j as it w e r e , r e t r o a c t i v e l y r e v e a l s ( a n d t h u s fully a c t u a l i z e s ) t h a t w h i c h it r e p e a t s . F o r this r e a s o n , H e i d e g g e r ' s ' d e c i s i o n ' , in the p r e c i s e s e n s e o f anticipa­ tory resoluteness

[Ent-Schlossenheit],

h a s t h e s t a t u s o f a forced

choice,

H c i d e g g e r i a n d e c i s i o n qua r e p e t i t i o n , is n o t a ' f r e e c h o i c e ' i n t h e

the usual

sense o f the term. ( S u c h a n o t i o n o f freely c h o o s i n g b e t w e e n alternative p o s s i b i l i t i e s is u t t e r l y f o r e i g n t o H e i d e g g e r ; h e d i s m i s s e s it as b e l o n g i n g to s u p e r f i c i a l A m e r i c a n i z e d l i b e r a l i n d i v i d u a l i s m . ) R a t h e r , i t is f u n d a m e n t a l l y the

c h o i c e o f 'freely assuming'

one's imposed

destiny. T h i s

paradox,

n e c e s s a r y i f o n e is t o a v o i d t h e v u l g a r l i b e r a l n o t i o n o f f r e e d o m o f c h o i c e , i n d i c a t e s t h e t h e o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m a t i c o f predestination decision/choice

(not a choice between

and

Grace:

a true

a series o f objects leaving

my

subjective p o s i t i o n intact, b u t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l c h o i c e by m e a n s o f w h i c h I ' c h o o s e m y s e l f ) p r e s u p p o s e s t h a t 1 a s s u m e a passive attitude o f 'letting m y s e l f b e c h o s e n ' - i n s h o r t , free choice

and

Grace

are strictly

equivalent,

as D e l e u z e p u t it, w e r e a l l y c h o o s e o n l y w h e n w e a r e chosen: b i e n , n e c h o i s i t e f f e c t i v e m e n t q u e c e l u i q u i est c h o i s i . ' To

or,

'Ne choisit

1 2

dispel t h e n o t i o n t h a t we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with an

obscurantist-

t h e o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m a t i c , l e t us e v o k e a m o r e telling leftist e x a m p l e o f proletarian

class i n t e r p e l l a t i o n : w h e n

a s u b j e c t r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f as a

p r o l e t a r i a n revolutionary, w h e n h e freely a s s u m e s a n d identifies with the t a s k o f r e v o l u t i o n , h e r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f as b e i n g c h o s e n b y H i s t o r y to a c c o m p l i s h this task. I n g e n e r a l , t h e A l t h u s s e r i a n n o t i o n o f i d e o l o g i c a l interpellation involves the situation o f ' f o r c e d c h o i c e ' by m e a n s o f which the s u b j e c t e m e r g e s o u t o f t h e act o f freely c h o o s i n g t h e inevitable -

that

is, i n w h i c h s h e / h e is g i v e n t h e f r e e d o m o f c h o i c e o n c o n d i t i o n t h a t s h e / he

makes

the

right

choice:

when

an

individual

is a d d r e s s e d

by

i n t e r p e l l a t i o n , s h e / h e is ' i n v i t e d t o p l a y a r o l e in s u c h a way t h a t

an the

i n v i t a t i o n a p p e a r s t o h a v e a l r e a d y b e e n a n s w e r e d b y t h e s u b j e c t b e f o r e it was p r o p o s e d , b u t at t h e s a m e t i m e t h e i n v i t a t i o n c o u l d b e

refused'.

1 1

T h e r e i n lies t h e i d e o l o g i c a l a c t o f r e c o g n i t i o n , i n w h i c h I r e c o g n i z e m y s e l 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

19

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: •' are in s o m e ways p r o d u c e d by decisions, that is, t h e r e is a certain r e d o u b l i n g o f decision-making. . . . T h e r e is first the decision to mark or delimit the c o n t e x t in which a decision [on what kinds o f differences ought not to b e i n c l u d e d in a given polity] will be m a d e , a n d then t h e r e is the m a r k i n g off o f certain kinds o f differences as inadmissible. 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'

paradox? Does n o t the primordial

a way t o e x p l a i n

'exclusion' which

grounds

( 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

this

decision

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

the

conservative o n

SUBJECT

practically everything

except

the essential,

except a

s o m e t i m e s tiny f e a t u r e w h i c h , n o n e t h e less, c h a n g e s e v e r y t h i n g . As f o r H e i d e g g e r ' s n o t i o n o f a u t h e n t i c c h o i c e as a r e p e t i t i o n , t h e p a r a l l e l w i t h B e n j a m i n ' s n o t i o n o f r e v o l u t i o n as r e p e t i t i o n , e l u c i d a t e d i n h i s ' T h e s e s on

the

Philosophy

o f History',

1 4

is s t r i k i n g :

here

also, revolution

is

c o n c e p t u a l i z e d as a r e p e t i t i o n t h a t r e a l i z e s t h e h i d d e n p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e past, so that a p r o p e r view o f t h e past ( t h e o n e t h a t p e r c e i v e s t h e past n o t as a c l o s e d s e t o f f a c t s b u t as o p e n , as i n v o l v i n g a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t f a i l e d , o r was r e p r e s s e d , i n its a c t u a l i t y ) o p e n s o n l y f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f a n a g e n t e n g a g e d i n a p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n . T h e p r e s e n t r e v o l u t i o n , i n its a t t e m p t to liberate

the

working

class,

also

retroactively

redeems

all

failed

past

a t t e m p t s a t l i b e r a t i o n - t h a t is t o say, t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f a p r e s e n t a g e n t engaged

in

a

revolutionary

project suddenly

makes

visible w h a t

the

o b j e c t i v i s t / p o s i t i v i s t h i s t o r i o g r a p h y , c o n s t r a i n e d t o f a c t i c i t y , is b y d e f i n i ­ tion b l i n d to: the h i d d e n potentialities o f l i b e r a t i o n that were c r u s h e d by the victorious march o f the forces o f domination. R e a d i n t h i s way, t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o n o f t h e p a s t t h r o u g h its r e p e t i t i o n i n an anticipatory d e c i s i o n that e n a c t s a p r o j e c t - this identification o f fate a n d f r e e d o m , o f a s s u m i n g o n e ' s D e s t i n y as t h e h i g h e s t

(albeit forced)

f r e e c h o i c e - d o e s not i n v o l v e a s i m p l e N i e t z s c h e a n p o i n t t h a t e v e n

the

m o s t neutral description o f the past serves the p r e s e n t purposes o f s o m e power-political project. O n e m u s t insist h e r e o n t h e o p p o s i t i o n

between

the appropriation o f the past from the standpoint o f those who rule (the n a r r a t i v e o f p a s t h i s t o r y as t h e e v o l u t i o n l e a d i n g t o a n d l e g i t i m a t i n g t h e i r triumph) and the appropriation

o f t h a t w h i c h , i n t h e p a s t , r e m a i n e d its

Utopian a n d f a i l e d ( ' r e p r e s s e d ' ) p o t e n t i a l i t y . W h a t H e i d e g g e r ' s d e s c r i p ­ tion

l a c k s is t h u s - t o p u t it i n a d i r e c t a n d s o m e w h a t c r u d e way - i n s i g h t

i n t o t h e r a d i c a l l y antagonistic

n a t u r e o f every h i t h e r t o c o m m u n a l way o f

life. H e i d e g g e r ' s o n t o l o g y is t h u s i n f a c t ' p o l i t i c a l ' ( t o r e f e r t o t h e B o u r d i e u ' s b o o k o n H e i d e g g e r ) : his e n d e a v o u r

title

to b r e a k t h r o u g h

d i t i o n a l o n t o l o g y , a n d t o a s s e r t as t h e k e y t o t h e ' s e n s e o f b e i n g '

of tra­

man's

d e c i s i o n to a d o p t a ' p r o j e c t ' by m e a n s o f w h i c h h e actively a s s u m e s his 'thrownness' into a finite historical situation, locates the historico-political a c t o f d e c i s i o n in t h e v e r y h e a r t o f o n t o l o g y i t s e l f : t h e v e r y c h o i c e o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l f o r m o f Dasein decision not grounded

is i n a s e n s e ' p o l i t i c a l ' , it c o n s i s t s i n a n a b y s s a l in a n y u n i v e r s a l o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e . T h u s

the

standard Habermasian liberal argumentation which locates the source o f H e i d e g g e r ' s Fascist t e m p t a t i o n in his ' i r r a t i o n a l ' d e c i s i o n i s m , in his r e j e c ­ tion

of

any

universal

rational-normative

criteria

for

political

activity,

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

21

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. ^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

In a perverted

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, freedom: vns

1 5

o f the

abyss o f

human

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 '

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 ( 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 leads

back

to

transcendental

subjectivism:

owing

to

the

Kehre

and,

Time

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

THE TICKLISH

22

SUBJECT

'false r e s o l u t i o n ' i n t h e way H a b e r m a s ' s p r o j e c t relates to A d o r n o ' s a n d Horkheimcr's

'dialectic o f Enlightenment'.

T h e latter

is a l s o

a

self-

d e f e a t i n g p r o j e c t , a g i g a n t i c f a i l u r e ; a n d , a g a i n , w h a t H a b e r m a s d o e s is t o resolve the u n b e a r a b l e

tension

o f the 'dialectic o f E n l i g h t e n m e n t '

by

i n t r o d u c i n g a d i s t i n c t i o n , a k i n d o f ' d i v i s i o n o f l a b o u r ' , b e t w e e n t h e two dimensions, production

and symbolic interaction

(in a strict h o m o l o g y

w i d i S c h e l l i n g , w h o d i s s o l v e s t h e t e n s i o n o f t h e Weltalter

by introducing

the distinction between 'negative' a n d 'positive' philosophy). O u r point is t h a t

enacts an analogous

false

r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e i n h e r e n t d e a d l o c k o f t h e o r i g i n a l p r o j e c t o f Being

Heidegger's

late

'thought

o f Being'

and

1

Time? '

W h y D i d Being W h y is H e i d e g g e r ' s Kant

and Time

R e m a i n Unfinished? 7

and the Problem

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

of Metaphysics'

and Time,

crucial here? L e t

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,

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. simply to imagine t h e

finished

v e r s i o n o f Being

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 .

was t h e a b u n d a n c e

of

O u r p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is n o t and. Time,

the impediment

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

have

of Metaphysics,

Kant

and

the Problem

was a c c o m p l i s h e d : n o t o n l y d o w e 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 cover precisely the remaining

Problems

of Phenomenology)

d o loosely

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 project.

Furthermore,

perhaps

even

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

more

enigmatic

and

Time

is t h e f a c t

that

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

w i t h h e r e is t h u s t h e o p p o s i t e o f t h e s t a n d a r d n o t i o n o f ' c l o s u r e ' conceals Being

or

and

'sutures'

Time,

the

persisting

openness

that

( i n c o n c l u s i v e n e s s ) : with

it is r a t h e r as i f H e i d e g g e r ' s i n s i s t e n c e t h a t t h e p u b l i s h e d

b o o k is j u s t a f r a g m e n t c o n c e a l s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e b o o k is c l o s e d , f i n i s h e d . T h e c o n c l u d i n g c h a p t e r s ( o n h i s t o r i c i t y ) c a n n o t b u t s t r i k e us as a r t i f i c i a l l y a d d e d , as i f t o a d d t o t h e c l o s u r e a h a s t i l y c o n c o c t e d a t t e m p t t o d e s i g n a t e another dimension (that o f collective forms o f historicity), for which there is n o p r o p e r p l a c e i n t h e o r i g i n a l p r o j e c t . . . . I f t h e p u b l i s h e d Being

and

Time

1 8

w e r e to c o v e r t h e e n t i r e P a r t I o f t h e

o r i g i n a l p r o j e c t , o n e c o u l d still s o m e h o w j u s t i f y t h i s p e r c e p t i o n o f w h o l e ­ n e s s . ( W e d i d g e t t h e e n t i r e ' s y s t e m a t i c ' p a r t ; w h a t is m i s s i n g is m e r e l y t h e ' h i s t o r i c ' part, the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e t h r e e key m o m e n t s in t h e history o f Western metaphysics - Aristotle, Descartes, K a n t - whose radicalized ' r e p e t i t i o n ' is H e i d e g g e r ' s o w n a n a l y t i c o f Dasein.)

Obviously, the i n h e r e n t

i m p e d i m e n t , the barrier preventing the c o m p l e t i o n o f the project, already affects t h e last s e c t i o n o f P a r t I. I f we leave aside t h e p r o b l e m o f n o n publication

o f the

texts

(lecture

notes)

covering

the

remaining

two

s e c t i o n s o f P a r t I I ( d o e s it h a v e s o m e t h i n g t o d o w i t h t h e e n i g m a t i c s t a t u s o f i m a g i n a t i o n i n A r i s t o t l e , as d e m o n s t r a t e d b y C a s t o r i a d i s , t h e s t a t u s t h a t e x p l o d e s t h e o n t o l o g i c a l edifice? o r with the s a m e i m p l i c i t a n t i - o n t o l o g i c a l t h r u s t o f t h e C a r t e s i a n cogito

as t h e first a n n o u n c e m e n t o f t h e ' n i g h t o f

t h e w o r l d ' ? ) , t h e e n i g m a is: why was H e i d e g g e r u n a b l e t o a c c o m p l i s h h i s v e r y s y s t e m a t i c e x p l o r a t i o n o f t i m e as t h e h o r i z o n o f B e i n g ? T h e s t a n d a r d , ' o f f i c i a l ' a n s w e r is w e l l k n o w n : b e c a u s e it b e c a m e c l e a r t o h i m t h a t approach

o f Being

and

Time

was still t o o

the

metaphysical/transcendental,

' m e t h o d o l o g i c a l ' , i n p r o c e e d i n g f r o m Dasein

to the question o f B e i n g ,

i n s t e a d o f d i r e c t l y a p p r o a c h i n g t h e t e m p o r a l D i s c l o s u r e o f B e i n g as t h a t w h i c h s u s t a i n s t h e u n i q u e s t a t u s o f Dasein there

was

another

deadlock,

another

a m o n g all e n t i t i e s . B u t w h a t if kind

o f abyss,

that

Heidegger

e n c o u n t e r e d - a n d w i t h d r e w f r o m - a t t h i s p o i n t ? W e t h e r e f o r e w a n t to argue against the 'official'

v e r s i o n o f this i m p e d i m e n t

b e c a m e a w a r e o f h o w t h e p r o j e c t o f Being

(that

t r a n s c c n d e n t a l - s u b j e c t i v i s t p r o c e d u r e o f first e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e o f possibility' o f t h e

Heidegger

and Time was still c a u g h t in t h e

s e n s e o f B e i n g via t h e

'conditions

a n a l y s i s o f Dasein):

H e i d e g g e r a c t u a l l y e n c o u n t e r e d i n h i s p u r s u i t o f Being

and

Time

what was t h e

abyss o f r a d i c a l s u b j e c t i v i t y a n n o u n c e d in K a n t i a n t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n J t t m r i j a n d h e r e c o i l e d f r o m this abyss i n t o his t h o u g h t o f t h e historicity of Being. T h i s c r i t i c i s m o f H e i d e g g e r d o e s n o t s e e m a t all n e w : it h a s

already

b e e n m a d e by, a m o n g o t h e r s , C o r n e l i u s C a s t o r i a d i s , w h o a r g u e s that t h e

24

THE TICKLISH

SUBJECT

K a n t i a n n o t i o n o f i m a g i n a t i o n (as t h a t w h i c h u n d e r m i n e s

the standard

' c l o s e d ' o n t o l o g i c a l i m a g e o f t h e C o s m o s ) is a n n o u n c e d

a l r e a d y in

u n i q u e p a s s a g e o f De Anima

a

(III, 7 a n d 8 ) , where Aristotle claims: 'never

d o e s t h e soul t h i n k w i t h o u t p h a n t a s m ' , a n d d e v e l o p s this f u r t h e r i n t o a k i n d o f ' A r i s t o t e l i a n S c h e m a t i s m ' ( e v e r y a b s t r a c t n o t i o n - say, o f a t r i a n g l e -

has to b e a c c o m p a n i e d in o u r

thought

by a sensible, a l t h o u g h

not

bodily, p h a n t a s m i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n - w h e n we think o f a triangle, we have in o u r m i n d a n i m a g e o f a c o n c r e t e t r i a n g l e ) .

1 9

Aristotle even a n n o u n c e s

t h e K a n t i a n n o t i o n o f t i m e 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 o u r e x p e r i ­ e n c e w h e n h e a s s e r t s : ' i t is n o t p o s s i b l e t o t h i n k w i t h o u t t i m e w h a t is n o t i n t i m e ' ( 0 » Memory,

449-50)

- without

finding

a kind o f figuration

in

s o m e t h i n g temporal; for e x a m p l e , that which 'endures forever'. Castoriadis o p p o s e s

this

notion

o f imagination

o t h e r w i s e p r e v a i l s b o t h in De Anima physical tradition:

to

the

standard

one

which

a n d in t h e e n t i r e s u b s e q u e n t m e t a ­

this r a d i c a l n o t i o n o f i m a g i n a t i o n is n e i t h e r p a s s i v e -

r e c e p t i v e n o r c o n c e p t u a l - t h a t is t o say, it c a n n o t b e p r o p e r l y

placed

o n t o l o g i c a l l y , s i n c e it i n d i c a t e s a g a p i n t h e v e r y 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 . C a s t o r i a d i s t h u s s e e m s fully j u s t i f i e d i n h i s c l a i m : 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 unsettles for every ontology ( a n d for e v e r y 'thinking o f B e i n g ' ) . ' " 2

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 s o c i e t y as g r o u n d e d

for the democratic opening -

the notion

of

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 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 . "

21

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

phenomenal

and

Noumenal.

l o c a t e d with

regard

to the

couple

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

of

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

>$jappen, m e n

and/or

would

lose

Spontaneity; they would s u b c h a p t e r o f h i s Critique

their

moral

freedom

to

transcendental

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 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 n o life would b e found in the figures.' ' 2 2

transcendental ftohenomenal: ijgtccessible

freedom

and/or

spontaneity

i t o c c u r s o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e

to the

subject. T h i s in-betweerj -

i t s e l f is t h u s i n noumenal

sphere

a

sense is

neither phenomenal

not nor

^ j f e o u m e n a l , b u t t h e g a p w h i c h s e p a r a t e s t h e two a n d , i n a way, p r e c e d e s t h e m - (is' t h e subject,! so that t h e fact t h a t S u b j e c t c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to Substance m e a n s precisely that transcendental F r e e d o m , although

it is

n o t p h e n o m e n a l ( i . e . a l t h o u g h it b r e a k s u p t h e c h a i n o f c a u s a l i t y t o w h i c h all p h e n o m e n a a r e s u b m i t t e d ) - t h a t is, a l t h o u g h it c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d t o a

n e f f e c t u n a w a r e o f its t r u e n o u m e n a l c a u s e s (I ' f e e l f r e e ' o n l y b e c a u s e I

a

m b l i n d e d t o t h e c a u s a l i t y w h i c h d e t e r m i n e s m y ' f r e e ' a c t s ) - is a l s o n o t

THE TICKLISH

26

SUBJECT

n o u m e n a l , b u t w o u l d vanish in t h e case o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s d i r e c t a c c e s s to the n o u m e n a l order. T h i s impossibility o f locating t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r e e d o m / s p o n t a n e i t y with r e g a r d to the c o u p l e p h e n o m e n a l / n o u m e n a l 2

explains

1

why - * K a n t w a s a t s u c h a l o s s , a n d g o t i n v o l v e d i n a s e r i e s o f i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s in his efforts to d e t e r m i n e t h e e x a c t o n t o l o g i c a l status o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l spontaneity. A n d

the mystery o f transcendental

imagination

ultimately

c o i n c i d e s w i t h t h e m y s t e r y o f t h i s abyss o f f r e e d o m . H e i d e g g e r ' s g r e a t a c h i e v e m e n t was t h a t h e c l e a r l y p e r c e i v e d t h i s K a n ­ t i a n d e a d l o c k , l i n k i n g it t o K a n t ' s u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o d r a w all t h e c o n s e ­ quences

from

the

finitude

of

the

transcendental

subject:

Kant's

'regression' into traditional metaphysics occurs the m o m e n t he interprets the spontaneity o f transcendental subject has a n o u m e n a l

apperception

side which

as t h e

p r o o f that

is n o t s u b j e c t t o t h e

causal

the con­

s t r a i n t s b i n d i n g all p h e n o m e n a . T h e f i n i t u d e o f t h e K a n t i a n s u b j e c t d o e s not amount

to the

standard sceptical assertion o f the

delusive c h a r a c t e r o f h u m a n k n o w l e d g e

unreliable

and

(man can never penetrate

the

m y s t e r y o f t h e h i g h e s t r e a l i t y , s i n c e h i s k n o w l e d g e is l i m i t e d t o e p h e m e r a l s e n s i b l e p h e n o m e n a . . . ) ; it i n v o l v e s a m u c h m o r e r a d i c a l s t a n c e : t h e v e r y d i m e n s i o n which, from within the h o r i z o n o f his finite t e m p o r a l experi­ e n c e , a p p e a r s t o t h e s u b j e c t as t h e t r a c e o f t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e n o u m e n a l B e y o n d , is a l r e a d y m a r k e d b y t h e h o r i z o n o f f i n i t u d e - it d e s i g n a t e s t h e way t h e n o u m e n a l

B e y o n d appears

to the subject

within

his

finite

temporal

experience. T h e r a d i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e o f all t h i s f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n

tem­

p o r a l i t y a n d e t e r n i t y is t h a t t e m p o r a l i t y is n o t a d e f i c i e n t m o d e o f e t e r n i t y : o n t h e c o n t r a r y , it is ' e t e r n i t y ' i t s e l f t h a t h a s t o b e c o n c e i v e d as a s p e c i f i c modification o f the subject's temporal (self-)experience. This m e a n s that the

t r u e s p l i t is n o l o n g e r b e t w e e n

the

phenomenal

(the domain

of

t e m p o r a l a n d / o r s e n s i b l e e x p e r i e n c e ) a n d t h e n o u m e n a l ; r a t h e r , it r u n s d o w n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e n o u m e n a l itself, in t h e guise o f t h e split b e t w e e n t h e way t h e n o u m e n a l I n - i t s e l f appears i t s e l f sans

phrase,

tout

court,

to the subject

a n d its ' i m p o s s i b l e ' I n -

w i t h o u t r e f e r e n c e to t h e s u b j e c t . G o d ,

S u p r e m e B e i n g W h o gives b o d y to t h e I d e a o f t h e course, designates a n o u m e n a l c o n s i s t e n t way as a n

entity

object of our

the

highest Good, o f

( o n e c a n n o t c o n c e i v e o f it in a

temporal

e x p e r i e n c e ) . However,

it

d e s i g n a t e s a n o u m e n a l e n t i t y i n t h e m o d e o f ' F o r - u s ' - t h a t is, it d e s i g n a t e s the

way a

noumenal

finite

rational

supreme

Being;

entity

(man)

or, to

put

has it in

to

represent

to itself

phenomenological

a l t h o u g h G o d qua S u p r e m e B e i n g c a n n e v e r b e a p h e n o m e n o n

the

terms, in

the

s e n s e o f a n o b j e c t o f s e n s i b l e t e m p o r a l e x p e r i e n c e , it is n o n e t h e l e s s a

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 'phenomenon'

27

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 reading

o f Kant during their famous

Davos debate

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 level, h u m a n

beings

are empirical

in 1 9 2 9 .

2 4

o f the human condition

entities

whose

behaviour

Cassirer ( a t this 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

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 I to say, s o t h a t

a human

b e i n g is a b l e

of

- t h a t is

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

^.imagination: ! undermines

the unique

character o f imagination

transcendental

lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t it

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

THE TICKLISH

28 receptivity

that

characterizes h u m a n

s u c c e e d in getting noumenal

rid

SUBJECT finitude:

o f receptivity a n d

in itself, h e w o u l d

if the

subject were

gaining direct access to

lose t h e very ' s p o n t a n e i t y '

o f his exist­

e n c e . . . . T h e d e a d l o c k o f K a n t is t h u s c o n d e n s e d i n h i s m i s r e a d i n g false

identification)

o f the

spontaneity

to the

o f transcendental

(or

freedom

as

n o u m e n a l : t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s p o n t a n e i t y is p r e c i s e l y s o m e t h i n g t h a t c a n n o t b e c o n c e i v e d o f as n o u m c n a l .

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 O u r n e x t step should b e to focus o n the f u n d a m e n t a l ambiguity o f Kant's n o t i o n o f i m a g i n a t i o n . A s is w e l l k n o w n , K a n t d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n

the

s y n t h e t i c activity o f t h e

the

understanding

[synthesis

intellectualis]

and

synthesis o f the m a n i f o l d o f s e n s u o u s intuition which, while also absolutely 'spontaneous'

( p r o d u c t i v e , f r e e , n o t s u b j e c t t o e m p i r i c a l laws o f a s s o c i a ­

t i o n ) , n o n e t h e less r e m a i n s at t h e l e v e l o f i n t u i t i o n , b r i n g i n g t h e s e n s u o u s m a n i f o l d t o g e t h e r w i t h o u t a l r e a d y involving t h e activity o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g -

t h i s s e c o n d s y n t h e s i s is t h e

transcendental

synthesis

of imagination.

d i s c u s s i n g this d i s t i n c t i o n , i n t e r p r e t e r s u s u a l l y f o c u s o n t h e d e n s e

In and

a m b i g u o u s last s e c t i o n o f C h a p t e r 1 o f t h e First Division o f t h e T r a n s c e n ­ dental Logic ( ' O f the Pure Conceptions o f the Understanding, egories'), different

which,

after

representations

defining to e a c h

diversity in o n e c o g n i t i o n ' ,

2 i

synthesis other,

as

and

'the

process

o r Cat­

of joining

of comprehending

their

g o e s o n t o c l a i m t h a t s y n t h e s i s is:

t h e m e r e operation o f the imagination - a blind but indispensable function o f t h e soul, without which we should have n o cognition whatever, but o f t h e working o f which we are seldom even c o n s c i o u s . But to r e d u c e this synthesis to c o n c e p t i o n s is a function o f the u n d e r s t a n d i n g , by m e a n s o f which we attain to c o g n i t i o n , in the p r o p e r m e a n i n g o f t h e t e r m . 26

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: T h e first thing which must be given to us in o r d e r to achieve the a priori c o g n i t i o n o f all objects, is the diversity o f the p u r e intuition; the synthesis o f this diversity by means o f the imagination is the s e c o n d ; but this gives, as yet, no c o g n i t i o n . T h e c o n c e p t i o n s which give unity to this p u r e synthesis . . . furnish the third requisite for the cognition o f an o b j e c t , a n d these c o n c e p t i o n s are given bv the understanding.'-'

THE Jjowever,

pure

m

D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L

s

r

o

l a r

a

s

p

U

r

IMAGINATION

29

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

e

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

i imagination

has

already

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

done

its w o r k ,

or

is i t t h a t

'pure

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 ing'.

s

o

t r i

after

synthesis,

understand­

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 . shadow

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

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 underdeveloped •Understanding?

'In-itself T h e point

of a

force

posited

as s u c h ' ,

o f Heidegger's reading

'for i t s e l f ,

is t h a t o n e

the in

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 vbetween

the

pure

reduced

sensuous

imagination

manifold

to a m e r e m e d i a t i n g

o f intuition

and

the

force

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

Jenaer

Realphilosophie,

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

a b o u t the 'night o f the world':

T h e h u m a n b e i n g is this night, this empty nothing, that c o n t a i n s everything in its simplicity - an u n e n d i n g wealth of many representations, images, o f which n o n e belongs to him - o r which are not present. T h i s night, ihe i n t e r i o r o f nature, that exists h e r e - p u r e self - in phantasmagorical representations, is night all a r o u n d it, in which h e r e shoots a bloody h e a d - t h e r e a n o t h e r white

30

THE TICKLISH

SUBJECT

ghastly apparition, suddenly h e r e b e f o r e it, a n d j u s t so disappears. O n e catches sight o f this night when o n e looks h u m a n beings in the eye - into a night that b e c o m e s awful."' W h a t better description c o u l d o n e offer o f the power o f i m a g i n a t i o n in its n e g a t i v e , d i s r u p t i v e , d e c o m p o s i n g a s p e c t , as t h e p o w e r t h a t d i s p e r s e s c o n t i n u o u s reality i n t o a c o n f u s e d m u l t i t u d e o f 'partial o b j e c t s ' , spectral a p p a r i t i o n s o f w h a t i n r e a l i t y is e f f e c t i v e o n l y as p a r t o f a l a r g e r o r g a n i s m ? Ultimately, i m a g i n a t i o n stands for the capacity o f o u r m i n d to d i s m e m b e r what immediate perception

puts t o g e t h e r , to ' a b s t r a c t ' n o t a

common

n o t i o n but a certain feature from o t h e r features. T o ' i m a g i n e ' m e a n s to i m a g i n e a p a r t i a l o b j e c t w i t h o u t its b o d y , a c o l o u r w i t h o u t s h a p e , a s h a p e without

a body:

'here

a

bloody

head

-

there

another

white

a p p a r i t i o n ' . T h i s ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' is t h u s t r a n s c e n d e n t a l

ghastly

imagination

at its m o s t e l e m e n t a r y a n d v i o l e n t - t h e u n r e s t r a i n e d r e i g n o f t h e v i o l e n c e o f i m a g i n a t i o n , o f its ' e m p t y f r e e d o m ' w h i c h d i s s o l v e s e v e r y o b j e c t i v e l i n k , e v e r y c o n n e c t i o n g r o u n d e d i n t h e t h i n g itself: 'For itself h h e r e t h e freedom

-

to tear u p

constraint.'

3 1

the

images and

arbitrary

without

any

T h e o t h e r passage - universally known, often q u o t e d

and

i n t e r p r e t e d - is f r o m t h e P r e f a c e t o t h e

to r e c o n n e c t t h e m Phenomenology.

T o break an idea up into its original e l e m e n t s is to return to its m o m e n t s , which at least do not have the form o f the given idea, but rather constitute the i m m e d i a t e property o f the self. T h i s analysis, to b e sure, only arrives at thoughts which are themselves familiar, fixed, a n d inert d e t e r m i n a t i o n s . B u t what is thus separated and non-actual is an essential m o m e n t ; for it is only b e c a u s e the c o n c r e t e does divide itself, a n d make itself into s o m e t h i n g non-actual, that it is self-moving. T h e activity o f dissolution is the power a n d work o f the Understand­ ing, t h e most astonishing a n d mightiest o f powers, o r rather the absolute power. T h e circle that remains self-enclosed and, like substance, holds its m o m e n t s together, is an i m m e d i a t e relationship, o n e therefore which has n o t h i n g aston­ ishing about it. B u t that an a c c i d e n t as such, d e t a c h e d from what c i r c u m s c r i b e s it, what is b o u n d a n d is actual only in its c o n t e x t with others, s h o u l d attain an e x i s t e n c e o f its own a n d a separate freedom - this is the t r e m e n d o u s power o f the negative; it is t h e energy o f thought, o f the p u r e T . Death, if that is what we want to call this non-actuality, is o f all things the most dreadful, and to hold fast what is dead requires t h e greatest strength. L a c k i n g strength, B e a u t y hates the U n d e r s t a n d i n g for asking o f h e r what it c a n n o t do. B u t the life o f Spirit is not the life that shrinks from death a n d keeps itself u n t o u c h e d by devastation, but rather the life that endures it and maintains itself in it. It wins its truth only when, in utter d i s m e m b e r m e n t , it finds itself. It is this power, not as s o m e t h i n g positive, which closes its eyes to t h e negative, as when we say o f s o m e t h i n g 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

31

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. . . H e r e , H e g e l praises J Understanding

not, as o n e w o u l d e x p e c t , s p e c u l a t i v e R e a s o n ,

but

as t h e m i g h t i e s t p o w e r in t h e w o r l d , as t h e i n f i n i t e p o w e r o f

'falsity', o f t e a r i n g a p a r t a n d t r e a t i n g as s e p a r a t e w h a t n a t u r a l l y b e l o n g s t o g e t h e r . Is this n o t a p r e c i s e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e b a s i c n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f - l e t us risk t h e t e r m - ' p r e - s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n ' , its d e s t r u c t i v e

power

of u n d e r m i n i n g e v e r y o r g a n i c u n i t y ? S o , a l t h o u g h t h e two q u o t e d i

ages

3 3

pass-

s e e m t o s p e a k o f o p p o s i t e p h e n o m e n a ( t h e first o f t h e p r e - r a t i o n a l /

pre-discursive c o n f u s e d i m m e r s i o n in t h e p u r e l y subjective I n t e r i o r ; the s e c o n d o f t h e a b s t r a c t discursive activity o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , w h i c h d e c o m ­ poses every ' d e p t h ' o f o r g a n i c unity into d e t a c h e d e l e m e n t s ) , they are i thus to b e r e a d t o g e t h e r : b o t h r e f e r to the

'mightiest o f powers',

^ power o f disrupting the unity o f the R e a l , violently installing the o l membra 1

'night'

disjecta,

o f the

o f phenomena 'pure

self,

the

domain

in the m o s t radical sense o f the term. T h e in

which

dismembered

'phantasmagorical representations' appear

and

disconnected

a n d v a n i s h , is t h e m o s t

m e n t a r y m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e p o w e r o f negativity by m e a n s o f w h i c h ^ a c c i d e n t as s u c h , d e t a c h e d f r o m w h a t c i r c u m s c r i b e s it, w h a t is b o u n d

ele­ 'an and

is a c t u a l o n l y in its c o n t e x t w i t h o t h e r s , . . . a t t a i n [ s ] a n e x i s t e n c e o f its \ o w n a n d a s e p a r a t e f r e e d o m ' . K a n t , i n h i s Critique s

* omable r

of Pure

Reason,

root

o f all s u b j e c t i v e activity, as a

'spontaneous'

capacity

to

c o n n e c t sensible impressions that p r e c e d e s rational synthesis o f sensible

, d a t a t h r o u g h a p r i o r i c a t e g o r i e s . W h a t if, i n t h e two q u o t e d '

elabo-

r a t e s t h e n o t i o n 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 ' as t h e m y s t e r i o u s , u n f a t h -

H e g e l is i n d i c a t i n g a k i n d o f e v e n m o r e m y s t e r i o u s obverse

* J j n a g i n a t i o n , an even m o r e primordial \ a t i o n ' , o f tearing

apart

passages,

o f the synthetic

power o f 'pre-synthetic

sensible elements out o f their context, o f

imagindismember­

ing t h e i m m e d i a t e e x p e r i e n c e o f a n o r g a n i c W h o l e ? I t w o u l d t h e r e f o r e b e t o o h a s t y to i d e n t i f y t h i s ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' w i t h t h e V o i d o f t h e m y s t i c e x p e r i e n c e : it d e s i g n a t e s , r a t h e r , its e x a c t o p p o s i t e , t h a t is, t h e p r i m o r d i a l B i g "Bang, t h e v i o l e n t self-contrast by m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e b a l a n c e

and

i n n e r p e a c e o f the V o i d o f which mystics speak are p e r t u r b e d , t h r o w n out of joint. I f t h e r e is s o m e t r u t h i n H e i d e g g e r ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t K a n t

retreated

f r o m t h e abyss o f i m a g i n a t i o n , h i s r e t r e a t t h u s c o n c e r n s , a b o v e a l l , his

THE TICKLISH

32

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 , relation

can

be

the primordial

immediate

c o n c e i v e d as w o r k i n g

both

unity o f intuition)? ways: o n e

can

This

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 disjecta,

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

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

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 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

that heals the

disjecta,

or

antag­ wound

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 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 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

two

structure

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

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

bring 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:

of the

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 .

because

subject's irreducible

finitude,

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 j

t o say, t h e u n i t y t h e s u b j e c t e n d e a v o u r s

s

to i m p o s e o n

the

33

sensuous

m u l t i t u d e v i a its s y n t h e t i c activity is always e r r a t i c , e c c e n t r i c , u n b a l a n c e d , ' u n s o u n d ' , s o m e t h i n g t h a t is e x t e r n a l l y a n d v i o l e n t l y i m p o s e d o n t o t h e multitude, never a simple impassive act o f discerning the i n h e r e n t subter­ ranean

connections between

the

membra

disjecta.

In this p r e c i s e sense,

e v e r y s y n t h e t i c u n i t y is b a s e d o n a n a c t o f ' r e p r e s s i o n ' ,

and

therefore

g e n e r a t e s s o m e i n d i v i s i b l e r e m a i n d e r : i t i m p o s e s as u n i f y i n g f e a t u r e s o m e 'unilateral' m o m e n t

t h a t ' b r e a c h e s t h e s y m m e t r y ' . T h i s is w h a t , in

d o m a i n o f c i n e m a t i c art, E i s e n s t e i n ' s c o n c e p t o f ' i n t e l l e c t u a l

the

montage'

seems t o a i m at: i n t e l l e c t u a l activity b r i n g s t o g e t h e r b i t s a n d p i e c e s t o r n by t h e p o w e r o f i m a g i n a t i o n f r o m t h e i r p r o p e r c o n t e x t , v i o l e n t l y r e c o m ­ posing them

i n t o a n e w u n i t y t h a t gives b i r t h

to a n

unexpected

new

meaning. K a n t ' s b r e a k with t h e previous r a t i o n a l i s t / e m p i r i c i s t p r o b l e m a t i c t h u s b e l o c a t e d p r e c i s e l y : in c o n t r a s t t o t h i s p r o b l e m a t i c , h e n o accepts s o m e pre-synthetic mind

-

there

is n o

zero-ground

neutral

elementary

' i d e a s ' in L o c k e ) w h i c h is t h e n s y n t h e t i c activity o f o u r m i n d

elements worked stuff

composed

e l e m e n t a r y c o n t a c t with ' r e a l i t y ' .

3 4

u p o n by

(like e l e m e n t a r y

by o u r

is ahuays-already

can

longer

mind -

our

sensory

that

is, t h e

at xuorh, e v e n i n o u r

most

T h e p r e - s y n t h e t i c R e a l , its p u r e ,

not-

yet-fashioned 'multitude'

n o t yet synthesized by a m i n i m u m o f transcen­

dental

stricto

imagination,

is,

.retroactively p r e s u p p o s e d ,

setisu,

but

can

impossible, never

a

actually

level be

that

must

encounteied.

be Our

* ( H e g e l i a n ) p o i n t , h o w e v e r ' , is t h a t t h i s m y t h i c a l / i m p o s s i b l e s t a r t i n g p o i n t , • the p r e s u p p o s i t i o n j the i m a g i n a t i o n ' s

o f i m a g i n a t i o n , is a l r e a d y t h e p r o d u c t , d i e r e s u l t , o f disruptive

| Stero-level o f p u r e m u l t i t u d e l", n o t h i n g b u t pure

imagination

activity. I n s h o r t ,

the

mythic, inaccessible

n o t yet a f f e c t e d / f a s h i o n e d b y i m a g i n a t i o n is itself, i m a g i n a t i o n at its m o s t v i o l e n t , as t h e

«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 from

outside,

but

is

b y another

simultaneously

Dasein

o r d i v i n e A g e n t ; it c o m e s

something

that

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,

emerges

from

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 outstrips

towards

the future,

t h e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f Dasein

p o t e n t i a l i t y always a n d

s determinate

a

priori

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

C o n s c i e n c e rely o n the paradigmatically m o d e r n

tradition

Call o f

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

injunction

from

the

Dasein

never

Call o f C o n s c i e n c e that

receives any

it c a n

never

positive

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

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

by i n t e r p r e t i n g Time,

the

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 Man, does

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, it': K a n t i a n

practical reason

provides

a glimpse

das

h o w one

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 founded

on

to

the

Critique

of Practical

Reason

an accurate insight into Kant's radical ethical

is

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

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

'ethical

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 the modern

for

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:, it u l t i m a t e l y wills Heidegger

w h e n m y will f o l l o w s its C a l l ,

48

itself.

thus d e n i e s any truly subversive p o t e n t i a l

o f the

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 ,

Kantian

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

S u b l i m e / M o n s t r o u s : Heidegger ignores the Sublime -

triad

Beautiful/

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 ­ g o n e i n An Introduction

49

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 d e r a i l s o u r i m m e r s i o n i n das Man

o f things -

t h a t is, i t

( 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,

U n c a n n y , das Unheimliche,

thematizes

the

Monstrous

(or

rather,

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 to Metaphysics, nature,

the

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 % Introduction

he deploys the contours o f the overpowering violence o f

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 ings) and

(natural surround­

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

correlative to the e m e r g e n c e o f m o d e r n subjectivity). K a n t himself o p e n s u p the d o m a i n o f this u n c a n n y p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l spectrality, o f the ' u n d e a d ' a p p a r i t i o n s , with his d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n n e g a t i v e a n d infinite j u d g e m e n t . " ' " T h i s d o m a i n is n o t t h e o l d , p r e m o d e r n ' u n d e r g r o u n d ' as t h e d a r k , l o w e r strata o f t h e g l o b a l c o s m i c o r d e r in w h i c h m o n s t r o u s entities dwell, b u t s o m e t h i n g stricto sensu

acosmic.

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 m i s s e s is t h e r a d i c a l a n t i - o n t o l o g i c a l (or, rather, anti-cosmological) thrust o f K a n t ' s philosophy: against

the

neo-Kantian historico-culturalist o r epistemological misreading o f Kant, H e i d e g g e r is j u s t i f i e d i n e m p h a s i z i n g h o w K a n t ' s Critique provides the foundation

o f a new ontology o f

finitude

of Pure

and

Reason

temporality;

w h a t h e m i s s e s is t h a t t h e a n t i n o m i e s o f p u r e r e a s o n g e n e r a t e d b y K a n t ' s insistence on the subject's as a w h o l e

o f the

finitude

universe,

s u r r o u n d i n g s , as a life-iuorld

u n d e r m i n e the very n o t i o n o f c o s m o s

as a m e a n i n g f u l

hermeneutic

totality o f

in w h i c h a historical p e o p l e dwells. O r -

to

p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - w h a t H e i d e g g e r m i s s e s is t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e dimension o f the

( b e i n g - i n - t h e - ) w o r l d , p s y c h o t i c s e l f - w i t h d r a w a l , as

the

u l t i m a t e ( i m ) p o s s i b i l i t y , as t h e m o s t r a d i c 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 , as that against which the violent synthetic imposition o f a (New) O r d e r - the E v e n t o f H i s t o r i c a l D i s c l o s u r e o f B e i n g - is t h e d e f e n c e . And

this b r i n g s us b a c k t o t h e

H e i d e g g e r left o u t i n h i s r e a d i n g

problematic

o f the

Sublime

o f Kant: the Kantian

which

notion o f the 7

S u b l i m e is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o t h i s f a i l u r e o f o n t o l o g y / c o s m o l o g y ; it designates t h e inability 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 to b r i n g a b o u t t h e closure o f the horizon necessary for the notion o f a cosmos. T h e Mon­ s t r o u s c o n c e p t u a l i z e d b y K a n t i n its d i f f e r e n t g u i s e s ( f r o m t h e c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e o f s t e p m o t h e r l y n a t u r e t o t h e d i a b o l i c a l E v i l ) is t h u s w h o l l y i n c o m p a t i b l e with t h e M o n s t r o u s o f w h i c h H e i d e g g e r s p e a k s : it is a l m o s t the exact obverse o f the violent imposition o f a new historical shape o f B e i n g ; n a m e l y , the very gesture o f t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e d i m e n s i o n o f W o r l d - D i s c l o s u r e . A n d t h e e t h i c a l L a w is e m p t y / s u b l i m e p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as its ' p r i m o r d i a l l y r e p r e s s e d ' c o n t e n t is t h e a b y s s o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e world', the M o n s t r o u s o f a spontaneity n o t yet b o u n d by any Law F r e u d i a n terms: o f d e a t h drive.

in

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

51

K a n t with D a v i d L y n c h Kant's n o t i o n o f the t r a n s c e n d e n t a l constitution o f reality thus o p e n s

up

a s p e c i f i c ' t h i r d d o m a i n ' , w h i c h is n e i t h e r p h e n o m e n a l n o r n o u m e n a l b u t stricto

sensu

p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l . I n D e r r i d e a n t e r m s , w e c o u l d d e s i g n a t e it as

spectrality; in L a c a n i a n t e r m s , it w o u l d b e t o o q u i c k a n d i n a p p r o p r i a t e

to

d e s i g n a t e it as f a n t a s y s i n c e , f o r L a c a n , f a n t a s y is o n t h e s i d e o f r e a l i t y t h a t is, it s u s t a i n s t h e s u b j e c t ' s ' s e n s e o f r e a l i t y ' : w h e n

the

phantasmic

f r a m e d i s i n t e g r a t e s , t h e s u b j e c t u n d e r g o e s a ' l o s s o f r e a l i t y ' a n d s t a r t s to p e r c e i v e r e a l i t y as a n ' u n r e a l ' n i g h t m a r i s h u n i v e r s e w i t h n o f i r m o n t o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n ; t h i s n i g h t m a r i s h u n i v e r s e is n o t ' p u r e f a n t a s y ' b u t , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , that

which

remains

of reality

after

reality

is deprived

of its support

in

fantasy. So when

Schumann's

Carnival

- w i t h its ' r e g r e s s i o n ' t o a

dreamlike

u n i v e r s e i n w h i c h i n t e r c o u r s e b e t w e e n ' r e a l p e o p l e ' is r e p l a c e d b y a k i n d o f m a s k e d b a l l w h e r e o n e n e v e r k n o w s w h a t o r w h o is h i d d e n

beneath

t h e m a s k l a u g h i n g c r a z i l y at us: a m a c h i n e , a s l i m y l i f e - s u b s t a n c e , o r (undoubtedly the m o s t horrifying) simply the 'real' double o f the mask i t s e l f - sets t o m u s i c H o f f m a n n ' s

Unheimliche,

w h a t we o b t a i n is n o t

the

'universe o f p u r e fantasy' but, rather, t h e u n i q u e artistic r e n d e r i n g o f the decomposition Carnival

o f the fantasy-frame. T h e c h a r a c t e r s musically d e p i c t e d

in

are like the ghastly apparitions strolling a l o n g t h e m a i n street o f

O s l o i n M u n c h ' s f a m o u s p a i n t i n g , p a l e - f a c e d a n d w i t h a frail, b u t s t r a n g e l y i n t e n s e s o u r c e o f l i g h t w i t h i n t h e i r e y e s ( s i g n a l l i n g gaze as o b j e c t r e p l a c i n g t h e l o o k i n g e y e ) : d e s u b j e c t i v i z e d l i v i n g d e a d , frail s p e c t r e s d e p r i v e d o f t h e i r m a t e r i a l s u b s t a n c e . 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

should

a p p r o a c h the L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f 'traversing ( g o i n g t h r o u g h ) the fantasy': ' t r a v e r s i n g t h e f a n t a s y ' p r e c i s e l y d o e s not d e s i g n a t e w h a t t h i s t e r m s u g g e s t s to a c o m m o n - s e n s i c a l a p p r o a c h : 'getting rid o f the fantasies, o f illusionary prejudices and

misperceptions, which

distort our

view o f reality,

f i n a l l y l e a r n i n g t o a c c e p t r e a l i t y t h e way it a c t u a l l y is . . .'. I n

and

'traversing

t h e fantasy' we d o n o t l e a r n to s u s p e n d o u r p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l p r o d u c t i o n s — o n the contrary, we identify with t h e work o f o u r ' i m a g i n a t i o n ' more

radically, in

a l l its i n c o n s i s t e n c y -

that

is t o

say, p r i o r

even to

its

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n t o t h e p h a n t a s m i c f r a m e t h a t g u a r a n t e e s o u r access to reality.

51

A t this 'zero-level', i m p o s s i b l e t o e n d u r e , we have o n l y t h e p u r e void o f subjectivity, c o n f r o n t e d

by a m u l t i t u d e

o f spectral

'partial

w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y , a r e e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n s o f t h e L a c a n i a n lamella,

objects'

the undead

52

THE

object-libido.

5 2

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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' synthetic

imagination,

the impossible domain o f transcendental

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 Law, the d o m a i n post-Renaissance

pre-

freedom/

to any self-imposed

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 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 membra

disjecta

morcele,

o f its

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

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, 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

s being-in-the-world

is n o t t h e p r i m a r y to a n o t h e r

phenomenon.

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 us.

5 3

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 das

Ungeheure,

o f the

Monstrous:

what

is a t s t a k e

in

the

53

process

'Oedipalization', the establishment o f the rule o f the paternal

of

L a w , is

p r e c i s e l y the p r o c e s s o f 'gentrifying' this m o n s t r o u s o t h e r n e s s , transform­ ing i t i n t o a p a r t n e r w i t h i n

the horizon

o f discursive

communication.

T o d a y , t h e a r t i s t w h o is a c t u a l l y o b s e s s e d w i t h i m a g i n a t i o n i n its m o n s t r o u 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 D a v i d L y n c h . A f t e r t h e r e l e a s e o f his

first f i l m , a s t r a n g e

rumour

began

Eraserhead,

to c i r c u l a t e to a c c o u n t f o r

its

traumatic impact: At t h e time, it was r u m o r e d that an ultra-low frequency d r o n e in the

film's

s o u n d t r a c k affected t h e viewer's s u b c o n s c i o u s m i n d . P e o p l e said that although inaudible, this noise caused a feeling o f unease, even nausea. T h i s was over ten years a g o a n d the n a m e o f the film was Eraserhead.

L o o k i n g b a c k o n it now, o n e

could say that David L y n c h ' s first feature length film was such an intense e x p e r i e n c e audio-visually that p e o p l e n e e d e d to invent e x p l a n a t i o n s . . . even to the point o f h e a r i n g inaudible n o i s e s / ' The

1

status o f this v o i c e w h i c h n o o n e c a n p e r c e i v e , b u t w h i c h n o n e

the

less d o m i n a t e s us a n d p r o d u c e s m a t e r i a l e f f e c t s ( f e e l i n g s o f u n e a s e

and

n a u s e a ) , is real-impossible

in t h e L a c a n i a n s e n s e o f t h e t e r m . I t is c r u c i a l t o

d i s t i n g u i s h t h i s i n a u d i b l e v o i c e f r o m t h e v o i c e t h a t is t h e o b j e c t o f t h e p s y c h o t i c h a l l u c i n a t i o n : i n p s y c h o s i s ( p a r a n o i a ) , t h e ' i m p o s s i b l e ' v o i c e is not only presupposed

t o e x i s t a n d t o e x e r t its e f f e c t i v e n e s s ; t h e s u b j e c t

a c t u a l l y p u r p o r t s t o h e a r it. A n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f t h e s a m e v o i c e is f o u n d ( u n e x p e c t e d l y , p e r h a p s ) in h u n t i n g : as is w e l l k n o w n , h u n t e r s u s e a s m a l l m e t a l l i c w h i s t l e t o r e a c h t h e i r d o g s ; o w i n g t o its h i g h f r e q u e n c y , o n l y d o g s c a n h e a r it a n d r e a c t t o it - w h i c h , o f c o u r s e , g i v e s r i s e t o t h e p e r s i s t e n t m y t h that we h u m a n s

u n k n o w i n g l y also h e a r this whistle ( b e n e a t h

the

t h r e s h o l d o f c o n s c i o u s p e r c e p t i o n ) a n d o b e y it . . . a p e r f e c t e x a m p l e o f t h e p a r a n o i d n o t i o n t h a t h u m a n s c a n b e c o n t r o l l e d by i n v i s i b l e / i m p e r ­ ceptible media. T h i s n o t i o n is g i v e n a d i r e c t c r i t i c o - i d e o l o g i c a l twist i n J o h n C a r p e n t e r ' s u n d e r r a t e d film They Live

( 1 9 8 8 ) , in w h i c h a l o n e l y drifter arrives in L o s

A n g e l e s a n d d i s c o v e r s t h a t o u r c o n s u m e r i s t s o c i e t y is d o m i n a t e d b y a l i e n s , w h o s e h u m a n disguises a n d s u b l i m i n a l advertising m e s s a g e s are visible o n l y t h r o u g h s p e c i a l g l a s s e s : w h e n we p u t t h e s e g l a s s e s o n , w e c a n p e r c e i v e all a r o u n d us i n j u n c t i o n s ( ' B u y t h i s ! ' , ' T u r n i n t o t h i s s t o r e ! ' , e t c . ) w h i c h we otherwise n o t i c e a n d o b e y w i t h o u t b e i n g aware o f t h e m . A g a i n , the c h a r m o f t h i s i d e a l i e s i n its v e r y n a i v e t y : as i f t h e s u r p l u s o f a n i d e o l o g i c a l m e c h a n i s m o v e r its v i s i b l e p r e s e n c e , is i t s e l f m a t e r i a l i z e d o n

another,

54

THE

invisible

level, so

ideology'. . . .

that,

TICKLISH

with

SUBJECT

special glasses o n ,

we

can

literally

'see

5 ! i

A t t h e l e v e l o f s p e e c h itself, a g a p f o r e v e r s e p a r a t e s w h a t o n e is t e m p t e d to call p r o t o - s p e e c h o r ' s p e e c h - i n - i t s e l f from

'speech-for-itself, explicit

s y m b o l i c registration. F o r e x a m p l e , today's s e x p s y c h o l o g i s t s tell us

that

even b e f o r e a c o u p l e explicidy state t h e i r i n t e n t i o n to g o to b e d t o g e t h e r , e v e r y t h i n g is a l r e a d y d e c i d e d a t t h e l e v e l o f i n n u e n d o s , b o d y l a n g u a g e , e x c h a n g e o f g l a n c e s . . . . T h e t r a p t o b e a v o i d e d h e r e is t h e p r e c i p i t a t e onlologization

o f t h i s ' s p e e c h - i n - i t s e l f , as i f s p e e c h i n f a c t p r e - e x i s t s i t s e l f

as a k i n d o f f u l l y - c o n s t i t u t e d ' s p e e c h b e f o r e s p e e c h ' - as i f t h i s ' s p e e c h avant

la lettre

a c t u a l l y e x i s t s as a n o t h e r , m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l , fully c o n s t i ­

tuted language,

reducing

normal,

'explicit' language

t o its

secondary

s u r f a c e r e f l e x , so t h a t t h i n g s a r e a l r e a d y t r u l y d e c i d e d b e f o r e t h e y a r e e x p l i c i t l y s p o k e n a b o u t . W h a t o n e s h o u l d always b e a r i n m i n d a g a i n s t t h i s d e l u s i o n is t h a t t h i s o t h e r p r o t o - s p e e c h r e m a i n s v i r t u a l : it b e c o m e s a c t u a l o n l y w h e n its s c o p e is s e a l e d , p o s i t e d as s u c h , in e x p l i c i t W o r d . T h e b e s t p r o o f o f t h i s is t h e f a c t t h a t t h i s p r o t o - l a n g u a g e is i r r e d u c i b l y a m b i g u o u s and

undecidable:

i t is ' p r e g n a n t

with

meaning',

but

with

a

kind

of

u n s p e c i f i e d free-floating m e a n i n g waiting for t h e a c t u a l s y m b o l i z a t i o n to c o n f e r o n it a d e f i n i t i v e s p i n . . . . I n a f a m o u s p a s s a g e f r o m h i s l e t t e r t o Lady Ottoline

Morrell, in which

he

recalls the

circumstances of

his

d e c l a r a t i o n o f love to h e r , B e r t r a n d Russell refers precisely to this

gap

that forever separates the ambiguous d o m a i n

the

explicit act o f symbolic assumption:

o f proto-speech from

' I d i d n o t k n o w I l o v e d y o u till I

h e a r d myself telling you so - for o n e i n s t a n t I t h o u g h t " G o o d G o d , what h a v e I s a i d ? " a n d t h e n I k n e w it was t h e t r u t h . '

5 0

A n d a g a i n , it is w r o n g t o

r e a d this 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 as if, d e e p i n h i m s e l f , R u s s e l l ' a l r e a d y k n e w t h a t h e l o v e d h e r ' : t h i s e f f e c t o f a l w a y s - a l r e a d y is s t r i c t l y r e t r o a c t i v e ; its t e m p o r a l i t y is t h a t o f -dfutur

anteri.eur-

t h a t is t o say, R u s s e l l

was n o t i n l o v e w i t h h e r all t h e t i m e w i t h o u t k n o w i n g it; r a t h e r , h e have

will

been i n l o v e w i t h h e r .

I n t h e h i s t o r y o f p h i l o s o p h y , t h e first t o a p p r o a c h

this u n c a n n y

o n t o l o g i c a l , n o t - y e t - s y m b o l i z e d t e x t u r e o f r e l a t i o n s was n o n e o t h e r P l a t o h i m s e l f , w h o , in h i s l a t e d i a l o g u e Timaeus,

prethan

feels c o m p e l l e d to pre­

s u p p o s e a k i n d o f m a t r i x - r e c e p t a c l e o f all d e t e r m i n a t e f o r m s g o v e r n e d b y its o w n c o n t i n g e n t r u l e s [chord]

- i t is c r u c i a l n o t t o i d e n t i f y t h i s chora

h a s t i l y w i t h t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n m a t t e r [hyle].

too

H o w e v e r , it w a s t h e g r e a t b r e a k

t h r o u g h o f G e r m a n Idealism to o u t l i n e the p r e c i s e c o n t o u r s o f this preontological dimension o f the spectral Real, which precedes a n d

eludes

t h e o n t o l o g i c a l c o n s t i t u t i o n o f reality (in c o n t r a s t to t h e s t a n d a r d c l i c h 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

55

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

; t h r o u g h the subject's active participation transcendental synthesis - t h e n

composite

constituted

t h a t is, t h r o u g h t h e a c t o f

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 q u o t e d p a s s a g e f r o m t h e Jenaer

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

RealphUosophie:

the

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 conditions

motto

o f the

transcendental

o f possibility o f o u r

constitution

knowledge

are

at the

o f reality same

('the

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, 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

the

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

(see the standard Marxist n o t i o n o f the 'critique o f ideology', whose basic p r e m i s s is t h a t t h e ' i n a d e q u a c y ' o f t h e i d e o l o g i c a l l y d i s t o r t e d v i e w o f s o c i a l r e a l i t y is n o t a s i m p l e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l m i s t a k e , b u t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y s i g n a l s t h e m u c h m o r e t r o u b l i n g fact t h a t s o m e t h i n g m u s t b e terribly w r o n g with o u r s o c i a l r e a l i t y i t s e l f - o n l y a s o c i e t y w h i c h is ' w r o n g ' i n i t s e l f g e n e r a t e s a ' w r o n g ' a w a r e n e s s o f i t s e l f ) . H e g e l ' s p o i n t h e r e is v e r y p r e c i s e : n o t o n l y do the inherent inconsistencies and contradictions o f our knowledge not p r e v e n t it f r o m f u n c t i o n i n g as ' t r u e ' k n o w l e d g e o f r e a l i t y , b u t t h e r e is ' r e a l i t y ' ( i n t h e m o s t u s u a l s e n s e o f ' h a r d e x t e r n a l r e a l i t y ' as o p p o s e d t o ' m e r e n o t i o n s ' ) o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e d o m a i n o f t h e N o t i o n is a l i e n a t e d from

itself, s p l i t , t r a v e r s e d

by s o m e radical d e a d l o c k , c a u g h t in

some

debilitating inconsistency. T o g e t a n a p p r o x i m a t e i d e a o f t h i s d i a l e c t i c a l v o r t e x , l e t us r e c a l l t h e c l a s s i c o p p o s i t i o n o f t h e t w o m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e n o t i o n s o f l i g h t : l i g h t as c o m p o s e d o f p a r t i c l e s a n d l i g h t as c o n s i s t i n g o f w a v e s - t h e ' s o l u t i o n ' o f q u a n t u m p h y s i c s ( l i g h t is b o t h a t t h e s a m e t i m e ) t r a n s p o s e s t h i s o p p o ­ sition i n t o t h e ' t h i n g i t s e l f , with t h e n e c e s s a r y r e s u l t t h a t ' o b j e c t i v e reality' i t s e l f l o s e s its full o n t o l o g i c a l s t a t u s - t h a t it t u r n s i n t o s o m e t h i n g t h a t is o n t o l o g i c a l l y i n c o m p l e t e , c o m p o s e d o f e n t i t i e s w h o s e s t a t u s is u l t i m a t e l y virtual. O r t h i n k o f t h e way the u n i v e r s e we r e c o n s t r u c t in o u r

minds

w h i l e r e a d i n g a n o v e l is full o f ' h o l e s ' , n o t fully c o n s t i t u t e d : w h e n

Conan

D o y l e d e s c r i b e s S h e r l o c k H o l m e s ' s flat, it is m e a n i n g l e s s t o a s k e x a c t l y h o w m a n y b o o k s there were o n the shelves - the writer simply did

not

h a v e a p r e c i s e i d e a o f it in his m i n d . W h a t , h o w e v e r , i f - o n t h e level o f symbolic m e a n i n g , at least -

t h e s a m e g o e s f o r reality

itselfi

Abraham

L i n c o l n ' s f a m o u s ' Y o u c a n f o o l all t h e p e o p l e s o m e o f t h e t i m e , a n d s o m e o f t h e p e o p l e all t h e t i m e , b u t y o u c a n n o t f o o l all t h e p e o p l e all o f t h e t i m e ' is l o g i c a l l y a m b i g u o u s : d o e s it m e a n t h a t t h e r e a r e some p e o p l e w h o c a n always

b e f o o l e d , o r t h a t o n e v e r y o c c a s i o n someone

or other is b o u n d t o

b e f o o l e d ? W h a t , h o w e v e r , i f it is w r o n g t o a s k ' W h a t d i d L i n c o l n reallymean?'

Isn't the most probable

solution

to this e n i g m a

that

Lincoln

h i m s e l f was n o t a w a r e o f t h e a m b i g u i t y - h e s i m p l y w a n t e d t o m a k e a witty point, a n d the phrase ' i m p o s e d itself o n h i m ' b e c a u s e 'it s o u n d e d g o o d ' ? A n d w h a t i f s u c h a s i t u a t i o n in w h i c h o n e a n d t h e s a m e signifier same

line)

'sutures'

the

fundamental

ambiguity

and

(here: the

inconclusiveness

w h i c h persists at the level o f the signified c o n t e n t p e r t a i n s also to w h a t we c a l l ' r e a l i t y ' ? W h a t i f o u r s o c i a l r e a l i t y is ' s y m b o l i c a l l y c o n s t r u c t e d ' a l s o i n t h i s r a d i c a l s e n s e , s o t h a t in o r d e r

to m a i n t a i n

the a p p e a r a n c e

o f its

consistency, an empty signifier (what L a c a n called the Master-Signifier) h a s to c o v e r u p a n d c o n c e a l t h e o n t o l o g i c a l gap?

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

57

S o t h e gap that forever separates t h e d o m a i n o f (symbolically mediated, | j . e . o n t o l o g i c a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d ) reality

f r o m t h e e l u s i v e a n d s p e c t r a l real

that

Iprecedes i t is c r u c i a l : w h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a l l s ' f a n t a s y ' is t h e e n d e a v o u r Ito c l o s e t h i s g a p b y ( m i s ) p e r c e i v i n g t h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l R e a l as s i m p l y another,

'more fundamental',

level o f reality - fantasy p r o j e c t s o n to t h e

|pre-ontological R e a l t h e f o r m o f c o n s t i t u t e d reality (as i n t h e Christian 5 notion o f a n o t h e r , s u p r a s e n s i b l e r e a l i t y ) . T h e g r e a t m e r i t o f L y n c h is t h a t jvhe r e s i s t s t h i s p r o p e r l y m e t a p h y s i c a l t e m p t a t i o n t o c l o s e t h e g a p b e t w e e n \ these p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l p h e n o m e n a a n d t h e l e v e l o f r e a l i t y . A p a r t f r o m h i s s primary v i s u a l p r o c e d u r e f o r c o n v e y i n g t h e s p e c t r a l d i m e n s i o n o f t h e R e a l (the e x c e s s i v e c l o s e - u p o n t h e d e p i c t e d o b j e c t , w h i c h r e n d e r s i t u n r e a l ) , one s h o u l d focus o n t h e way L y n c h plays with u n c a n n y I sounds. T h e nightmare accompanied

s e q u e n c e o f The Elephant

by a strange

vibrating

noise

non-localizable

Man,

that

f o r e x a m p l e , is

seems

to

transgress

the b o r d e r s e p a r a t i n g i n t e r i o r f r o m e x t e r i o r : it is as if, i n t h i s n o i s e , t h e extreme

externality

o f a m a c h i n e c o i n c i d e s with t h e u t m o s t

intimacy

of

the b o d i l y i n t e r i o r , w i t h t h e r h y t h m o f t h e p a l p i t a t i n g h e a r t . D o e s n o t t h i s coincidence

o f t h e very c o r e o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g ,

o f his/her

life-

s u b s t a n c e , with t h e e x t e r n a l i t y o f a m a c h i n e , offer a p e r f e c t illustration o f the Lacanian notion o f

ex-timacy?

O n t h e l e v e l o f s p e e c h , p e r h a p s t h e b e s t i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h i s g a p is t h e s c e n e i n L y n c h ' s Dune

w h e n , i n h i s c o n f r o n t a t i o n with t h e E m p e r o r , t h e

space guild representative utters unintelligible whispers transformed

into

articulate s p e e c h only by passing t h r o u g h a m i c r o p h o n e - in L a c a n i a n t e r m s , t h r o u g h t h e m e d i u m o f t h e b i g O t h e r . I n Twin

Peaks

as w e l l , t h e

dwarf in the R e d L o d g e speaks an i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e , distorted rendered

English,

intelligible only with t h e h e l p o f subtitles, w h i c h a s s u m e

here

t h e role o f t h e m i c r o p h o n e , that is, t h e m e d i u m o f t h e big O t h e r . . . . I n b o t h cases, L y n c h reveals t h e g a p that forever separates

pre-ontological

p r o t o - s p e e c h , t h i s ' m u r m u r o f t h e R e a l ' , f r o m t h e fully c o n s t i t u t e d This

brings

us to t h e f u n d a m e n t a l

feature

logos.

o f dialectical-materialist

ontology: t h e m i n i m a l g a p , t h e delay, w h i c h forever separates a n event 'in i t s e l f f r o m its s y m b o l i c i n s c r i p t i o n / r e g i s t r a t i o n ; t h i s g a p c a n b e d i s c e r n e d i n its d i f f e r e n t g u i s e s f r o m q u a n t u m p h y s i c s ( a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h a n e v e n t ' b e c o m e s i t s e l f , is fully a c t u a l i z e d , o n l y t h r o u g h its r e g i s t r a t i o n

i n its

s u r r o u n d i n g s - t h a t is, t h e m o m e n t its s u r r o u n d i n g s ' t a k e n o t e ' o f i t ) t o the procedure

o f 'double

take' in t h e classic H o l l y w o o d c o m e d i e s ( t h e

v i c t i m o f a f r a u d o r a n a c c i d e n t first p e r c e i v e s t h e e v e n t o r t h e s t a t e m e n t w h i c h m e a n s c a t a s t r o p h e t o h i m c a l m l y , e v e n w i t h i r o n y , u n a w a r e o f its consequences;

then,

after

a minimal

time

lapse

all o f a s u d d e n

he

58

THE

shudders unmarried

or

stiffens

-

TICKLISH

like

the

innocent daughter

SUBJECT

father

who,

is p r e g n a n t ,

upon

learning

that

first c a l m l y r e m a r k s

his '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 two p a r t n e r s

t h e m a g i c s i l e n c e is b r o k e n

-

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 pronounced,

it -

y e t o n c e t h e W o r d is

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 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

simultaneously

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 Is n o t t h e g a p b e t w e e n

to remain

'unspecified'.

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 ' (a f a t h e r

being

informed

to the g a p b e t w e e n the e v e n t itself

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 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

registered? O f crucial i m p o r t a n c e

here

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 the

'thing

itself.

And,

'false'

i n c i d e n t a l l y , therein

appearance lies t h e

is comprised

within

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

paradoxically constitutes itself t h r o u g h appearance

from

'essence' o f a thing

t h e very r e m o v a l o f t h e

t h e R e a l i n its i m m e d i a c y .

r , K

thus 'false'

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

'essence'

'interface'-screen o f appearances;

appears.

The

appearing/emerging

c a t c h is t h u s

o f the

that

essence -

finally, o n

appearance

that

this

screen,

is l i t e r a l l y

the

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 F r o m this v a n t a g e p o i n t , o n e c a n clearly see w h e r e K a n t ' r e c o i l s ' from the abyss 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 . R e m e m b e r h i s a n s w e r t o 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 a c c e s s t o t h e n o u m e n a l domain,

to Things-in-themselves: n o w o n d e r

this vision o f a m a n

who

t u r n s i n t o a lifeless p u p p e t b e c a u s e o f h i s d i r e c t i n s i g h t i n t o t h e m o n s t r o s ­ ity

o f the

divine

commentators on

Being-in-itself provokes Kant

such

an

unease

among

the

( u s u a l l y , it is e i t h e r p a s s e d o v e r i n s i l e n c e o r

d i s m i s s e d as a n u n c a n n y , o u t - o f - p l a c e b o d y ) : w h a t K a n t d e l i v e r s is n o l e s s t h a n w h a t o n e is t e m p t e d to c a l l the Kantian

fundamental

fantasy,

the O t h e r

S c e n e o f f r e e d o m , o f t h e s p o n t a n e o u s free a g e n t , t h e S c e n e in w h i c h t h e f r e e a g e n t is t u r n e d i n t o a l i f e l e s s p v i p p c t at t h e m e r e } ' o f a p e r v e r s e G o d .

THE TICKLISH

60

SUBJECT

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 phantasmic

support, without

manipulated

this O t h e r

Scene

in which

he

is

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

access to the n o u m e n a l

domain

should

be reformulated:

o f direct

what

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 fantasy

this

totally should

fundamental

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

stealthily ( r e ) i n t r o d u c e s the standard, p r e m o d e r n ,

it

'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 positivity 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 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

the 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 cannot be integrated

that

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 selfcontraction, 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 . Only

at

this

achievement:

level

are

far from

we

able

regressing

to

appreciate

from

Hegel's

K a n t ' s c r i t i c i s m to

breathtaking pre-critical

m e t a p h y s i c s e x p r e s s i n g t h e r a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e c o s m o s , H e g e l fully a c c e p t s ( a n d draws the c o n s e q u e n c e s f r o m ) t h e result o f K a n t i a n c o s m o ­ l o g i c a l a n t i n o m i e s - t h e r e is n o ' c o s m o s ' , t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f c o s m o s as t h e o n t o l o g i c a l l y fully c o n s t i t u t e d

positive

totality

is i n c o n s i s t e n t .

On

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

61

a c c o u n t , H e g e l also rejects K a n t ' s vision o f a m a n w h o , b e c a u s e o f his direct insight into t h e monstrosity o f the divine Being-in-itself, would turn i n t o a l i f e l e s s p u p p e t : s u c h a v i s i o n is m e a n i n g l e s s a n d i n c o n s i s t e n t , s i n c e , as w e h a v e a l r e a d y p o i n t e d o u t , it s e c r e t l y r e i n t r o d u c e s t h e o n t o l o g i c a l l y fully c o n s t i t u t e d d i v i n e t o t a l i t y : a w o r l d c o n c e i v e d only as S u b s t a n c e , not also as S u b j e c t . F o r H e g e l , t h e fantasy o f s u c h a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f m a n i n t o a lifeless p u p p e t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e m o n s t r o u s divine Will ( o r w h i m ) , horrible

as i t m a y a p p e a r ,

already signals

the retreat

from

the true

m o n s t r o s i t y , w h i c h is t h a t o f t h e a b y s s o f f r e e d o m , o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' . W h a t H e g e l d o e s is t h u s t o ' t r a v e r s e ' t h i s f a n t a s y b y d e m o n s t r a t i n g its f u n c t i o n o f filling i n t h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l a b y s s o f f r e e d o m - t h a t is, b y r e c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e positive S c e n e i n w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t is i n s e r t e d i n t o a positive n o u m e n a l order. 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 mum).

Posthu-

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 'night

o f the world'. This 'abstraction'

into t h e

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 logic

of their

philosophical

m o m e n t o f 'madness'

project,

to

articulate

a

inherent

certain

i n h e r e n t t o cogito, w h i c h t h e y t h e n

excessive

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 a g a i n c o n c e i v e s Dasein sensu

m i s s e s its m a r k ,

Heidegger's notion

ultimately

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 it d o e s

express

the

o f being-in-the-world,

apprehension

the

point

slricto

o f how,

o f 'madness'

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

in that

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 howH e i d e g g e r turned a r o u n d the famous Kantian statement that the 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

great

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 , but

even

the p r o b l e m

o f psychoanalysis.

5 9

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 ' , 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

the

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

reduction

is

crucial

here:

nothing

SUBJECT

is

lost

in

the

phenomenologico-

t r a n s c e n d e n t a l r e d u c t i o n , t h e e n t i r e flow o f p h e n o m e n a is r e t a i n e d , it is only the subject's existential stance towards t h e m that c h a n g e s o f a c c e p t i n g t h e flow o f p h e n o m e n a

instead

as i n d i c a t i n g e n t i t i e s ( o b j e c t s

and

states o f things) that exist 'in t h e m s e l v e s ' , o u t t h e r e in t h e world,

the

phenomenological

the

reduction

'derealizes' them,

pure non-substantial p h e n o m e n a l

accepting them

f l o w ( a s h i f t t h a t is p e r h a p s

as close

to

s o m e v e r s i o n s o f B u d d h i s m ) , T h i s ' d i s c o n n e c t i o n ' f r o m r e a l i t y is l o s t i n H e i d e g g e r ' s n o t i o n o f Dasein

as ' b e i n g [ t h r o w n ]

in t h e w o r l d ' . O n

other hand, although Husseii's phenomenologico-transcendental t i o n m a y a p p e a r to b e t h e very o p p o s i t e o f t h e K a n t i a n

the

reduc­

transcendental

d i m e n s i o n ( t h e d i m e n s i o n o f a p r i o r i c o n d i t i o n s o i e x p e r i e n c e ) , t h e r e is n o n e t h e less a n u n e x p e c t e d l i n k w i t h K a n t . I n h i s u n p u b l i s h e d

manu­

script 'Kant's Materialism', Paid de M a n focused on the Kantian problem­ a t i c o f t h e S u b l i m e as t h e l o c u s o f K a n t ' s m a t e r i a l i s m : 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

against the b a c k g r o u n d o f b e i n g thrown into a c o n c r e t e situation. when we e n c o u n t e r an object from

the distant historical past -

(So

sav, a

m e d i e v a l t o o l - w h a t m a k e s it ' p a s t ' is n o t its a g e as s u c h b u t t h e f a c t t h a t i t is a t r a c e o f a w o r l d ( o f a h i s t o r i c a l m o d e o f t h e d i s c l o s u r e o f b e i n g , o f a n i n t e r c o n n e c t e d t e x t u r e o i s i g n i f i c a t i o n s a n d s o c i a l p r a c t i c e s ) t h a t is n o l o n g e r directly 'ours'. Now when undermined

we c l a i m

that

K a n t , in his a n t i n o m i e s

o f pure

reason,

t h e ( o n t o l o g i c a l v a l i d i t y o f t h e ) n o t i o n o f t h e w o r l d , is n o t

t h i s c l a i m l i m i t e d t o 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 the

t o t a l i t y o f all e n t i t i e s

( w h i c h is e f f e c t i v e l y

beyond

the

horizon

of

possible e x p e r i e n c e ) ? Furthermore, does not the notion o f transcendental h o r i z o n ( a s o p p o s e d to n o u m c n a l t r a n s c e n d e n c e ) a l r e a d y p o i n t t h e H e i d e g g e r i a n n o t i o n o f t h e w o r l d as t h e

finite

towards

historical horizon o f

t h e d i s c l o s u r e o f b e i n g , i f o n l y we p u r g e it o f its C a r t e s i a n p h y s i c a l i s t c o n n o t a t i o n s ( 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 as t h e c o n c e p t u a l

framework

o f the scientific c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f representations o f natural,

present-at-

h a n d objects)

a n d t r a n s p o s e it i n t o t h e h o r i z o n o f m e a n i n g o f a

finite

e n g a g e d a g e n t ? P e r h a p s o n e s h o u l d a d d a n o t h e r n o t i o n o f t h e w o r l d to t h e list: t h e p r e m o d e r n

' a n t h r o p o c e n t r i c ' , but n o t yet s u b j e c t i v e view o f

t h e w o r l d as c o s m o s , t h e finite o r d e r e d ' G r e a t C h a i n o f B e i n g ' w i t h E a r t h in t h e c e n t r e , t h e stars a b o v e , t h e u n i v e r s e w h o s e o r d e r b e a r s witness to a d e e p e r m e a n i n g , a n d so o n . A l t h o u g h this o r d e r e d c o s m o s today

in various

'holistic' approaches)

also differs

(reasserted

radically from

the

properly m o d e r n , infinite m e a n i n g l e s s 'silent universe' o f void a n d atoms, it s h o u l d

not

be confused

with

the

phenomenological-transcendental

n o t i o n o f w o r l d as a h o r i z o n o f m e a n i n g d e t e r m i n i n g h o w e n t i t i e s a r c d i s c l o s e d t o a finite a g e n t . 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 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

the

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 Damn

n e v e r fully fits its s u r r o u n d i n g s ;

Life-World

is always p r e c a r i o u s , a n d

animal,

its i m m e r s i o n i n its d e t e r m i n a t e

can be undermined

by a

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 ,

sudden

therefore,

THE

66

is:

how

Dasein

does to

this

its

shattering

immersion

in

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

experience its

o f anxiety,

contingent

way

of

which life,

extraneates

relate

to

the

experience o f the 'night o f the world', o f the p o i n t o f madness, o f radical contraction,

o f self-withdrawal,

How does the Heideggerian death

drive?

Lacan's

In

work

contrast

of

the

to

early

as

the

founding

gesture

being-towards-death some 1950s),

attempts one

to

identify

should

insist

incompatibility: 'death drive' designates the ' u n d e a d ' tal'

o f subjectivity?

relate to the them on

lamella,

Freudian (found

in

their

radical

the

'immor­

i n s i s t e n c e o f drive t h a t p r e c e d e s t h e o n t o l o g i c a l d i s c l o s u r e o f B e i n g ,

whose

finitude

confronts

a human

being

in

the

experience of

'being-

towards-death'.

Notes 1. See J a c q u e s Derrida, De Vespiit. Heidegger el la question, Paris: Galilee 1 9 8 7 . 2. S e e R e i n e r S c h i i r m a n n , Heidegger on Being and Ailing, B l o o m i n g t o n : I n d i a n a University Press 1 9 8 7 . 3. S e e T h e o d o r W. A d o r n o , The Jargon of A ulhenluily, L o n d o n : New Left B o o k s 1 9 7 3 . 4. See J e a n - F r a n c o i s L y o t a r d , Heidegger el 'lesjuifs', Paris: Galilee 1 9 8 8 . 5. ' "Eating Well", o r t h e Calculation o f the Subject: A n Interview with J a c q u e s D e r r i d a ' , in Who Comes After the Subject, e d . E d u a r d o Cadava, P e t e r C o n n o r a n d J e a n - L u c Nancy, New York: R o u t l e d g e 1 9 9 1 , p. 104. 6. W h e n , in his Spiegel interview, H e i d e g g e r was asked which political system is best a c c o m m o d a t e d to m o d e r n technology, h e answered: 'I a m n o t c o n v i n c e d that it is d e m o c ­ racy' (The. Heidegger Controversy: A Critical Reader, e d . R i c h a r d Wollin, C a m b r i d g e , MA: M I T Press 1 9 9 3 , p. 1 0 4 ) . 7. ' T h e works that a r e being p e d d l e d about nowadays as t h e philosophy o f National Socialism . . . have n o t h i n g whatever t o d o with t h e i n n e r t r u t h a n d g r e a t n e s s o f this m o v e m e n t ( n a m e l y t h e e n c o u n t e r between global t e c h n o l o g y a n d m o d e r n m a n ) . ' (Martin H e i d e g g e r , An Introduction to Metaphysics, New H a v e n , C T : Yale University Press 1 9 9 7 , p. 1 9 9 . ) 8. With respect t o t h e c o u p l i n g o f Stalinism a n d Fascism, H e i d e g g e r silently g r a n t s priority to Fascism - at this point, I differ from him a n d follow Alain B a d i o u (see Alain B a d i o u , L'f'.thii/ue, Paris: I l a t i e r 1 9 9 3 ) , w h o claims that despite t h e h o r r o r s c o m m i t t e d o n its behalf ( o r , rather, o n b e h a l f o f t h e specific f o r m o f these h o r r o r s ) , Stalinist C o m m u n i s m was inherently related t o a T r u t h - E v e n t ( o f t h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n ) ; while Fascism was a pseudoevent, a lie in t h e guise o f authenticity. S e e C h a p t e r 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, The Plague of Fantasies, London: Verso 1997. 9. See R o b e r t Pippin, Idealism as M o d e r n i s m , C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press 1 9 9 7 , pp. 3 9 5 - 4 1 4 . 10. I draw h e r e o n a c o n v e r s a t i o n with E r i c S a n t n e r . 11. Martin H e i d e g g e r , Being and 7 'ime,.Albany, NY: S U N Y Press 1 9 9 6 , p. 4 3 7 . 12. Gilles D e l e u z e , hnage.-temps, Paris: Editions d e Minuit 1 9 8 5 , p. 2 3 2 . T o p u t it in a n o t h e r way: c h o i c e is always a m e t a - c h o i c e ; it involves a c h o i c e to c h o o s e o r n o t . Prostitution, for e x a m p l e , is a simple e x c h a n g e : a m a n pays a w o m a n f o r having s e x with h e r . M a r r i a g e , on the o t h e r h a n d , involves two levels: in traditional m a r r i a g e , with m a n as b r e a d w i n n e r , h e pays t h e w o m a n much more (maintains h e r as his wife) in o r d e r not to have, to pay her (for s e x ) . So, in t h e case o f m a r r i a g e for m o n e y , o n e c a n say that t h e h u s b a n d pays t h e wife in o r d e r 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

IMAGINATION

67

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

3 4 . O n this crucial point, Analecta 1995.

see

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

Z d r a v k o K o b e , Automaton

transcendentale

I, Ljubljana:

3 5 . H e r e , o f c o u r s e , we a r e r e p e a t i n g t h e reversal that H e g e l a c c o m p l i s h e s a p r o p o s Kant's Thing-in-itself: this p u r e presupposition o f o u r - subjective - p o s i t i n g / m e d i a t i o n , this e x t e r n a l T h i n g which affects us, but that is n o t yet w o r k e d t h r o u g h by t h e subject's reflexive activity, actually turns out to be its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : s o m e t h i n g purely posited, t h e result o f the utmost effort o f mental a b s t r a c t i o n , a p u r e T h i n g - o f - t h o u g h t [Gedankending]. In t h e s a m e way, the pre-synthetic real presupposition o f i m a g i n a t i o n is already t h e p r o d u c t o f imagin­ ation at its purest. 36. H e g e l , J e n a e r Realphilosophie', p. 2 0 6 ; trans, q u o t e d from V e r e n e , p. 8. 37. See J a c q u e s D e r r i d a , 'Cogito and t h e History o f Madness', in Writing and Difference, C h i c a g o : University o f C h i c a g o Press 1 9 7 8 . 3 8 . Kant on Education, L o n d o n : Kegan Paul, F r e n c h , T r u b n e r & C o . 1 8 9 9 , p p . 3 - 5 . 3 9 . See G.W.F. Hegel, lectures on the Philosophy of World History, Introduction: Reason in History, C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press 1 9 7 5 , pp. 1 7 6 - 9 0 . 4 0 . See J a c o b Rogozinski, Ktmten, Paris: Editions Kime 1 9 9 6 , p p . 1 2 4 - 3 0 . 4 1 . F o r a m o r e detailed a c c o u n t o f the c o n n e c t i o n between t h e Kantian a n t i n o m i e s a n d L a c a n ' s p a r a d o x e s o f non-All, see C h a p t e r 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, Tanying Willi the Negative, D u r h a m , NO. Duke University Press 1 9 9 3 . 4 2 . Q u o t e d from Rogozinski, Kanten, p. 1 1 8 . 4 3 . T h e great a c h i e v e m e n t o f Schelling's n o t i o n o f Past, P r e s e n t a n d F u t u r e as the t h r e e 'ages' o f the Absolute was to b r e a k the c o n s t r a i n t s o f t h e Kantian t e m p o r a l s c h e m a t i s m , with its p r e d o m i n a n c e o f t h e P r e s e n t : what Soliciting m a k e s t h e m a t i c , in t h e guise o f t h e abyss o f t h e Real, a r e the c o n t o u r s o f a Past that was n e v e r p r e s e n t , since it is past from t h e very b e g i n n i n g o f time; c o m p l e m e n t a r y to it is t h e n o t i o n o f a F u t u r e that will always r e m a i n 'to c o m e ' , not just a deficient m o d e o f the P r e s e n t . 4 4 . O n e is t e m p t e d to establish h e r e a c o n n e c t i o n with Badiou's notion o f the T r u t h Event as the u n f o r e s e e n e m e r g e n c e o f s o m e t h i n g New that c a n n o t be a c c o u n t e d for in terms o f the network o f existing causes. (See C h a p t e r 3 below.) 15. See Daniel B r e a z e a d a l e , ' C h e c k o r C h e c k m a t e ? O n the Finitude o f the F i c h t e a n S e l f , in The Modern Suhjeit. Conceptions of the Self in Classical German Philosophy, ed. Karl Ameriks and Dieter S t u r m a , Albany, NY: S U N Y Press 1 9 9 5 , pp. 8 7 - 1 1 4 . 4 6 . Ibid., p. 1 0 0 . 4 7 . W h a t imposes itself h e r e is the parallel between t h e F i c h t e a n Anstoss a n d t h e F r e u d i a n - L a c a n i a n s c h e m a o f t h e relationship between the p r i m o r d i a l Ich [llr-hh] a n d the object, t h e foreign body in its midst, which disturbs its narcissistic b a l a n c e , setting in m o t i o n the l o n g process o f t h e g r a d u a l expulsion a n d s t n i c t u r a t i o n o f this i n n e r snag, t h r o u g h which (what we e x p e r i e n c e as) ' e x t e r n a l , objective reality' is constituted (see C h a p t e r 3 o f Slavoj Zizek, Enjoy Your Symptom!, New York: R o u t l e d g e 1 9 9 3 ) . 4 8 . Rogozinski opposes to this r e a d i n g a n o t h e r ' s u b t e r r a n e a n ' t e n d e n c y in K a n t himself, a c c o r d i n g to which t h e Kantian c a t e g o r i c a l imperative stands for a Call o f O t h e r n e s s that n o t only involves its own temporality o f finitude (a t e m p o r a l i t y t h a t breaks the constraints o f the linear succession o f 'HOWS', since it is the t e m p o r a l i t y o f t h e Events o f F r e e d o m , o f r u p t u r e s that e m e r g e ex nihilo), but is also a Law n o l o n g e r g r o u n d e d in a Will: like t h e C o n n ' s e n i g m a t i c Law in Kafka's Trial, t h e m o r a l imperative is a Law that 'wants n o t h i n g from yon'. In this f u n d a m e n t a l indifference towards h u m a n affairs lies t h e ultimate e n i g m a o f t h e Law. 4 9 . See H e i d e g g e r , An Introduction to Metaphysics, p p . 1 4 6 - 6 5 . 5 0 . See C h a p t e r 3 o f Zizek, Tanying With the Negative. 5 1 . So o n e should be very careful in d e f e n d i n g the thesis that t h e fact that f e m i n i n e subjectivity finds it easier to b r e a k t h e hold o f fantasy, to 'traverse' its f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy, than masculine subjectivity m e a n s that w o m e n e n t e r t a i n towards the universe o f symbolic s e m b l a n c e s / f i c t i o n s the attitude o f cynical distance ('I know that the phallus, symbolic phallic power, is a m e r e s e m b l a n c e , a n d t h e only thing that c o u n t s is the Real o f puissance' -

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

69

t h e well-known cliche a b o u t women as subjects who c a n easily 'see t h r o u g h ' t h e spell o f symbolic fictions, ideals, values, a n d focus o n h a r d facts - sex, power . . . - that reallv c o u n t , a n d a r e t h e true desublimated s u p p o r t o f sublime s e m b l a n c e s ) : such a cynical distance does not a m o u n t to 'traversing t h e fantasy', since it implicitly r e d u c e s fantasy to t h e veil o f illusions distorting o u r access to reality 'as it really is'. In c o n t r a s t to t h e c o n c l u s i o n that imposes itself with false e v i d e n c e , o n e should insist that t h e cynical subject is the o n e who is tmst delivered from t h e h o l d o f fantasy. 5 2 . F o r this notion o f lamella, see J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Tour Fundamental Concepts o\(PsychoAnalysis, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 7 9 , pp. 1 9 7 - 8 . 5 3 . See, again, C h a p t e r 3 of Zizek, Ttmying With the Negative. 5 4 . Yuji K o n n o , 'Noise Floats, Night Falls', in David Lynch: Paintings mid Drawings, Tokyo: T o k y o M u s e u m o f C o n t e m p o r a r y A n 1 9 9 1 , p. 2 3 . 5 5 . O f c o u r s e , t h e question r e m a i n s o p e n t o what e x t e n t this p a r a n o i d n o t i o n is quite justified in t h e case o f subliminal advertising. 5 6 . Q u o t e d from RAY. Clark, The. Life ofBertraml Russell, L o n d o n : Weidenfelcl & Nicolson 1 9 7 5 , p. 1 7 6 . 57. F o r a detailed a c c o u n t , see Slavoj Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder. An Tssay on Sche.lling and Related Matters, L o n d o n : Verso 1 9 9 6 . 5 8 . T h e s a m e holds for the Kantian m o r a l Law. if o n e gets t o o close, to it, its sublime g r a n d e u r suddenly c h a n g e s into the horrifying abyss o f the T h i n g t h r e a t e n i n g to swallow the subject. 5 9 . F r o m this standpoint, it is crucial to r e r e a d HrrsserTs late m a n u s c r i p t s on 'passive synthesis', published after his dearh in Husserltana. as p o i n t i n g towards this d o m a i n that, eludes H e i d e g g e r - from which, that is, H e i d e g g e r r e t r e a t e d . P e r h a p s the later Husserl was not exclusively i m m e r s e d in a philosophical p r o j e c t r e n d e r e d obsolete by the great break­ t h r o u g h o f Being and Time. . . . See E d m r r n d Husserl, Analysen zur passnvn Synthesis, Hiisserliaira, vol. X I , T h e H a g u e : Martinus Nijhoff 1 9 6 6 .

The Hegelian 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 ' ? C o l i n W i l s o n ' s From Atlantis

to the Sphinx?

o n e i n t h e e n d l e s s s e r i e s o f New-

A g e airport p o c k e t b o o k variations o n t h e t h e m e o f ' r e c o v e r i n g the lost w i s d o m o f t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d ' ( t h e b o o k ' s s u b t i t l e ) , o p p o s e s i n its c o n c l u d ­ i n g c h a p t e r two types o f k n o w l e d g e : t h e ' a n c i e n t ' i n t u i t i v e , e n c o m p a s s i n g o n e , w h i c h m a k e s us e x p e r i e n c e d i r e c t l y t h e u n d e r l y i n g r h y t h m o f r e a l i t y ('right-brain awareness'), and the m o d e r n knowledge o f self-consciousness a n d r a t i o n a l d i s s e c t i o n o f r e a l i t y ( ' l e f t - b r a i n a w a r e n e s s ' ) . A f t e r all h i s h i g h praise for the m a g i c powers o f a n c i e n t collective consciousness, the a u t h o r a c k n o w l e d g e s t h a t a l t h o u g h this type o f k n o w l e d g e h a d e n o r m o u s advan­ t a g e s , ' i t was e s s e n t i a l l y limited.

I t w a s t o o p l e a s a n t , t o o r e l a x e d , a n d its

a c h i e v e m e n t s t e n d e d t o b e c o m m u n a l ' ; ' - s o i t was n e c e s s a r y f o r

human

e v o l u t i o n to e s c a p e f r o m this state t o t h e m o r e active attitude o f r a t i o n a l t e c h n o l o g i c a l d o m i n a t i o n . T o d a y , o f c o u r s e , we a r e c o n f r o n t e d by p r o s p e c t o f r e u n i t i n g t h e two h a l v e s a n d

the

' r e c o v e r i n g t h e lost w i s d o m ' ,

c o m b i n i n g it w i t h m o d e r n a c h i e v e m e n t s ( t h e u s u a l s t o r y o f h o w

modern

s c i e n c e itself, i n its m o s t r a d i c a l a c h i e v e m e n t s - q u a n t u m p h y s i c s , a n d s o o n - a l r e a d y p o i n t s towards t h e self-sublation o f t h e m e c h a n i s t i c view in the direction o f the holistic universe d o m i n a t e d by a h i d d e n pattern o f the 'dance o f life'). H e r e , h o w e v e r , W i l s o n ' s b o o k t a k e s a n u n e x p e c t e d t u r n : h o w will t h i s s y n t h e s i s o c c u r ? W i l s o n is i n t e l l i g e n t e n o u g h t o r e j e c t b o t h

predominant

views: t h e d i r e c t l y p r e m o d e r n o n e , a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e ' r a t i o n a l i s t W e s t ' was a m e r e a b e r r a t i o n , a n d w e s h o u l d s i m p l y r e t u r n t o the old wisdom; and

the pseudo-Hegelian

notion o f a 'synthesis'

that

w o u l d s o m e h o w m a i n t a i n d i e b a l a n c e b e t w e e n t h e two s p i r i t u a l p r i n c i p l e s , e n a b l i n g us t o k e e p t h e b e s t o f b o t h w o r l d s : t o r e g a i n t h e l o s t U n i t y w h i l e m a i n t a i n i n g t h e a c h i e v e m e n t s b a s e d o n its l o s s ( t e c h n i c a l p r o g r e s s , i n d i ­ vidualist d y n a m i c s , e t c . ) . A g a i n s t b o t h t h e s e versions, W i l s o n e m p h a s i z e s

THE HEGELIAN

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

71

that the n e x t stage, the o v e r c o m i n g o f the limitation o f the Western rationalist/individualist stance, must s o m e h o w e m e r g e from within

this

W e s t e r n s t a n c e . H e l o c a t e s its s o u r c e i n t h e f o r c e o f i m a g i n a t i o n :

the

Western principle o f self-consciousness a n d individuation

also

brought

a b o u t a b r e a t h t a k i n g r i s e in o u r c a p a c i t y o f i m a g i n a t i o n , a n d i f w e d e v e l o p this

c a p a c i t y t o its u t m o s t ,

c o n s c i o u s n e s s , o f shared

i t will l e a d

to

a

n e w level

o f collective

i m a g i n a t i o n . S o t h e s u r p r i s i n g c o n c l u s i o n is t h a t

the longed-for n e x t step in h u m a n evolution, the step b e y o n d the aliena­ t i o n f r o m n a t u r e a n d t h e u n i v e r s e as a W h o l e , ' h a s a l r e a d y h a p p e n e d . I t has b e e n h a p p e n i n g

f o r t h e p a s t 3 5 0 0 y e a r s . N o w all w e h a v e t o d o is

r e c o g n i s e i t ' ( t h e last s e n t e n c e in t h e b o o k ) . So

what h a p p e n e d

3 , 5 0 0 years a g o -

3

t h a t is, a r o u n d 2 0 0 0

BC? T h e

decline o f the O l d K i n g d o m o f Egypt, the highest a c h i e v e m e n t o f a n c i e n t w i s d o m , a n d t h e rise o f t h e n e w , violent c u l t u r e s o u t o f w h i c h European

consciousness arose

-

in

short,

the

Fall

modern

itself, t h e

fateful

f o r g e t t i n g o f t h e a n c i e n t w i s d o m w h i c h e n a b l e d us to m a i n t a i n a d i r e c t c o n t a c t with t h e ' d a n c e o f life'. I f we t a k e t h e s e s t a t e m e n t s literally, t h e u n a v o i d a b l e c o n c l u s i o n is t h a t the moment ancient

wisdom)

evolution.

coincides

of the Fall

with its exact opposite,

(the forgetting

with the longed-for

of the

next step in

H e r e we h a v e t h e p r o p e r l y H e g e l i a n m a t r i x o f d e v e l o p m e n t : t h e

F a l l is a l r e a d y in itself lis o w n s e l f - s u b l a t i o n ; t h e w o u n d is a l r e a d y i n i t s e l f its o w n h e a l i n g , s o t h a t t h e p e r c e p t i o n t h a t w e a r c d e a l i n g w i t h t h e F a l l is u l t i m a t e l y a m i s p e r c c p t i o n , a n e f f e c t o f o u r s k e w e d p e r s p e c t i v e - all w e h a v e to d o is t o a c c o m p l i s h t h e m o v e f r o m I n - i t s e l f t o F o r - i t s e l f : t o c h a n g e our

perspective

and

recognize how the longed-for

reversal

is a l r e a d y

o p e r a t i v e i n w h a t is g o i n g o n . The

i n n e r l o g i c o f t h e m o v e m e n t f r o m o n e s t a g e t o a n o t h e r is n o t t h a t

f r o m o n e e x t r e m e , to t h e o p p o s i t e e x t r e m e , a n d t h e n

to their

higher

u n i t y ; t h e s e c o n d p a s s a g e is, r a t h e r , s i m p l y t h e r a d i c a l i z a t i o n o f t h e first. The

p r o b l e m w i t h t h e ' W e s t e r n m e c h a n i s t i c a t t i t u d e ' is n o t t h a t it f o r g o t -

repressed thoroughly

the a n c i e n t holistic W i s d o m , but that enough:

it did not break

with it

it c o n t i n u e d t o p e r c e i v e t h e n e w u n i v e r s e ( o f d i s c u r s i v e

stance) from the perspective o f the old o n e , o f the ' a n c i e n t wisdom'; a n d o f c o u r s e , f r o m t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e t h e n e w u n i v e r s e c a n n o t b u t a p p e a r as t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c w o r l d w h i c h c o m e s a b o u t ' a f t e r t h e F a l l ' . W e rise a g a i n f r o m t h e F a l l n o t b y u n d o i n g its e f f e c t s , b u t in r e c o g n i z i n g in t h e F a l l itself the longed-for liberation. In

Stales

4

of Injury,

Wendy

dialectical process when

Brown

refers

she emphasizes

to t h e s a m e

logic o f the

h o w t h e first r e a c t i o n o f t h e

o p p r e s s e d t o t h e i r o p p r e s s i o n is t h a t t h e y i m a g i n e a w o r l d s i m p l y d e p r i v e d

THE TICKLISH

72

SUBJECT

o f the O t h e r that exerts oppression on t h e m - w o m e n imagine a world without

men; A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n s a w o r l d

without capitalists.

tvithout

whites; w o r k e r s a

world

. . . T h e m i s t a k e o f s u c h a n a t t i t u d e is n o t t h a t i t is ' t o o

r a d i c a l ' , t h a t it w a n t s t o a n n i h i l a t e t h e O t h e r i n s t e a d o f m e r e l y c h a n g i n g it; b u t , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h a t it is n o t r a d i c a l e n o u g h : it fails t o e x a m i n e t h e way t h e i d e n t i t y o f its o w n p o s i t i o n ( t h a t o f a w o r k e r , a w o m a n , A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n . . . ) is ' m e d i a t e d '

by the

Other

( t h e r e is n o

an

worker

without a capitalist organizing the p r o d u c t i o n process, etc.), so that i f o n e is t o g e t r i d o f t h e o p p r e s s i v e O t h e r , o n e h a s s u b s t a n t i a l l y t o

transform

t h e c o n t e n t o f o n e ' s o w n p o s i t i o n . T h a t is a l s o t h e f a t a l flaw o f p r e c i p i t a t e historicization: those w h o want 'free sexuality delivered o f the

Oedipal

b u r d e n o f g u i l t a n d a n x i e t y ' p r o c e e d i n t h e s a m e way as t h e w o r k e r w h o w a n t s t o survive as a worker w i t h o u t a c a p i t a l i s t ; t h e y a l s o fail t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e way t h e i r o w n p o s i t i o n is ' m e d i a t e d ' b y t h e O t h e r . T h e w e l l known M e a d - M a l i n o w s k i myth o f the free, n o n - i n h i b i t e d sexuality reign­ i n g in t h e S o u t h P a c i f i c p r o v i d e s a n e x e m p l a r y c a s e o f s u c h a n ' a b s t r a c t n e g a t i o n ' : it m e r e l y p r o j e c t s i n t o t h e s p a t i o - h i s t o r i c a l O t h e r o f ' p r i m i t i v e societies' the fantasy o f a 'free sexuality' r o o t e d in o u r o w n c o n t e x t . I n t h i s way, it is n o t

historical

h i s t o r i c a l ' e n o u g h : it r e m a i n s c a u g h t i n t h e

c o - o r d i n a t e s o f o n e ' s o w n h i s t o r i c a l h o r i z o n p r e c i s e l y i n its a t t e m p t imagine a 'radical' Otherness -

in s h o r t , a n t i - O e d i p u s

is t h e

to

ultimate

Oedipal myth. . . . T h i s m i s t a k e tells us a l o t a b o u t t h e 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 ' : its m a t r i x is n o t t h a t o f a l o s s a n d its r e c u p e r a t i o n , b u t s i m p l y t h a t o f a p r o c e s s o f p a s s a g e f r o m s t a t e A t o s t a t e B : t h e first, i m m e d i a t e o f A n e g a t e s t h e p o s i t i o n o f A while remaining

'negation'

xuithin its symbolic confines,

it m u s t b e f o l l o w e d b y a n o t h e r n e g a t i o n , w h i c h t h e n

so

n e g a t e s t h e very

s y m b o l i c s p a c e c o m m o n t o A a n d its i m m e d i a t e n e g a t i o n ( t h e r e i g n o f a r e l i g i o n is first s u b v e r t e d i n t h e g u i s e o f a t h e o l o g i c a l h e r e s y ; c a p i t a l i s m is first

s u b v e r t e d in t h e n a m e o f t h e ' r e i g n o f L a b o u r ' ) . H e r e t h e g a p

that

s e p a r a t e s t h e n e g a t e d s y s t e m ' s ' r e a l ' d e a t h f r o m its ' s y m b o l i c ' d e a t h is crucial: t h e system has to die twice. T h e o n l y t i m e M a n e uses t h e ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' in Capital,

term

apropos o f the 'expropriation o f expro­

p r i a t o r s ' in socialism, h e has i n m i n d p r e c i s e l y s u c h a two-stage p r o c e s s . The

( m y t h i c a l ) s t a r t i n g p o i n t is t h e s t a t e in w h i c h p r o d u c e r s o w n

their

m e a n s o f p r o d u c t i o n ; i n t h e first s t a g e , t h e p r o c e s s o f e x p r o p r i a t i o n t a k e s p l a c e within the frame of the private

ownership

of the means

of production,

m e a n s that t h e e x p r o p r i a t i o n o f t h e m a j o r i t y a m o u n t s to t h e

which

appropria­

tion a n d c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f the ownership o f the m e a n s o f p r o d u c t i o n in a s m a l l c l a s s ( o f c a p i t a l i s t s ) ; in t h e s e c o n d s t a g e , t h e s e e x p r o p r i a t o r s

are

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH themselves expropriated,

SUBJECT

s i n c e t h e very f o r m

73

o f private

ownership

a b o l i s h e d . . . . W h a t is o f i n t e r e s t h e r e is t h a t , in M a r x ' s e y e s ,

is

capitalism

itself, in its very notion, is c o n c e i v e d as a p o i n t o f p a s s a g e b e t w e e n t h e two m o r e 'stable' modes o f production:

c a p i t a l i s m lives o f f t h e

incomplete

r e a l i z a t i o n o f its o w n p r o j e c t ( t h e s a m e p o i n t was l a t e r m a d e b y D e l e u z e , who

emphasized

that

capitalism

poses

' d e t e r r i t o r i a l i z a t i o n ' it itself u n l e a s h e s ) .

a

limit

to

the

very forces

of

5

T h e s a m e m a t r i x o f the H e g e l i a n triad also structured the e x p e r i e n c e of

the

dissident

struggle

against Party rule; in S l o v e n i a , this

struggle

p r o c e e d e d i n t h r e e s t a g e s . T h e first was t h e s t a g e o f i n h e r e n t o p p o s i t i o n , o f c r i t i c i z i n g t h e r e g i m e i n t h e n a m e o f its o w n v a l u e s : ' W h a t w e h a v e is not

true socialism, true

s o c i a l i s t d e m o c r a c y ! ' T h i s c r i t i c i s m was

'pre-

H e g e l i a n ' : it d i d n o t t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e f a c t t h a t t h e e x i s t i n g r e g i m e ' s f a i l u r e to r e a l i z e its n o t i o n s i g n a l l e d t h e i n s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h i s n o t i o n i t s e l f ) ; f o r this r e a s o n , t h e r e g i m e ' s a n s w e r t o this criticism was, strictly s p e a k i n g , c o r r e c t : it was a b s t r a c t ; it d i s p l a y e d t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e B e a u t i f u l S o u l u n a b l e to p e r c e i v e in t h e reality it criticizes t h e o n l y historically p o s s i b l e r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e i d e a l s it a d v o c a t e s a g a i n s t t h i s r e a l i t y . T h e m o m e n t t h e o p p o s i t i o n a c c e p t e d t h i s t r u t h , it p a s s e d t o t h e n e x t , s e c o n d stage: to c o n s t r u c t the space o f a u t o n o m o u s

'civil s o c i e t y ' c o n ­

c e i v e d o f as e x t e r n a l t o t h e s p h e r e o f p o l i t i c a l p o w e r . N o w t h e a t t i t u d e was: w e d o n o t w a n t p o w e r , w e j u s t w a n t t h e a u t o n o m o u s s p a c e o u t s i d e t h e d o m a i n o f p o l i t i c a l p o w e r i n w h i c h w e c a n a r t i c u l a t e o u r a r t i s t i c , civil rights, spiritual, a n d so o n , interests, criticize p o w e r a n d limitations, without

endeavouring

reflect on

t o s u p p l a n t it. A g a i n , o f c o u r s e ,

its the

r e g i m e ' s f u n d a m e n t a l criticism o f this attitude ( ' Y o u r i n d i f f e r e n c e towards p o w e r is f a l s e a n d h y p o c r i t i c a l - w h a t y o u a r e r e a l l y a f t e r is p o w e r ' ) was c o r r e c t , a n d t h e p a s s a g e t o t h e last, t h i r d , s t a g e was t h u s t o s u m m o n

up

o u r c o u r a g e and, instead o f hypocritically asserting that o u r hands were c l e a n , t h a t w e d i d n o t w a n t p o w e r , to r e v e r s e o u r p o s i t i o n a n d

emphati­

cally a g r e e

and

why

I n t h e first two s t a g e s , w e e n c o u n t e r t h e s p l i t b e t w e e n k n o w l e d g e

and

with

power's

criticism: 'Yes, we

do w a n t

power,

s h o u l d n ' t we? W h y s h o u l d it b e r e s e r v e d f o r y o u ? '

t r u t h : t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e r e g i m e ' s p r o p o n e n t s was f a l s e , y e t t h e r e was some

truth

in

their

criticism, while

the

opposition

was

hypocritical

( a l t h o u g h t h i s h y p o c r i s y was c o n d i t i o n e d b y t h e c o n s t r a i n t s i m p o s e d by t h e r e g i m e i t s e l f , s o t h a t i n t h e h y p o c r i s y o f its o p p o s i t i o n

the

regime

r e c e i v e d t h e t r u t h a b o u t t h e falsity o f its o w n d i s c o u r s e ) ; in t h e

third

s t a g e , h y p o c r i s y was finally o n t h e s i d e o f t h e r e g i m e i t s e l f . T h a t is t o say: w h e n t h e dissidents finally a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t t h e y w e r e after p o w e r , d i e

74

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

liberal, 'civilized' Party m e m b e r s criticized t h e m for a brutal lust for p o w e r - o f c o u r s e , t h i s c r i t i c i s m was p u r e h y p o c r i s y , s i n c e i t w a s e n u n c i a t e d b y t h o s e w h o i n f a c t did ( s t i l l ) h o l d a b s o l u t e p o w e r . T h e o t h e r k e y f e a t u r e was t h a t w h a t a c t u a l l y m a t t e r e d i n t h e first two s t a g e s w a s the form itself, as f o r t h e c o n t e n t , t h e p o s i t i v e c r i t i c i s m o f t h e e x i s t i n g p o w e r was i r r e l e v a n t ( m u c h o f t h e t i m e it was t h e r e j e c t i o n o f t h e e m e r g i n g m a r k e t

reforms

which t h e n played directly into the h a n d s o f the Party hardliners) whole point

was its p l a c e o f e n u n c i a t i o n ,

the

fact that

the

c r i t i c i s m was

f o r m u l a t e d from outside. I n t h e n e x t s t a g e , t h a t o f a u t o n o m o u s civil s o c i e t y , t h i s o u t s i d e b e c a m e o n l y ' f o r i t s e l f , t h a t is, t h e k e y d i m e n s i o n w a s a g a i n purely formal, that o f limiting the p o w e r to the political d o m a i n in the restricted sense o f the term. O n l y in the third stage did f o r m a n d c o n t e n t coincide. 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 ' ,

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 -

giving b o d y

to

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

the 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 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 .

6

' 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.

repetition o f Understanding

R e a s o n is n o t h i n g

but

the

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 mobilizes and paradox

manipulates

is c o n f i r m e d

the victim's own

SUBJECT propensity

by every successful swindler:

75 to cheat. T h i s

the

way to d o

it

p r o p e r l y is t o d e p i c t f o r t h e p r o s p e c t i v e v i c t i m t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f m a k i n g a q u i c k f o r t u n e i n a s e m i - l e g a l way, s o t h a t t h e v i c t i m , a r o u s e d b y y o u r o f f e r o f d e c e i v i n g a t h i r d p a r t y , d o e s n o t n o t i c e t h e t r u e c a t c h t h a t will t u r n him i n t o a s u c k e r . . . o r , t o p u t it i n H e g e l e s e , y o u r - t h e c r o o k ' s - e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n o n t h e v i c t i m is a l r e a d y a n i n h e r e n t r e f l e c t i v e d e t e r ­ mination

o f the victim himself. I n m y

nonexistent

third

victim -

'negation'

I effectively ' n e g a t e

-

deception

myself,

the

of

the

deceiver

h i m s e l f is d e c e i v e d ( i n a k i n d o f m o c k i n g r e v e r s a l o f t h e ' r e d e m p t i o n o f the redeemer' from Wagner's

Parsifal).

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 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

of politics 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

between Feminine and Masculine Principles . .. ) .

the

struggle

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 c o n s c i o u s n e s s ' f r o m Phenomenology

two s e p a r a t e

'figures o f

(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

Phenomenology:

Consciousness', condenses

the

basic operation

of

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. A n obvious c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t imposes itself h e r e : in the c o u r s e o f the phenomenological

p r o c e s s , w e a r e still d e a l i n g w i t h

a subject who

is

c a u g h t in his narcissistic l i m i t e d f r a m e , a n d t h e r e f o r e h a s t o pay t h e p r i c e f o r it b y h i s u l t i m a t e d e m i s e ; t h e a c t u a l u n i v e r s a l s u b j e c t e m e r g e s o n l y a t t h e e n d o f t h e p r o c e s s , a n d is n o l o n g e r o p p o s e d t o s u b s t a n c e b u t t r u l y e n c o m p a s s e s it. . . . T h e p r o p e r l y H e g e l i a n a n s w e r t o t h i s c r i d c i s m is t h a t there simply is no such

'absolute subject', s i n c e t h e H e g e l i a n s u b j e c t is

nothing

but t h e v e r y m o v e m e n t o f u n i l a t e r a l s e l f - d e c e p t i o n , o f t h e hubris o f p o s i t i n g o n e s e l f in o n e ' s exclusive particularity, w h i c h n e c e s s a r i l y turns

against

i t s e l f a n d e n d s i n s e l f - n e g a t i o n . ' 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 that this m o v e m e n t o f self-deception, by m e a n s o f w h i c h

a

particular

a s p e c t p o s i t s i t s e l f as t h e u n i v e r s a l p r i n c i p l e , is n o t e x t e r n a l t o S u b s t a n c e b u t c o n s t i t u t i v e o f it. F o r t h i s r e a s o n , t h e 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 ' is n o t t h e m a g i c r e t u r n to identity w h i c h follows t h e painful e x p e r i e n c e o f splitting

and

alienation, but

the

the

very r e v e n g e

subject's presumption: against the

o f the

decentred

Other

against

t h e first n e g a t i o n c o n s i s t s i n t h e s u b j e c t ' s m o v e

social S u b s t a n c e

(in his

'criminal' act which

disturbs

the

s u b s t a n t i a l b a l a n c e ) , a n d t h e s u b s e q u e n t ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' is n o t h i n g b u t t h e revenge

of the Substance

(for i n s t a n c e , in psychoanalysis, ' n e g a t i o n '

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH is t h e

subject's repression

into

the

SUBJECT

unconscious

77

of some

substantial

c o n t e n t o f h i s b e i n g , w h i l e t h e ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' is t h e r e t u r n o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ) . T o r e f e r again to t h e well-worn e x a m p l e o f the Beautiful Soul: ' n e g a t i o n ' is t h e B e a u t i f u l S o u l ' s c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s its s o c i a l s u r ­ roundings,

a n d t h e ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' is t h e i n s i g h t i n t o h o w

the

B e a u t i f u l S o u l i t s e l f d e p e n d s o n - a n d t h u s fully p a r t i c i p a t e s i n -

the

w i c k e d u n i v e r s e it p u r p o r t s t o r e j e c t . ' N e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' no

magic

r e v e r s a l ; it s i m p l y s i g n a l s t h e

unavoidable

presupposes

displacement

or

t h w a r t e d n e s s o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s t e l e o l o g i c a l activity. F o r t h a t r e a s o n , insist­ e n c e o n t h e way i n w h i c h n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n c a n a l s o fail, o n h o w t h e splitting c a n also n o t b e f o l l o w e d by the ' r e t u r n to S e l f , t h e r e f o r e misses t h e m a r k : n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n is t h e v e r y l o g i c a l m a t r i x o f t h e n e c e s s a r y f a i l u r e o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s p r o j e c t - t h a t is t o say, a n e g a t i o n w i t h o u t its selfrelating

negation

would

be

precisely the

successful

realization

of

the

s u b j e c t ' s t e l e o l o g i c a l activity. 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

speak

on

the

action

which,

in

addition,

does

not

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

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

as

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; narrative c o n t e x t and

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

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

the own

78

THE TICKLISH

SUBJECT

p r e d i c a m e n t . . . . I n b o t h c a s e s , i n Dune

a n d i n J Love Lucy,

i n n o c e n t p r o c e d u r e t h r e a t e n s the very f o u n d a t i o n

this a p p a r e n t l y

o f the standard onto­

l o g i c a l e d i f i c e ; it i n s c r i b e s a s u b j e c t i v e p o i n t o f v i e w i n t o t h e v e r y h e a r t o f ' o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y ' . I n o t h e r w o r d s , it u n d e r m i n e s t h e o p p o s i t i o n naive objectivism a n d

transcendental

between

subjectivism: we have n e i t h e r

the

' o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y ' t h a t is g i v e n i n a d v a n c e , w i t h a m u l t i t u d e o f s u b j e c t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e s p r o v i d i n g d i s t o r t e d views o f it, n o r its t r a n s c e n d e n t a l

counter­

point, the unified Subject who encompasses and constitutes the whole o f r e a l i t y ; w h a t w e h a v e is t h e p a r a d o x o f m u l t i p l e s u b j e c t s w h o a r e

included

i n r e a l i t y , e m b e d d e d i n it, a n d w h o s e p e r s p e c t i v e s o n r e a l i t y a r e n o n e t h e l e s s c o n s t i t u t i v e o f it. W h a t L y n c h is s t r i v i n g t o i l l u s t r a t e is t h e

ambiguous

a n d u n c a n n y s t a t u s o f s u b j e c t i v e i l l u s i o n w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y as a n i l l u s i o n ( a d i s t o r t e d view o f r e a l i t y ) , c o n s t i t u t e s reality: i f we s u b t r a c t f r o m reality t h e i l l u s o r y p e r s p e c t i v e o n it, w e l o s e r e a l i t y i t s e l f . 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, character

in a n u n p r e c e d e n t e d

of the subject's

activity

way, the analogically

with the subject's

irreducible

constitutive

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

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

in

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

standard Idealist n o t i o n o f 'subjective constitution' r e a l i t y as such,

L a c a n from

the

(according to which

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

esse = percipi, o f ' b e i n g t h e r e ' o n l y f o r t h e s u b j e c t ' s g a z e ) : L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f t h e b l i n d s p o t i n r e a l i t y introduces

anamorphic

distortion

into reality itself.

T h e f a c t t h a t r e a l i t y is t h e r e f o r t h e s u b j e c t o n l y must be inscribed itself in the guise of an anamorphic

in reality

stain - t h i s s t a i n s t a n d s f o r t h e g a z e o f t h e

O t h e r , f o r t h e g a z e qua o b j e c t . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e a n a m o r p h i c

stain

corrects the standard 'subjective idealism' by r e n d e r i n g t h e gap b e t w e e n t h e e y e a n d t h e g a z e : t h e p e r c e i v i n g s u b j e c t is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y g a z e d

at

f r o m a p o i n t that e l u d e s his eyes.

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 quintuplicity. H o w

pertinent,

tripartite

'rhythm'

then,

is t h e

form

o f triad,

that

is, t h e

infamous

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 Let

us t a k e as t h e

subjectivity.

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 : process, between the starting i m m e d i a c y a n d

the m i d d l e

moment

the concluding

of a

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

traditional

opposition

o f 3 and 7

n u m b e r s in o r i e n t a l t h o u g h t . )

4

to

as t h e

nature

points

masculine'

and

towards

the

'feminine'

80

THE

There

is, h o w e v e r ,

TICKLISH

another,

much

SUBJECT

more

substantial

and

pertinent

exemplification o f the logic o f quadruplicity. T h e Idea, the kingdom o f Logic, o f pure conceptual determinations,

o f ' G o d p r i o r to t h e act o f

C r e a t i o n ' , c a n b e n e g a t e d i n two ways: i n t h e g u i s e o f N a t u r e as w e l l as i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e f i n i t e S p i r i t . N a t u r e is t h e i m m e d i a t e n e g a t i o n o f t h e I d e a ; it s t a n d s distinct from

f o r t h e I d e a i n its i n d i f f e r e n t

spatial externality.

i t is t h e f i n i t e S p i r i t , a c t i v e s u b j e c t i v i t y , w h i c h

infinite right a n d o p p o s e s itself to t h e U n i v e r s a l , disturbing balance, subordinating

the

interest o f the W h o l e

to

Quite

a s s e r t s its its o r g a n i c

its e g o t i s m ;

this

n e g a t i o n is s e l f - r e l a t e d , it is ' E v i l ' , t h e m o m e n t o f F a l l ( i n c o n t r a s t

to

N a t u r e ' s i n n o c e n c e ) . T h e p a r a d o x o f t h i s s e c o n d n e g a t i o n is t h a t it is m o r e radical, the m o m e n t o f infinite pain, self-alienation; but, for very r e a s o n , c l o s e r to R e c o n c i l i a t i o n : s i n c e , i n t h e c a s e o f t h e

finite

that Self,

t h e F a l l f r o m T o t a l i t y is s e l f - r e l a t e d , p o s i t e d as s u c h , it is a l s o p r e s e n t as the l o n g i n g for r e u n i f i c a t i o n with the lost Totality. . . . V i t t o r i o H o s l e ' s i d e a is t h a t t h e m o m e n t o f R e c o n c i l i a t i o n w h i c h s h o u l d t h e n f o l l o w t h a t o f the

finite

s p i r i t is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e ' o b j e c t i v e ' S p i r i t , i n w h i c h

two d i v i d e d m o m e n t s , n a t u r e a n d o f i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e Sittlichkeil

finite

the

spirit, are r e c o n c i l e d : t h e totality

as m a n ' s ' s e c o n d n a t u r e ' .

8

T h e entire system

c o u l d t h u s b e c o m p o s e d o f f o u r m o m e n t s : t h e l o g i c a l I d e a , its i m m e d i a t e e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n i n N a t u r e , its a b s t r a c t ' r e t u r n t o i t s e l f i n t h e finite s u b j e c t o p p o s e d to N a t u r e , a n d t h e f o u r t h

m o m e n t , ethical Substance, 'second

n a t u r e ' , as t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n b e t w e e n N a t u r e a n d

finite

Spirit. A c c o r d i n g

to H o s l c , H e g e l ' s i n s i s t e n c e o n T r i a d against q u a d r u p l i c i t y h i n g e s o n his f a i l u r e p r o p e r l y t o g r a s p t h e l o g i c o f i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y as o p p o s e d t o t h e m o n a d i c S u b j e c t a n d its d i a l e c t i c a l m o v e m e n t t o w a r d s t h e O b j e c t . These problems

overdetermine

Hegel's oscillation between

o v e r a l l s t r u c t u r e s o f h i s L o g i c , as w e l l as b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t between

L o g i c itself a n d

the

Realphilosophie.

In

his L o g i c ,

different

correlations the

triadic

a r t i c u l a t i o n o f B e i n g - E s s e n c e - N o t i o n o v e r l a p s s t r a n g e l y with t h e

dyadic

split i n t o ' o b j e c t i v e l o g i c ' ( B e i n g a n d E s s e n c e ) a n d the 'subjective l o g i c ' of

the

Notion

-

in

clear contrast

to

the

overall

articulation

of

the

dialectical process in which subjectivity c o m e s s e c o n d a n d stands for the moment

o f split, negativity, loss. F o r H o s l e , w h o

is q u i t e j u s t i f i e d

in

e m p h a s i z i n g h o w g a m e s with 'alternative h i s t o r i e s ' , with possible different versions o f H e g e l ' s system, are d e e p l y productive, t h e s y m p t o m a t i c weak point, the p o i n t o f failure that betrays the p r o b l e m a t i c n a t u r e o f 'subjec­ tive l o g i c ' as t h e c o n c l u d i n g m o m e n t o f t h e e n t i r e L o g i c , is t h e p a s s a g e f r o m its first p a r t t o ' o b j e c t i v i t y ' , w h i c h t h r o w s us b a c k t o s t r u c t u r e s w h i c h p r o p e r l y b e l o n g to t h e d o m a i n o f E s s e n c e (causal m e c h a n i s m s ) , to

the

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

81

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

existence); the

already

'autopoiesis'

o f life, w h i c h

teleology; L a c a n ' s notion o f 'logical

time';

displays an

actual

internal

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 , 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

the

Haber-

mas discerned the m o d e l o f the intersubjective communicational process? However,

we

still h a v e

to

face

the

question

o f whether

the

S u b s t a n c e is e f f e c t i v e l y t h e a c c o m p l i s h e d r e c o n c i l i a t i o n b e t w e e n

social Nature

a n d f i n i t e S p i r i t : is it n o t t h a t a g a p f o r e v e r p e r s i s t s b e t w e e n t h e

'first'

n a t u r e a n d the ' s e c o n d ' ? Is n o t t h e ' s e c o n d n a t u r e ' a p r e c a r i o u s state o f balance

that

contingency

can be

destroyed

(the proverbial

self-destruction

at a n y m o m e n t ,

e i t h e r by an

c o m e t h i t t i n g t h e E a r t h ) o r by

external

humanity's

t h r o u g h war or ecological catastrophe? F u r t h e r m o r e ,

is

n o t t h e o b j e c t o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s p r e c i s e l y t h i s g a p b e t w e e n first a n d s e c o n d n a t u r e - the i n s e c u r e position o f a h u m a n s u b j e c t w h o , after losing his

82

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 passage

from

first

to

in der Kultur,

second

nature

t h e d i f f e r e n t way t h e s u b j e c t ' s

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 , b e e n quadruple:

'objective logic'

prc-subjective reality) a n d

'subjective logic'

the finite subject's reasoning, from

(describing the structure

n o t i o n to syllogism) should

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 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 between

first

and

have

(describing the categorial structures o f

second nature),

be

of fol­

(since the intersubjecitself a n d objectivity,

'absolute logic'. In Lacanian

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

terms,

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 d u a l i t y o f Realphilosophie philosophie

mere

( 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

into the triad o f N a t u r e -

finite

Spirit -

Real­

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 p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n L o g i c a n d Realphilosophie,

perfect

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 ? this

passion

strives

to

suspend

the

domain

o f Culture

Although

( 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

satisfaction remain

needs a cultural

operative.

TICKLISH

prosthesis,

SUBJECT

some kind

of symbolic

crutch,

in order to

I t is o n l y at t h i s l e v e l , i n t h e ' p e r v e r s e ' c u l t u r a l i z a t i o n o f

the sexual impetus

itself, t h a t w e o b t a i n

the actual

'reconciliation' of

Nature and Culture."' A l o n g these lines, o n e can also a c c o u n t for the 'secret' o f the b i p a r t i t e s t r u c t u r e o f H e g e l ' s Phenomenology:

actual

the logical c o u n t e r p a r t to the

two p a r t s i n t o w h i c h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f Phenomenology

e v i d e n t l y falls

the ' s y n c h r o n o u s ' triad C o n s c i o u s n e s s - S e l f c o n s c i o u s n e s s - R e a s o n a n d

-

the

' h i s t o r i c a l ' t r i a d S p i r i t - R e l i g i o n - P h i l o s o p h y ( i . e . A b s o l u t e K n o w i n g ) - is t h e d u a l i t y i n e a r l y H e g e l ( u p t o t h e J e n a y e a r s ) o f L o g i c and. M e t a p h y s i c s as t h e two p a r t s o f ' p u r e ' p h i l o s o p h y , w h i c h is t h e n f o l l o w e d b y sophie

(corresponding

Realphilo-

to t h e l a t e r p h i l o s o p h y o f N a t u r e a n d o f S p i r i t ) .

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 a n d M e t a p h y s i c s p r o p e r fits t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n subjective reflexive R e a s o n , to w h i c h o n l y t h e finite reality c a u g h t in t h e n e t w o r k o f r e l a t i o n s / m e d i a t i o n s is a c c e s s i b l e , a n d t h e h u m a n S p i r i t i n s o f a r as it g r a s p s ( o r , r a t h e r , d i r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e s w i t h ) t h e A b s o l u t e i t s e l f b e y o n d all r e f l e x i v e o p p o s i t i o n s being,

o f reason

itself a n d

(of subject and object, o f thought

intuition . . . ) . This distinction,

of

and

course,

remains Schellingian: Hegel 'became Hegel' when he accepted that there is n o A b s o l u t e beyond, o r above t h e r e f l e x i v e o p p o s i t i o n s a n d c o n t r a d i c t i o n s o f t h e F i n i t e - t h e A b s o l u t e is nothing

but t h e m o v e m e n t o f s c l f - s u b l a t i o n

o f t h e s e f i n i t e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s ; i t is n o t b e y o n d r e f l e c t i o n , b u t

absolute

r e f l e c t i o n itself. O n c e H e g e l g a i n e d this i n s i g h t , t h e d i s t i n c t i o n L o g i c a n d Metaphysics h a d to collapse: L o g i c itself h a d to b e

between identified

w i t h ' M e t a p h y s i c s ' , with t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l s c i e n c e o f t h e i n h e r e n t c a t e g o r ial n e t w o r k t h a t d e t e r m i n e s e v e r y c o n c e i v a b l e f o r m o f r e a l i t y . 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

( m i s ) p e r c e i v e d as a m e r e organon, our

grasping

the Absolute -

becoming

aware

of

how

what

we

introductory tools, preparatory step, to

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 the domain

of our finite

reflected reasoning,

to presuppose

that, above and

there is an Absolute

beyond

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 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

' L o g i c ' in 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 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

the

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 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

Phenomenology

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

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

simul­

unresolved

ambiguity). For

Hegel,

Reason

is n o t

another,

'higher'

capacity

than

that

of

' a b s t r a c t ' U n d e r s t a n d i n g ; w h a t d e f i n e s U n d e r s t a n d i n g is t h e v e r y i l l u s i o n t h a t , b e y o n d it, t h e r e is a n o t h e r d o m a i n

( e i t h e r t h e ineffable Mystical o r

R e a s o n ) w h i c h e l u d e s its d i s c u r s i v e g r a s p . I n s h o r t , t o g e t f r o m standing

to R e a s o n , o n e

c o n t r a r y , t o subtract

does n o t have

to

add

anything,

Under­

but, o n

s o m e t h i n g : w h a t H e g e l c a l l s ' R e a s o n ' is

the

Understanding

itself, b e r e f t o f t h e i l l u s i o n 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 it. T h i s is w h y , i n t h e d i r e c t c h o i c e b e t w e e n U n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d R e a s o n , o n e h a s first t o choose Understanding:

n o t in o r d e r

to play the stupid

game

o f self-

b l i n d i n g ( t h e a b s o l u t e s u b j e c t first h a s t o a l i e n a t e itself, t o p o s i t e x t e r n a l r e a l i t y as i n d e p e n d e n t o f itself, i n o r d e r t o s u p e r s e d e / s u b l a t e tion

this a l i e n a ­

b y way o f r e c o g n i z i n g i n it its o w n p r o d u c t . . . ) , b u t f o r t h e s i m p l e

r e a s o n t h a t there is nothing Understanding;

outside

or beyond Understanding.

F i r s t , we c h o o s e

t h e n , in t h e s e c o n d m o v e , we choose Understanding

again,

o n l y w i t h o u t a n y t h i n g in a d d i t i o n to it (i.e. w i t h o u t t h e illusion that t h e r e is a n o t h e r ,

' h i g h e r ' c a p a c i t y b e y o n d o r b e n e a t h it, e v e n i f t h i s

'higher'

86

THE

c a p a c i t y is c a l l e d R e a s o n ) -

TICKLISH

and

SUBJECT

this U n d e r s t a n d i n g ,

deprived

of

the

i l l u s i o n 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 it, is R e a s o n . T h i s e n a b l e s us to throw s o m e n e w l i g h t o n t h e a g e - o l d q u e s t i o n o f t h e relationship between Kant and Hegel. Today's Kantians' most convincing a n s w e r t o H e g e l ' s c r i t i c i s m o f K a n t (as e x e m p l i f i e d , say, i n h i s d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n o f the i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s a n d d i s p l a c e m e n t s d i s c e r n i b l e in ' m o r a l v i e w o f t h e w o r l d ' i n Phenomenology

of Spirit)

is a s i m p l e : so

the what?

W h a t H e g e l c r i t i c i z e s as i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s ( t h e f a c t t h a t K a n t ' s m o r a l theoryp o s i t s t h e necessity o f e t h i c a l a c t i v i t y , w h i l e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y m a k i n g a t r u e e t h i c a l a c t impossible

to accomplish,

e t c . ) is p r e c i s e l y t h e p a r a d o x o f t h e

a u t h e n t i c K a n t i a n p o s i t i o n . . . . T h e H e g e l i a n a n s w e r to this w o u l d t r u e , b u t K a n t is n o t a b l e t o acknowledge, that provide adding

t o state openly, t h e s e

be:

paradoxes

t h e very c o r e o f h i s p h i l o s o p h i c a l e d i f i c e ; a n d , f a r

from

a n y t h i n g t o K a n t (say, t h e ' h i g h e r ' c a p a c i t y o f R e a s o n t h a t is a b l e

to m o v e b e y o n d the K a n t i a n o p p o s i t e s o f n o u m e n a l a n d p h e n o m e n a l , o f f r e e d o m a n d n e c e s s i t y , e t c . ) , Hegel's the paradoxes

constitutive

of Kant's

critique simply openly states and

position.

I t is e n o u g h

assumes

to m e n t i o n

the

r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n E s s e n c e a n d its A p p e a r i n g : K a n t , o f c o u r s e , ' i m p l i c ­ itly' a l r e a d y k n o w s t h a t t h e n o u m e n a l E s s e n c e b e y o n d p h e n o m e n a l realityis n o t s i m p l y a t r a n s c e n d e n t I n - i t s e l f , b u t s o m e h o w h a s t o appear

within

t h i s v e r y r e a l i t y ( s e e h i s w e l l - k n o w n e x a m p l e o f e n t h u s i a s m as a sign o f n o u m e n a l F r e e d o m : in t h e e n t h u s i a s m g e n e r a t e d by t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u ­ tion in e n l i g h t e n e d appeared

o b s e r v e r s all a r o u n d

Europe, noumenal

Freedom

as t h e b e l i e f in t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a h i s t o r i c a l a c t w h i c h , as it w e r e ,

s t a r t s ex nihilo - w h i c h s u s p e n d s

the chain o f causal d e p e n d e n c i e s

and

realizes f r e e d o m ) ; however, this u l t i m a t e identity o f t h e n o u m e n a l

with

t h e a p p e a r a n c e r e m a i n e d ' i n i t s e l f f o r K a n t - w i t h i n h i s e d i f i c e , it w a s n o t p o s s i b l e e x p l i c i t l y t o s t a t e t h a t n o u m e n a l F r e e d o m is nothing r u p t u r e within p h e n o m e n a l reality, t h e p r e m o n i t i o n o f a n o t h e r s i o n w h i c h appears w i t h i n p h e n o m e n a l r e a l i t y .

T h e Speculative

but a dimen­

11

Identity o f Substance and Subject

S o , to r e t u r n to H o s l e ' s basic c r i t i c i s m o f H e g e l : H e g e l misses the for

the

second

Reconciliation between

Nature

and

Spirit

(qua

need

Nature

r e t u r n e d i n t o i t s e l f f r o m its e x t e r n a l i t y ) , b e c a u s e h e fails t o d e p l o y all t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e m o v e m e n t o f Er-Innerung

(internaliza­

t i o n o f t h e e x t e r n a l , o f w h a t is m e r e l y g i v e n as n e c e s s a r y - c o n t i n g e n t ) is strictly

correlative

to

the

opposite

movement

of

cxternalization,

of

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

87

r e n e w e d ' n a t u r a l i z a t i o n ' . H e g e l , w h o always e m p h a s i z e s t h e a s p e c t o f ErInnerung,

o f t h e Spirit's ' r e t u r n to i t s e l f f r o m t h e e x t e r n a l i t y o f N a t u r e ,

does n o t sufficiendy take into a c c o u n t the opposite m o v e m e n t o f extern a l i z a t i o n - t h e f a c t t h a t t h e S p i r i t w h i c h ' r e t u r n s t o i t s e l f f r o m N a t u r e ' is still t h e f i n i t e S p i r i t a b s t r a c t l y o p p o s e d t o N a t u r e , a n d s h o u l d as s u c h , i n yet a n o t h e r dialectical t u r n o f the screw, b e a g a i n r e c o n c i l e d with N a t u r e . . . . I t s e e m s , n o n e t h e less t h a t H d s l e m i s s e s h e r e t h e p r o p e r m o v e in which

'abstract' internalization

(withdrawal

Hegelian

to the Interior o f

t h o u g h t ) is a c c o m p a n i e d b y - is a n o t h e r a s p e c t o f - t h e a s s e r t i o n o f t h e meaningless externality abstractly o p p o s e d

to the subject. T h e

classical

p o l i t i c a l e x a m p l e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t o f t h e R o m a n E m p i r e , i n w h i c h s u b j e c t w i t h d r a w s f r o m t h e Sittlichkeit f r e e d o m a n d , for that very reason,

the

o f t h e G r e e k polis i n t o a b s t r a c t i n n e r

e x t e r n a l i t y a s s e r t s its r i g h t i n t h e g u i s e o f

t h e s t a t e p o w e r o f t h e E m p i r e e x p e r i e n c e d b y t h e s u b j e c t as a n e x t e r n a l p o w e r in which h e n o l o n g e r r e c o g n i z e s his ethical substance. T h e m o s t e l e m e n t a r y f o r m o f t h e S p i r i t ' s e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n , o f c o u r s e , is language,

as H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s a g a i n a n d a g a i n , o u r i n n e r e x p e r i e n c e c a n

s h e d the traces o f external senses a n d a c q u i r e the form o f a p u r e

thought

o n l y b y a g a i n b e c o m i n g e x t e r n a l i z e d i n a m e a n i n g l e s s s i g n - w e think o n l y i n words, i n l a n g u a g e . T h e s a m e g o e s f o r customs in g e n e r a l : c u s t o m s f o r m the necessary b a c k g r o u n d , the space o f o u r social freedom. A n d the same g o e s f o r t h e s o c i a l S u b s t a n c e itself, f o r t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f Sittlichkeit, L a c a n i a n ' b i g O t h e r ' , w h i c h is p r e c i s e l y o u r ' s e c o n d n a t u r e ' : spirit', the spirit's r e n e w e d naturalization a n d / o r

the

'objective

externalization.

1 2

I n a n a p p r o a c h t o H e g e l w h i c h , w i t h its e m p h a s i s o n h i s t o r i c a l d i a l e c t i c as t h e o n l y a s p e c t o f H e g e l w o r t h s a v i n g , is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f H o s l e ' s systematic r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , Charles T a y l o r also e n d e a v o u r s

to deploy

the

i n n e r inconsistency o f the Hegelian logic o f cxternalization o f the Idea. A c c o r d i n g to T a y l o r ,

1 3

t h e H e g e l i a n S p i r i t h a s t w o e m b o d i m e n t s : it p o s i t s

its p r e s u p p o s i t i o n , its c o n d i t i o n s o f e x i s t e n c e , and it e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f in its b o d i l y e x t e r i o r . I n t h e case o f t h e A b s o l u t e Spirit, t h e two

embodiments

c o i n c i d e , w h i l e i n t h e c a s e o f m a n qua f i n i t e b e i n g , t h e two a r e f o r e v e r s e p a r a t e d - t h a t is t o say, m a n is always 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 o f e x i s t e n c e w h i c h h e c a n n o t e v e r fully ' i n t e r n a l i z e ' , t r a n s f o r m

into

an

e x p r e s s i o n o f h i s s u b j e c t i v i t y - t h e r e is always a n e l e m e n t o f c o n t i n g e n t externality which persists. T h e first a s s o c i a t i o n h e r e , o f c o u r s e , is S c h e l l i n g : t h e p o i n t o f S c h e l ling's

distinction

between

Divine

Existence

and

its

insurmountable

G r o u n d is t h a t t h e g a p t h a t f o r e v e r s e p a r a t e s e x p r e s s i o n f r o m conditions

o f existence holds

also for

the Absolute

Subject,

external for

God

88

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 histori 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

contingency-fnitude,

to Him

the fundamental

postulate

of

temporality-

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

finite h u m a n subject. W e thus

finish

the infinite absolute Subject a n d the

(self-)consciousness o f the

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 , 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

S p i r i t is a b o n e ' . T h e p o i n t foundation

is n o t

that

the

Substance

(the

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

'the

ultimate 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

substantial

reappropriates

it, a n d

so o n :

agency o f phenomenalization,

'Subject'

stands

appearance,

for the

non-

'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 notion o f their

identity o f S u b s t a n c e and

Subject,

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

the

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 subjects.

T h i s also o p e n s

O t h e r who speaks 'through' up

the

false,

finite

pseudo-Hegelian

human

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 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

'preponder­ 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.

T h e Hegelian Forced Choice These

paradoxes

provide

a clue to

the

Hegelian

opposition

between

' c o n c r e t e ' a n d ' a b s t r a c t ' u n i v e r s a l i t y . H e g e l was t h e first t o e l a b o r a t e t h e p r o p e r l y m o d e r n n o t i o n o f individualization

through secondary

identification.

A t t h e b e g i n n i n g , t h e s u b j e c t is i m m e r s e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r l i f e - f o r m i n t o w h i c h h e was b o r n ( f a m i l y , l o c a l c o m m u n i t y ) ; t h e o n l y w a y f o r h i m t o t e a r h i m s e l f away f r o m h i s p r i m o r d i a l

' o r g a n i c ' c o m m u n i t y , to cut his links

w i t h it a n d a s s e r t h i m s e l f as a n ' a u t o n o m o u s i n d i v i d u a l ' , is t o s h i f t h i s fundamental

a l l e g i a n c e , to

recognize

the

substance

o f his

a n o t h e r , s e c o n d a r y c o m m u n i t y , w h i c h is u n i v e r s a l a n d , 'artificial';

no

longer

'spontaneous'

activity o f i n d e p e n d e n t

free

but

subjects

'mediated,'

(nation

being

sustained

versus

in

simultaneously

local

by

the

community;

p r o f e s s i o n in t h e m o d e r n s e n s e - j o b in a l a r g e a n o n y m o u s c o m p a n y versus

the

'personalized'

master-artisan;

the

ditional wisdom

relationship

between

an

apprentice

academic community o f knowledge

passed from

generation

and

versus

to g e n e r a t i o n ;

the

etc., up

-

his tra­ to

a

m o t h e r who relies m o r e on child-care manuals than o n parental advice). T h i s shift f r o m p r i m a r y t o s e c o n d a r y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n d o e s n o t i n v o l v e a d i r e c t loss o f p r i m a r y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s : w h a t h a p p e n s is t h a t p r i m a r y i d e n t i ­ fications

u n d e r g o a k i n d o f t r a n s u b s t a n t i a t i o n ; t h e y s t a r t to f u n c t i o n

the form o f a p p e a r a n c e o f the universal secondary identification

as

(say,

precisely by b e i n g a g o o d m e m b e r o f m y family, I t h e r e b y c o n t r i b u t e to t h e p r o p e r f u n c t i o n i n g o f m y n a t i o n - s t a t e ) . T h e r e i n lies t h e

Hegelian

difference

between

universal

secondary

identification

'abstract'

and

remains

' c o n c r e t e ' universality: t h e 'abstract'

in

so

far

as it is

directly

o p p o s e d t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r f o r m s o f p r i m a r y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - t h a t is, i n s o f a r as it c o m p e l s t h e s u b j e c t t o r e n o u n c e h i s p r i m a r y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s ; i t becomes

'concrete' when

forming

them

into

it r e i n t e g r a t e s

the

modes

of

'abstract'

and

primary

appearance

identifications, of

the

trans­

secondary

identification. This tension

between

' c o n c r e t e ' u n i v e r s a l i t y is clearly-

d i s c e r n i b l e in t h e p r e c a r i o u s social status o f t h e e a r l y C h r i s t i a n

Church:

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

91

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 ,

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 -

peasant,

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 a b s t r a c t Sollen,

(the moral Law) functions

as

the

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

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

the 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

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,

common),

and

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 sellc 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

THE TICKLISH

92

SUBJECT

i n t o e x i s t e n c e ' as universal,

t h a t is, b y o p p o s i n g i t s e l f to all its p a r t i c u l a r

content,

a

by e n t e r i n g

into

'negative

relationship'

with

its

particular

content. W i t h r e g a r d to t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n a b s t r a c t a n d c o n c r e t e U n i v e r s a l ­ ity, t h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e o n l y way t o w a r d s a truly ' c o n c r e t e ' u n i v e r s a l i t y l e a d s t h r o u g h t h e full a s s e r t i o n o f t h e r a d i c a l n e g a t i v i t y by m e a n s o f w h i c h the

universal

negates

its e n t i r e

particular

content: despite

misleading

a p p e a r a n c e s , it is t h e ' m u t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' o f t h e n e u t r a l c o n t a i n e r o f 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 is t h e p r e d o m i n a n t f o r m o f a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l i t y . I n o t h e r w o r d s , 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 b e c o m e ' c o n c r e t e ' is t o stop being a neutral-abstract m e d i u m

o f its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t , a n d

include

W h a t this m e a n s is t h a t , p a r a d o x ­

itself among

its particular

subspecies.

to

ically, t h e first s t e p t o w a r d s ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' is t h e r a d i c a l n e g a t i o n o f the entire particular c o n t e n t : only t h r o u g h such a n e g a t i o n d o e s the Universal gain

e x i s t e n c e , b e c o m e visible 'as s u c h ' . H e r e

let us

H e g e l ' s analysis o f p h r e n o l o g y , w h i c h closes the c h a p t e r o n R e a s o n ' i n his Phenomenology:

recall

'Observing

H e g e l resorts to an e x p l i c i t p h a l l i c m e t a p h o r

i n o r d e r t o e x p l a i n t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f t h e two p o s s i b l e r e a d i n g s o f t h e proposition reading -

'the

S p i r i t is a b o n e '

(the vulgar-materialist

t h e s h a p e o f o u r skull actually a n d

'reductionist'

directly d e t e r m i n e s

the

f e a t u r e s o f o u r m i n d - a n d t h e s p e c u l a t i v e r e a d i n g - t h e s p i r i t is s t r o n g enough

t o a s s e r t its i d e n t i t y w i t h

the

m o s t u t t e r l y i n e r t stuff,

and

to

' s u b l a t e ' it - t h a t is t o say, e v e n t h e m o s t u t t e r l y i n e r t s t u f f c a n n o t e s c a p e t h e S p i r i t ' s p o w e r o f m e d i a t i o n ) . T h e v u l g a r - m a t e r i a l i s t r e a d i n g is l i k e t h e a p p r o a c h w h i c h sees in t h e p h a l l u s o n l y t h e o r g a n o f u r i n a t i o n , while t h e s p e c u l a t i v e r e a d i n g is a l s o a b l e t o d i s c e r n in i t t h e m u c h h i g h e r f u n c t i o n o f i n s e m i n a t i o n ( i . e . p r e c i s e l y ' c o n c e p t i o n ' as t h e b i o l o g i c a l a n t i c i p a t i o n of

concept). O n a first a p p r o a c h , w e a r e d e a l i n g h e r e w i t h t h e w e l l - k n o w n e l e m e n ­

tary m o v e m e n t o f Aufhebung

('sublation'): you must go t h r o u g h the lowest

i n o r d e r o n c e m o r e to r e a c h t h e h i g h e s t , t h e l o s t t o t a l i t y ( y o u m u s t l o s e t h e i m m e d i a t e reality in t h e s e l f - c o n t r a c t i o n o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' in o r d e r t o r e g a i n i t as ' p o s i t e d ' , m e d i a t e d b y t h e s y m b o l i c activity o f t h e subject; you must r e n o u n c e the immediate organic W h o l e a n d

submit

y o u r s e l f t o t h e m o r t i f y i n g activity o f a b s t r a c t U n d e r s t a n d i n g i n o r d e r regain

t h e l o s t t o t a l i t y at a h i g h e r ,

'mediated'

l e v e l , as t h e

to

totality o f

R e a s o n ) . T h i s m o v e t h u s s e e m s t o o f f e r i t s e l f as a n i d e a l t a r g e t o f t h e s t a n d a r d c r i t i c i s m : yes, o f c o u r s e H e g e l r e c o g n i z e s t h e h o r r o r o f t h e p s y c h ­ o t i c s e l f - c o n t r a c t i o n a n d its ' l o s s o f r e a l i t y ' , y e s , h e a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e n e e d f o r a b s t r a c t d i s m e m b e r m e n t , b u t o n l y as a s t e p , a d e t o u r o n t h e

trium-

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

93

p h a n t path which, a c c o r d i n g to the i n e x o r a b l e dialectical necessity, leads us b a c k t o t h e r e c o n s t i t u t e d o r g a n i c W h o l e . . . . O u r c o n t e n t i o n is t h a t s u c h a r e a d i n g misses the point o f H e g e l ' s a r g u m e n t a t i o n : 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 remains at the level o f picture-thinking behaves as u r i n a t i o n . 15

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 p o s s i b l e to c h o o s e t h e

is the infallible

way to miss it it is n o t

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 modern

feature o f modernity. S i n c e the subject-citizen o f a

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

social role that confers o n h i m a d e t e r m i n a t e

in s o m e

particular

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 leads through the h o r r o r o f revolutionary T e r r o r : o n e should

state

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

r e v o l u t i o n a r y T e r r o r in h i s Phenomenology

famous

analysis o f

the

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 selfd 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 wrong

were

the

late-nineteenth-century

conservative

British

how

Hegelians

THE

94

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

(Bradley a n d o t h e r s ) , who i n t e r p r e t e d the social logic o f H e g e l ' s c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y as d e m a n d i n g

the identification o f e a c h individual with h i s /

h e r specific post within the d e f i n e d a n d hierarchical W h o l e o f the global social body -

t h i s , p r e c i s e l y , is w h a t t h e m o d e r n

n o t i o n o f subjectivity

precludes. I n o t h e r w o r d s , ' 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 '

means

that when

we a r e c o n f r o n t e d

with

the

c h o i c e between the organic W h o l e a n d the 'madness' o f the

radical

unilateral

feature which throws the W h o l e o u t o f j o i n t a n d i n t o d a m a g i n g

imbal­

a n c e , t h i s c h o i c e h a s t h e s t r u c t u r e o f a f o r c e d c h o i c e - t h a t is t o say, o n e h a s to c h o o s e u n i l a t e r a l ' m a d n e s s ' a g a i n s t t h e o r g a n i c W h o l e . S o w h e n o n e is c o n f r o n t e d b y t h e c h o i c e b e t w e e n t h e p r e m o d e r n

organic social

Body a n d the revolutionary T e r r o r which unleashes the destructive force o f a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y , one has to choose Terror - o n l y i n this way c a n

one

create the terrain for the new post-revolutionary reconciliation b e t w e e n the d e m a n d s o f social O r d e r and the abstract f r e e d o m o f the individual. T h e m o n s t r o s i t y o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y T e r r o r is a n a b s o l u t e l y i n d i s p e n s a b l e 'vanishing mediator'

-

this o u t b u r s t

o f radical negativity which

under­

m i n e d t h e o l d e s t a b l i s h e d o r d e r ; c l e a r e d t h e s l a t e , as it w e r e , f o r t h e n e w rational order o f the m o d e r n Siltlichkeit/Moralitat

State.

1 7

T h e same holds for the

couple

for the opposition between the subject's immersion

in his c o n c r e t e social life-world a n d his a b s t r a c t

individualist/universal

m o r a l o p p o s i t i o n to this c o n c r e t e i n h e r i t e d u n i v e r s e ; in this c h o i c e , o n e h a s t o c h o o s e Moralitat,

t h a t is, t h e a c t o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l w h o , o n b e h a l f o f

a l a r g e r u n i v e r s a l i t y , u n d e r m i n e s t h e d e t e r m i n a t e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f mores w h i c h defines his society ( S o c r a t e s versus the

c o n c r e t e totality o f

the

G r e e k city; C h r i s t v e r s u s t h e c o n c r e t e t o t a l i t y o f J e w s ) . H e g e l is fully a w a r e that

the

positive f o r m

in w h i c h

this a b s t r a c t universality gains

actual

e x i s t e n c e is t h a t o f e x t r e m e v i o l e n c e : t h e o b v e r s e o f t h e i n n e r p e a c e o f U n i v e r s a l i t y is t h e d e s t r u c t i v e fury t o w a r d s all p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t , t h a t is t o say, t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y 'in b e c o m i n g ' is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f t h e

peaceful

n e u t r a l m e d i u m o f all p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t - o n l y i n t h i s way c a n u n i v e r s a l i t y b e c o m e ' f o r i t s e l f ; o n l y i n t h i s way c a n ' p r o g r e s s ' t a k e p l a c e . O n e can thus precisely d e t e r m i n e the m o m e n t when

'Hegel became

H e g e l ' : only when h e r e n o u n c e d t h e a e s t h e t i c / G r e e k vision o f the o r g a n i c s o c i a l t o t a l i t y o f Sittlichkeit

( w h i c h f o u n d its m o s t a r t i c u l a t e e x p r e s s i o n in

t h e p o s t h u m o u s l y p u b l i s h e d System der Sittlichkeit

[ 1 8 0 2 - 0 3 ] , a text which

d e f i n i t e l y p o i n t s t o w a r d s w h a t was l a t e r d e v e l o p e d as t h e ' o r g a n i c ' p r o t o Fascist corporate-organicist n o t i o n o f society) -

t h a t is t o say, w h e n

he

b e c a m e fully a w a r e t h a t t h e o n l y p a t h t o t r u e c o n c r e t e t o t a l i t y is t h a t i n

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

95

every d i r e c t c h o i c e b e t w e e n abstract negativity a n d a c o n c r e t e W h o l e , t h e s u b j e c t h a s t o c h o o s e a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y . T h i s s h i f t is m o s t c l e a r l y d e t e c t ­ a b l e in y o u n g H e g e l ' s o s c i l l a t i o n in his a p p r e c i a t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n i t y : H e g e l ' b e c o m e s H e g e l ' w h e n h e fully e n d o r s e s t h e d i s r u p t i v e tive'

skandalon

'abstractly nega­

o f C h r i s t ' s e m e r g e n c e - w h e n , t h a t is, w h e n h e r e n o u n c e s

t h e n o s t a l g i c h o p e o f a r e t u r n t o a n e w v e r s i o n o f G r e e k mores as a s o l u t i o n to the problems o f modernity. In

this

sense, the

mature

Hegelian

'reconciliation' remains

utterly

a m b i g u o u s : it d e s i g n a t e s t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n o f a split ( t h e h e a l i n g o f t h e w o u n d o f t h e s o c i a l b o d y ) , as well as t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n with t h i s split as t h e n e c e s s a r y p r i c e o f i n d i v i d u a l f r e e d o m . W i t h r e g a r d t o p o l i t i c s , o n e is thus t e m p t e d to turn a r o u n d the standard myth o f the y o u n g

'revolution­

a r y ' H e g e l w h o , in h i s l a t e r y e a r s , b e t r a y e d h i s s u b v e r s i v e o r i g i n s

and

b e c a m e t h e s t a t e p h i l o s o p h e r p r a i s i n g t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r as t h e e m b o d i ­ m e n t o f R e a s o n , as t h e ' a c t u a l l y e x i s t i n g G o d ' : r a t h e r , it was t h e y o u n g H e g e l w h o s e ' r e v o l u t i o n a r y ' p r o j e c t - f r o m t o d a y ' s p e r s p e c t i v e , at l e a s t a n n o u n c e d the Fascist 'aestheticization o f the political,' the establishment o f a new o r g a n i c O r d e r that abolishes m o d e r n individuality; while

Hegel

b e c a m e H e g e l ' t h r o u g h his i n s i s t e n c e o n t h e u n a v o i d a b l e a s s e r t i o n o f t h e ' i n f i n i t e r i g h t o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' — o n h o w t h e r o a d to ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l ­ ity' l e a d s o n l y t h r o u g h t h e full a s s e r t i o n o f ' a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y ' . A n o t h e r way t o d i s c e r n t h i s p a s s a g e f r o m p r e - H e g e l i a n H e g e l t o ' H e g e l w h o b e c a m e H e g e l ' is v i a a s m a l l b u t s i g n i f i c a n t c h a n g e in t h e s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e . I n System der Sittlichkeit,

s o c i e t y is s u b d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e e s t a t e s ,

e a c h involving a specific ethical stance: t h e peasantry with the attitude o f pre-refiexive thrust, immersion into substance; e n t r e p r e n e u r s , the g e o i s class, with

their reflected attitude o f individual

bour­

competition

and

a c h i e v e m e n t (civil s o c i e t y p r o p e r , i n d u s t r y , e x c h a n g e ) ; t h e a r i s t o c r a c y , t h e u n i v e r s a l c l a s s , w h i c h r u n s p o l i t i c a l life a n d g o e s t o w a r , r e a d y t o risk t h e i r lives w h e n n e c e s s a r y . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , a f t e r H e g e l ' b e c a m e H e g e l ' , t h e u n i v e r ­ sal c l a s s is n o l o n g e r t h e a r i s t o c r a c y ( a s l a n d l o r d s , t h e y a r e i n c l u d e d

in

the peasantry), but the e n l i g h t e n e d state bureaucracy. T h e key p o i n t o f t h i s c h a n g e is t h a t

now,

not

only the

aristocracy but

everybody,

any

i n d i v i d u a l f r o m a n y class, c a n b e m o b i l i z e d a t t d h a s to g o t o war: a b s o l u t e n e g a t i v i t y , t h e r i s k o f d e a t h w h i c h d i s s o l v e s all determinate

fixed

a t t a c h m e n t s to a

c o n t e n t , is n o l o n g e r t h e p r i v i l e g e o f a s p e c i f i c c l a s s ,

b e c o m e s a universal r i g h t / o b l i g a t i o n o f every citizen. A b o v e a n d

but

beyond

his specific p l a c e within the social body, every citizen thus p a r t i c i p a t e s in a b s t r a c t / a b s o l u t e n e g a t i v i t y : n o i n d i v i d u a l is c o m p l e t e l y d e l i m i t e d b y w h a t r e d u c e s h i m to his p a r t i c u l a r p l a c e within t h e social edifice.'*

THE

96

TICKLISH

T h i s is w h y , i n t h e p a s s a g e f r o m

SUBJECT

his Introduction

q u o t e d a t l e n g t h i n C h a p t e r 1, H e g e l h a i l s Understanding infinite

power

to

Phenomenology

(not R e a s o n ! ) , its

t o d i s r u p t a n y o r g a n i c l i n k , t o t r e a t as s e p a r a t e d

what

o r i g i n a l l y b e l o n g s t o g e t h e r a n d h a s a c t u a l e x i s t e n c e o n l y as p a r t o f its c o n c r e t e c o n t e x t : h e r e ' U n d e r s t a n d i n g ' is a n o t h e r n a m e f o r w h a t w e h a v e called

'pre-synthetic imagination', for imagination's power

a n y o r g a n i c W h o l e , t h e p o w e r t h a t p r e c e d e s t h e synthesis

to

dissipate

o f imagination

w h o s e h i g h e s t e x p r e s s i o n is logos ( a s H e i d e g g e r l i k e d t o p o i n t o u t , i n o l d G r e e k , legein a l s o m e a n s ' t o c o l l e c t , t o g a t h e r ' ) . T h i s is w h y t h o s e

who

a d v o c a t e t h e s u b j e c t ' s w i l l i n g s u b m i s s i o n to a n d a c c e p t a n c e o f h i s / h e r 7

p r o p e r p l a c e w i t h i n t h e c o n c r e t e totality o f t h e s u b s t a n t i a l O r d e r a r e as f a r f r o m H e g e l as c o u l d b e : t h e v e r y e x i s t e n c e o f s u b j e c t i v i t y i n v o l v e s t h e ' f a l s e ' , ' a b s t r a c t ' c h o i c e o f E v i l , o f C r i m e - t h a t is, a n e x c e s s i v e ' u n i l a t e r a l ' gesture which throws the h a r m o n i o u s O r d e r o f the W h o l e o u t o f b a l a n c e : why? B e c a u s e s u c h a n a r b i t r a r y c h o i c e o f s o m e t h i n g trivial a n d i n s u b s t a n ­ tial, s u c h a n e x e r c i s e o f u t t e r c a p r i c e b a s e d o n n o g o o d r e a s o n ( ' I w a n t it b e c a u s e I w a n t i t ! ' ) , is, p a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h e o n l y way f o r t h e U n i v e r s a l t o a s s e r t i t s e l f ' f o r i t s e l f , a g a i n s t all d e t e r m i n a t e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t . T h i s e n t r y i n t o t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e U n i v e r s a l 'as s u c h , ' i n c o n t r a d i s t i n c ­ t i o n t o all d e t e r m i n a t e

c o n t e n t , this violent u n i l a t e r a l e n d o r s e m e n t o f

s o m e ' a b s t r a c t ' f e a t u r e , w h i c h t e a r s i t o u t o f its c o n c r e t e l i f e - c o n t e x t a n d thus

involves the

mortification

o f the

organic

W h o l e o f Life,

is

the

m o m e n t o f the actualization o f Subject against the b a l a n c e d substantial O r d e r . T h e f e a r t h a t t h e H e g e l i a n d i a l e c t i c a l m o v e m e n t will g e n e r a t e a negativity

'too

strong'

to

be

reinserted

into

the

circle

o f dialectical

m e d i a t i o n is t h u s d e e p l y m i s p l a c e d : t h e f a c t t h a t ' S u b s t a n c e is [ a l s o t o b e c o n c e i v e d o f as] S u b j e c t ' m e a n s that this e x p l o s i o n o f t h e o r g a n i c U n i t y is w h a t always happens i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s , a n d t h e n e w ' m e d i a t e d ' U n i t y w h i c h c o m e s a f t e r w a r d s i n n o way s i g n a l s a r e t u r n ' a t a h i g h e r level' to the lost initial U n i t y - in the newly reinstated t o t a l i t y , w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h a substantially

differentUnity,

'mediated'

a Unity grounded

o n t h e d i s r u p t i v e p o w e r o f n e g a t i v i t y , a U n i t y i n w h i c h this negativity assumes positive

itself

existence,.

P e r h a p s this is t h e s o u r c e o f t h e u n r e s o l v e d t e n s i o n t h a t e n d s H e g e l ' s Logic,

t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n L i f e a n d K n o w l e d g e as t h e two p a r a d i g m s o f

t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a : i n L i f e , t h e P a r t i c u l a r is still s u b m e r g e d i n t h e U n i v e r s a l - t h a t is t o say, L i f e is a d y n a m i c s y s t e m i n w h i c h t h e U n i v e r s a l r e p r o d u c e s i t s e l f t h r o u g h t h e i n c e s s a n t p r o c e s s o f t h e e m e r g i n g a n d p a s s i n g o f f o f its p a r t i c u l a r m o m e n t s , a system k e p t alive by t h e very p e r p e t u a l d y n a m i c s o f t h e s e l l - m o v e m e n t o f its c o n s t i t u e n t s ; h o w e v e r , s u c h a s y s t e m , in w h i c h

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

97

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? 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

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

(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 purelyf 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

is t o say, t h e v e r y p a s s i v e ' w i t h d r a w a l '

SUBJECT

by m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e

thought

' s e c e d e s ' , 'splits o f f f r o m its o b j e c t , a c q u i r e s a d i s t a n c e , v i o l e n t l y t e a r s itself o f f ' t h e flow o f t h i n g s ' , a s s u m i n g t h e s t a n c e o f a n ' e x t e r n a l o b s e r v e r ' ; t h i s n o n - a c t is its highest act, t h e i n f i n i t e P o w e r w h i c h i n t r o d u c e s a g a p i n t o the self-enclosed W h o l e o f Substance. T h e s a m e p r o b l e m c o n f r o n t s us i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e o p p o s i t i o n 'positing'

and

H e g e l ' s Logic.

'external'

reflection from

the

beginning

between

of Book

II o f

P o s i t i n g r e f l e c t i o n is ' o n t o l o g i c a l ' , it c o n c e p t u a l i z e s

E s s e n c e as t h e p r o d u c t i v e / g e n e r a t i v e

the

power that 'posits' the wealth

of

a p p e a r a n c e s ; e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n , i n c o n t r a s t , is ' e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l ' , i t s t a n d s for the subject's reflexive p e n e t r a t i o n o f the o b j e c t o f k n o w l e d g e — for his effort to d i s c e r n , b e h i n d t h e veil o f p h e n o m e n a , underlying

rational structure

the contours o f their

(their Essence).''' T h e fundamental

dead­

l o c k o f t h e e n t i r e ' l o g i c o f E s s e n c e ' is t h a t t h e s e two a s p e c t s , t h e ' o n t o l o g ical'

and

the

'epistemological', can

never

be

fully

synchronized:

s o l u t i o n c a n r e s o l v e t h e o s c i l l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e two p o l e s appearance

is r e d u c e d

to s o m e t h i n g

that

no

either

is ' m e r e l y s u b j e c t i v e '

the ('the

E s s e n c e o f t h i n g s is a n i n a c c e s s i b l e I n I t s e l f , w h a t I c a n c o n t e m p l a t e is m e r e l y t h e i r illusive a p p e a r a n c e ' ) , o r t h e E s s e n c e 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 ( ' t h e h i d d e n E s s e n c e is u l t i m a t e l y t h e s u b j e c t ' s r a t i o n a l

construct,

the result o f his c o n c e p t u a l w o r k ' - j u s t think o f c o n t e m p o r a r y s u b p a r t i c l e physics, in w h i c h t h e last c o n s t i t u e n t s o f reality have t h e status o f a h i g h l y abstract hypothesis - o f a p u r e rational presupposition that we shall n e v e r e n c o u n t e r o u t s i d e t h e t h e o r e t i c a l n e t w o r k , in o u r everyday e x p e r i e n c e ) . A g a i n , this t e n s i o n is r e s o l v e d n o t b y t h e i n c l u s i o n o f e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n into

the

overall structure

o f the

Absolute's self-positing

activity, as

a

m e d i a t i n g m o m e n t o f split a n d e x t e r n a l i t y , b u t by t h e o p p o s i t e a s s e r t i o n o f the d i r e c t ' o n t o l o g i c a l ' status o f the 'externality' o f r e f l e c t i o n itself every positive a n d d e t e r m i n a t e

ontological entity can e m e r g e

o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e A b s o l u t e is ' e x t e r n a l t o i t s e l f , i n s o f a r as a p r e v e n t s its full o n t o l o g i c a l a c t u a l i z a t i o n .

-

'as s u c h ' gap

2 0

' 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 structure

it d e s c r i b e s . W h a t sets in m o t i o n

the

categorial

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 ) impossible

and

( 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 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

spiri-

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 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

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

o f symbolic

— t h a t is t o say, f a r

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 enumerating

examples

from

a multitude

o f symbolic,

he

rules, from

it. B e s i d e s

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 often

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

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 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 . ' usually

dismissed

as s o - c a l l e d deponentia,

2 2

T h e s e exceptions are

'irrational'

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

irregularities

foreign

language

due 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 laudor'l

is ' I p r a i s e ' ,

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 ' ! In H e g e l c s e , s u c h e x c e p t i o n s are n e c e s s a r y i f rules are to b e c o m e 'iorthemselves', not merely a natural

'in-itself

-

t h a t is, i f t h e y a r e t o

be

3

n o t e d ' , p e r c e i v e d 'as s u c h ' . ' - F o r t h i s r e a s o n , a n y a t t e m p t t o a c c o u n t f o r these exceptions a n d / o r

violations by i n v o k i n g t h e i n f l u e n c e oi

neigh­

b o u r i n g t o n g u e s o r p a s t f o r m s o f t h e s a m e t o n g u e is i n s u f f i c i e n t : causal c o n n e c t i o n s are undoubtedly

' h i s t o r i c a l l y a c c u r a t e ' ; in o r d e r

such for

THE TICKLISH

1 U U

SUBJECT

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 -

Socialist p r e s e n t ) . E x a m p l e s a b o u n d

the inconsistency o f that very

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: 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 .

2 4

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 , foundation

indifferent

to

gender,

and

as s u c h

the

philosophical

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 to

the

end.

(When

post-Cartesians

like

Malebranche,

for

out

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.) 2. T h e s t a n d a r d M a r x i s t o r c r i t i c o - i d e o l o g i c a l ' s y m p t o m a t i c ' w h i c h n o t o n l y d i s c e r n s b e n e a t h t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f cogito t h e n a n c e o f certain male features

reading, predomi­

('cogi.to e f f e c t i v e l y s t a n d s f o r t h e

white

u p p e r - c l a s s m a l e p a t r i a r c h a l i n d i v i d u a l ' ) , b u t , i n its s t r o n g e s t v e r s i o n , e v e n c l a i m s t h a t the very gesture ences - the f o r m inherently

of abstract

'masculine',

of universalization, universality

of obliterating

as such

particular

- is not gender-neutral,

differ­ but

s i n c e it d e f i n e s t h e m o d e r n m a l e a t t i t u d e o f d o m i n a ­

tion a n d manipulation, so that sexual difference does n o t only stand for t h e d i f f e r e n c e o f t h e two s p e c i e s o f t h e h u m a n g e n u s , b u t i n v o l v e s two different m o d e s o f t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e very r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n

the

Universal a n d the Particular. 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 . I n a c c e p t i n g this third

position, o n e

should

insist o n

the

cut i n

the

p a r t i c u l a r s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t by m e a n s o f w h i c h a U n i v e r s a l e s t a b l i s h e s itself. T h a t is t o say. t h e p a r a d o x o f t h e p r o p e r H e g e l i a n n o t i o n o f t h e U n i v e r s a l is t h a t it is n o t t h e n e u t r a l f r a m e o f t h e m u l t i t u d e o f p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s , b u t i n h e r e n t l y divisive, s p l i t t i n g u p its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t :

the

U n i v e r s a l always a s s e r t s i t s e l f in t h e g u i s e o f s o m e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t w h i c h claims

to

embody

it d i r e c t l y ,

excluding

all

other

content

as

merely

particular. What, then,

is 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 ' , i f it i n v o l v e s s u c h

a

r a d i c a l c u t - i f it is not t h e o r g a n i c a r t i c u l a t i o n o f a W h o l e in w h i c h e a c h e l e m e n t p l a y s its u n i q u e ,

particular

but irreplaceable part?

Perhaps

a

r e f e r e n c e t o m u s i c c o u l d b e o f s o m e h e l p h e r e ; l e t us t a k e t h e c o n c e p t o f a violin concerto - w h e n , i n w h a t way, clo w e t r e a t it as a n a c t u a l ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' ? W h e n w e d o n o t s u b d i v i d e it s i m p l y i n t o its p a r t i c u l a r f o r m s ( t h e Classical violin c o n c e r t o , the great R o m a n t i c c o n c e r t o s from

Men­

d e l s s o h n v i a T c h a i k o v s k y t o S i b e l i u s , e t c . ) , b u t c o n c e i v e its ' s p e c i e s ' o r ' s t a g e s ' as so m a n y a t t e m p t s t o g r a s p - t o d e t e r m i n e , t o give a f o r m t o , t o s t r u g g l e with - t h e v e r y u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h e c o n c e p t . I t is a l r e a d y d e e p l y significant that Mozart's violin c o n c e r t o s are a bit o f a failure measured

against

his

high

standards,

and

compared

with

(at least

his

piano

c o n c e r t o s ) - n o w o n d e r h i s m o s t p o p u l a r p i e c e f o r v i o l i n a n d c o n c e r t o is h i s Sinfonia

concertante,

w h i c h is a s t r a n g e k i n d o f a n i m a l ( t h e v i o l i n is n o t

y e t a l l o w e d t o a s s u m e a n a u t o n o m o u s r o l e a g a i n s t t h e o r c h e s t r a , s o we a r e d e a l i n g w i t h a s y m p h o n y in a ' c o n c e r t i n g ' m o d e , n o t w i t h a v i o l i n concerto proper). T h e r e a s o n f o r t h i s p r o b a b l y l i e s in t h e fact, e m p h a s i z e d by A d o r n o , that

the

violin, m u c h

more

than

the

piano,

is t h e

ultimate

musical

i n s t r u m e n t a n d e x p r e s s i o n o f subjectivity: a c o n c e r t o f o r s o l o violin, with its i n t e r a c t i o n 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 , t h u s p r o v i d e s p e r h a p s

the

THE

102

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 Substance,

is a l r e a d y

counterpoint

disturbed

B r a h m s , w h i c h was q u i t e against

by t h e

t o t h i s e x c e s s is t h e n

subjective excess. T h e

-

and

proper

(again the o n e ) violin c o n c e r t o o f c h a r a c t e r i z e d as t h e

'concerto

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

appropriately

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 concerto

that

fully

'realized

its c o n c e p t '

never has b e e n a violin

(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 universal

notion

but

struggle with

neutral

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 of

H e g e l i a n c o n c r e t e universality.

concrete

S o it is n o t

enough

feature

to claim

that

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 and

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

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 . . .' The

notion

that best illustrates the

necessity o f a 'false'

('unilateral',

' a b s t r a c t ' ) c h o i c e i n t h e c o u r s e o f a 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 ' s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' ; t h i s t h o r o u g h l y a m b i g u o u s n o t i o n is o p e r a t i v e H e g e l ' s Phenomenology. attachment

to s o m e

On

throughout

t h e o n e h a n d , it s t a n d s f o r t h e p a t h o l o g i c a l

particular

content

(interest, object,

p l e a s u r e . . .)

s c o r n e d by t h e m o r a l i s t i c j u d g i n g c o n s c i e n c e . H e g e l is f a r f r o m

simply

c o n d e m n i n g such an attachment: h e emphasizes again and again

that

s u c h a n a t t a c h m e n t is t h e o n t o l o g i c a l a p r i o r i o f a n act - t h e h e r o ' s ( a c t i v e subject's) ethical

act by m e a n s o f w h i c h h e disturbs t h e b a l a n c e o f t h e

t o t a l i t y o f mores

is always a n d

necessarily e x p e r i e n c e d

c o m m u n i t y as a c r i m e . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a far m o r e p e r i l o u s

socioby

his

stubborn

a t t a c h m e n t ' is t h a t o f t h e i n a c t i v e j u d g i n g s u b j e c t w h o r e m a i n s p a t h o l o g i ­ cally a t t a c h e d to his a b s t r a c t m o r a l s t a n d a r d s a n d , on b e h a l f o f t h e m , c o n d e m n s e v e r y a c t as c r i m i n a l : s u c h a s t u b b o r n

c l i n g i n g to

abstract

THE TICKLISH

104

SUBJECT

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 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

universal

properly dialectical paradox,

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

of

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,

military

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

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 the universal m e d i u m o f W e s t e r n civilization.

2 7

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

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]', to a m e r e invisible G r o u n d

'higher' reduced

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 particular between

longer attached

life-world.

to a n y positive o r d e r ,

S o , like F o u c a u l t , H e g e l

r o o t e d in

insists o n

discipline a n d subjectivization, although

he

a

any

close link

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

THE

106

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 '

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

o f puissance excellence,

provided

by

blind

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 t h a t is, e n j o y m e n t Philosophy

its o w n s a t i s f a c t i o n

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

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 Fouc 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 ' 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

r e v e r s a l o f negating

is t h u s t h e

uncanny

2 9

possibility o f the

dialectical

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: repudiation

h o w c a n t h e very v i o l e n t d e n i a l

and

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 , nothingness.'

3 0

man

even

wants

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 to

animal

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

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 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 . )

3 1

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 particular

object, maintaining

one's 'stubborn, attachment'

the very concrete form of 'wanting thus

stricto

sensu

Nothingness'.

litis

to it come what may, is

Excess and lack o f attachment

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

THE TICKLISH

108

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.

Nietzsche o n the o n e hand, and F r e u d and Lacan on

Here,

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

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 contended

life-rhythm,

some Cause -

in

order

to

become

'passionately attached'

the selfto

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!' As for this N i e t z s c h e a n d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n 'willing n o t h i n g

( n o t willing

a n y t h i n g a t a l l ) ' a n d ' w i l l i n g N o t i r i n g n e s s i t s e l f , o n e s h o u l d r e a d it a g a i n s t the b a c k g r o u n d o f L a c a n ' s distinction, elaborated apropos o f Ernst Kris's case

o f 'pathological'

nothing

between

'stealing

(in the simple sense o f "not stealing a n y t h i n g " ) ' a n d

self-accusation

o f plagiarism,

'stealing

N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f : w h e n the p a t i e n t - an intellectual obsessed with

the

n o t i o n t h a t h e is c o n s t a n t l y s t e a l i n g i d e a s f r o m h i s c o l l e a g u e s - is p r o v e d

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH

SUBJECT

109

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') W h a t , exactly, d o Leader

3 2

linked

but, rather,

these passages, so often

this

case to

another

in

eating

Nothingness

referred which

a

to, m e a n ? patient

itself. . . . Darian

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 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 ' : everything he jouissance

3 3

the patient's apprehension

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

that

satisfaction

-

— 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 .

THE TICKLISH

no

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

'nothing

signifier by m e a n s

o f (in

( 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 ' -

the

guise of)

which

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

myself

the

-

by L a c a n : 'I have t h r e e

third

term,

'myself,

brothers, Ernest, Paul

designates

the

way

the

and

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

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

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

-

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: whydid 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,

vehemently defends

when

nobody

himself: 'I did

o f theft,

already

not s t e a l it!' - w h y d o e s h e

is a c c u s i n g h i m

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

tiptoed out o f the apartment.

Later 1 learned from

place,

then

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 timethat 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 . . . . S o m e t h i n g s i m i l a r h a p p e n s i n t h e C o e n b r o t h e r s ' e x c e l l e n t film Blood Simple,

t h e private investigator, h i r e d by the j e a l o u s h u s b a n d

t o kill h i s

wife a n d h e r l o v e r , kills t h e h u s b a n d h i m s e l f i n s t e a d . A f t e r w a r d s , t h e l o v e r who stumbles on the dead husband

thinks that his mistress ( t h e wife)

c o m m i t t e d t h e c r i m e , a n d e r a s e s its t r a c e s ; t h e wife, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a l s o w r o n g l y a s s u m e s t h a t h e r l o v e r d i d it - a s e t o f u n e x p e c t e d c o m p l i ­ cations arises f r o m intervened towards intervene

in

the

which in

the

the

couple's unawareness

situation. . . . This, obsessional

a situation), but

then,

neurotic in

the

that is t h e

strives: to

mode

m e d i a t o r / i n t e r c e s s o r w h o is n e v e r p r o p e r l y

another

agent

unattainable be

o f 'out',

'included' o f an

counted, included,

has ideal (to

invisible among

the elements o f the situation. I n Sleeping

with the Enemy, J u l i a R o b e r t s e s c a p e s f r o m h e r p a t h o l o g i c a l

s a d i s t i c h u s b a n d a n d a s s u m e s a n e w i d e n t i t y in a s m a l l I o w a t o w n ; i n h i s efforts to track h e r d o w n , t h e h u s b a n d l o c a t e s h e r b l i n d old m o t h e r a n d

THE TICKLISH

112

SUBJECT

a p p r o a c h e s h e r in a nursing h o m e - in o r d e r to trap h e r into revealing h e r d a u g h t e r ' s w h e r e a b o u t s t o h i m , h e p o s e s as a p o l i c e d e t e c t i v e w h o , a w a r e o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e h u s b a n d is a p a t h o l o g i c a l k i l l e r , w a n t s t o w a r n J u l i a R o b e r t s t h a t h e r h u s b a n d is o n h e r t r a c k s , a n d t o p r o t e c t h e r f r o m his m e r c i l e s s r e v e n g e . T h e h u s b a n d t h u s uses t h e very e f f o r t to p r o t e c t J u l i a R o b e r t s a g a i n s t h i s f u r y as a m e a n s o f t r a c k i n g h e r d o w n a n d t a k i n g his r e v e n g e - by i n c l u d i n g h i m s e l f in t h e s c r i e s o f t h o s e trying to p r o t e c t J u l i a R o b e r t s , h e ' i n c l u d e s h i m s e l f o u t ' as t o w h a t h e e f f e c t i v e l y is. . . . A similar inversion

provides

what

is p r o b a b l y

the

best solution

to

the

s u b g e n r e o f the 'locked-room mystery' (a m u r d e r which ' c o u l d n ' t o c c u r ' , s i n c e it t o o k p l a c e in a h e r m e t i c a l l y i s o l a t e d p l a c e ) , i n w h i c h J o h n D i c k s o n Carr specialized: the

murderer

is t h e

very p e r s o n

who

discovers

the

m u r d e r - h e starts s h o u t i n g ' M u r d e r ! M u r d e r ! ' , i n d u c i n g the p e r s o n

to

b e m u r d e r e d to u n l o c k t h e d o o r o f h i s r o o m , a n d then q u i c k l y m u r d e r i n g him -

since the m u r d e r e r

was t h e o n e w h o

'discovered' the

murder,

n o b o d y s u s p e c t s him . . . a g a i n , h e r e t h e m u r d e r e r is ' i n c l u d e d o u t '

from

t h e s e r i e s o f t h o s e t r y i n g t o s o l v e t h e c r i m e . ( T h i s l o g i c , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t o f the thief h i m s e l f shouting 'Catch a thief!' - including h i m s e l f out from the set o f potential thieves.) 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

inscription o f subjectivity i n t o the series a n d

the

the

'impossible'

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 source

turns into an

o f libidinal satisfaction. T h i s satisfaction provided

regulatory

activity, t h i s

desire

for

regulation,

plays

autonomous by t h e

exactly the

very 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

g e t t h e key to t h e specific m o d e o f his s u b j e c t i v e s t a n c e o n l y i f we ' i n c l u d e o u t ' t h e d e s i r e f o r r e g u l a t i o n itself. . . . T h i s r e f l e x i v e r e v e r s a l is h y s t e r i a a t its m o s t e l e m e n t a r y : t h e r e v e r s a l o f t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f satisfying a d e s i r e i n t o t h e d e s i r e f o r t h e d e s i r e remain

unsatisfied

desire).

Perhaps

(and thus turn into a 'reflected' desire, a 'desire

t h a t is t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f K a n t ' s p h i l o s o p h y : n o t i n

f o r m a l i s m as s u c h b u t , r a t h e r , i n t h e f a c t t h a t K a n t was n o t a b l e r e a d y t o count/include

the form into content,

to to its

and/or

as part of the content. O n a first

a p p r o a c h , it m a y s e e m t h a t , p r e c i s e l y , K a n t was a b l e t o d o s o : is n o t t h e m y s t e r i o u s f a c t t h a t , i n a m o r a l a g e n t , t h e p u r e form o f m o r a l L a w can a c t as t h e m o t i v e , t h e m o t i v a t i o n a l f o r c e , o f p r a c t i c a l activity t h e k e y p o i n t o f his e t h i c a l theory? H e r e , h o w e v e r , o n e s h o u l d i n t r o d u c e

the

Hegelian

d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n 'in i t s e l f a n d 'for i t s e l f : K a n t d o e s a c c o m p l i s h this s t e p ( o f ' i n c l u d i n g o u t ' t h e f o r m i n t o c o n t e n t i t s e l f ) in itself, n o t y e t for itself - t h a t is, h e is n o t r e a d y t o e m b r a c e a l l t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h i s ' i n c l u s i o n o u t ' o f t h e f o r m i n t o c o n t e n t , a n d c o n t i n u e s t o t r e a t f o r m as 'pure

form',

abstractly o p p o s e d

to

its c o n t e n t

(which

is w h y ,

in

his

formulations, h e constantly 'regresses' to the standard n o t i o n o f a m a n split b e t w e e n the universal Call o f Duty a n d the wealth o f p a t h o l o g i c a l e g o t i s t i c i m p u l s e s ) . I n a way, H e g e l is m u c h c l o s e r t o K a n t t h a n h e maya p p e a r t o b e : w h a t o f t e n c r e a t e s a d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two is t h e b a r e l y p e r c e p t i b l e gap that separates the In-itself f r o m the For-itself.

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:

THE TICKLISH

114 every

SUBJECT

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

self-referentially p o s i t e d by this a c t itself.

34

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

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

the

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

lesson o f the dissolution o f the traditional set o f values a n d / o r

the

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 the

universally

accepted

frame

of

reference.

(Hobbes

was

the

as 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 necessary ambiguity o f Schmitt's notion

o f e x c e p t i o n : it stands

taneously for the intrusion

(of the pure contingency

o f the Real

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) Sovereign who

(violently, without

the

simul­ that

and f o r t h e g e s t u r e o f t h e

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 This double nature o f the foundational

SUBJECT

115

a c t is c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e i n

r e l i g i o n : Christ calls o n his followers to o b e y a n d r e s p e c t t h e i r superiors i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h e s t a b l i s h e d c u s t o m s and t o h a t e a n d d i s o b e y

them,

t h a t is, t o c u t all h u m a n l i n k s w i t h t h e m : ' I f a n y o n e c o m e s t o m e a n d d o e s n o t h a t e h i s f a t h e r a n d h i s m o t h e r , h i s wife a n d c h i l d r e n , h i s b r o t h e r s a n d s i s t e r s - y e s , e v e n h i s o w n life - h e c a n n o t b e m y d i s c i p l e ' ( L u k e 1 4 : 2 6 ) . D o we n o t e n c o u n t e r h e r e Christ's o w n 'religious s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e e t h i c a l ' ? T h e u n i v e r s e o f e s t a b l i s h e d e t h i c a l n o r m s (mores,

the substance

o f s o c i a l life) is r e a s s e r t e d , b u t o n l y i n so f a r as it is ' m e d i a t e d ' b y C h r i s t ' s a u t h o r i t y : first, w e h a v e t o a c c o m p l i s h t h e g e s t u r e o f r a d i c a l n e g a t i v i t y a n d r e j e c t e v e r y t h i n g t h a t is m o s t p r e c i o u s t o us; l a t e r , w e g e t i t b a c k , b u t as a n e x p r e s s i o n o f C h r i s t ' s will, m e d i a t e d b y it ( t h e way a S o v e r e i g n r e l a t e s t o p o s i t i v e laws i n v o l v e s t h e s a m e p a r a d o x : a S o v e r e i g n c o m p e l s u s

to

r e s p e c t laws p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as h e is t h e p o i n t o f t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f laws). W h e n Christ claims that h e did n o t c o m e to u n d e r m i n e

the Old

L a w , b u t m e r e l y t o fulfil it, o n e h a s t o r e a d i n t o t h i s ' f u l f i l m e n t ' t h e full ambiguity o f the Derridean supplement: undermines

its direct authority.

the very act of fulfilling

the

Law

I n t h i s p r e c i s e s e n s e , ' L o v e Is t h e F u l f i l m e n t

o f the L a w ' ( R o m a n s 13: 1 0 ) : love a c c o m p l i s h e s what the Law ( C o m m a n d ­ m e n t s ) a i m s at, b u t t h i s v e r y a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n v o l v e s t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e L a w . T h e n o t i o n o f b e l i e f w h i c h fits t h i s p a r a d o x o f a u t h o r i t y was e l a b o r a t e d b y K i e r k e g a a r d ; t h i s is why, f o r h i m , religion eminently

modern:

involves a radical disruption wager on

the

is

t h e t r a d i t i o n a l u n i v e r s e is e t h i c a l , w h i l e t h e R e l i g i o u s o f the O l d Ways -

Impossible we have

to m a k e

t r u e r e l i g i o n is a c r a z y

o n c e we

lose support

in

tradition. T

W h a t is p r o p e r l y m o d e r n i n S c h m i t t ' s n o t i o n o f e x c e p t i o n is t h u s t h e v i o l e n t g e s t u r e o f asserting the i n d e p e n d e n c e o f t h e abyssal act o f free d e c i s i o n f r o m its p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t . W h a t is ' M o d e r n ' is t h e g a p b e t w e e n the

act o f decision and

matters

its c o n t e n t -

the

is t h e a c t as s u c h , i n d e p e n d e n t

independent

perception

o f its c o n t e n t

o f the positive d e t e r m i n a t e

that what (or

order). The paradox

g r o u n d s s o - c a l l e d ' c o n s e r v a t i v e m o d e r n i s m ' ) is t h u s t h a t t h e

really

'ordering', (which

innermost

p o s s i b i l i t y o f m o d e r n i s m is a s s e r t e d i n t h e g u i s e o f its a p p a r e n t o p p o s i t e , o f the return to an u n c o n d i t i o n a l authority that c a n n o t b e g r o u n d e d

in

p o s i t i v e r e a s o n s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e p r o p e r l y m o d e r n G o d is t h e G o d o f predestination,

a k i n d o f S c h m i t t i a n politician w h o draws the

line o f

separation between Us and T h e m , Friends and E n e m i e s , the Delivered a n d t h e D a m n e d , by means any grounds

of a purely formal,

in the actual properties

abyssal act of decision,

and acts of concerned

humans

without

(since they

THE

116

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

were n o t yet even b o r n ) . I n traditional C a t h o l i c i s m , salvation d e p e n d s o n earthly g o o d

deeds; in

the

logic o f Protestant predestination,

earthly

d e e d s a n d f o r t u n e s ( w e a l t h ) a r e a t b e s t a n a m b i g u o u s sign o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is a l r e a d y r e d e e m e d t h r o u g h t h e i n s c r u t a b l e d i v i n e a c t -

that

is, h e is n o t s a v e d because h e is r i c h o r d i d g o o d d e e d s , h e a c c o m p l i s h e s g o o d d e e d s o r is r i c h because h e is s a v e d . . . . C r u c i a l h e r e is t h e s h i f t f r o m a c t t o s i g n : f r o m t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f p r e d e s t i n a t i o n , a d e e d b e c o m e s a sign o f the predestined divine decision. T h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l v e r s i o n o f t h i s v o l u n t a r i s t d e c i s i o n i s m was a s s e r t e d by Descartes

( i n h i s Reply

to the Six

Objections),

apropos

o f the

most

e l e m e n t a r y m a t h e m a t i c a l t r u t h s : ' G o d d i d n o t will t h e t h r e e a n g l e s o f a t r i a n g l e t o b e e q u a l t o two r i g h t a n g l e s b e c a u s e h e k n e w t h a t t h e y c o u l d n o t b e o t h e r w i s e . O n t h e c o n t r a r y , it is b e c a u s e h e w i l l e d t h e t h r e e a n g l e s o f a t r i a n g l e t o b e n e c e s s a r i l y e q u a l t o two r i g h t a n g l e s t h a t t h i s is t r u e a n d c a n n o t b e otherwise.' T h e b e s t p r o o f o f h o w this gap, o n c e asserted, c a n n o t b e d e n i e d , is p r o v i d e d b y M a l e b r a n c h c , w h o o p p o s e d t h i s ' m o d ­ e r n i s t ' a s s e r t i o n o f t h e p r i m a c y o f W i l l o v e r R e a s o n , s i n c e h e was

not

r e a d y t o a c c e p t as t h e u l t i m a t e G r o u n d o f t h e w o r l d ' a c e r t a i n a b s o l u t e decree, without reason'

( a s L e i b n i z p u t it i n h i s ' O n t h e P h i l o s o p h y o f

D e s c a r t e s ' ) : h o w e v e r , t h i s r e j e c t i o n i n n o way e n t a i l e d a r e t u r n t o

the

p r e m o d e r n identification o f G o d with the rational h a r m o n i o u s o r d e r o f 1

the universe in which T r u t h c o i n c i d e s with S u p r e m e Good. "' M a l e b r a n c h e b e g i n s by e x t e n d i n g t h e r a t i o n a l necessity f o l l o w e d by G o d in His acts f r o m

Nature

t o G r a c e : n o t o n l y is N a t u r e a g i g a n t i c

C a r t e s i a n m e c h a n i s m w h i c h , i n its m o v e m e n t , o b e y s s i m p l e laws; t h e s a m e h o l d s f o r G r a c e itself, w h o s e d i s t r i b u t i o n f o l l o w s u n i v e r s a l laws t h a t a r c indifferent towards individuals. It m a y well h a p p e n that -

as w i t h

rain

w h i c h , o b e y i n g t h e b l i n d laws o f N a t u r e , c a n fall o n b a r r e n l a n d , l e a v i n g t h e carefully cultivated field n e a r b y dry; o r with t h e p r o v e r b i a l b r i c k f r o m a roof, which can hit the h e a d o f a virtuous p e r s o n a n d miss a c r i m i n a l walking nearby - G r a c e c a n also hit the worst o f f e n d e r o r hypocrite, a n d miss a virtuous m a n . W h y ? B e c a u s e , m o r e t h a n t h e h a p p i n e s s o f worthless individuals, G o d values t h e simplicity a n d o r d e r o f the structure o f the e n t i r e u n i v e r s e : t h e c r u e l a n d u n d e s e r v e d f a t e o f v i r t u o u s i n d i v i d u a l s is t h e p r i c e t o b e p a i d i f t h e u n i v e r s e is t o b e g o v e r n e d b y s i m p l e u n i v e r s a l laws. T h e M a l e b r a n c h i a n G o d is t h u s u n c a n n i l y c l o s e t o t h e G o d i n t h e memoirs

o f Daniel Paul

Schreber: a

cruel and

indifferent

God

who

e m p h a t i c a l l y d o e s not ' u n d e r s t a n d ' o u r i n d i v i d u a l s e c r e t s a n d d r e a m s , a n Egoist who

loves H i m s e l f

more

than

His

creatures

and

whose

blind

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH universal Will inevitably, without

SUBJECT

117

any qualms, tramples down

individual

flowers: T h e g e n e r a l laws which diffuse grace in o u r hearts, thus find n o t h i n g in o u r wills which d e t e r m i n e their efficacy - j u s t as the g e n e r a l laws which govern t h e rains are not based on the dispositions o f the places where it rains. F o r w h e t h e r the grounds be fallow o r w h e t h e r they b e cultivated, it rains indifferently in all places, both in t h e deserts and in t h e s e a .

36

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

only son' into 'It would work

were

not

'God

so loved

be unworthy

inseparable

from

the

world,

that

he

gave

his

o f G o d t o love t h e world, i f this

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 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 ' . 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

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 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 and

makes

his

finite

choices following

3 7

to G o d

As the

merits,

h o r i z o n o f a h u m a n soul, h e acts

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 epistemological

occasionalism: for

him,

occasionalism

Cartesian

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 a c u t a l l y b e t o u c h e d by G r a c e .

3 8

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 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

the

furnish

THE TICKLISH

118 the

SUBJECT

o c c a s i o n f o r G r a c e to b e d i s t r i b u t e d .

human

and,

as s u c h , p r o n e

to h u m a n

However,

Christ's soul

limitations; his t h o u g h t s

' a c c o m p a n i e d b y c e r t a i n d e s i r e s ' w i t h r e g a r d to p e o p l e h e h e was p e r p l e x e d a n d

intrigued

was were

encountered;

b y s o m e , r e p e l l e d by o t h e r s -

so

he

d i s t r i b u t e d G r a c e u n e v e n l y , g i v i n g it t o a s i n n e r o r w i t h h o l d i n g i t f r o m a virtuous person. S o M a l e b r a n c h e is u n a b l e t o a v o i d t h e d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n G r a c e a n d v i r t u e : G o d ' s g e n e r a l will o p e r a t e s o n a u n i v e r s a l level a n d

distributes

Grace

individual

according

to

simple

Cartesian

laws w h i c h ,

from

an

p e r s p e c t i v e , n e c e s s a r i l y a p p e a r u n j u s t a n d t a i n t e d by c r u e l i n d i f f e r e n c e . M a l e b r a n c h e d e n i e s t h e n o t i o n o f a G o d w h o h a s in m i n d m e i n

my

p a r t i c u l a r i t y , a G o d w h o a c t s w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r will t o h e l p m e , t o a n s w e r m y p r a y e r ; C h r i s t , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , d o e s a c t w i t h a volonte

particuliere,

b u t b e c a u s e o f h i s h u m a n l i m i t a t i o n s h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n o f G r a c e is i r r e g u l a r and

unjust,

Hegel,

p a t h o l o g i c a l l y t w i s t e d . . . . D o e s t h i s n o t b r i n g us b a c k

to his thesis o n

subjectivity?

The

how

relationship

abstract between

universality the

coincides

general

with

laws o f G r a c e

C h r i s t ' s p a r t i c u l a r o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e s is t h a t o f speculative

identity:

to

arbitrary and

abstract

g e n e r a l laws r e a l i z e t h e m s e l v e s 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 , i n c o n t i n ­ gent particular whims o f a subject's

(Christ's) disposition -

H e g e l i a n civil s o c i e t y o f t h e m a r k e t , i n w h i c h t h e u n i v e r s a l

as in

the

anonymous

law r e a l i z e s i t s e l f t h r o u g h t h e c o n t i n g e n t i n t e r a c t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v e p a r t i c u ­ lar i n t e r e s t s .

3 9

A q u e s t i o n a r i s e s h e r e : why t h i s d e t o u r t h r o u g h A d a m ' s F a l l a n d arrival o f Christ; why d o c s G o d n o t distribute G r a c e directly a n d d a n t l y t o all m e n t h r o u g h H i s volonte generate?

On account

of His

the

abun­

Narcissism:

G o d c r e a t e d t h e w o r l d f o r H i s G l o r y - t h a t is, s o t h a t t h e w o r l d w o u l d b e r e d e e m e d through Christ's sacrifice. T h e o p p o n e n t s o f M a l e b r a n c h e , o f c o u r s e , were q u i c k to draw f r o m this t h e u n a v o i d a b l e u n c a n n y c o n c l u s i o n : all m e n h a d to b e d a m n e d s o t h a t C h r i s t w a s a b l e t o r e d e e m some o f t h e m - o r , as B o s s u e t p u t it: 'we w o u l d all b e s a v e d , i f w e h a d n o S a v i o u r ' .

4 0

T h i s p a r a d o x is t h e k e y t o M a l e b r a n c h e ' s s e r i e s o f s t r a n g e r e v e r s a l s o f t h e e s t a b l i s h e d t h e o l o g i c a l c l i c h e s : A d a m h a d t o fall, c o r r u p t i o n was n e c e s s a r y i n o r d e r t o m a k e C h r i s t ' s a r r i v a l p o s s i b l e ; a t n o t i m e was G o d

happier

t h a n w h e n H e was o b s e r v i n g C h r i s t ' s s u f f e r i n g o n t h e C r o s s . . . . I n w h a t , then, consists the role o f f r e e d o m within the confines o f strict occasional­ i s m ? M a l e 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 r a d i c a l c o n c l u s i o n : a t t h e l e v e l o f c o n t e n t , e v e r y t h i n g is d e c i d e d 'en nous sans nous

4 1

- t h a t is t o say, w e

a r c m e c h a n i s m s ; G o d p r o m p t s us, p r o d u c e s feelings a n d m o v e m e n t s in us; we a r e c o m p l e t e l y r u l e d by m o t i v e s . T h e m a r g i n o f f r e e d o m lies o n l y

THE

in the

HEGELIAN

TICKLISH

subject's capacity to withhold

SUBJECT

or grant

119

his c o n s e n t from

or to

a

m o t i v e - f r e e d o m is t h e p o w e r ' w h i c h t h e s o u l h a s , t o s u s p e n d o r t o g i v e 4 2

its c o n s e n t t o m o t i v e s , w h i c h

naturally follow interesting

perceptions'.

What,

act

Malebranche's

then,

happens

a n s w e r is r a d i c a l a n d stop

ourselves,

put

in

an

of

consistent:

ourselves

(human)

freedom?

' N o t h i n g . . . . T h e o n l y t h i n g we d o

at

rest.'

This

p r o d u c e s n o t h i n g physical in o u r s u b s t a n c e s ' ,

is 4 3

'an

immanent

act

'an act which docs

and which makes the general cause [ G o d ] do nothing'.

4 1

nous

sans

nous;

the s u b j e c t m e r e l y provides his f o r m a l

decided

c o n s e n t . Is

this r e d u c t i o n o f f r e e d o m to t h e ' n o t h i n g ' o f a n e m p t y g e s t u r e the of the Hegelian Absolute

nothing

F r e e d o m as o u r

c o n s e n t t o m o t i v e s is t h u s p u r e l y r e f l e x i v e : e v e r y t h i n g is e f f e c t i v e l y en

is

which

not

'truth'

Subject?

Notes 1. Colin Wilson, From Atlantis to the Sphinx, L o n d o n : Virgin B o o k s 1 9 9 7 . 2. Ibid., p. 3 5 2 . 3. Ibid., p. 3 5 4 . 4. See W e n d y Brown, Status of Injury, Stanford, CA : Stanford University Press 1 9 9 6 , p. 3 6 . 5. T h e m a t r i x o f t h e n o t o r i o u s 'Hegelian triad' is provided by t h e two shifts in t h e relationship between h e a d a c h e a n d s e x . In t h e g o o d old pre-feminist days, t h e sexually subdued wife was supposed t o reject t h e husband's o r m a n ' s a d v a n c e s with: 'Not tonight, darling, I've g o t a h e a d a c h e ! ' In t h e sexually liberated 1970s, when it b e c a m e a c c e p t a b l e f o r w o m e n t o play t h e active role in instigating sex, it was usually t h e m a n w h o used t h e s a m e e x c u s e to stall a w o m a n ' s advances: I d o n ' t want to d o it tonight, I've g o t a h e a d a c h e ! ' In t h e t h e r a p e u t i c 1980s and 1990s, however, w o m e n again use a h e a d a c h e as a n a r g u m e n t , but for t h e o p p o s i t e p u r p o s e : 'I've g o t a h e a d a c h e , so let's d o it ( t o refresh m e ) ! ' ( P e r h a p s , between t h e s e c o n d a n d third phases, o n e should insert a n o t h e r b r i e f stage o f absolute negativity in which t h e two p a r t n e r s simply a g r e e that since they b o t h have a h e a d a c h e , they shouldn't d o i t . . . ) 6. F o r this reason, la traverse? du [antasine \\\ psychoanalytic t r e a t m e n t is d o u b l e - that is, t h e r e a r e two traversees, a n d analysis p r o p e r fills in t h e distance 'in between t h e two traversees'. T h e first traversee is t h e b r e a k d o w n o f t h e p h a n t a s m i c s u p p o r t o f t h e analysand's everyday e x i s t e n c e , which sustained his d e m a n d to e n t e r psychoanalysis: s o m e t h i n g must g o awn', t h e p a t t e r n o f his everyday life must disintegrate, otherwise analysis r e m a i n s e m p t y c h a t t e r with n o radical subjective c o n s e q u e n c e s . T h e point o f preliminary talks is to establish if this e l e m e n t a r y condition for real analysis is fulfilled. T h e n o n e works towards 'going t h r o u g h ' the fantasy. This g a p is, again, t h e g a p between In-itself a n d For-itself: t h e first traversing is 'In-itself, a n d only t h e s e c o n d is 'For-itself. 7. However, t h e oscillation is n o t only that between triplicity o r quadruplicity: historical dialectics often s e e m s to point towards quintuplicity. In H e g e l ' s Phenomenology, t h e ideal triad o f W e s t e r n history would b e t h e G r e e k Siltluhke.ilt h e world o f i m m e d i a t e ethical substanti­ ality a n d o r g a n i c unity - its alienation in t h e medieval universe, c u l m i n a t i n g in m o d e r n utilitarianism, a n d t h e final r e c o n c i l i a t i o n o f t h e ethical S u b s t a n c e with free individuality in the m o d e r n rational State; however, in each o f the two passages (from substantial unity to its alienation, a n d from utter alienation t o r e c o n c i l i a t i o n ) a n u n c a n n y i n t e r m e d i a t e m o m e n t

120

THE TICKLISH SUBJECT

intervenes: between G r e e k substantial unity a n d medieval alienation t h e r e is t h e R o m a n e p o c h o f abstract individualism (in which, a l t h o u g h t h e Greek substantial ethical unity is alreadv lost, alienation has not \et occurred - t h e R o m a n s did not yet c o n c e i v e o f t h e i r real world as a m e r e reflection o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t Deity); between utilitarian civil society a n d the m o d e r n rational State t h e r e is the b r i e f e p o c h o f Absolute F r e e d o m , the t r a u m a t i c T e r r o r o f t h e Revolution (which a l r e a d y supersedes alienation, but in a n i m m e d i a t e way, a n d thus, instead o f bringing about true reconciliation, e n d s u p in u t t e r self-destructive f u r y ) . T h e interesting point is that a h o m o l o g o u s shift o f triplicity to quintuplicity via t h e intrusion o f t h e two i n t e r m e d i a t e stages s e e m s also to disturb the s t a n d a r d historical materialist triad o f pre-class tribal society, 'alienated' class societies, a n d a p p r o a c h i n g post-class socialist society: 'Oriental Despotism' intervenes between pre-class tribal society a n d classic slave society, t h e n reintervenes again in t h e guise o f t h e despotic Stalinist State between capitalism a n d ' a u t h e n t i c ' socialism. 8. See Vittorio Hosle, Hegels System: l)er Idealismus der Subjektivitdt und das Problem der Intersubjektivitdt, vols 1 a n d 2, H a m b u r g : Felix M e i n e r V e r l a g 1 9 8 8 . 9. A n o t h e r i n d i c a t o r o f Hegel's failure seems to be t h e way he treats m a d n e s s in his 'Anthropology': he r e d u c e s t h e withdrawal from the public social universe that c h a r a c t e r i z e s m a d n e s s to t h e (egression to 'animal soul', missing the obvious point that t h e 'night o f t h e world' to which we r e t u r n in psychosis is n o t the animal universe but, r a t h e r the radical n e g a t i o n , suspension, o f the living being's i m m e r s i o n in its natural s u r r o u n d i n g s . See p a r a . 4 0 8 in Hegel's Philosophy of Mind, O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n Press 1 9 9 2 . 10. T h e s t a n d a r d a r g u m e n t o f the C a t h o l i c C h u r c h against c o n t r a c e p t i o n ( a c c o r d i n g to which sex, deprived o f t h e higher goal o f p r o c r e a t i o n , is r e d u c e d to a n i m a l f o r n i c a t i o n ) thus obviously misses t h e point: is it not precisely sex in the service o f p r o c r e a t i o n - i.e. biological r e p r o d u c t i o n - that is animal? Is it not specifically h u m a n that sexual activity c a n d e t a c h it.self from its 'natural" goal a n d turn into an end-in-itself? O r , to p u t it in male-chauvinist terms: is it possible to imagine t h e opposition between 'whore' a n d ' m o t h e r ' in the a n i m a l universe? F r o m the standpoint o f n a t u r e , 'Spirit' designates a meaningless e x p e n d i t u r e , a zielgehemmtes instinct - t h a t is, an instinct thwarted as to its 'natural' goal, a n d thereby c a u g h t in the endless repetitive m o v e m e n t o f drive. I f - as L a c a n e m p h a s i z e d again a n d again - t h e symbolic gesture par excellence is an e m p t y a n d / o r i n t e r r u p t e d gesture, a gesture m e a n t n o t to be a c c o m p l i s h e d , t h e n sexuality 'humanizes' itself by c u t t i n g its links with t h e natural movement of procreation. 1 1 . T h e trickiest p r o c e d u r e in i n t e r p r e t i n g g r e a t texts o f the philosophical tradition is t h e precise positioning o f a thesis o r notion which t h e a u t h o r ferociously rejects: at these points, the question to be asked is always Is t h e a u t h o r simply rejecting a n o t h e r ' s n o t i o n , o r is he actually introducing this idea in t h e very guise o f its r e j e c t i o n ? ' . T a k e Kant's rejection o f t h e notion o f 'diabolical Evil' (Evil elevated into m o r a l Duty, i.e. a c c o m p l i s h e d n o t o u t o f 'pathological' motivation, but j u s t 'for its own s a k e ' ) : is n o t K a n t h e r e rejecting a notion the conceptual space for which was opened up only by his own philosophical system - that is to say, is h e not battling with the i n n e r m o s t c o n s e q u e n c e , t h e u n b e a r a b l e excess, o f lib. own philosophy? ( T o m a k e an u n e x p e c t e d c o m p a r i s o n , is he not behaving a little bit like the proverbial wife who accuses h e r husband's best friend o f m a k i n g advances to h e r , t h e r e b y betraying h e r own disavowed sexual desire for hint?) O n e o f t h e m a t r i x e s o f p r o g r e s s ' in t h e history o f philosophy is that a l a t e r p h i l o s o p h e r , a pupil o f the first o n e , o p e n l y assumes a n d fully articulates t h e notion which his t e a c h e r actually i n t r o d u c e d in t h e guise o f p o l e m i c a l rejection - as was the case with Schelling, with his theory o f evil, in relation to Kant. 12. This externality o f the symbolic o r d e r should f u r t h e r m o r e b e o p p o s e d to the e x t e r n a l i t y o f the peu de reaUte, o f an asinine positive e l e m e n t in which the big O t h e r itself must e m b o d y itself in o r d e r to a c q u i r e full actuality: the Spirit is a h o n e ' , t h e State as a rational totality b e c o m e s actual in the body o f the M o n a r c h , a n d so on. T h e role o f t h e King ( M o n a r c h ) in Hegel's rational State is thus what E d g a r Allan P o e called the 'imp o f perversity': w h e n a criminal s u c c e e d s in wholly obliterating t h e traces o f his c r i m e - when t h e r e a r e n o

THE HEGELIAN TICKLISH SUBJECT

121

s y m p t o m a t i c 'returns o f the repressed', n o 'clues' that betray the p r e s e n c e o f t h e O t h e r S c e n e o f c r i m e - that is, when he is in n o d a n g e r o f being discovered, when t h e c a m o u f l a g e o f rationalization works perfectly - t h e criminal feels an irresistible u r g e t o display his c r i m e publicly, to shout o u t t h e truth about his h o r r i b l e d e e d . Is it not the s a m e with the H e g e l i a n d e d u c t i o n o f the m o n a r c h y ? J u s t when t h e social edifice attains t h e a c c o m p l i s h e d rationality o f a perfectly o r g a n i z e d State, this rationality is paid for by t h e necessity to s u p p l e m e n t it by - to posit at its h e a d - t h e t h o r o u g h l y 'irrational' e l e m e n t o f t h e h e r e d i t a r y m o n a r c h who is immediately, in his n a t u r e (i.e. d u e to his biological d e s c e n d e n c y ) , what he is 'in c u l t u r e ' , in t e r m s o f his symbolic title. 13. See Charles Taylor, Hegel, C a m b r i d g e , MA: C a m b r i d g e University Press 1 9 7 5 , p. 9 2 . 14. Recall the s t a n d a r d cynical designation o f s o m e o n e as a relative genius' - o n e is a g e n i u s o r not; 'genius' is not an attribute that allows levels o f amplification. In t h e s a m e wav, Schelling qualifies G o d as 'relatively Absolute': H e is t h e absolute M a s t e r a n d C r e a t o r , but His absolute p o w e r is n o n e t h e less qualified, limited by what is not yet G o d in H i m . 15. G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, O x f o r d : O x f o r d University Press 1 9 7 7 , p. 2 1 0 . In t h e a c c o m p a n y i n g f o o t n o t e , the t r a n s l a t o r (A.V. Miller) draws a t t e n t i o n to t h e passage from Hegel's Philosophy of Nature in which he asserts the s a m e identity: 'In m a n y animals the o r g a n s o f e x c r e t i o n a n d the genitals, t h e highest a n d lowest parts in the a n i m a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , a r intimately c o n n e c t e d : just as s p e e c h a n d kissing, on t h e o n e h a n d , a n d eating, drinking a n d spitting, on t h e o t h e r , a r e all d o n e with the m o u t h . ' 16. I owe this precise point to M l a d e n Dolar; see T h e P h r e n o l o g y o f Spirit", in Supposing the Subject, ed. J o a n C o p j e c , L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 4 . T h e r e is a clear parallel between this necessity to m a k e the w r o n g c h o i c e in o r d e r to r e a c h t h e p r o p e r result (to c h o o s e ' u r i n a t i o n ' in o r d e r to r e a c h ' i n s e m i n a t i o n ' ) , and t h e s t r u c t u r e o f the Russian j o k e from Socialist times on Rabinovitch, who wants to e m i g r a t e f r o m the Soviet U n i o n for two reasons: 'First, I f e a r that if t h e socialist o r d e r disintegrates, all t h e b l a m e for t h e C o m m u n i s t c r i m e s will be put on us, t h e Jews.' T o t h e state b u r e a u c r a t ' s e x c l a m a t i o n 'But n o t h i n g will ever c h a n g e in t h e Soviet U n i o n ! Socialism is h e r e to stay for ever!', Rabinovilch calmly answers: ' T h a t ' s my s e c o n d reason!' H e r e also, the only way to r e a c h t h e true r e a s o n is via the w r o n g first r e a s o n . 17. T o put it tn E r n e s t o L a c l a u ' s t e r m s o f a n t a g o n i s m versus the s t r u c t u r e o f differences: for H e g e l , ever,' system o f differences - every posilive social s t r u c t u r e - is based o n a n antagonistic struggle, a n d war is the r e t u r n o f t h e a n t a g o n i s t i c logic o f 'Us versus T h e m ' which forever t h r e a t e n s every s t r u c t u r e o f differences. 18. P e r h a p s t h e p r o b l e m with this triadic articulation o f the social edifice is that H e g e l tries to c o m p r e s s into a s y n c h r o n o u s o r d e r t h r e e different global principles o f social organization: ( 1 ) the p r e r n o d e r n p e a s a n t / f e r r d a l principle, which, in feudalism, s t r u c t u r e s the whole o f society (artisans themselves a r e o r g a n i z e d into guilds a n d estates, they d o n o t function in a free m a r k e t ; State pow er itself is paternalistic, involving a naive pre-reflexive trust o f its subjects in t h e King's divine right to r u l e ) ; ( 2 ) the m o d e r n market-liberal principle o f civil society, which also d e t e r m i n e s t h e way peasant life functions (with a g r i c u l t u r e itself o r g a n i z e d as a b r a n c h o f industrial p r o d u c t i o n ) a n d t h e political s u p e r s t r u c t u r e ( t h e State r e d u c e d to a 'police state', t h e 'night w a t c h m a n ' g u a r a n t e e i n g t h e legal a n d p o l i c e / p o l i t i c a l c o n d i t i o n s o f civil life): ( 3 ) t h e p l a n n e d state-socialist logic in which the State b u r e a u c r a c y , as t h e universal class, also e n d e a v o u r s t o run t h e e n t i r e p r o d u c t i o n , including a g r i c u l t u r e ( n o w o n d e r t h e biggest effort o f Stalinism, as the s u p r e m e e x p r e s s i o n o f this t e n d e n c y , was to crush the peasantry, with its naive-trusting pre-reflexive a t t i t u d e ) . C a n these t h r e e principles be effectively ' m e d i a t e d ' into a c o m p l e t e arid stable 'syllogism o f Society'? T h e p r o b l e m is that e a c h o f t h e m is split from within, involved in an antagonistic tension that i n t r o d u c e s the properly political dimension: the a r c h a i c o r g a n i c o r d e r c a n t u r n into Fascist populist violence against ' T h e m ' ; liberalism is split betw-een a conservative laissezfaire attitude and an activist stance o f egaliberlir, state socialism g e n e r a t e s a r e a c t i o n in t h e guise o f grass-roots s p o n t a n e o u s self-organization. Do n o t these t h r e e principles t h e r e f o r e 7

122

THE TICKLISH SUBJECT

n e e d ( o r involve) a fourth principle: that, precisely, o f t h e political as such, o f social a n t a g o n i s m , o f d e m o c r a t i c destabilization o f t h e articulated social body, a p r i n c i p l e which, from time t o time, finds expression in different f o r m s o f ' s p o n t a n e o u s ' o r 'direct' d e m o c r a c y (like workers' councils in t h e revolutionary t u r m o i l a t t h e e n d o f W o r l d W a r I, o r d e m o c r a t i c 'forums' in t h e disintegration o f Socialism)? F o r a m o r e detailed a c c o u n t o f this n o t i o n o f the political, see C h a p t e r 4 below. 19. O n e should b e a r in m i n d that all c a t e g o r i e s o f reflection directly involve r e f e r e n c e to the knowing subject: say, the difference between a p p e a r a n c e a n d essence exists only for the gaze o f the subject t o w h o m only t h e a p p e a r a n c e is directly accessible, who t h e n e n d e a v o u r s t o p e n e t r a t e the underlying e s s e n c e hidden b e n e a t h the veil. See Taylor, Hegel, pp. 2 5 7 - 9 . 20. This point is also crucial for t h e p r o p e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e difference that s e p a r a t e s H e g e l from Schelling: as l o n g as H e g e l r e m a i n e d c o m m i t t e d to Schelling's critique o f K a n t i a n - F i c h t e a n subjectivism, he - as it were - b a c k e d insemination against u r i n a t i o n , that is, the direct c h o i c e o f t h e c o n c r e t e totality against the abstract subjective division. H e g e l ' b e c a m e H e g e l ' the m o m e n t he b e c a m e aware that every c h o i c e between Totality a n d abstract subjectivity which disbands Totality's c o n c r e t e o r g a n i c link is ultimately a forced c h o i c e in which the subject is c o m p e l l e d to c h o o s e himself- that is, the 'unilateral' disruptive violence which 'is' t h e subject. 2 1 . See Karel van het Rcve, 'Reves V e r m u t u n g ' , in Dr Freud and Slierhck Holmes, H a m b u r g : F i s c h e r Verlag 1 9 9 4 , pp. 1 4 0 - 5 1 . 2 2 . Ibid., p. 1 4 9 . 2 3 . L a c a n has s o m e t h i n g o f t h e s a m e order in mind w h e n he posits the c o r r e l a t i o n between the universal 'phallic function' and its constitutive e x c e p t i o n . 24. A n o t h e r e x a m p l e : how d o e s a c o u p l e c o m e to the decision to marry, to e n t e r a p e r m a n e n t , symbolically asserted relationship? Usually, the decision is not taken when t h e two p a r t n e r s , after a p e r i o d o f trial a n d d e l i b e r a t i o n , finally ascertain the h a r m o n i o u s n a t u r e o f their respective n e e d s a n d c h a r a c t e r features; r a t h e r , after s o m e small conflict that disturbs t h e bliss o f their c o m m o n life, the p a r t n e r s b e c o m e aware o f the insignificance o f this conflict - o f how the b o n d between t h e m is infinitely s t r o n g e r than this a n n o y a n c e . It is thus t h e very disturbing detail which forces m e to b e c o m e aware o f the d e p t h o f my a t t a c h m e n t . 2 5 . See E r n e s t o L a c l a u , Fmancipation(s), L o n d o n : Verso 1 9 9 6 . 2 6 . P e r h a p s t h e best f o r m u l a t i o n o f this vertiginous abyss in which t h e Universal is c a u g h t in t h e Hegelian dialectical p r o c e s s is provided by J e a n - L u c Nancy in his Hegel l.'infpiietude du negatif, Paris: H a c h e t t e 1 9 9 7 . 27. See R e n a t a Salecl, The Spoils of Freedom, L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e 1 9 9 4 , p. 1 3 6 . 2 8 . Within t h e d o m a i n o f l a n g u a g e , H e g e l m a k e s the s a m e point by m e a n s o f his notion o f ' m e c h a n i c a l m e m o r y ' . See C h a p t e r 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, The Metastases of Enjoyment, L o n d o n : Verso 1994. 29. J u d i t h B u t l e r claims that when he deals with the s t r u c t u r e o f religious sacrificial labour, H e g e l a b a n d o n s its dialectical subversion, which would consist in pointing o u t how t h e sacrificial r e n u n c i a t i o n is false in so far as it p r o d u c e s a satisfaction o f its own, a pleasurein-pain ( o r , to put it in L a c a n i a n t e r m s , the u n d e r m i n i n g o f t h e e n u n c i a t e d c o n t e n t via r e f e r e n c e to its position o f e n u n c i a t i o n : I inflict pain on myself, but at t h e level o f t h e subjective position o f e n u n c i a t i o n I e x p e r i e n c e this pain as excessively p l e a s u r a b l e ) . A c c o r d ­ ing to Butler, in t h e case o f sacrificial religious l a b o u r , pain a n d satisfaction a r e externally opposed; what m a k e s m e e n d u r e pain, o r even inflict it on myself, is n o t the d i r e c t perverse satisfaction I get out o f it, but the belief that t h e m o r e I suffer h e r e , o n this e a r t h , the m o r e I will be c o m p e n s a t e d , the m o r e satisfaction I will get, in t h e B e y o n d , after m v d e a t h . (See J u d i t h Butler, The Psychic Fife of Tower, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press 1 9 9 7 , p. 4 4 . ) Is this, however, in fact Hegel's position? Is n o t H e g e l well aware that the p r o m i s e d p l e a s u r e o f the B e y o n d is a m e r e mask for t h e pleasure I derive h e r e and now f r o m imagining this future reward? 30. Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Ceneal/igy of Morals, New York: Vintage 1 9 8 9 , p. 1 6 3 .

THE

HEGELIAN

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

123

3 1 . A n d is this not c o n n e c t e d to the logical distinction between e x t e r n a l a n d internal n e g a t i o n ? T h e basic p r o c e d u r e o f Stalinist p a r a n o i a was to r e a d e x t e r n a l n e g a t i o n as internal: the people's indifference towards c o n s t r u c t i n g Socialism ( n o t wanting to d o it) was r e a d as active plotting against it (wanting n o t to d o it, i.e. o p p o s i n g i t ) . O n e c a n thus say that the s p a c e o f the d e a t h drive is this very gap between e x t e r n a l a n d internal n e g a t i o n , between wanting n o t h i n g a n d actively wanting Nothingness. 3 2 . See Darian L e a d e r , Promises Lovers Make When It dels Lute, L o n d o n : F a b e r & F a b e r 1997, pp. 4 9 - 6 6 . 3 3 . Ibid., p. 5 6 . 3 4 . S e e Carl Schmitt, Political Theology: Four Chapters att the Concept of Sovereignty, C a m b r i d g e , MA: M I T Press 1 9 8 8 . 3 5 . See Miian Bozovic, ' 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 , o r , Philosophy in the G a r d e n of E d e n ' , in Cogito and the Unconscious, e d . Slavoj Zizek, D u r h a m , NC: Duke University Press 1998. 3 6 . Nicolas M a l e b r a n c h e , Treatise on Nature and Grace, O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n Press 1 9 9 2 , pp. 1 4 0 - 4 1 . 3 7 . Nicolas M a l e b r a n c h e , finite de morale, Paris: G a r n i e r - F l a m m a r i o n 1 9 9 5 . p. 4 1 . 3 8 . M a l e b r a n c h e ' s use o f the t e r m 'occasionalism' is thus highly idiosyncratic in that it c o m b i n e s this m e a n i n g ( t h e n e e d for a p a r t i c u l a r cause to s u p p l e m e n t the universal law) with a different m e a n i n g which refers to the (lack o f a d i r e c t ) relationship between the two substances: since t h e r e is n o d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n between body a n d soul - since a hody c a n n o t directly a r t upon a soul (and vice v e r s a ) , the c o - o r d i n a t i o n between the two ( t h e fact that when I think about raising my h a n d , my h a n d actually goes u p ) must be g u a r a n t e e d by God's g e n e r a l will. In this s e c o n d case, an occasional c a u s e (say, my intention to raise my h a n d ) d o e s not have to rely only o n g e n e r a l laws in o r d e r to c o n n e c t with o t h e r objects o f the s a m e o r d e r ( m y o t h e r intentions a n d t h o u g h t s ) : the divine g e n e r a l taws also have to sustain the c o - o r d i n a t i o n between two totally i n d e p e n d e n t series o f p a r t i c u l a r events, the 'mental' a n d 'bodily' series. 3 9 . O n e should be attentive h e r e to the implicit dialectic o f the Universal a n d its e x c e p t i o n : the Universal is m e r e l y potential, 'prelapsarian', a n d it realizes itself via the Fall, in the guise o f the contingently distributed p a r t i c u l a r G r a c e . 4 0 . S e e also F e n e l o n ' s version: 'it is precisely b e c a u s e we have a Saviour that so m a n y souls perish' ('Refutations du svsteme du P e r e M a l e b r a n c h e ' , in (Evvres de Venelon, Paris: C h e z L e f e v r e 1835, ch. 3 6 ) . 4 1 . Nicolas M a l e b r a n c h e , Lntretiens sur la melaphysiaue, Paris: W i n 1 9 8 4 , p. 117. 4 2 . Nicolas M a l e b r a n c h e , Recherche de la verite, Paris: Galerie de la S o r b o n n e 1 9 9 1 , p. 4 2 8 . 4 3 . Ibid., p. 4 3 1 . 4 4 . Ibid.

PART II

-

The Split Universality

3

The Politics of Truth, or, Alain Badiou as a Reader of St Paul

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' 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, up

[remain

(signifi­

Althusserf:

'Shut

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 enemies

references

(note

the

( S p i n o z a ) with

growing

importance

r e f e r e n c e s to Althusser's o f Hegel

in

arch­

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

THE TICKLISH

128

SUBJECT

allows t h e o r e t i c i a n s to ' s p e a k f o r ' t h e m a s s e s , to k n o w t h e t r u t h

about

t h e m , R a n c i e r e e n d e a v o u r s again a n d again to e l a b o r a t e the c o n t o u r s o f those m a g i c , violently p o e t i c m o m e n t s o f subjectivization in which

the

e x c l u d e d ('lower classes') put forward their claim to speak for themselves, to effect a c h a n g e in t h e g l o b a l p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e social s p a c e so t h a t t h e i r c l a i m s h a v e a l e g i t i m a t e p l a c e i n it. I n a m o r e m e d i a t e d way, t h e s a m e a l s o h o l d s f o r E r n e s t o L a c l a u a n d A l a i n B a d i o u . L a c l a u ' s first b o o k (Politics was still s t r o n g l y A l t h u s s e r i a n

and Ideology

(the notion

in Marxist

plays a c e n t r a l r o l e i n i t ) ; h i s f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t , e s p e c i a l l y i n and

Socialist

Strategy

Theory)

o f ideological interpellation

(written with C h a n t a l M o u f f e ) ,

Hegemony

c o u l d b e r e a d as a

kind o f 'postmodernist' or 'deconstructionist' displacement o f the Althus­ serian

edifice: the distinction between science a n d

ideology collapses,

s i n c e t h e n o t i o n o f i d e o l o g y is u n i v e r s a l i z e d as t h e s t r u g g l e f o r h e g e m o n y t h a t r e n d s t h e v e r y h e a r t o f e v e r y s o c i a l f o r m a t i o n , a c c o u n t i n g f o r its f r a g i l e i d e n t i t y a n d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , f o r e v e r p r e v e n t i n g its c l o s u r e ; notion

of

the

subject

is

reconceptualized

as

the

very

operator

the of

h e g e m o n y . F i n a l l y , t h e r e is t h e s t r a n g e c a s e o f A l a i n B a d i o u . I s n o t B a d i o u also intimately r e l a t e d to Althusser, n o t only o n t h e level o f his p e r s o n a l i n t e l l e c t u a l b i o g r a p h y ( h e b e g a n as a m e m b e r o f t h e L a c a n o - A l t h u s s e r i a n l e g e n d a r y Cahiers

pour I'Analyse

g r o u p i n t h e 1 9 6 0 s ; h i s first b o o k l e t was

p u b l i s h e d in A l t h u s s e r ' s Theorie s e r i e s ) b u t a l s o o n t h e i n h e r e n t t h e o r e t i c a l level: his o p p o s i t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e ( r e l a t e d to t h e positive o r d e r o f B e i n g ) a n d truth ( r e l a t e d to t h e E v e n t that springs f r o m t h e void in t h e midst o f being)

seems

to

reverse

the

Althusserian

opposition

o f science

and

i d e o l o g y : B a d i o u ' s ' k n o w l e d g e ' is c l o s e r to ( a p o s i t i v i s t n o t i o n o f ) s c i e n c e , while his d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t b e a r s a n u n c a n n y r e s e m b l a n c e to Althusserian 'ideological interpellation'.

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 always-already

be

to b e ' c o u n t e d

a meta-structure

that

as O n e ' , its s t r u c t u r e

designates

it as o n e

must

(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 ' c o u n t e d as O n e ' ; f r o m

the standpoint

must

o f the state o f a situation,

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

be the

'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

THE TICKLISH

130 -

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

eighteenth

late

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

fraternity);

its ' o p e r a t o r '

(the

political m o v e m e n t s

freedom-equalitystruggling

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 s u b j e c t is h i s fidelity

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

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 the compulsion appropriate

to d i s t a n c e h i m s e l f f r o m

131

Communism,

t o r e a s s e r t t h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n as a n

it s e e m s

more

Event o f Truth

d e f i n e d against t h e o p p o r t u n i s t i c leftist ' f o o l s ' a n d c o n s e r v a t i v e ' k n a v e s ' . T h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n a l s o allows us t o i d e n t i f y c l e a r l y t h r e e ways o f b e t r a y i n g the T r u t h - E v e n t : s i m p l e disavowal, the a t t e m p t patterns

as i f n o t h i n g

had

happened, just

a minor

to follow old

disturbance

(the

r e a c t i o n o f 'utilitarian' l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y ) ; false i m i t a t i o n o f t h e E v e n t o f Truth

( t h e F a s c i s t s t a g i n g o f t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e r e v o l u t i o n as a

pseudo-

e v e n t ) ; a n d a d i r e c t ' o n t o l o g i c i z a t i o n ' o f t h e E v e n t o f T r u t h , its r e d u c t i o n to a n e w positive o r d e r o f b e i n g ( S t a l i n i s m ) . the gap

that separates B a d i o u from

3

H e r e o n e can readily grasp

d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t fictionalism: his

r a d i c a l o p p o s i t i o n to t h e n o t i o n o f a ' m u l t i t u d e 'truth-effects'). situation;

Truth

i t is t h e

o f truths'

is c o n t i n g e n t ; i t h i n g e s o n

truth

of t h i s s i t u a t i o n ,

but

in

(or,

rather,

a c o n c r e t e historical every c o n c r e t e

and

c o n t i n g e n t h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n t h e r e is one and only one T r u t h w h i c h , o n c e a r t i c u l a t e d , s p o k e n o u t , f u n c t i o n s as t h e i n d e x o f i t s e l f a n d o f t h e falsity o f t h e f i e l d s u b v e r t e d by it. W h e n B a d i o u s p e a k s o f ' t h i s s y m p t o m a l t o r s i o n o f b e i n g w h i c h is a 4

t r u t h i n t h e always-total t e x t u r e o f k n o w l e d g e s ' , e v e r y t e r m h a s its w e i g h t . The

t e x t u r e o f K n o w l e d g e is, b y d e f i n i t i o n , always t o t a l -

t h a t is, f o r

K n o w l e d g e o f B e i n g , t h e r e is n o e x c e s s ; e x c e s s a n d l a c k o f a s i t u a t i o n a r e visible o n l y f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e E v e n t , n o t f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e k n o w i n g servants o f the State. F r o m within this s t a n d p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , o n e sees ' p r o b l e m s ' , but they are automatically r e d u c e d to 'local', m a r ­ g i n a l d i f f i c u l t i e s , to c o n t i n g e n t e r r o r s - w h a t T r u t h d o e s is t o r e v e a l t h a t (what K n o w l e d g e m i s p e r c e i v e s as) m a r g i n a l m a l f u n c t i o n i n g s a n d o f failure are a structural

necessity. Crucial for the

points

E v e n t is t h u s

the

elevation o f an empirical obstacle into a transcendental limitation. With r e g a r d t o t h e ancien

regime, w h a t t h e T r u t h - E v e n t r e v e a l s is h o w i n j u s t i c e s

a r e n o t m a r g i n a l m a l f u n c t i o n i n g s b u t p e r t a i n to t h e very s t r u c t u r e o f the s y s t e m w h i c h is i n its e s s e n c e , as s u c h , ' c o r r u p t ' . S u c h a n e n t i t y - w h i c h , m i s p e r c e i v e d b y t h e s y s t e m as a l o c a l ' a b n o r m a l i t y ' , e f f e c t i v e l y c o n d e n s e s t h e g l o b a l ' a b n o r m a l i t y ' o f t h e s y s t e m as s u c h , i n its e n t i r e t y - is w h a t , i n t h e F r e u d o - M a r x i a n t r a d i t i o n , is c a l l e d t h e symptom:

in psychoanalysis,

lapses, d r e a m s , c o m p u l s i v e f o r m a t i o n s a n d acts, a n d so o n , are ' s y m p t o m a l torsions' that m a k e accessible the subject's T r u t h , inaccessible to Knowl­ e d g e , w h i c h s e e s t h e m as m e r e m a l f u n c t i o n i n g s ; i n M a r x i s m , e c o n o m i c c r i s i s is s u c h a ' s y m p t o m a l t o r s i o n ' . H e r e B a d i o u is c l e a r l y a n d r a d i c a l l y o p p o s e d t o t h e p o s t m o d e r n

anti-

P l a t o n i c t h r u s t w h o s e b a s i c d o g m a is t h a t t h e e r a w h e n it was still p o s s i b l e

THE TICKLISH

132

to base a political m o v e m e n t

on

SUBJECT

a direct reference

to s o m e

eternal

m e t a p h y s i c a l o r t r a n s c e n d e n t a l t r u t h is d e f i n i t e l y o v e r : t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f o u r century proves that such a r e f e r e n c e to s o m e metaphysical a priori c a n l e a d o n l y to c a t a s t r o p h i c 'totalitarian' social c o n s e q u e n c e s . F o r this r e a s o n , t h e o n l y s o l u t i o n is t o a c c e p t t h a t w e live i n a n e w e r a d e p r i v e d o f m e t a p h y s i c a l c e r t a i n t i e s , in an e r a o f c o n t i n g e n c y a n d c o n j e c t u r e s , in a ' r i s k s o c i e t y ' i n w h i c h p o l i t i c s is a m a t t e r o f phronesis,

o f strategic j u d g e ­

ments a n d dialogue, not o f applying fundamental

cognitive insights. . . .

W h a t B a d i o u is a i m i n g at, a g a i n s t t h i s p o s t m o d e r n

doxa, is p r e c i s e l y t h e

resuscitation

o f t h e politics

of (universal)

Truth

in today's c o n d i t i o n s o f

global c o n t i n g e n c y . T h u s B a d i o u rehabilitates, in the m o d e r n o f multiplicity and meta-physkal

conditions

contingency, not only philosophy but the

dimension:

the

infinite

Truth

is ' e t e r n a l '

and

properly

meta-

with

r e g a r d t o t h e t e m p o r a l p r o c e s s o f B e i n g ; it is a f l a s h o f a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n t r a n s c e n d i n g t h e positivity o f B e i n g . 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

his a r r o g a n t

assumption

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

tradition)

is m a n ' s

hubris,

t h a t h e is

that

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 his profit.

This

hubris,

which

disturbs

the

rightful

he

endowed for

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

will

our

humbly

assume

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

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 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

hubris 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 p o s i n g a s its h u m b l e i n s t r u m e n t .

133

In c o n t r a s t to this false humility,

the

e n t i r e W e s t e r n s t a n c e was a n t i - g l o b a l : n o t o n l y d o e s C h r i s t i a n i t y i n v o l v e reference pagan

to

order

a

higher

Truth

which

cuts

into

and

o f C o s m o s e x p r e s s e d in p r o f o u n d

disturbs

the

Wisdoms; even

old

Plato's

I d e a l i s m i t s e l f c a n b e q u a l i f i e d a s t h e first c l e a r e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e

idea

t h a t t h e g l o b a l c o s m i c ' C h a i n o f B e i n g ' is n o t ' a l l t h e r e i s ' , t h a t t h e r e is another

Order

( o f Ideas) which suspends

t h e validity o f t h e O r d e r

of

Being. O n e o f B a d i o u ' s g r e a t t h e s e s is t h a t t h e p u r e m u l t i p l e l a c k s t h e d i g n i t y o f the p r o p e r

object o f thought:

from

Stalin to D e r r i d a ,

philosophical

c o m m o n s e n s e h a s always i n s i s t e d o n i n f i n i t e c o m p l e x i t y ( e v e r y t h i n g is i n t e r c o n n e c t e d ; r e a l i t y is s o c o m p l e x t h a t it is a c c e s s i b l e t o us o n l y i n a p p r o x i m a t i o n s . . . ) . B a d i o u implicitly c o n d e m n s d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s m itself as t h e l a t e s t v e r s i o n o f t h i s c o m m o n - s e n s e m o t i f o f i n f i n i t e c o m p l e x i t y . A m o n g the advocates o f 'anti-essentialist' p o s t m o d e r n identity politics, for e x a m p l e , o n e o f t e n e n c o u n t e r s t h e i n s i s t e n c e t h a t t h e r e is n o ' w o m a n

in

general', there are only white middle-class w o m e n , black single m o t h e r s , l e s b i a n s , a n d s o o n . O n e s h o u l d r e j e c t s u c h ' i n s i g h t s ' as b a n a l i t i e s u n w o r ­ thy o f b e i n g o b j e c t s o f t h o u g h t . lies p r e c i s e l y in

how

the

T h e problem o f philosophical

universality

o f 'woman'

emerges

thought

out

of

this

endless multitude. T h u s , o n e c a n also rehabilitate the H e g e l i a n difference b e t w e e n b a d ( s p u r i o u s ) a n d p r o p e r i n f i n i t y : t h e first r e f e r s t o c o m m o n sense infinite complexity; the s e c o n d c o n c e r n s t h e infinity o f an which, precisely, transcends

the

Event,

' i n f i n i t e c o m p l e x i t y ' o f its c o n t e x t .

In

e x a c t l y t h e s a m e way o n e c a n d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n h i s t o r i c i s m a n d h i s t o r i c ­ ity p r o p e r : h i s t o r i c i s m r e f e r s t o t h e s e t o f e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l , c u l t u r a l , a n d so o n , c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h o s e c o m p l e x i n t e r a c t i o n allows us to a c c o u n t for the E v e n t to b e e x p l a i n e d , while historicity p r o p e r involves the specific t e m p o r a l i t y o f t h e E v e n t a n d its a f t e r m a t h , and

its

between

final

End

(between

Revolution and

Christ's

Communism,

the span between the

death

and

between

the

Last

Event

Judgement,

falling in love a n d

the

a c c o m p l i s h e d bliss o f living t o g e t h e r . . . ) . Perhaps

the

gap

separating

Badiou

from

the

standard

postmodern

d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t p o l i t i c a l t h e o r i s t s is u l t i m a t e l y c r e a t e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t the latter r e m a i n within

the confines o f the pessimistic wisdom o f the

f a i l e d e n c o u n t e r : is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t l e s s o n t h a t e v e r y enthusiastic e n c o u n t e r with t h e R e a l T h i n g , ever)' p a t h e t i c

identification

o f a p o s i t i v e e m p i r i c a l E v e n t w i t h it, is a d e l u s i v e s e m b l a n c e s u s t a i n e d b y the short circuit b e t w e e n a c o n t i n g e n t positive e l e m e n t a n d the p r e c e d i n g u n i v e r s a l V o i d ? I n it, we m o m e n t a r i l y s u c c u m b t o t h e i l l u s i o n t h a i

the

THE TICKLISH

134

SUBJECT

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

deconstructionist stance, admiration

that

is always

'to c o m e ' . In

this

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 right

to divorce. Events like this d o

o c c u r in

135 politics, and

they

are

authentic Events belying shameful 'post-ideological realism': they are n o t momentary

enthusiastic

outbursts

occasionally

disturbing

the

usual

d e p r e s s i v e / c o n f o r m i s t / u t i l i t a r i a n run o f things, only to b e followed by an i n e x o r a b l e s o b e r i n g disillusionment 'the m o r n i n g after'; o n the contrary, they are the m o m e n t o f T r u t h in the overall structure o f d e c e p t i o n

and

l u r e . T h e f u n d a m e n t a l l e s s o n o f p o s t m o d e r n i s t p o l i t i c s is t h a t there is no Event,

that 'nothing

r e a l l y h a p p e n s ' , t h a t t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is a p a s s i n g ,

illusory s h o r t circuit, a false i d e n t i f i c a t i o n to b e d i s p e l l e d s o o n e r o r l a t e r b y t h e r e a s s e r d o n o f d i f f e r e n c e o r , at b e s t , t h e f l e e t i n g p r o m i s e o f t h e R e d e m p t i o n - t o - c o m e , towards w h i c h we have to m a i n t a i n a p r o p e r

dis­

tance in o r d e r to avoid catastrophic 'totalitarian' c o n s e q u e n c e s ; against t h i s s t r u c t u r a l s c e p t i c i s m , B a d i o u is fully j u s t i f i e d i n i n s i s t i n g t h a t - t o u s e t h e t e r m w i t h its full t h e o l o g i c a l w e i g h t - miracles do happen.

. . ."'

. . . 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 ,(i

intervention

the standpoint

o f what B a d i o u calls ' a n

interpreting

- 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] he

belonged

to

the

situation'.

8

Fidelity to

the

who d e c i d e d that

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

THE TICKLISH

136

SUBJECT

' s u b j e c t - l a n g u a g e ' . T h i s l a n g u a g e is m e a n i n g l e s s f r o m

the standpoint

of

K n o w l e d g e , w h i c h j u d g e s p r o p o s i t i o n s with r e g a r d to t h e i r r e f e r e n t within t h e d o m a i n o f positive b e i n g ( o r with r e g a r d to the p r o p e r f u n c t i o n i n g o f s p e e c h within the established symbolic o r d e r ) : w h e n the

subject-language

speaks o f Christian r e d e m p t i o n , revolutionary e m a n c i p a t i o n , love, a n d so on,

Knowledge

referent

d i s m i s s e s all t h i s a s e m p t y

phrases

lacking any

proper

('political-messianic j a r g o n ' , ' p o e t i c hermeticism", etc.). L e t us

imagine a person

in love describing

the features

o f his b e l o v e d

to

his

f r i e n d : t h e f r i e n d , w h o is n o t i n l o v e w i t h t h e s a m e p e r s o n , will s i m p l y f i n d t h i s e n t h u s i a s t i c d e s c r i p t i o n m e a n i n g l e s s ; h e will n o t g e t ' t h e

point'

o f it. . . . I n s h o r t , s u b j e c t - l a n g u a g e i n v o l v e s t h e l o g i c o f t h e s h i b b o l e t h , o f a d i f f e r e n c e w h i c h is v i s i b l e o n l y f r o m however,

in n o way m e a n s

that

the

within,

not from without.

subject-language

involves

This,

another,

' d e e p e r ' r e f e r e n c e t o a h i d d e n t r u e c o n t e n t : i t is, r a t h e r , t h a t t h e s u b j e c t language,

'derails'

or 'unsettles'

the standard use o f language

with

e s t a b l i s h e d m e a n i n g s , a n d leaves the r e f e r e n c e ' e m p t y ' - with the that

this

void

will

be

filled w h e n

a c t u a l i z e s i t s e l f as a n e w s i t u a t i o n

the

Goal

is r e a c h e d ,

its

'wager'

when

Truth

(God's kingdom on earth; the emanci­

p a t e d s o c i e t y . . . ) . T h e n a m i n g o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is ' e m p t y ' p r e c i s e l y in s o f a r as it r e f e r s t o t h e f u l l n e s s y e t t o c o m e . The

undecidability

o f the Event thus m e a n s

that an E v e n t does

p o s s e s s a n y o n t o l o g i c a l g u a r a n t e e : it c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d t o ( o r

not

deduced,

g e n e r a t e d f r o m ) a ( p r e v i o u s ) S i t u a t i o n : it e m e r g e s ' o u t o f n o t h i n g '

(the

N o t h i n g w h i c h was t h e o n t o l o g i c a l t r u t h o f t h i s p r e v i o u s s i t u a t i o n ) . T h u s t h e r e is n o n e u t r a l g a z e o f k n o w l e d g e t h a t c o u l d d i s c e r n t h e E v e n t i n its e f f e c t s : a D e c i s i o n is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y

here -

t h a t is, o n e c a n d i s c e r n

the

signs o f a n E v e n t in t h e S i t u a t i o n o n l y from a previous D e c i s i o n f o r T r u t h , j u s t as i n J a n s e n i s t t h e o l o g y , i n w h i c h d i v i n e m i r a c l e s a r e l e g i b l e as s u c h o n l y to t h o s e w h o have a l r e a d y d e c i d e d

for Faith. A neutral

historicist

g a z e will n e v e r s e e in t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n a s e r i e s o f t r a c e s o f t h e E v e n t called the 'French Revolution', merely a multitude o f occurrences caught in

the

network

o f social determinations;

to an

external

g a z e , L o v e is

m e r e l y a succession o f psychic a n d physiological states. . . . ( P e r h a p s

this

was t h e n e g a t i v e a c h i e v e m e n t t h a t b r o u g h t s u c h f a m e t o F r a n c o i s F u r e t : did n o t his m a i n i m p a c t derive f r o m his de-eventualization

o f the F r e n c h

R e v o l u t i o n , in a d o p t i n g an e x t e r n a l p e r s p e c t i v e towards it a n d t u r n i n g it into

a

succession

of complex

specific historical

facts?)

The

engaged

o b s e r v e r p e r c e i v e s p o s i t i v e h i s t o r i c a l o c c u r r e n c e s as p a r t s o f t h e E v e n t o f the F r e n c h Revolution only to the e x t e n t that h e observes t h e m from

the

u n i q u e e n g a g e d s t a n d p o i n t o f R e v o l u t i o n - as B a d i o u p u t s it, a n E v e n t is

T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l i n t h a t it includes

its own designation:

137 the symbolic designa­

t i o n ' F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ' is p a r t o f t h e d e s i g n a t e d c o n t e n t i t s e l f , s i n c e , i f we s u b t r a c t t h i s d e s i g n a t i o n , t h e d e s c r i b e d c o n t e n t t u r n s i n t o a m u l t i t u d e o f positive o c c u r r e n c e s available to k n o w l e d g e . In this p r e c i s e s e n s e , a n E v e n t involves subjectivity: t h e e n g a g e d

'subjective perspective' o n

the

1

E v e n t is p a r t o f t h e E v e n t itself. ' T h e difference between veracity ( t h e a c c u r a c y - a d e q u a c y o f k n o w l e d g e ) a n d T r u t h is c r u c i a l h e r e . L e t u s t a k e t h e M a r x i s t t h e s i s t h a t all h i s t o r y is the

history o f class struggle:

this thesis already p r e s u p p o s e s

engaged

s u b j e c t i v i t y — t h a t is t o say, o n l y f r o m t h i s s l a n t d o e s t h e w h o l e o f h i s t o r y a p p e a r as s u c h ; o n l y f r o m t h i s ' i n t e r e s t e d ' s t a n d p o i n t

can one

discern

t r a c e s o f t h e c l a s s s t r u g g l e in t h e e n t i r e s o c i a l e d i f i c e , u p t o t h e p r o d u c t s o f the highest culture. T h e answer to the obvious c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t

(this

v e r y f a c t p r o v e s t h a t we a r e d e a l i n g w i t h a d i s t o r t e d view, n o t w i t h t h e t r u e s t a t e o f t h i n g s ) is t h a t it is t h e a l l e g e d l y ' o b j e c t i v e ' , ' i m p a r t i a l ' g a z e t h a t is n o t i n f a c t n e u t r a l b u t a l r e a d y p a r t i a l - t h a t is, t h e g a z e o f t h e w i n n e r s , o f t h e ruling classes. ( N o w o n d e r t h e m o t t o o f right-wing historical revision­ ists is ' L e t ' s a p p r o a c h t h e t o p i c o f t h e H o l o c a u s t i n a c o o l , o b j e c t i v e way; l e t ' s p u t it i n its c o n t e x t , l e t ' s i n s p e c t t h e f a c t s . . . ' ) A t h e o r i s t o f t h e C o m m u n i s t r e v o l u t i o n is n o t s o m e o n e w h o , a f t e r e s t a b l i s h i n g by m e a n s o f objective study that the future

b e l o n g s to t h e w o r k i n g class, d e c i d e s to

t a k e its s i d e a n d t o b e t o n t h e w i n n e r : t h e e n g a g e d v i e w p e r m e a t e s h i s t h e o r y from the very outset. 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,

more

mode

directly messianic, proto-religious

'Theses on

a n d in a

by W a l t e r B e n j a m i n

the Philosophy o f History': 'truth' e m e r g e s when

from his p r e s e n t catastrophic position, gains a s u d d e n insight into 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

in

a victim, the

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 , Marx himself used 'proletariat'

although

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 . Furthermore,

the

status

o f the

pure

multiple

and

its V o i d is a l s o

u n d e c i d a b l e a n d p u r e l y ' i n t e r m e d i a r y ' : w e n e v e r e n c o u n t e r it ' n o w ' , s i n c e

THE TICKLISH

138

SUBJECT

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-Jewishclass-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 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 made.

the

already

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

political

appears

as u n d e c i d a b l e

Chaos. F o r an

established

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

b e c a u s e only t h e latter r e l a t e d to the very f o u n d a t i o n s o f the Situation o f capitalist o r d e r , effectively u n d e r m i n i n g t h o s e f o u n d a t i o n s , in c o n t r a s t to Nazism, which

staged

a pseudo-Event

precisely in

order

to

save

the

c a p i t a l i s t o r d e r . T h e N a z i s t r a t e g y was ' t o c h a n g e t h i n g s s o t h a t , a t t h e i r most fundamental, they can remain the s a m e ' . W e all r e m e m b e r t h e f a m o u s s c e n e f r o m B o b F o s s e ' s Cabaret,

which

t a k e s p l a c e i n t h e e a r l y 1 9 3 0 s , in a s m a l l c o u n t r y i n n n e a r B e r l i n : a b o y ( i n N a z i u n i f o r m , as we l e a r n i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e s o n g ) s t a r t s t o s i n g a sorrowful e l e g i a c s o n g a b o u t the F a t h e r l a n d , w h i c h s h o u l d give G e r m a n s a s i g n t h a t t o m o r r o w b e l o n g s t o t h e m , a n d so o n ; t h e c r o w d

gradually

j o i n s him, a n d everyone, including a g r o u p o f d e c a d e n t nightlifers from B e r l i n , is i m p r e s s e d b y its e m o t i o n a l i m p a c t . . . . T h i s s c e n e is o f t e n e v o k e d b y p s e u d o - i n t e l l e c t u a l s as t h e m o m e n t w h e n

they 'finally grasped

what

N a z i s m was a b o u t , h o w it w o r k e d ' . O n e is t e m p t e d t o a d d t h a t t h e y a r e r i g h t , b u t f o r t h e w r o n g r e a s o n s : it is n o t t h e p a t h o s o f p a t r i o t i c e n g a g e ­ ment

as such

that

is ' F a s c i s t ' . W h a t a c t u a l l y p r e p a r e s

the

ground

for

F a s c i s m is t h e v e r y l i b e r a l s u s p i c i o n a n d d e n u n c i a t i o n o f e v e r y f o r m o f u n c o n d i t i o n a l e n g a g e m e n t , o f d e v o t i o n t o a C a u s e , as p o t e n t i a l l y ' t o t a l i ­ t a r i a n ' f a n a t i c i s m - t h a t is t o say, t h e p r o b l e m l i e s i n t h e v e r y c o m p l i c i t y o f t h e a t m o s p h e r e o f i n c a p a c i t a t i n g c y n i c a l d e c a d e n t s e l f - e n j o y m e n t with the

Fascist E v e n t , with

Order

the

into this C h a o s . In

Decision which

purports

o t h e r words, what

to

(re)introduce

is f a l s e a b o u t

the

Nazi

i d e o l o g i c a l m a c h i n e is n o t t h e r h e t o r i c o f D e c i s i o n as s u c h ( o f t h e E v e n t that puts an e n d to d e c a d e n t i m p o t e n c e , e t c . ) , b u t - o n t h e c o n t r a r y the

fact

that

the

Nazi

' E v e n t ' is a e s t h e t i c i z e d t h e a t r e ,

a faked

-

event

e f f e c t i v e l y u n a b l e to p u t a n e n d t o t h e d e c a d e n t c r i p p l i n g i m p a s s e . I t is i n this p r e c i s e s e n s e t h a t t h e c o m m o n r e a c t i o n to t h e Nazi s o n g from

Cabaret

is r i g h t f o r d i e w r o n g r e a s o n s : w h a t it fails t o p e r c e i v e is h o w o u r f o r m e r cynical pleasure

in

decadent

promiscuity created

the

cabaret songs about

background

that

made

money

and

sexual

us s u s c e p t i b l e t o

the

i m p a c t o f the Nazi song. S o how are an Event a n d

its n a m i n g

related? B a d i o u rejects

Kant's

reading o f the Event o f the F r e n c h Revolution, the reading which locates t h e crucial effect o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n in t h e s u b l i m e f e e l i n g o f e n t h u s i a s m t h a t t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y e v e n t s in P a r i s s e t i n m o t i o n i n p a s s i v e o b s e r v e r s a c r o s s E u r o p e , n o t d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d in t h e e v e n t i t s e l f , a n d t h e n this s u b l i m e effect

opposes

( t h e assertion o f o u r b e l i e f in t h e p r o g r e s s o f m a n ' s

R e a s o n a n d F r e e d o m ) to t h e grim reality o f the R e v o l u t i o n itself ( K a n t r e a d i l y c o n c e d e s t h a t h o r r i b l e t h i n g s t o o k p l a c e in F r a n c e : t h e R e v o l u t i o n often

s e r v e d as t h e c a t a l y s t f o r t h e o u t b u r s t

o f the

lowest

destructive

THE

140

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

p a s s i o n s o f t h e wild m o b ) . B a d i o u sarcastically r e m a r k s

that such

an

a e s t h e t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n a d m i r e d f r o m a safe d i s t a n c e b y p a s s i v e observers goes hand

in h a n d

with

the utmost

loathing for the

actual

r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s t h e m s e l v e s . ( D o we n o t a g a i n e n c o u n t e r h e r e t h e t e n s i o n between the Sublime and the Monstrous

[das

Ungeheure]:

what

appears

from a p r o p e r distance to b e the S u b l i m e cause o f enthusiasm turns into the figure o f monstrous

Evil, o n c e w e a p p r o a c h

it t o o closely a n d

get

d i r e c d y involved in it?) A g a i n s t this K a n t i a n c e l e b r a t i o n o f t h e s u b l i m e effect o n passive observ­ ers, B a d i o u insists o n t h e i m m a n e n c e o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t : t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is T r u t h i n i t s e l f f o r its a g e n t s t h e m s e l v e s , n o t f o r e x t e r n a l o b s e r v e r s . O n a first a p p r o a c h , it m a y a p p e a r

t h a t K a n t ' s p o s i t i o n is m o r e

'Lacanian'

h e r e : is n o t t h e T r u t h o f a n E v e n t a p r i o r i d e c e n t r e d w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e E v e n t itself; d o e s i t n o t d e p e n d o n t h e m o d e o f its i n s c r i p t i o n i n t o t h e b i g O t h e r ( p e r s o n i f i e d h e r e b y e n l i g h t e n e d p u b l i c o p i n i o n ) , w h i c h is always, a p r i o r i , d e f e r r e d ? Is n o t w h a t is p r o p e r l y u n t h i n k a b l e p r e c i s e l y a T r u t h t h a t w o u l d d i r e c t l y k n o w i t s e l f as T r u t h ? Is n o t t h e d e l a y o f c o m p r e h e n s i o n constitutive

(therein

lies t h e

Hegelian

materialist

M i n e r v a flies o n l y at d u s k ) ? F u r t h e r m o r e ,

lesson: the

Owl

of

i f a T r u t h - E v e n t is r a d i c a l l y

i m m a n e n t , h o w a r e w e t o d i s t i n g u i s h T r u t h f r o m its s i m u l a c r u m ? Is i t n o t o n l y t h e r e f e r e n c e to t h e d e c e n t r e d b i g O t h e r t h a t e n a b l e s us t o d r a w t h i s distinction? B a d i o u n o n e t h e less p r o v i d e s a p r e c i s e c r i t e r i o n f o r t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i n t h e way a n E v e n t r e l a t e s t o its c o n d i t i o n s , t o t h e ' s i t u a t i o n ' o u t o f w h i c h i t a r o s e : a t r u e E v e n t e m e r g e s o u t o f t h e ' v o i d ' o f t h e s i t u a t i o n ; it is a t t a c h e d t o its element surnumeraire.

to the s y m p t o m a t i c e l e m e n t that has n o

proper

p l a c e i n t h e s i t u a t i o n , a l t h o u g h it b e l o n g s t o it, w h i l e t h e s i m u l a c r u m o f a n E v e n t disavows t h e s y m p t o m . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , t h e L e n i n i s t O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n r e m a i n s a n E v e n t , s i n c e it r e l a t e s t o t h e ' c l a s s s t r u g g l e ' as t h e s y m p t o m a t i c t o r s i o n o f its s i t u a t i o n , w h i l e t h e N a z i m o v e m e n t is a s i m u l a ­ c r u m , a disavowal o f t h e t r a u m a o f class struggle. . . . T h e d i f f e r e n c e lies n o t i n t h e i n h e r e n t q u a l i t i e s o f t h e E v e n t itself, b u t i n its p l a c e - i n t h e way i t r e l a t e s t o t h e s i t u a t i o n o u t o f w h i c h it e m e r g e d . A s f o r t h e e x t e r n a l gaze that bears witness to the T r u t h

o f t h e E v e n t , t h i s g a z e is a b l e

d i s c e r n t h a t T r u t h o n l y i n s o f a r as it is t h e g a z e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s

to

who

a r e a l r e a d y e n g a g e d o n its b e h a l f : t h e r e is n o n e u t r a l e n l i g h t e n e d p u b l i c o p i n i o n t o b e i m p r e s s e d b y t h e E v e n t , s i n c e T r u t h is d i s c e r n i b l e o n l y f o r the potential m e m b e r s

o f the new C o m m u n i t y o f 'believers', for

their

e n g a g e d gaze. I n t h i s way, w e c a n p a r a d o x i c a l l y r e t a i n b o t h d i s t a n c e and

engagement:

T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H

141

in the case o f Christianity, the Event ( C r u c i f i x i o n ) b e c o m e s a T r u t h - E v e n t ' a f t e r t h e f a c t ' , t h a t is, w h e n it l e a d s t o t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e g r o u p o f believers, o f the e n g a g e d C o m m u n i t y h e l d

t o g e t h e r b y fidelity to

E v e n t . T h e r e is t h u s a d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n a n E v e n t a n d its n a m i n g :

the an

E v e n t is t h e t r a u m a t i c e n c o u n t e r w i t h t h e R e a l ( C h r i s t ' s d e a t h ; t h e h i s t o r i c s h o c k o f r e v o l u t i o n ; e t c . ) , w h i l e its n a m i n g is t h e i n s c r i p t i o n o f t h e E v e n t into the language

(Christian doctrine, revolutionary consciousness). In

L a c a n e s e , a n E v e n t is objet petit a, w h i l e n a m i n g is t h e n e w s i g n i f i e r t h a t establishes what R i m b a u d calls the N e w O r d e r , t h e n e w readability o f t h e situation based o n D e c i s i o n (in the M a r x i s t revolutionary perspective, the entire

prior

history

becomes a

history

o f class struggle,

of

defeated

emancipatory striving).

Truth and Ideology 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, event, precisely, does

not fit a n y o f t h e f o u r generiques

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 ) ?

and that

o f the event

this he

1 0

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

THE TICKLISH

142

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

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

as t h e

one who

articulated

the

Christian

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 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

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

occurrences which

shatters

the

predominant

take place in a universe

symbolic

texture,

c o m p a t i b l e with

only-

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

-

the

political

'sites' act,

of

the

artistic

Event

today

invention,

the

are

scientific

discovery

psychoanalytic

itself,

confrontation

with love. . . . T h a t is t h e p r o b l e m which endeavours

with G r a h a m

Greene's drama

The Potting

to resuscitate t h e C h r i s t i a n version o f t h e

Shed,

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

engagement,

rendered

his e n t i r e

meaningless. . . . Intriguing

theoretical work, as i t is, s u c h

his

lifelong

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 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 conditions

of the truth-procedure,

articulation

o f how

what

he

provides

is t h e

fidelity to a T r u t h - E v e n t o p e r a t e s

d i m e n s i o n : t h e e x c e s s i v e , surnumeraire

proposed

of the first

i n its

formal

detailed universal

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

formulates

longer

operative

the operative m o d e

for

us,

o f the

the

very

terms

in

Christian religion do

which

he

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 problem

remains

o f how

by d e a t h . . . . N o n e t h e less,

i t was p o s s i b l e f o r

the

first

pertinent description o f the m o d e o f operation o f the

and

fidelity

still

the most

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) 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 Truth-Event

( N a z i s m ) . S o it is as if, i f o n e

a fake, n o t an

is to e x p r e s s

the

was

actual formal

THE TICKLISH

144

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 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 .

of them,

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 b y futur

yet

1 2

confirmed

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 ; fundamentally

the present

situation

is e x p e r i e n c e d

'dislocated', 'out o f j o i n t ' (the corruption

of the

as

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 ideology -

notion

o f the

s u b j e c t to

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 engaged

Truth

that

subjectivizes

provides

torsion; while

authentic

insight

the

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 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

(and

( 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:

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

they 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 )

signalling that each h u m a n b e i n g can be r e d e e m e d

Christ,

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 , 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 and

mortality

(from

the

standpoint

o f the

cosmos, o f the

the

finitude

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

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

the

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

the

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

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 Truth-Event. T h e interesting

thing

to n o t e

is h o w

to

Badiou here

the

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 . W e t h u s h a v e two lives, t h e

finite

b i o l o g i c a l life a n d t h e i n f i n i t e L i f e o f

participating in the T r u t h - E v e n t o f R e s u r r e c t i o n . Correspondingly, are

a l s o two d e a t h s :

the

biological death

and

Death

in

the

there

sense o f

s u c c u m b i n g t o t h e 'way o f all f l e s h ' . H o w d o e s S t P a u l d e t e r m i n e

this

o p p o s i t i o n o f L i f e a n d D e a t h as t h e two s u b j e c t i v e , e x i s t e n t i a l a t t i t u d e s ? Here

we

touch

the

crux

of

Badiou's

argument,

c o n c e r n s psychoanalysis: for B a d i o u , the opposition

which

also

directly

o f Death and

Life

overlaps with t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f L a w a n d L o v e . F o r S t P a u l , s u c c u m b i n g to t h e t e m p t a t i o n s o f t h e f l e s h d o e s n o t s i m p l y m e a n i n d u l g i n g in u n b r i d l e d

THE

148

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

terrestrial conquests (the search for pleasures, power, wealth . . .) irrespec­ tive o f t h e L a w ( o f m o r a l p r o h i b i t i o n s ) . O n t h e c o n t r a r y , h i s c e n t r a l t e n e t , e l a b o r a t e d i n w h a t is p r o b a b l y t h e ( d e s e r v e d l y ) m o s t f a m o u s p a s s a g e i n h i s w r i t i n g s , C h a p t e r 7, v e r s e 7, i n t h e E p i s t l e t o t h e R o m a n s , is t h a t t h e r e is n o S i n p r i o r t o o r i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e L a w : w h a t c o m e s b e f o r e i t is a s i m p l e i n n o c e n t p r e l a p s a r i a n life f o r e v e r l o s t t o u s m o r t a l h u m a n b e i n g s . T h e u n i v e r s e w e live i n , our 'way o f all f l e s h ' , is t h e u n i v e r s e i n w h i c h S i n a n d L a w , d e s i r e a n d its p r o h i b i t i o n , a r e i n e x t r i c a b l y i n t e r t w i n e d : i t is t h e v e r y a c t o f P r o h i b i t i o n t h a t gives rise t o t h e d e s i r e f o r its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , t h a t is, fixes o u r d e s i r e o n t h e p r o h i b i t e d o b j e c t : W h a t then should we say? T h a t the law is sin? By n o m e a n s ! Yet, i f it had not b e e n for the law, I would not have known sin, I would not have known what it is to covet if the law h a d n o t said, 'You shall not covet.' B u t sin, seizing an opportunity in the c o m m a n d m e n t , p r o d u c e s in m e all kinds o f covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was o n c e alive apart from the law, but when t h e c o m m a n d m e n t c a m e , sin revived and I died, a n d the very c o m m a n d m e n t that promised life proved to b e death to m e . F o r sin, seizing an opportunity in the c o m m a n d m e n t , deceived m e a n d through it killed m e . . . . I do n o t understand my own actions. F o r I do n o t do what I want, but I do the very t h i n g I hate. Now if I do what 1 do not want, I agree that the law is g o o d . B u t in fact it is no l o n g e r I that do it, but sin that dwells within m e . F o r I know that n o t h i n g g o o d dwells within m e , that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I c a n n o t doit. l s

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 : B u t if o u r injustice serves to confirm t h e j u s t i c e o f G o d , what should we say? T h a t G o d is unjust to inflict wrath on us? . . . B u t if through my falsehood G o d ' s truthfulness a b o u n d s to his glory, why am I still b e i n g c o n d e m n e d as a s i n n e r ? A n d why not say (as s o m e p e o p l e slander us by saying that we say) ' L e t us do evil so that g o o d may c o m e ' ? T h i s ' L e t u s d o evil s o t h a t g o o d m a y c o m e [ f r o m i t ] ' is t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t definition o f t h e s h o r t c i r c u i t o f t h e perverse position. D o e s this m a k e G o d a c l o s e t p e r v e r t w h o b r i n g s a b o u t o u r fall s o t h a t H e

may

then

r e d e e m us t h r o u g h H i s s a c r i f i c e , o r - t o q u o t e R o m a n s 1 1 : 11 - ' h a v e t h e y s t u m b l e d s o as t o f a l l ' , t h a t is, d i d w e s t u m b l e ( b e c o m e i n v o l v e d i n S i n , i n t h e 'way o f all f l e s h ' ) b e c a u s e G o d n e e d e d o u r F a l l as p a r t o f H i s p l a n o f

T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H

149

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 b y h u n d r e d s o f 'sics

Notebooks, w i t h q u o t e s a c c o m p a n i e d

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 j u s t theological rubbish!' . . , S o , b a c k to t h e

long

1 4

quote

from

Romans: 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

direct result o f

the

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

i m p u l s e s in w h i c h I d o B e c a u s e o f this split, m y

' S i n ' itself, t h e

n o t r e c o g n i z e myself, a n d w h i c h I even

sinful hate.

( 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 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

my

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

THE TICKLISH

150

SUBJECT

transgress t h e Law, with t h e u n a c k n o w l e d g e d c o m p l i c i t y o f t h e L a w itself, b u t as a fully s u b j e c t i v i z e d , p o s i t i v e ' Y e s ! ' t o m y L i f e ? H e r e S t P a u l a n d B a d i o u s e e m fully t o e n d o r s e H e g e l ' s p o i n t t h a t t h e r e is Evil o n l y f o r t h e g a z e t h a t p e r c e i v e s s o m e t h i n g as Evil: it is t h e L a w i t s e l f that n o t only o p e n s u p a n d sustains t h e d o m a i n o f Sin, o f sinful u r g e s to t r a n s g r e s s it, b u t a l s o f i n d s a p e r v e r s e a n d m o r b i d s a t i s f a c t i o n i n m a k i n g u s f e e l g u i l t y a b o u t it. T h e u l t i m a t e r e s u l t o f t h e r u l e o f t h e L a w t h u s c o n s i s t s o f all t h e w e l l - k n o w n twists a n d p a r a d o x e s o f t h e s u p e r e g o : I c a n e n j o y o n l y i f I f e e l g u i l t y a b o u t it, w h i c h m e a n s t h a t , i n a s e l f - r e f l e x i v e turn, I can

take pleasure

in f e e l i n g guilty; I c a n

find

enjoyment

in

p u n i s h i n g m y s e l f for sinful t h o u g h t s ; a n d so o n . S o w h e n B a d i o u speaks o f t h e ' m o r b i d f a s c i n a t i o n o f t h e d e a t h d r i v e ' , a n d s o f o r t h , h e is n o t r e s o r t i n g to g e n e r a l platitudes, b u t r e f e r r i n g to a very p r e c i s e ' P a u l i n e ' r e a d i n g o f the psychoanalytic n o t i o n s h e uses: the e n t i r e c o m p l e x e n t a n ­ g l e m e n t o f L a w a n d desire - n o t o n l y illicit sinful d e s i r e s t h a t g o against t h e L a w , b u t t h i s m o r b i d i n t e r t w i n i n g o f life a n d

d e a t h in w h i c h

the

' d e a d ' l e t t e r o f t h e L a w p e r v e r t s m y e n j o y m e n t o f life i t s e l f , c h a n g i n g it i n t o a f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h d e a t h ; t h i s p e r v e r t e d u n i v e r s e in w h i c h t h e a s c e t i c w h o flagellates h i m s e l f o n b e h a l f o f the Law enjoys m o r e intensely than t h e p e r s o n w h o t a k e s i n n o c e n t p l e a s u r e i n e a r t h l y d e l i g h t s — is w h a t S t P a u l d e s i g n a t e s as ' t h e way o f t h e F l e s h ' as o p p o s e d t o ' t h e way o f t h e S p i r i t ' : ' F l e s h ' is n o t f l e s h as o p p o s e d t o t h e L a w , b u t f l e s h as a n e x c e s s i v e self-torturing,

mortifying

morbid

fascination

begotten

by the Law

(sec

R o m a n s 5: 2 0 : ' l a w c a m e i n , w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t t h e t r e s p a s s m u l t i p l i e d ' ) . As B a d i o u e m p h a s i z e s , h e r e S t P a u l is u n e x p e c t e d l y c l o s e t o h i s g r e a t d e t r a c t o r N i e t z s c h e , w h o s e p r o b l e m was a l s o h o w t o b r e a k away f r o m t h e vicious cycle o f t h e self-mortifying m o r b i d denial o f Life: for h i m Christian

'way o f t h e

Spirit'

is p r e c i s e l y t h e

magic

break,

the

B e g i n n i n g t h a t d e l i v e r s us f r o m t h i s d e b i l i t a t i n g m o r b i d d e a d l o c k

the New and

e n a b l e s us t o o p e n o u r s e l v e s t o t h e E t e r n a l L i f e o f L o v e w i t h o u t S i n ( i . e . L a w a n d t h e g u i l t t h e L a w i n d u c e s ) . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i t is as i f S t P a u l h i m s e l f h a s a n s w e r e d D o s t o e v s k y ' s i n f a m o u s ' I f t h e r e is n o G o d , e v e r y ­ t h i n g is p e r m i t t e d ! ' i n a d v a n c e - f o r S t P a u l , precisely since there is the God of Love, everything

is permitted

to the Christian

believer - t h a t is t o say, t h e L a w

w h i c h r e g u l a t e s a n d p r o h i b i t s c e r t a i n a c t s is s u s p e n d e d . F o r a C h r i s t i a n b e l i e v e r , t h e f a c t t h a t h e d o e s n o t d o c e r t a i n t h i n g s is b a s e d n o t prohibitions

(which then

generate

the

transgressive desire

to

on

indulge

precisely in t h e s e t h i n g s ) b u t in t h e positive, affirmative attitude o f L o v e , which r e n d e r s m e a n i n g l e s s the a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f acts w h i c h b e a r witness t o t h e f a c t t h a t I a m n o t f r e e , b u t still d o m i n a t e d b y a n e x t e r n a l f o r c e :

T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H

151

' "All t h i n g s a r c lawful f o r m e " , b u t n o t all t h i n g s a r e b e n e f i c i a l . "All t h i n g s a r e lawful f o r m e " , b u t I will n o t b e d o m i n a t e d b y a n y t h i n g . ' ( I C o r i n t h i a n s 7: 1 2 - 'All t h i n g s a r e lawful f o r m e ' is o f t e n t r a n s l a t e d a l s o as ' N o t h i n g is p r o h i b i t e d t o m e ' ! ) T h i s r u p t u r e w i t h t h e u n i v e r s e o f t h e L a w a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n is m o s t c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d i n a v e r y p r o v o k i n g ' a n a l o g y f r o m marriage': 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

d e c e n t r e d desire which, operating

to

the

letter o f the

Law, and

his

'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. radical division b e t w e e n

O n the o t h e r h a n d , we have the

this e n t i r e d o m a i n

more

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 .

THE

152

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

Between the T w o Deaths W h a t s t a n c e d o e s t h e L a c a n i a n ' d i v i d e d s u b j e c t ' a d o p t t o w a r d s t h e s e two d i v i s i o n s ? I t m a y a p p e a r t h a t t h e a n s w e r is s i m p l e a n d

straightforward:

p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is the t h e o r y t h a t c o n c e p t u a l i z e s , b r i n g s i n t o d a y l i g h t , t h e p a r a d o x i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e first d i v i s i o n . Is n o t B a d i o u ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e i n t e r t w i n i n g o f L a w a n d d e s i r e full o f i m p l i c i t ( s o m e t i m e s e v e n e x p ­ licit) r e f e r e n c e s to a n d p a r a p h r a s e s o f L a c a n ? Is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e d o m a i n o f psychoanalysis t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s y m b o l i c L a w a n d d e s i r e ? Is n o t the multitude connection

o f p e r v e r s e satisfactions t h e very f o r m in w h i c h

between

Law and

d e s i r e is r e a l i z e d ? Is n o t

the

the

Lacanian

division o f the s u b j e c t the division that c o n c e r n s precisely 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 L a w ? F u r t h e r m o r e , is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e c o n f i r ­ m a t i o n o f this L a c a n ' s ' K a n t avec S a d e ' , w h i c h directly posits t h e S a d e i a n u n i v e r s e o f m o r b i d p e r v e r s i o n as t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e m o s t r a d i c a l a s s e r t i o n o f t h e m o r a l w e i g h t o f s y m b o l i c L a w in h u m a n history ( K a n t i a n e t h i c s ) ? ( T h e i r o n i c p o i n t n o t t o b e m i s s e d h e r e is t h a t F o u c a u l t c o n c e i v e s o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s as t h e f i n a l c h a i n i n t h e l i n k t h a t b e g a n w i t h t h e C h r i s t i a n c o n f e s s i o n a l m o d e o f sexuality, i r r e d u c i b l y l i n k i n g it to L a w a n d while -

at l e a s t i n B a d i o u ' s r e a d i n g -

St Paul, the founding

guilt,

figure o f

C h r i s t i a n i t y , d o e s t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e : h e e n d e a v o u r s t o break t h e m o r b i d link between Law and desire. . . .) However, the crucial p o i n t for psychoa­ n a l y s i s h e r e is: d o e s p s y c h o a n a l y s i s r e m a i n w i t h i n

the c o n f i n e s o f this

' m o r b i d ' m a s o c h i s t i c o b s e s s i o n with d e a t h , o f t h e p e r v e r s e i n t e r m i n g l i n g o f Life a n d D e a t h w h i c h characterizes t h e dialectics o f the

prohibitory

L a w t h a t g e n e r a t e s t h e d e s i r e f o r its t r a n s g r e s s i o n ? P e r h a p s t h e b e s t way t o a n s w e r this q u e s t i o n is t o s t a r t w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t L a c a n h i m s e l f a l s o focuses o n the s a m e passage from St Paul in his e l a b o r a t i o n o f the link b e t w e e n L a w a n d d e s i r e , r e f e r r i n g t o t h e T h i n g as t h e i m p o s s i b l e o b j e c t o f jouissance

a c c e s s i b l e o n l y v i a t h e p r o h i b i t o r y L a w , as its t r a n s g r e s s i o n .

T h i s p a s s a g e s h o u l d b e q u o t e d i n full:

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 u r n e d out to lead to death, for t h e T h i n g found a way a n d thanks to t h e c o m m a n d m e n t seduced me; t h r o u g h it I c a m e to desire death. I believe that for a little while now s o m e o f you at least have b e g u n to suspect that it is n o l o n g e r I who have b e e n speaking. In fact, with o n e small c h a n g e , namely, ' T h i n g ' for 'sin', this is the s p e e c h o f Saint Paul on t h e subject o f t h e relations between the law and the sin in t h e Epistle to the R o m a n s , C h a p t e r 7, paragraph 7. . . . T h e relationship between the T h i n g a n d the Law c o u l d not b e b e t t e r defined than in these terms. . . . T h e dialectical relationship between desire a n d the Law causes o u r desire to flare up only in relation to t h e Law, through which it b e c o m e s t h e desire for death. It is only because o f the Law that sin . . . takes on an excessive, hyperbolic c h a r a c t e r . F r e u d ' s discovery - t h e ethics o f psycho­ analysis - does it leave us clinging to that d i a l e c t i c ? 15

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, ist c l a i m t o g i v e v o i c e t o

the obscurant­

( 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

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

thus

involved

in

a

'morbid'

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 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 ! '

is

1 7

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

THE TICKLISH

154

SUBJECT

' s u t u r e d ' with t h e arrival o f a n e w T r u t h - E v e n t . F o r L a c a n , negativity, a negative gesture o f withdrawal, p r e c e d e s any positive gesture o f enthusi­ a s t i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h a C a u s e : n e g a t i v i t y f u n c t i o n s as t h e c o n d i t i o n o f ( i m ) p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e e n t h u s i a s t i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - t h a t is t o say, i t lays t h e g r o u n d , o p e n s u p s p a c e f o r it, b u t is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y o b f u s c a t e d b y i t a n d undermines

it. F o r t h i s r e a s o n , L a c a n i m p l i c i t l y c h a n g e s t h e

balance

between D e a t h a n d R e s u r r e c t i o n in favour o f D e a t h : what ' D e a t h '

stands

f o r a t its m o s t r a d i c a l is n o t m e r e l y t h e p a s s i n g o f e a r t h l y l i f e , b u t 'night

of the

world',

the

self-withdrawal,

the

absolute

the

contraction

of

s u b j e c t i v i t y , t h e s e v e r i n g o f its l i n k s w i t h ' r e a l i t y ' - this is t h e ' w i p i n g t h e slate c l e a n ' that o p e n s up the d o m a i n o f the symbolic New B e g i n n i n g , o f the e m e r g e n c e o f the

'New Harmony'

sustained

by a newly

emerged

Master-Signifier. H e r e , L a c a n p a r t s c o m p a n y w i t h S t P a u l a n d B a d i o u : G o d n o t o n l y is b u t a l w a y s - a l r e a d y was d e a d -

t h a t is t o say, a f t e r F r e u d ,

one

cannot

directly have faith in a Truth-Event; every such E v e n t ultimately r e m a i n s a s e m b l a n c e o b f u s c a t i n g a p r e c e d i n g V o i d w h o s e F r e u d i a n n a m e is drive.

S o L a c a n differs f r o m B a d i o u in t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n

status o f this d o m a i n

o f the

death exact

b e y o n d t h e r u l e o f t h e L a w . T h a t is t o say: l i k e

Lacan, B a d i o u delineates the contours o f a d o m a i n beyond the O r d e r o f B e i n g , b e y o n d t h e p o l i t i c s o f service des Mens, b e y o n d t h e ' m o r b i d ' ego connection between

Law and

super­

its t r a n s g r e s s i v e d e s i r e . F o r L a c a n ,

however, the F r e u d i a n topic o f the d e a t h drive c a n n o t b e a c c o u n t e d for i n t h e t e r m s o f t h i s c o n n e c t i o n : t h e ' d e a t h d r i v e ' is not t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e m o r b i d c o n f u s i o n o f Life a n d D e a t h c a u s e d by t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e symbolic Law. F o r L a c a n , the u n c a n n y d o m a i n b e y o n d the O r d e r o f B e i n g is w h a t h e c a l l s t h e d o m a i n ' b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h s ' , t h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l d o m a i n o f m o n s t r o u s s p e c t r a l a p p a r i t i o n s , t h e d o m a i n t h a t is ' i m m o r t a l ' , yet n o t i n t h e B a d i o u i a n s e n s e o f t h e i m m o r t a l i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g T r u t h , b u t i n t h e s e n s e o f w h a t L a c a n c a l l s lamella, 'undead' object-libido. finds

in

monstrous

, s

T h i s d o m a i n , in w h i c h O e d i p u s plary case)

o f the

himself after

( o r K i n g L e a r , to take a n o t h e r e x e m ­

the

Fall, when

h i s s y m b o l i c d e s t i n y is

f u l f i l l e d , is f o r L a c a n t h e p r o p e r d o m a i n ' b e y o n d t h e L a w ' . T h a t is t o say: i n his r e a d i n g o f t h e O e d i p u s m y t h , t h e e a r l y L a c a n a l r e a d y f o c u s e s o n w h a t t h e u s u a l v e r s i o n o f t h e ' O e d i p u s c o m p l e x ' l e a v e s o u t : t h e first f i g u r e o f w h a t is ' b e y o n d O e d i p u s ' , w h i c h is Oedipus

himself a f t e r h e h a s f u l f i l l e d

h i s d e s t i n y t o t h e b i t t e r e n d , t h e h o r r i f y i n g figure o f O e d i p u s at C o l o n n u s , this e m b i t t e r e d o l d m a n with his t h o r o u g h l y u n c o m p r o m i s i n g cursing everyone around

h i m . . . . D o e s n o t this

figure

attitude,

of Oedipus

at

T H E POLITICS OF T R U T H C o l o n n u s c o n f r o n t us with jouissance, gressed

155

the i n h e r e n t deadlock, the impossibility o f

c o n c e a l e d b y its P r o h i b i t i o n ? W a s h e n o t t h e o n e w h o the

Prohibition

and

paid

the

price by having

trans­

to a s s u m e

this

impossibility? T o illustrate the position o f O e d i p u s at C o l o n n u s , L a c a n c o m p a r e s it t o t h a t o f t h e u n f o r t u n a t e M r V a l d e m a r i n P o e ' s f a m o u s s t o r y , the

person

w h o , via h y p n o s i s , is p u t

to death

and

then

reawakened,

imploring the people who observe the horrible experiment: 'For God's sake! - quick! - quick! - p u t m e to s l e e p - or, quick! - waken m e ! quick! - I SAY T O Y O U T H A T I AM DEAD!' W h e n h e is a w a k e n e d , M r V a l d e m a r : is n o m o r e than a disgusting liquefaction, s o m e t h i n g for which n o language has a n a m e , the naked apparition, pure, simple, brutal, o f this figure which is impossible to gaze at face on, which hovers in the b a c k g r o u n d o f all the imaginings o f h u m a n destiny, which is beyond all qualification, and for which the word carrion is completely inadequate, the c o m p l e t e collapse o f this species o f swelling that is life - the bubble bursts and dissolves down into i n a n i m a t e putrid liquid. T h a t is what h a p p e n s in the case o f O e d i p u s . As everything right from the start o f the tragedy goes to show, O e d i p u s is n o t h i n g m o r e than t h e scum o f the earth, the refuse, the residue, a thing empty o f any plausible a p p e a r a n c e . ' ' ' 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

theorized

by

o f this

Lacan

as

'life

lamella,

beyond the

death'

later

(in

undead-indestructible

Seminar

XT)

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 o n an interface, the m o r e the 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' integrated

into

the

interface

appears

as t h e

encountered

t h a t resists b e i n g

horrifying

remainder

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 '

of

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

restaurant r e c o m m e n d s day's m e n u

-

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

to his c u s t o m e r s the best suggestions f r o m

the

( ' 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 , e x c r e m c n t a l , paste-like lump:'

20

this split b e t w e e n the i m a g e o f the

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

food

exemplifies perfectly

the disintegration o f reality into the ghostlike, substanccless a p p e a r a n c e

THE

156

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

o n a n i n t e r f a c e a n d t h e raw s t u f f o f t h e r e m a i n d e r obsession

with

this

remainder

is t h e

price

we

o f the Real -

have

to

pay

suspension o f the paternal P r o h i b i t i o n / L a w that sustains a n d

the

for

the

guarantees

o u r a c c e s s t o r e a l i t y . A n d o f c o u r s e , L a c a n ' s p o i n t is t h a t i f o n e e x p l o i t s t h e p o t e n t i a l s o p e n e d u p b y o u r e x i s t e n c e as parlhres

fully

('beings o f

l a n g u a g e ' ) , o n e s o o n e r o r l a t e r finds o n e s e l f in this horrifying i n - b e t w e e n state - t h e t h r e a t e n i n g possibility o f this o c c u r r e n c e l o o m s o v e r e a c h o f us. T h i s 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' , this f o r m l e s s stain o f the 'little p i e c e o f the Real' the

that

'is' O e d i p u s

a f t e r t h e f u l f i l m e n t o f h i s s y m b o l i c D e s t i n y , is

direct e m b o d i m e n t

of what

Lacan

c a l l s plus-de-jouir,

e n j o y m e n t ' , the excess that c a n n o t b e a c c o u n t e d idealization. W h e n

L a c a n uses the

term

the

'surplus-

f o r by a n y s y m b o l i c

plus-de-jouir,

he

is, o f c o u r s e ,

playing on the ambiguity o f the F r e n c h expression ('excess o f e n j o y m e n t ' as well tempted

as ' n o

longer

any

to s p e a k h e r e

e n j o y m e n t ' ) ; following

o f this f o r m l e s s

model,

one

'indivisible r e m a i n d e r '

this

that

O e d i p u s a f t e r t h e f u l f i l m e n t o f his D e s t i n y as a c a s e o f plus d'homme is ' e x c e s s i v e l y h u m a n ' , h e h a s l i v e d t h e ' h u m a n c o n d i t i o n ' t o t h e e n d , r e a l i z i n g its m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l

there

by n o h u m a n laws o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . . . . As L a c a n a r c two m a i n

is he

bitter

possibility; and, for that very reason,

h e is in a way ' n o l o n g e r h u m a n ' , a n d t u r n s i n t o a n ' i n h u m a n bound

-

is

ways o f c o p i n g

with

this

'remainder':

monster',

emphasizes, traditional

h u m a n i s m disavows it, a v o i d s c o n f r o n t i n g it, c o v e r s it u p w i t h i d e a l i z a t i o n s , c o n c e a l i n g it w i t h n o b l e i m a g e s o f H u m a n i t y ;

on the other hand,

the

ruthless a n d b o u n d l e s s capitalist e c o n o m y p u t s this e x c e s s / r e m a i n d e r to u s e , m a n i p u l a t i n g i t i n o r d e r t o k e e p its p r o d u c t i v e m a c h i n e r y i n ual m o t i o n

perpet­

(as o n e u s u a l l y p u t s it, t h e r e is n o d e s i r e , n o d e p r a v i t y ,

too

low to b e exploited for capitalist p r o f i t e e r i n g ) . A t t h i s p o i n t , w h e n O e d i p u s is r e d u c e d t o t h e ' s c u m o f h u m a n i t y ' , we again e n c o u n t e r the a m b i g u o u s relationship (or, in H e g e l e s e , the specu­ lative identity) b e t w e e n

the lowest a n d t h e highest, b e t w e e n

the

excre-

m e n t a l s c u m a n d t h e s a c r e d : a f t e r h i s u t t e r d e j e c t i o n , all o f a s u d d e n , m e s s e n g e r s f r o m d i f f e r e n t c i t i e s vie f o r O e d i p u s ' s f a v o u r s , a s k i n g h i m t o bless t h e i r h o m e t o w n with his p r e s e n c e , to w h i c h t h e e m b i t t e r e d

Oedipus

a n s w e r s w i t h t h e f a m o u s l i n e : ' A m I t o b e c o u n t e d as s o m e t h i n g

[accord­

i n g t o s o m e r e a d i n g s : as a m a n ] o n l y n o w , w h e n I a m r e d u c e d t o n o t h i n g [ w h e n 1 a m n o l o n g e r h u m a n ] ? ' D o e s n o t this l i n e r e v e a l t h e e l e m e n t a r y m a t r i x o f subjectivity: you b e c o m e

'something'

(you are c o u n t e d

as a

subject) only after going through the zero-point, after being deprived o f all t h e

'pathological'

(in

the Kantian

sense o f empirical,

contingent)

THE

POLITICS

OF

TRUTH

157

features that support your identity, a n d thus r e d u c e d to ' n o t h i n g ' -

'a

N o t h i n g n e s s c o u n t e d as S o m e t h i n g ' is t h e m o s t c o n c i s e f o r m u l a o f t h e Lacanian 'barred' subject (s).One

1

c o u l d say t h a t M a r t i n L u t h e r was t h e first g r e a t

antihumanist:

m o d e r n s u b j e c t i v i t y is a n n o u n c e d n o t i n t h e R e n a i s s a n c e h u m a n i s t

cel­

e b r a t i o n o f m a n as t h e ' c r o w n o f c r e a t i o n ' , t h a t is, i n t h e t r a d i t i o n o f E r a s m u s a n d o t h e r s ( t o w h o m L u t h e r c a n n o t b u t a p p e a r as a ' b a r b a r i a n ' ) , b u t , r a t h e r , in L u t h e r ' s f a m o u s s t a t e m e n t t h a t m a n is t h e e x c r e m e n t t h a t fell o u t o f G o d ' s anus. M o d e r n subjectivity has n o t h i n g to d o with

the

n o t i o n o f m a n as t h e h i g h e s t c r e a t u r e i n t h e ' G r e a t C h a i n o f B e i n g ' , as the

final

point

o f the

evolution

o f the

universe:

modern

subjectivity

e m e r g e s w h e n t h e s u b j e c t p e r c e i v e s h i m s e l f as ' o u t o f j o i n t ' , as

excluded

f r o m the ' o r d e r o f things', from the positive o r d e r o f entities. F o r that reason, the ontic equivalent o f the m o d e r n

s u b j e c t is i n h e r e n t l y

excre-

mental: t h e r e is n o s u b j e c t i v i t y p r o p e r w i t h o u t t h e n o t i o n t h a t at a d i f f e r e n t level, f r o m a n o t h e r perspective, I a m a m e r e p i e c e o f shit. F o r M a r x , the e m e r g e n c e o f w o r k i n g - c l a s s s u b j e c t i v i t y is s t r i c t l y c o - d e p e n d e n t o n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e w o r k e r is c o m p e l l e d t o s e l l t h e very' s u b s t a n c e o f h i s b e i n g ( h i s c r e a t i v e p o w e r ) as a c o m m o d i t y o n t h e m a r k e t - t h a t is, t o r e d u c e agalma,

the

t h e treasure, t h e p r e c i o u s c o r e o f his b e i n g , to an o b j e c t that c a n

b e b o u g h t f o r m o n e y : t h e r e is n o s u b j e c t i v i t y w i t h o u t t h e r e d u c t i o n o f t h e subject's positive-substantial b e i n g to a d i s p o s a b l e ' p i e c e o f shit'. In this case o f correlation between

Cartesian subjectivity a n d

its e x c r e m e n t a l

o b j e c t a l c o u n t e r p a r t , we are n o t d e a l i n g m e r e l y with an e x a m p l e o f what Foucault

called the

modern

empirico-transcendental

couple

that

characterizes

a n t h r o p o l o g y , b u t r a t h e r , with t h e s p l i t b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t o f

the enunciation

and

the subject o f the enunciated:*-

if the

Cartesian

s u b j e c t is t o e m e r g e a t t h e l e v e l o f t h e e n u n c i a t i o n , h e m u s t b e r e d u c e d to

the

'almost-nothing'

o f disposable

excrement

at

the

level

of

the

enunciated content. W h a t B a d i o u does n o t take into a c c o u n t c a n b e best s u m m a r i z e d by the f a c t t h a t , in t h e C h r i s t i a n i c o n o g r a p h y , S t P a u l t a k e s t h e p l a c e o f J u d a s t h e T r a i t o r a m o n g the twelve apostles - a c a s e o f m e t a p h o r i c

substitution

i f e v e r t h e r e was o n e . T h e k e y p o i n t is t h a t S t P a u l was i n a p o s i t i o n t o e s t a b l i s h C h r i s t i a n i t y as a n I n s t i t u t i o n , t o f o r m u l a t e its u n i v e r s a l precisely because he did excluded

from

the

not k n o w C h r i s t p e r s o n a l l y -

initiatoiy deadlock

o f those

who

as s u c h were

Truth, he

was

personally

e n g a g e d w i t h t h e M a s t e r ; h o w e v e r , in o r d e r f o r t h i s d i s t a n c e t o b e c o m e p r o d u c t i v e - t h a t is, i n o r d e r f o r h i s u n i v e r s a l m e s s a g e t o m a t t e r

more

t h a n h i s p e r s o n - C h r i s t had t o b e b e t r a y e d . . . . T o p u t it a n o t h e r way:

THE TICKLISH

158

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 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

that 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 ' act o f decision.

2 3

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

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 , still b e c a l l e d " s u b j e c t " ? ' - is a n e m p h a t i c ' Y e s ! ' - t h e s u b j e c t is b o t h a t t h e s a m e t i m e , t h e o n t o l o g i c a l g a p ( t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' , t h e m a d n e s s o f r a d i c a l s e l f - w i t h d r a w a l ) as w e l l as t h e

gesture

o f subjectivization which, by m e a n s o f a s h o r t circuit b e t w e e n t h e Univer­ sal a n d

the Particular, h e a l s the w o u n d o f this gap

(in L a c a n e s e : t h e

g e s t u r e o f t h e M a s t e r w h i c h e s t a b l i s h e s a ' n e w h a r m o n y ' ) . 'Subjectivity' name for this irreducible

circularity,

for a, power which does not fight an

resisting force (say, the inertia of the given substantial is absolutely

inherent,

which ultimately

t h e s u b j e c t ' s very e n d e a v o u r

order),

but an obstacle that 24

'is' the subject

is a

external

itself.'

In other

words,

t o fill i n t h e g a p r e t r o a c t i v e l y s u s t a i n s

and

g e n e r a t e s this gap. The

'death drive'

is t h u s t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e o b v e r s e o f e v e r y

emphatic

assertion o f T r u t h i r r e d u c i b l e to t h e positive o r d e r o f B e i n g : the negative gesture that clears a space for creative sublimation. T h e fact that sublima­ tion p r e s u p p o s e s t h e d e a t h drive m e a n s t h a t w h e n we a r e enthusiastically t r a n s f i x e d b y a s u b l i m e o b j e c t , tiiis o b j e c t is a ' m a s k o f d e a t h ' , a v e i l t h a t c o v e r s u p t h e p r i m o r d i a l o n t o l o g i c a l V o i d — as N i e t z s c h e w o u l d h a v e p u t it: t o will t h i s s u b l i m e o b j e c t e f f e c t i v e l y a m o u n t s t o w i l l i n g a N o t h i n g n e s s . T h a t is 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 B a d i o u : L a c a n insists o n

5

the

p r i m a c y o f t h e ( n e g a t i v e ) act o v e r t h e ( p o s i t i v e ) e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a ' n e w harmony' Badiou,

via t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n the

different

facets

o f s o m e new Master-Signifier; while of

negativity

(ethical

catastrophes)

for are

r e d u c e d t o so m a n y v e r s i o n s o f t h e ' b e t r a v a l ' o f ( o r i n f i d e l i t y t o , o r d e n i a l of) the positive Truth-Event. T h i s d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n B a d i o u a n d L a c a n c o n c e r n s precisely the status o f t h e s u b j e c t : B a d i o u ' s m a i n p o i n t is t o a v o i d i d e n t i f y i n g t h e s u b j e c t w i t h the constitutive V o i d o f the structure

-

such

an identification

already

' o n t o l o g i z e s ' t h e s u b j e c t , a l b e i t i n a p u r e l y n e g a t i v e way - t h a t is, it t u r n s t h e s u b j e c t i n t o a n entity c o n s u b s t a n t i a l with t h e s t r u c t u r e , a n entity that b e l o n g s to t h e o r d e r

o f w h a t is n e c e s s a r y a n d

a priori

('no

structure

w i t h o u t a s u b j e c t ' ) . T o this L a c a n i a n o n t o l o g i z a t i o n o f the s u b j e c t , B a d i o u o p p o s e s its ' r a r i t y ' , t h e l o c a l - c o n t i n g e n t - f r a g i l e - p a s s i n g e m e r g e n c e o f s u b ­ j e c t i v i t y : w h e n , 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 T r u t h - E v e n t t a k e s p l a c e , a s u b j e c t is t h e r e to e x e r t f i d e l i t y t o t h e E v e n t b y d i s c e r n i n g 2n

t r a c e s i n a S i t u a t i o n w h o s e T r u t h t h i s E v e n t is.'

its

F o r B a d i o u , as w e l l as f o r

L a c l a u , t h e s u b j e c t is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h a c o n t i n g e n t a c t o f D e c i s i o n ; while

Lacan introduces

the

distinction

between

the

subject

and

the

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 a t B a d i o u a n d L a c l a u d e s c r i b e is t h e p r o c e s s o f .subjectivization - t h e e m p h a t i c e n g a g e m e n t , t h e a s s u m p t i o n o f

fidelity

to t h e E v e n t (or, in L a c l a u , the e m p h a t i c gesture o f identifying

empty

THE TICKLISH

160

SUBJECT

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 new Master-Signifier.

2 7

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 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 an Act that sustains

the very ontological

o f the

the contingency

of

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 fidelity drive

(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

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 (a category Badiou adamandy

'vanishing

mediator'

between

to it. T h e L a c a n i a n

opposes)

Being and

is t h u s a g a i n a k i n d

Event: there

is a

a

death of

'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 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

a s

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

r e d u c e d to 'less t h a n n o t h i n g ' , to a f o r m l e s s stain, t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f some

unspeakable

h o r r o r ? All these

and

other

figures

(from

s p e a r e ' s K i n g L e a r to C l a u d e l ' s S y g n e de C o u f o n t a i n e ) are find

t h e m s e l v e s in

this void,

trespassing

the

Shake­

figures

who

limit o f 'humanity'

and

e n t e r i n g t h e d o m a i n w h i c h , i n a n c i e n t G r e e k , was c a l l e d ate,

'inhuman

m a d n e s s ' . H e r e , B a d i o u pays t h e p r i c e f o r h i s p r o t o - P l a t o n i c a d h e r e n c e to T r u t h a n d t h e G o o d : w h a t r e m a i n s b e y o n d his r e a c h , in his v i o l e n t ( a n d , o n its o w n l e v e l , q u i t e j u s t i f i e d ) p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y o b s e s s i o n with d e p o l i t i c i z e d ' r a d i c a l Evil' insistence

that the different

(the Holocaust, etc.) and

f a c e t s o f Evil a r e m e r e l y s o m a n y

his

conse­

q u e n c e s o f t h e b e t r a y a l o f t h e G o o d ( o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t ) , is t h i s d o m a i n ' b e y o n d t h e G o o d ' , in w h i c h a h u m a n b e i n g e n c o u n t e r s t h e d e a t h drive as t h e u t m o s t l i m i t o f h u m a n e x p e r i e n c e , a n d pays t h e p r i c e b y u n d e r g o ­ ing a radical 'subjective d e s t i t u t i o n ' , by b e i n g r e d u c e d to an e x c r e m e n t a l r e m a i n d e r . L a c a n ' s p o i n t is t h a t t h i s l i m i t - e x p e r i e n c e is t h e i r r e d u c i b l e / constitutive condition o f the (im)possibility o f the creative act o f e m b r a c ­ i n g a T r u t h - E v e n t : it o p e n s u p a n d s u s t a i n s t h e s p a c e for t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , y e t its e x c e s s always t h r e a t e n s t o u n d e r m i n e it. C l a s s i c o n t o - t h e o l o g y is f o c u s e d o n t h e t r i a d o f t h e T r u e , t h e B e a u t i f u l a n d t h e G o o d . W h a t L a c a n d o e s is t o p u s h t h e s e t h r e e n o t i o n s t o t h e i r limit, d e m o n s t r a t i n g

t h a t t h e G o o d is t h e m a s k o f ' d i a b o l i c a l ' E v i l , t h a t

t h e B e a u t i f u l is t h e m a s k o f t h e U g l y , o f t h e d i s g u s t i n g h o r r o r o f t h e R e a l , a n d t h a t t h e T r u e is t h e m a s k o f t h e c e n t r a l V o i d a r o u n d w h i c h e v e r y s y m b o l i c e d i f i c e is w o v e n . I n s h o r t , t h e r e is a d o m a i n ' b e y o n d t h e G o o d ' t h a t is n o t s i m p l y e v e r y d a y background

' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' villainy, b u t

o f t h e G o o d itself, t h e

p o w e r ; t h e r e is a d o m a i n

the

terrifying a m b i g u o u s

constitutive s o u r c e o f its

' b e y o n d t h e B e a u t i f u l ' t h a t is n o t s i m p l y t h e

ugliness o f ordinary everyday objects, but the constitutive b a c k g r o u n d o f B e a u t y itself, t h e H o r r o r v e i l e d b y t h e f a s c i n a t i n g p r e s e n c e o f B e a u t y ; t h e r e is a d o m a i n ' b e y o n d T r u t h ' t h a t is n o t s i m p l y t h e e v e r y d a y d o m a i n o f l i e s , d e c e p t i o n s a n d f a l s i t i e s , b u t t h e V o i d t h a t s u s t a i n s t h e p l a c e in which o n e can only formulate symbolic there

is a n

fictions

that we call ' t r u t h s ' . I f

e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l l e s s o n o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , it c o n s i s t s i n

the

insight into how the great calamities o f our century (from the Holocaust t o t h e S t a l i n i s t desastre)

are

not the

result o f o u r

succumbing

to

the

m o r b i d attraction o f this B e y o n d but, o n the contrary, the result o f o u r e n d e a v o u r t o a v o i d c o n f r o n t i n g it a n d t o i m p o s e t h e d i r e c t r u l e o f t h e Truth a n d / o r Goodness.

THE TICKLISH

162

SUBJECT

T h e M a s t e r o r t h e Analyst? W e are now in a position to provide a precise definition o f the gap

that

s e p a r a t e s B a d i o u f r o m L a c a n : f o r B a d i o u , w h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s p r o v i d e s is insight into the m o r b i d intertwining o f Life a n d D e a t h , o f Law and desire, a n i n s i g h t i n t o t h e o b s c e n i t y o f t h e L a w i t s e l f as t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e a n d m o r a l stance that limit themselves to t h e O r d e r

thought

of Being and

d i s c r i m i n a t o r y L a w s ; as s u c h , p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a n n o t p r o p e r l y r e n d e r matic the d o m a i n fidelity

b e y o n d t h e L a w , t h a t is, t h e m o d e

to t h e T r u t h - E v e n t -

o f operation

t h e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c s u b j e c t is t h e

its the­ of

divided

s u b j e c t o f t h e ( s y m b o l i c ) L a w , not t h e s u b j e c t d i v i d e d b e t w e e n L a w ( w h i c h r e g u l a t e s the O r d e r o f B e i n g ) a n d L o v e (as

fidelity

to the T r u t h - E v e n t ) .

T h e l o g i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h i s is t h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , f o r B a d i o u , r e m a i n s c o n s t r a i n e d t o t h e field o f K n o w l e d g e , u n a b l e to a p p r o a c h t h e

properly

positive d i m e n s i o n o f T r u t h - p r o c e s s e s : in t h e case o f love, psychoanalysis r e d u c e s it t o a s u b l i m a t e d e x p r e s s i o n o f s e x u a l i t y ; i n t h e c a s e o f s c i e n c e as w e l l as a r t , p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a n o n l y p r o v i d e

the subjective libidinal

c o n d i t i o n s o f a scientific i n v e n t i o n o r a w o r k o f art, w h i c h a r e u l t i m a t e l y i r r e l e v a n t t o t h e i r t r u t h - d i m e n s i o n - t h a t a n a r t i s t o r a s c i e n t i s t was d r i v e n b y his u n r e s o l v e d O e d i p u s c o m p l e x o r l a t e n t h o m o s e x u a l i t y , a n d s o o n ; in the case o f politics, psychoanalysis c a n c o n c e i v e o f collectivity only a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f t h e Totem and

Taboo o r Moses and

Monotheism

p r o b l e m a t i c o f p r i m o r d i a l c r i m e a n d g u i l t , a n d so o n , u n a b l e t o c o n c e i v e a m i l i t a n t ' r e v o l u t i o n a r y ' c o l l e c t i v e t h a t is b o u n d not b y p a r e n t a l g u i l t b u t by t h e positive f o r c e o f L o v e . F o r L a c a n , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a Truth-Event background

of the traumatic

a r e B a d i o u ' s f o u r generiques

encounter

can operate only against

xuith the undead/monstrous

Thing,

the what

- art, s c i e n c e , l o v e , p o l i t i c s - i f n o t f o u r ways

o f r e i n s c r i b i n g t h e e n c o u n t e r with t h e R e a l T h i n g o n to t h e s y m b o l i c t e x t u r e ? I n art, b e a u t y is ' t h e l a s t v e i l o f t h e M o n s t r o u s ' ; f a r f r o m

being

j u s t a n o t h e r s y m b o l i c n a r r a t i v e , science is t h e e n d e a v o u r t o f o r m u l a t e structure o f the Real b e n e a t h the symbolic

fiction;

the

for the later Lacan,

love is n o l o n g e r m e r e l y t h e n a r c i s s i s t i c s c r e e n o b f u s c a t i n g t h e t r u t h o f d e s i r e , b u t t h e way t o ' g e n t r i f y ' a n d c o m e t o t e r m s w i t h t h e

traumatic

d r i v e ; finally, m i l i t a n t politics is a way o f p u t t i n g t o u s e t h e t e r r i f i c f o r c e o f N e g a t i v i t y i n o r d e r t o r e s t r u c t u r e o u r s o c i a l affairs. . . . S o L a c a n is n o t a p o s t m o d e r n i s t c u l t u r a l relativist: t h e r e d e f i n i t e l y is a d i f f e r e n c e a n a u t h e n t i c T r u t h - E v e n t a n d its s e m b l a n c e , a n d t h e fact t h a t i n a T r u t h - E v e n t

between

t h i s d i f f e r e n c e lies i n

the void o f the d e a t h drive, o f radical

T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H

163

negativity, a gap that m o m e n t a r i l y s u s p e n d s the O r d e r o f B e i n g , c o n t i n u e s to resonate. T h i s b r i n g s us b a c k t o t h e p r o b l e m o f h u m a n f i n i t u d e : w h e n B a d i o u dismisses the topic o f h u m a n finitude, from H e i d e g g e r i a n

'being-towards-

d e a t h ' t o F r e u d i a n ' d e a t h d r i v e ' , as t h e m o r b i d o b s e s s i o n w i t h w h a t m a k e s m a n e q u a l t o a n d t h u s r e d u c e d t o a m e r e a n i m a l - as t h e b l i n d n e s s t o that

properly

meta-physical

dimension

that

elevates m a n

beyond

the

a n i m a l k i n g d o m a n d allows h i m to ' g a i n i m m o r t a l i t y ' by p a r t i c i p a t i n g in a Truth-Event thought',

his t h e o r e t i c a l g e s t u r e involves a ' r e g r e s s i o n ' to

to a naive traditional

two o r d e r s ( t h e

finitude

'non-

(pre-critical, pre-Kantian) opposition o f

o f positive B e i n g ; the i m m o r t a l i t y o f the T r u t h -

Event) that r e m a i n s b l i n d to h o w the very s p a c e for the specific ' i m m o r ­ tality' i n w h i c h h u m a n b e i n g s c a n p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is o p e n e d up by m a n ' s u n i q u e

r e l a t i o n s h i p to his

finitudc

d e a t h . As H e i d e g g e r c o n c l u s i v e l y d e m o n s t r a t e d

and

the possibility o f

in h i s p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t

C a s s i r e r ' s n e o - K a n t i a n r e a d i n g o f K a n t , t h a t is K a n t ' s g r e a t p h i l o s o p h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n : it is t h e very

finitude

o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s u b j e c t as c o n s t i t u ­

tive o f ' o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y ' t h a t a l l o w s K a n t t o b r e a k o u t o f t h e f r a m e o f t r a d i t i o n a l m e t a p h y s i c s , t o r e j e c t t h e n o t i o n o f t h e c o s m o s as t h e o r d e r e d W h o l e o f B e i n g : t o p o s i t t h a t t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g , t h e field o f t r a n s c e n d e n tally c o n s t i t u t e d r e a l i t y , is i n i t s e l f n o n - t o t a l i z a b l e , c a n n o t b e c o h e r e n t l y t h o u g h t o f as a W h o l e , s i n c e its e x i s t e n c e is a t t a c h e d t o finite s u b j e c t i v i t y ; the

transcendental

spontaneity

o f freedom

thus

emerges

as

a

third

:,

d o m a i n , n e i t h e r p h e n o m e n a l reality n o r the n o u m e n a l In-itself. ° T h e k e y p o i n t is t h a t t h e ' i m m o r t a l i t y ' o f w h i c h L a c a n s p e a k s ( t h a t o f t h e ' u n d e a d ' lamella, the horizon o f h u m a n

the o b j e c t that 'is' l i b i d o ) c a n e m e r g e only within finitude,

as a f o r m a t i o n t h a t s t a n d s f o r a n d fills t h e

o n t o l o g i c a l V o i d , t h e h o l e in t h e t e x t u r e o f reality o p e n e d u p by t h e fact that

r e a l i t y is 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 by t h e

subject.

(If the transcendental

finite

transcendental

s u b j e c t w e r e n o t finite b u t infinite, we

w o u l d b e d e a l i n g n o t with t r a n s c e n d e n t a l c o n s t i t u t i o n b u t with ' i n t e l l e c ­ tual i n t u i t i o n ' - w i t h a n i n t u i t i o n t h a t d i r e c t l y c r e a t e s w h a t it p e r c e i v e s : a p r e r o g a t i v e o f t h e i n f i n i t e D i v i n e B e i n g . ) S o t h e p o i n t is n o t t o d e n y t h e specifically h u m a n m o d e o f 'immortality' (that o f participating in a TruthE v e n t sustaining a d i m e n s i o n irreducible to the c o n s t r a i n e d positive o r d e r o f B e i n g ) , b u t t o b e a r i n m i n d h o w t h i s ' i m m o r t a l i t y ' is b a s e d o n specific m o d e o f h u m a n

finitude.

F o r Kant himself, the

finitude

t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s u b j e c t is n o t a l i m i t a t i o n o f h i s f r e e d o m a n d

the

o f the

transcenden­

tal s p o n t a n e i t y , b u t its p o s i t i v e c o n d i t i o n : i f a h u m a n s u b j e c t w e r e t o g a i n d i r e c t a c c e s s to t h e n o u m e n a l

domain,

he would

change from

a

free

THE TICKLISH

164

SUBJECT

s u b j e c t i n t o a lifeless p u p p e t directly c o n f r o n t e d with a n d d o m i n a t e d by the awesome Divine Power. I n short, against B a d i o u , o n e s h o u l d insist that only to a

finite/mortal

b e i n g d o e s t h e a c t ( o r E v e n t ) a p p e a r as a t r a u m a t i c i n t r u s i o n o f t h e R e a l , as s o m e t h i n g t h a t c a n n o t b e n a m e d d i r e c t l y : i t is t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t m a n is split b e t w e e n m o r t a l i t y (a finite b e i n g d e s t i n e d to p e r i s h ) a n d t h e capacity to p a r t i c i p a t e in t h e E t e r n i t y o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t w h i c h b e a r s witness to the fact that we are d e a l i n g with a

finite/mortal

b e i n g . T o a truly i n f i n i t e /

immortal being, the act would b e transparent,

directly symbolized,

the

R e a l w o u l d c o i n c i d e w i t h t h e S y m b o l i c - t h a t is, i n B a d i o u ' s t e r m s , n a m i n g w o u l d b e d i r e c d y i n s c r i b e d i n t o , w o u l d c o i n c i d e w i t h , t h e E v e n t itself, w h i c h w o u l d t h u s l o s e its t r a u m a t i c c h a r a c t e r as t h e i n t r u s i o n o f t h e R e a l t h a t is innomable

( w h a t c a n n o t b e n a m e d ) . O r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r

way - t h e a c t ( E v e n t ) c a n n e v e r b e fully s u b j e c t i v i z e d , i n t e g r a t e d i n t o t h e s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e , p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as t h e s u b j e c t w h o is its a g e n t is a finite/mortal

e n t i t y . Is n o t a f u r t h e r p r o o f o f t h i s p o i n t t h e f a c t t h a t , f o r

Badiou, Truth

is always t h e

Truth

o f a specific c o n t i n g e n t

situation,

a t t a c h e d to it: e t e r n i t y / i m m o r t a l i t y is t h u s always e t e r n i t y / i m m o r t a l i t y of t h e g i v e n finite, s p e c i f i c c o n t i n g e n t s i t u a t i o n o r c o n d i t i o n ? Perhaps the gap that formulated

in

terms

finally

o f the

separates B a d i o u from L a c a n c a n also be difference

between

the

Hysteric

and

the

M a s t e r . B a d i o u is i n t e r e s t e d i n h o w t o r e t a i n f i d e l i t y t o t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , h o w to formulate the universal symbolic framework that guarantees

and

a c c o m p l i s h e s this fidelity, h o w to t r a n s m u t e t h e u n i q u e singularity o f the Event into the constitutive gesture o f a lasting symbolic edifice based on fidelity

t o t h e E v e n t - t h a t is t o say, h e is o p p o s e d t o t h e f a l s e p o e t i c s o f

t h o s e w h o r e m a i n f a s c i n a t e d by t h e i n e f f a b l e singularity o f t h e E v e n t a n d c o n s i d e r e v e r y n a m i n g o f t h e E v e n t as a l r e a d y a b e t r a y a l . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , B a d i o u e l e v a t e s t h e f i g u r e o f t h e M a s t e r : t h e M a s t e r is t h e o n e w h o the Event

- w h o , by p r o d u c i n g

a n e w point

de caption,

names

Master-Signifier,-

r e c o n f i g u r e s t h e s y m b o l i c field via t h e r e f e r e n c e to t h e n e w E v e n t . L a c a n , in contrast, following F r e u d , takes the side o f the Hysteric w h o , precisely, q u e s t i o n s a n d c h a l l e n g e s t h e M a s t e r ' s n a m i n g o f t h e E v e n t - w h o , t h a t is, o n b e h a l f o f h e r v e r y fidelity t o t h e E v e n t , i n s i s t s o n t h e 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 / n a m i n g

(in L a c a n e s e , b e t w e e n

objet petit

a

a n d t h e M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r ) . T h e H y s t e r i c ' s q u e s t i o n is s i m p l y : "Why is that name the name of the

Event?'

W h e n , i n his u n p u b l i s h e d

course o f 1 9 9 7 / 9 8 , Badiou elaborated

four possible subjective stances towards

the Truth-Event, he

added

the as

t h e f o u r t h t e r m to t h e triad o f M a s t e r / H y s t e r i c / U n i v e r s i t y t h e p o s i t i o n o f

T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H

165

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 Hysteric a n d

University pervert

the

term to the triad o f Master,

discourse o f the

analyst: f o r

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 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

consistency o f L a c a n ' s entire edifice hinges on discursive

him,

his/her

the fact that a

the

fourth

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. T h e political c o n s e q u e n c e s o f this r e a s s e r t i o n o f psychoanalysis in the

THE TICKLISH

166

SUBJECT

face o f Badiou's critique constitute

t h e very o p p o s i t e o f t h e

psychoanalytic scepticism about the

final

process

o u t c o m e o f the

standard

revolutionary

( t h e well-known story o f ' t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o c e s s has to

go

w r o n g a n d e n d u p i n a s e l f - d e s t r u c t i v e fury b e c a u s e it is u n a w a r e o f its o w n l i b i d i n a l f o u n d a t i o n s , o f t h e m u r d e r o u s a g g r e s s i v i t y t h a t s u s t a i n s its i d e a l i s m ' , e t c . ) : we a r e t e m p t e d to c l a i m , r a t h e r , that B a d i o u ' s r e s i s t a n c e t o p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is p a r t o f h i s h i d d e n K a n t i a n i s m , w h i c h u l t i m a t e l y a l s o l e a d s h i m t o o p p o s e t h e full r e v o l u t i o n a r y passage

a Vacte. T h a t is t o say:

a l t h o u g h B a d i o u is a d a m a n t l y a n t i - K a n t i a n a n d , i n h i s p o l i t i c a l s t a n c e s , r a d i c a l l y leftist ( r e j e c t i n g o u t r i g h t n o t o n l y p a r l i a m e n t a r y d e m o c r a c y , b u t also m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t 'identity p o l i t i e s ' ) , at a d e e p e r level his d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the o r d e r o f the positive K n o w l e d g e o f B e i n g a n d the wholly different Truth-Event remains Kantian: when he emphasizes how,

from

t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f K n o w l e d g e , t h e r e s i m p l y is n o E v e n t - h o w , t h a t is, t h e t r a c e s o f t h e E v e n t c a n b e d i s c e r n e d as s i g n s o n l y b y t h o s e w h o a r e a l r e a d y involved in s u p p o r t o f t h e E v e n t n o t i o n o f signs that a n n o u n c e

does he not thereby repeat

the n o u m e n a l

Kant's

fact o f f r e e d o m

without

p o s i t i v e l y p r o v i n g it ( l i k e e n t h u s i a s m f o r t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ) ? Badiou's inconsistent pure multiple

is L a c a n ' s R e a l as pas-tout,

that

which a 'state o f a situation' unifies, inscribes, a c c o u n t s for, turns into a consistent structure,

that X

that precedes

the

Kantian

transcendental

synthesis. T h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f the p u r e multiple i n t o the state o f things c o r r e s p o n d s to K a n t ' s t r a n s c e n d e n t a l synthesis c o n s t i t u t i n g reality. T h e o r d e r o f r e a l i t y , i n K a n t , is t h r e a t e n e d / l i m i t e d i n two w a y s :

31

by ' m a t h ­

e m a t i c a l a n t i n o m i e s ' - t h a t is, b y t h e i n h e r e n t f a i l u r e o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l synthesis, the gap 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 , the delay between the latter and the f o r m e r (in Badiou, the ontological Void the correlative excess o f presentation over re-presentation that

and

threatens

the n o r m a l f u n c t i o n i n g o f a state o f t h i n g s ) - a n d by ' d y n a m i c a n t i n o m i e s ' - t h a t is, b y t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f a n e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t o r d e r o f n o u m e n a l ethical Goals o f rational F r e e d o m (in B a d i o u , the T r u t h - E v e n t ) . A n d in K a n t , as w e l l as i n B a d i o u , is n o t t h e s p a c e f o r f r e e d o m o p e n e d u p b y t h e excess and inconsistency o f the ontological o r d e r ?

3 2

B a d i o u ' s K a n t i a n i s m is d i s c e r n i b l e p r e c i s e l y i n t h e way h e l i m i t s t h e s c o p e o f T r u t h : a l t h o u g h T r u t h is u n i v e r s a l a n d n e c e s s a r y as t h e t r u t h o f a s i t u a t i o n , n o n e t h e l e s s it c a n n o t n a m e t h e W h o l e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n , b u t c a n e x i s t o n l y as t h e i n f i n i t e , i n c e s s a n t e f f o r t t o d i s c e r n i n t h e s i t u a t i o n the

traces o f the

Truth-Event,

exactly h o m o l o g o u s

infinite ethical effort. W h e n T r u t h

pretends

with

the

to g r a s p / n a m e

Kantian

the

entire

situation, we e n d up in t h e c a t a s t r o p h e o f S t a l i n i s m o r t h e M a o i s t C u l t u r a l

THE

POLITICS

R e v o l u t i o n , with t h e i r t h o r o u g h g o i n g innomable for

OK T R U T H

167

'totalitarian' destructive rage. This

s u r p l u s , t h a t w h i c h f o r e v e r resists b e i n g n a m e d in a s i t u a t i o n , is,

Badiou, precisely defined

community

in

in

each

p o l i t i c s , s e x u a l puissance

o f the in

four

'generics' o f

love, a n d

so

on.

L a c a n i a n p e r s p e c t i v e , h o w e v e r , t h i s c o r e t h a t r e s i s t s n a m i n g is in a ' f u n d a m e n t a l authentic Lacan,

fantasy'

-

a c t does i n t e r v e n e

the

authentic

t h a t i s , i t is t h e

to put

and

act

an

it s u c c i n c t l y -

a c t i t s e l f i n its n e g a t i v e d i m e n s i o n ,

for

t h e a c t as

R e a l o f a n ' o b j e c t ' p r e c e d i n g n a m i n g , is w h a t is u l t i m a t e l y innomable. one

the

structured

c o r e o f puissance,

in this c o r e . S o -

Truth:

From

the

Here

can see the crucial weight o f the L a c a n i a n distinction between a s o b j e c t , as a n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f d i s c o n t i n u i t y , a n d its n a m i n g

positive

Truth-procedure.

thesis that remain a

'truth fiction

F o r this

has the structure

reason,

one

should

stick to

the in a

Lacan's

o f a f i c t i o n ' : t r u t h is c o n d e m n e d

p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as t h e innomable

Real

to

e l u d e s its g r a s p .

Notes 1. F . W J . Schclling, Sdmlliehe Werke, e d . K.F.A. Schelling, Stuttgart: C o t t a 1 8 5 6 - 6 1 , vol. VIII, p. 6 0 0 . 2. Alain B a d i o u , I.'elre el levenement, Paris: Editions d u Seuil 1 9 8 8 . 3. T o m a k e this logic c l e a r e r , let us m e n t i o n a n o t h e r o f Badiou's e x a m p l e s o f T r u t h Event: t h e atonal revolution in music a c c o m p l i s h e d hy t h e S e c o n d V i e n n e s e S c h o o l ( S c h o e n berg, B e r g , W e h e r n ) . H e r e , also, we have t h r e e ways o f betraying this E v e n t o f T r u t h : t h e traditionalists' dismissal o f t h e atonal revolution as an e m p t y formal e x p e r i m e n t , which allows t h e m t o c o n t i n u e t o c o m p o s e in t h e old ways, as if n o t h i n g h a d h a p p e n e d ; t h e p s e u d o m o d e r n i s t imitation o f atonality; a n d t h e t e n d e n c y t o c h a n g e atonal music into a new positive tradition. 4. B a d i o u , L'etre el Vevenemenl, p. 2 5 . 5. In theory, p e r h a p s t h e main indication o f this suspension o f Event is t h e n o t i o n a n d p r a c t i c e o f 'cultural studies' as t h e p r e d o m i n a n t n a m e for t h e all-encompassing a p p r o a c h to socio-symbolic p r o d u c t s : t h e basic feature o f cultural studies is that they a r e n o l o n g e r able o r ready t o c o n f r o n t religious, scientific o r philosophical works in t e r m s o f their i n h e r e n t T r u t h , but r e d u c e t h e m to a p r o d u c t o f historical c i r c u m s t a n c e s , to a n object o f anthropologico-psychoanalytic i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 6. B a d i o u , L'etre el Vevenemenl, p. 2 0 2 . 7. Ibid., p. 2 2 4 . 8. Ibid., p. 2 9 . 9. U p to a point, o n e c a n also say that K n o w l e d g e is constative, while T r u t h is performative. 10. As B a d i o u perspicacious])' notes, these four d o m a i n s o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t a r e today, in public discourse, m o r e a n d m o r e r e p l a c e d by t h e i r fake doubles: we speak o f 'culture instead o f art, o f 'administration' instead o f politics, o f 'sex' instead o f love, ot 'know-how o r 'wisdom' instead o f science: a r t is r e d u c e d t o a n e x p r e s s i o n / a r t i c u l a t i o n o f historically specific c u l t u r e , love to an ideological d a t e d f o r m o f sexuality; s c i e n c e is dismissed as a W e s t e r n , falsely universalized form o f practical knowledge o n a n equal footing with forms o f

168

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 subjectl 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

all; the well-known c o m i c r e j o i n d e r q u o t e d by F r e u d a n d r e f e r r e d to by L a c a n ('Unfortu­ nately, that h a p p e n s to scarcely o n e in a h u n d r e d t h o u s a n d ' ) takes o n a new m e a n i n g today, in the midst o f t h e h e a t e d d e b a t e a b o u t a b o r t i o n : a r e not t h e a b o r t e d c h i l d r e n in a sense those who did s u c c e e d in not being b o r n ? 2 2 . See L a c a n , Ecrits: A Selection, p. 3 0 0 . 2 3 . T h a t is t h e task o f today's critique o f ideology: to u n e a r t h , b e n e a t h any s e m b l a n c e o f a 'reified' o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r , its disavowed 'political' f o u n d a t i o n : h o w it hinges o n s o m e excessive 'subjective' act. 2 4 . P e r h a p s t h e first - a n d still u n s u r p a s s e d - description o f this p a r a d o x was p r o v i d e d by Fichte's notion o f Anstoss, t h e ' o b s t a c l e / i m p e t u s ' t h a t sets in m o t i o n t h e subject's p r o d u c t i v e effort o f 'positing' objective reality: this Anstoss is n o l o n g e r the Kantian Thing-in-itself - an e x t e r n a l stimulus affecting t h e subject from outside - but a c o r e o f c o n t i n g e n c y that is extimate: a foreign body at t h e very h e a r t o f t h e subject. Subjectivity is thus defined not by a struggle against t h e inertia o f t h e o p p o s e d substantial o r d e r , but by an absolutely i n h e r e n t tension. ( S e e C h a p t e r 1 above.) 2 5 . Consequently, t h e r e is simply n o p l a c e for t h e F r e u d i a n d e a t h drive in Badiou's pair o f Being and Event: t h e d e a t h drive certainly i n t e r r u p t s t h e e c o n o m y o f the 'service o f t h e G o o d s [service des biens]', the principle o f t h e s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f affairs, which is the highest political principle o f the O r d e r o f Being; on t h e o t h e r h a n d , B a d i o u is certainly right to e m p h a s i z e that t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t disavows t h e d e a t h drive. . . . In short, the death drive is the point that u n d e r m i n e s B a d i o u ' s proto-Kantian o n t o l o g i c a l dualism between t h e O r d e r o f Being a n d t h e Event o f T r u t h : it is a kind o f 'vanishing m e d i a t o r ' between the two; it o p e n s u p a g a p in t h e positivity o f Being, a suspension in its s m o o t h functioning, a n d it is this g a p t h a t c a n later b e filled by t h e T r u t h - E v e n t . 2 6 . Alain B a d i o u , L'etre et levevement, pp. 4 7 2 - 4 . 27. In his implicit p o l e m i c s against L a c l a u a n d L a c a n , R a n c i e r e m a k e s t h e s a m e point as B a d i o u : h e emphasizes that politics is not a c o n s e q u e n c e o f the i n c o m p l e t e n e s s o f t h e social subject - t h e r e is n o ontological g u a r a n t e e o r f o u n d a t i o n o f politics in the a priori Void o f Being, in t h e subject as constitutive L a c k / F i n i t u d e / I n c o m p l e t e u e s s ; o n e looks in vain for the p h i l o s o p h i c o - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l 'condition o f possibility' o f politics. T h e o r d e r o f 'police' (the positive o r d e r o f B e i n g ) is in itself full, t h e r e a r e n o holes in it; it is only the political act itself, the gesture o f political subjectivization, that adds to it t h e 'distance towards itself a n d dislodges its self-identity . . . (see J a c q u e s R a n c i e r e , Ln mesentente, Paris: Galilee 1 9 9 5 , pp. 4 3 - 6 7 ) . T h e L a c a n i a n answer to this would be that h e r e R a n c i e r e fetishizes the o r d e r o f police, failing to r e c o g n i z e how this o r d e r itself relies on t h e excessive gesture o f the Master, which is a stand-in for the political L a c k - the 'gentrification', the positivization, o f the p r o p e r l y political excess. In short, we d o n o t have t h e full positivity o f the police o r d e r p e r t u r b e d from time to time by the h e t e r o g e n e o u s i n t e r v e n t i o n o f political subjectivity: this positivity itself alwavs-already relies on t h e (disavowal of s o m e ) excessive gesture o f t h e Master. O r - to put it in yet a n o t h e r way - politics is not a consequence o f t h e (pre-polilical) g a p in the o l d e r o f B e i n g o r n o n - c o i n c i d e n c e o f t h e social subject with itself: t h e fact that the social subject is n e v e r c o m p l e t e a n d self-identical m e a n s that t h e social being itself is always-already bused on a (disavowed) g e s t u r e o f politicization a n d , as s u c h , t h o r o u g h l y political. 2 8 . This difference between L a c a n a n d B a d i o u also has precise c o n s e q u e n c e s for the a p p r e c i a t i o n o f c o n c r e t e political events. F o r B a d i o u , t h e disintegration o f Eastern E u r o p e a n Socialism was not a T r u t h - E v e n t : a p a r t f r o m giving rise to a b r i e f p o p u l a r enthusiasm, the dissident f e r m e n t did not s u c c e e d in t r a n s f o r m i n g itself into a stable m o v e m e n t o f followers patiently e n g a g e d in the militant fidelity t o t h e E v e n t , but s o o n disintegrated, so that what we have today is e i t h e r the r e t u r n to vulgar liberal p a r l i a m e n t a r y capitalism o r the a d v o c a c y o f racist e t h n i c f u n d a m e n t a l i s m . However, if we a c c e p t t h e L a c a n i a n distinction between the act as a negative gesture o f saying 'No!', a n d its positive a f l e t m a t h , locating the key d i m e n s i o n in the primordial negative g e s t u r e , t h e n the p r o c e s s o f disintegration did n o n e the less

170

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

p r o d u c e a t r u e art in t h e guise o f t h e enthusiastic mass m o v e m e n t o f saying No!' to t h e C o m m u n i s t r e g i m e o n b e h a l f o f a u t h e n t i c solidarity; this negative gesture c o u n t e d m o r e than its later failed positivization. 2 9 . T h e case o f A n t i g o n e , o f c o u r s e , is m o r e c o m p l e x , since she puts h e r life at stake a n d e n t e r s the d o m a i n 'in between t h e two d e a t h s ' precisely in order to prevent her brother's second death: to give him a p r o p e r funeral rite that will s e c u r e his eternalization in t h e symbolic order. 3 0 . A n o t h e r p r o b l e m is that Kant often s h r a n k from his own discovery, identifying f r e e d o m as n o u m e n a l (see C h a p t e r 1 a b o v e ) . 3 1 . Again, see C h a p t e r 1 above. 3 2 . Badiou's Kantianism c a n also be d i s c e r n e d in the way his political p r o j e c t gets c a u g h t in t h e quintessential Kantian p a r a d o x o f 'spurious infinity' in o u r a p p r o a c h to the Ideal: for B a d i o u , the ultimate goal o f political activity is to achieve p r e s e n c e without r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , that is, a situation n o l o n g e r r e d o u b l e d in its State; however, t h e political a c t itself in its e s s e n c e is d i r e c t e d against the State; it is an intervention into the existing State that u n d e r m i n e s its functioning - so it needs a pre-existing State in the s a m e sense that o n e needs an e n e m y in o r d e r to assert o n e s e l f by fighting it.

4

Political Subjectivization and Its Vicissitudes

Badiou, Balibar, Ranciere As F r e d r i c J a m e s o n

has

often

Modernism-Postmodernism

emphasized,

provides

the

triad

Traditionalism-

a logical m a t r i x that c a n also b e

a p p l i e d to a p a r t i c u l a r historical c o n t e n t . T h e r e a r e clearly t h r e e

main

readings o f Nietzsche: traditional (die Nietzsche o f the return to p r e m o d ern aristocratic warrior values against d e c a d e n t Judaeo-Christian m o d e r n ­ ity), m o d e r n

(the Nietzsche o f the hermeneutics o f doubt and

self-probing), and postmodern

ironic

(the Nietzsche o f the play o f a p p e a r a n c e s

a n d differences). D o e s n o t the s a m e h o l d for today's three m a i n philosophico-political positions: the

(traditionalist)

o t h e r s ) , t h e ( m o d e r n ) universalists ern)

'dispersionists'

of the political,

communitarians

(Taylor and

(Rawls, H a b e r m a s ) , a n d the ( p o s t m o d ­

( L y o t a r d a n d o t h e r s ) ? W h a t t h e y all s h a r e is a

s o m e v e r s i o n o f pre-political

reduction

e t h i c s : t h e r e is n o p o l i t i c s p r o p e r

in a c l o s e d c o m m u n i t y r u l e d by a traditional set o f values; universalists g r o u n d politics in a p r o c e d u r a l i s t a priori o f discursive ( o r distributive) e t h i c s ; ' d i s p e r s i o n i s t s ' c o n d e m n p o l i t i c s as u n i f y i n g , t o t a l i t a r i a n , v i o l e n t , a n d so o n , a n d a s s u m e the position o f e t h i c a l critics w h o reveal ( o r voice) t h e e t h i c a l W r o n g o r Evil c o m m i t t e d b y p o l i t i c s , w i t h o u t e n g a g i n g i n a n alternative political project.

1

E a c h o f the three positions thus involves a p r a g m a t i c

(performative)

p a r a d o x o f its o w n . T h e c o m m u n i t a r i a n s ' p r o b l e m is t h a t i n

today's

global

s o c i e t y t h e i r p o s i t i o n is a p r i o r i f a k e d , m a r k e d b y a s p l i t b e t w e e n e n u n c i ­ ated and enunciation: they themselves do not speak from the particular p o s i t i o n o f a c l o s e d c o m m u n i t y , t h e i r p o s i t i o n o f e n u n c i a t i o n is a l r e a d y u n i v e r s a l ( t h e i r m i s t a k e is t h u s t h e o p p o s i t e o f t h a t o f t h e who

conceals the

universalists'

particular

problem

is t h a t

kernel

o f his

alleged

their universalism

universalist,

universality).

is always

too

The

narrow,

THE TICKLISH

172 grounded differend,

SUBJECT

i n a n e x c e p t i o n , i n a g e s t u r e o f e x c l u s i o n (it r e p r e s s e s

the

d o e s n o t e v e n a l l o w it t o b e p r o p e r l y f o r m u l a t e d ) . A n d f i n a l l y ,

t h e o p p o s i t e p r o b l e m o f ' d i s p e r s i o n i s t s ' is t h a t t h e y a r e t o o a l l - i n c l u s i v e : h o w d o we pass f r o m t h e i r ' o n t o l o g i c a l ' assertion o f m u l t i t u d e to e t h i c s ( o f diversity, t o l e r a n c e . . . ) ? Three

contemporary

2

French

political

philosophers

(Alain

Badiou,

E t i e n n e Balibar a n d J a c q u e s R a n c i e r e ) have formulated a kind o f i n h e r e n t s e l f - c r i t i c i s m o f t h e s e t h r e e p o s i t i o n s - t h a t is, e a c h o f t h e m c a n b e s a i d t o focus o n the i n h e r e n t split o f t h e p o s i t i o n in q u e s t i o n : •

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 o p t s f o r a political

mode

ruling

political/police space), Ranciere

o f rebellion against the universal

police/

political order. A fourth

name

should

be added

to this triad,

a kind o f constitutive

e x c e p t i o n to this series: t h e ' a n t i - S c h m i t t i a n S c h m i t t i a n ' E r n e s t o L a c l a u ( w h o works with C h a n t a l M o u f f e ) . L a c l a u a c k n o w l e d g e s the

fundamental,

u n s u r p a s s a b l e status o f a n t a g o n i s m , y e t i n s t e a d o f fetishizing it in a h e r o i c w a r f a r e c o n f l i c t , h e i n s c r i b e s it i n t o t h e s y m b o l i c as t h e p o l i t i c a l l o g i c o f the struggle for h e g e m o n y . A series o f obvious differences

notwithstand­

ing, the theoretical edifices o f L a c l a u and B a d i o u are u n i t e d by a d e e p h o m o l o g y . Against t h e H e g e l i a n vision o f t h e ' c o n c r e t e universal', o f the reconciliation between Universal and Particular (or between B e i n g and

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 Event),

which

is still c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e

asserting a constitutive

and

irreducible

in gap

Marx,

they both

that undermines

173

start the

by self-

e n c l o s e d c o n s i s t e n c y o f t h e o n t o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e : f o r L a c l a u , t h i s g a p is t h e gap between the Particular a n d the empty Universal, which necessitates the operation o f h e g e m o n y (or the gap between the differential o f t h e p o s i t i v e s o c i a l o r d e r - t h e l o g i c o f differences

structure

— a n d properly political

a n t a g o n i s m , w h i c h i n v o l v e s t h e l o g i c o f equivalence);

f o r B a d i o u , i t is t h e

g a p b e t w e e n B e i n g a n d E v e n t ( b e t w e e n t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g -- s t r u c t u r e , s t a t e o f s i t u a t i o n , k n o w l e d g e - a n d t h e e v e n t o f T r u t h , T r u t h as E v e n t ) . I n b o t h c a s e s , t h e p r o b l e m is h o w t o b r e a k o u t o f t h e s e l f - e n c l o s e d f i e l d o f o n t o l o g y as a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p o s i t i v e u n i v e r s e ; i n b o t h c a s e s , t h e dimension

which undermines

the closure o f ontology has an

c h a r a c t e r - it c o n c e r n s t h e c o n t i n g e n t a c t o f decision ground

o f the

'undecidable'

'ethical'

against the back­

multiplicity o f Being; consequently,

both

a u t h o r s e n d e a v o u r t o c o n c e p t u a l i z e a n e w , p o s t - C a r t e s i a n m o d e o f subjec­ tivity w h i c h c u t s its l i n k s w i t h o n t o l o g y a n d h i n g e s o n a c o n t i n g e n t a c t o f decision. B o t h authors a c c o m p l i s h the return to a proto-Kantian ism: they b o t h hegemony

or

elaborate

a quasi-transcendental

o f T r u t h ) , which

is d e s t i n e d

theory

to

serve

formal­

(of ideological as

the

a

priori

framework for contingent empirical occurrences o f hegemony or Truth. I n b o t h c a s e s , h o w e v e r , this f o r m a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e t h e o r y is l i n k e d , b y a kind

o f half-acknowledged

umbilical cord, to

a concrete and

limited

politico-historical constellation a n d practice (in L a c l a u , the post-Marxist strategy o f the multitude

o f e m a n c i p a t o r y s t r u g g l e s f o r r e c o g n i t i o n ; in

B a d i o u , the anti-State 'marginal'

r e v o l u t i o n a r y politics in factories,

on

campuses, etc.). T h e s a m e g o e s f o r t h e o t h e r two a u t h o r s . I n t h e c a s e o f R a n c i e r e , h i s o b v i o u s p a r a d i g m is t h e ' s p o n t a n e o u s ' r e b e l l i o n o f t h e p r o l e t a r i a n m a s s e s ( n o t t h e m y t h i c a l M a r x i a n p r o l e t a r i a t as t h e S u b j e c t o f H i s t o r y , b u t a c t u a l groups o f e x p l o i t e d artisans, textile workers, working w o m e n a n d 'ordinary'

people) who reject the police frame

defining

their

other

'proper'

p l a c e a n d , in a v i o l e n t p o l i t i c o - p o e t i c g e s t u r e , take t h e floor, start to s p e a k f o r t h e m s e l v e s . B a l i b a r is m o r e f o c u s e d o n t h e u n i v e r s e o f ' c i v i l i t y ' , e v e n d e c e n c y : h i s p r o b l e m is h o w , t o d a y , w e a r e to m a i n t a i n a c i v i c s p a c e o f dialogue in w h i c h we c a n articulate o u r d e m a n d

for h u m a n rights; for

t h a t r e a s o n , B a l i b a r resists t h e anti-State r h e t o r i c s o f t h e N e w L e f t o f t h e 1 9 6 0 s ( t h e n o t i o n o f t h e S t a t e as a m e c h a n i s m o f ' o p p r e s s i o n ' o f p e o p l e ' s i n i t i a t i v e s ) a n d e m p h a s i z e s t h e r o l e o f t h e S t a t e as t h e ( p o s s i b l e ) g u a r a n ­ t o r o f t h e s p a c e o f civic d i s c u s s i o n . All t h e s e a u t h o r s o s c i l l a t e b e t w e e n p r o p o s i n g

a neutral formal

frame

THE TICKLISH

174

SUBJECT

that describes the working o f the political field, without specific

prise

de parti,

and

the

prevalence

given

implying

to a p a r t i c u l a r

any

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 advocates a determinate political option, 'radical d e m o c r a c y ' .

3

H e g e m o n y a n d Its S y m p t o m s S o let us p r o c e e d like p r o p e r materialists, a n d b e g i n with t h e e x c e p t i o n to t h e series: with L a c l a u , w h o s e p r o p o s i t i o n

that today 'the realm o f

p h i l o s o p h y c o m e s to an e n d a n d t h e r e a l m o f politics b e g i n s ' e c h o e s M a r x ' s thesis o n the passage from

4

strangely

theoretical interpretation

to

r e v o l u t i o n a r y t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . A l t h o u g h , o f c o u r s e , in L a c l a u this thesis h a s a d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g , t h e r e is n e v e r t h e l e s s a c o m m o n t h r e a d : i n b o t h cases, any theoretical

approach

that

endeavours

to grasp

and

mirror

a d e q u a t e l y ' w h a t i s ' ( w h a t M a r x c a l l e d t h e ' w o r l d - v i e w ' ) is d e n o u n c e d

as

s o m e t h i n g w h i c h , u n b e k n o w n t o itself, r e l i e s o n a c o n t i n g e n t p r a c t i c a l a c t -

that

is t o say, i n b o t h

cases the

ultimate

solution

to

philosophical

p r o b l e m s is p r a c t i c e . F o r M a r x , t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r o b l e m o f finds

freedom

its s o l u t i o n i n t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a f r e e s o c i e t y ; w h i l e

for L a c l a u , the b r e a k d o w n o f the traditional c l o s e d o n t o l o g y reveals h o w f e a t u r e s t h a t w e ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e as o n t o l o g i c a l l y p o s i t i v e r e l y o n a n e t h i c o political decision that sustains t h e prevailing h e g e m o n y . S o w h a t is h e g e m o n y ? T h o s e w h o still r e m e m b e r t h e g o o d o l d days o f S o c i a l i s t R e a l i s m a r e well a w a r e o f t h e k e y r o l e p l a y e d b y t h e n o t i o n o f t h e ' t y p i c a l ' in its t h e o r e t i c a l e d i f i c e : t r u l y p r o g r e s s i v e S o c i a l i s t l i t e r a t u r 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 should

depict

'typical' h e r o e s in

175

'typical' situations. Writers who,

for

e x a m p l e , p r e s e n t e d a p r e d o m i n a n t l y b l e a k p i c t u r e o f the Soviet reality w e r e n o t a c c u s e d s i m p l y o f l y i n g - t h e a c c u s a t i o n was t h a t t h e y p r o v i d e d a distorted reflection o f social reality by focusing o n p h e n o m e n a were n o t focusing

'typical', which were sad r e m a i n d e r s on

phenomena

expressing the

deeper

which were

underlying

o f the

' t y p i c a l ' in

the

which

past, instead o f precise sense o f

historical tendency o f the

progress

t o w a r d s C o m m u n i s m . A n o v e l w h i c h p r e s e n t e d a n e w S o c i a l i s t type o f m a n w h o d e d i c a t e d h i s l i f e t o t h e h a p p i n e s s o f all t h e p e o p l e , o f c o u r s e , depicted a minority p h e n o m e n o n yet like t h a t ) , b u t n o n e

(the majority o f the people were

t h e less a p h e n o m e n o n

w h i c h e n a b l e d us

not to

i d e n t i f y t h e t r u l y p r o g r e s s i v e f o r c e s a c t i v e in t h e s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n . R i d i c u l o u s as t h i s n o t i o n o f t h e ' t y p i c a l ' m a y s o u n d , t h e r e is a g r a i n o f t r u t h i n it - i t l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t e a c h a p p a r e n t l y u n i v e r s a l i d e o l o g i c a l n o t i o n is always h e g e m o n i z e d b y s o m e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t w h i c h c o l o u r s its v e r y u n i v e r s a l i t y a n d a c c o u n t s f o r its e f f i c i e n c y . I n t h e p r e s e n t r e j e c t i o n o f t h e social welfare system by the N e w R i g h t in t h e U S A , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e v e r y u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n o f t h e p r e s e n t w e l f a r e s y s t e m as i n e f f i c i e n t is c o n t a m i n a t e d by t h e m o r e c o n c r e t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e n o t o r i o u s single A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n m o t h e r , as i f s o c i a l w e l f a r e w e r e , i n t h e l a s t r e s o r t , a p r o g r a m m e for single b l a c k m o t h e r s - the particular case o f 'the single b l a c k m o t h e r ' is s i l e n d y c o n c e i v e d o f as ' t y p i c a l ' o f t h e u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n o f s o c i a l w e l f a r e , a n d w h a t is w r o n g w i t h it. . . . T h e s a m e g o e s f o r u n i v e r s a l i d e o l o g i c a l n o t i o n : o n e always h a s t o l o o k f o r t h e

every

particular

c o n t e n t which accounts for the specific efficiency o f an ideological notion. In the case o f the Moral Majority c a m p a i g n against abortion, for e x a m p l e , t h e ' t y p i c a l ' c a s e is t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e o f t h e

(jobless) black mother: a

successful a n d sexually p r o m i s c u o u s c a r e e r w o m a n w h o gives priority to h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l life o v e r h e r ' n a t u r a l '

assignment o f motherhood

(in

b l a t a n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o t h e f a c t s , w h i c h tell us t h a t t h e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f a b o r t i o n s o c c u r in lower-class families with several c h i l d r e n ) . T h i s s p e c i f i c ' t w i s t ' , 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 is p r o m u l g a t e d

as

' t y p i c a l ' o f t h e u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n , is t h e e l e m e n t o f f a n t a s y , o f t h e p h a n t a s mic background/support

o f the universal i d e o l o g i c a l n o t i o n - in K a n t s

t e r m s , it plays t h e r o l e o f ' t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s c h e m a t i s m ' , t r a n s l a t i n g

the

empty universal n o t i o n into a n o t i o n which directly relates a n d applies to o u r ' a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e ' . A s s u c h , t h i s p h a n t a s m i c s p e c i f i c a t i o n is b y n o m e a n s a m e r e i n s i g n i f i c a n t i l l u s t r a t i o n o r e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n : it is o n

this

l e v e l o f w h i c h p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t will c o u n t as ' t y p i c a l ' t h a t i d e o l o g i c a l battles are won

o r lost. T o g o b a c k to o u r e x a m p l e o f a b o r t i o n :

the

THE

176

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 c h a n g e s radically. . . .

perspective

5

' 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, 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 'thing itself

that which holds together

- 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

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.

in the that

. ..

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

Universal e m e r g e s within

o f identity

and

the Particular when

fullness

as

such':''

some particular

the

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 '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

the 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 hegemony), signifier:

the existence o f the

' P o l i t i c s is p o s s i b l e

U n i v e r s a l always r e l i e s o n

because

the

constitutive

struggle for an

empty

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 signifiers.'

7

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

w o r d s , p o l i t i c s e x i s t s b e c a u s e ' s o c i e t y d o e s n ' t e x i s t ' : p o l i t i c s is t h e s t r u g g l e for the c o n t e n t o f the e m p t y signifier which represents the impossibility o f S o c i e t y . T h e w o r n - o u t p h r a s e ' t h e p o l i t i c s o f d i e s i g n i f i e r ' is t h u s fully j u s t i f i e d : t h e o r d e r o f s i g n i f i e r as s u c h is p o l i t i c a l a n d , v i c e v e r s a , t h e r e is n o p o l i t i c s o u t s i d e t h e o r d e r o f t h e s i g n i f i e r . T h e s p a c e o f p o l i t i c s is t h e gap b e t w e e n the series o f 'ordinary' signifiers ( S ) a n d the empty Master2

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 : W e are not dealing h e r e with ' d e t e r m i n a t e n e g a t i o n ' in t h e Hegelian sense: while the latter c o m e s out o f the a p p a r e n t positivity o f the c o n c r e t e a n d 'circulates' t h r o u g h c o n t e n t s that are always d e t e r m i n a t e , o u r notion o f negativ­ ity d e p e n d s on the failure in t h e constitution o f all d e t e r m i n a t i o n . 8

What, however, if the infamous

'Hegelian determinate

negation'

aims

p r e c i s e l y at t h e f a c t t h a t e v e r y p a r t i c u l a r f o r m a t i o n i n v o l v e s a g a p b e t w e e n the

Universal and

the

Particular -

or, in H e g e l e s e , that a

particular

f o r m a t i o n n e v e r c o i n c i d e s w i t h its ( u n i v e r s a l ) n o t i o n - a n d t h a t it is t h i s very gap

t h a t b r i n g s a b o u t its d i a l e c t i c a l d i s s o l u t i o n ? L e t us t a k e

the

e x a m p l e o f t h e S t a t e : t h e r e is always a g a p b e t w e e n t h e n o t i o n o f t h e S t a t e a n d its p a r t i c u l a r a c t u a l i z a t i o n s ; H e g e l ' s p o i n t h e r e , h o w e v e r , is n o t t h a t , in the c o u r s e o f t h e t e l e o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s o f history, positively existing, actual states are gradually a p p r o a c h i n g their n o t i o n , until modern

post-revolutionary

state, actuality a n d

notion

finally,

overlap.

in t h e Hegel's

p o i n t , r a t h e r , is t h a t t h e d e f i c i e n c y o f a c t u a l l y e x i s t i n g , p o s i t i v e s t a t e s w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r n o t i o n is g r o u n d e d in a n i n h e r e n t d e f i c i e n c y o f t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f t h e S t a t e ; t h u s t h e s p l i t is i n h e r e n t t o t h e n o t i o n o f t h e S t a l e it s h o u l d b e r e f o r m u l a t e d as t h e s p l i t b e t w e e n t h e S t a t e qua t h e r a t i o n a l totality o f social relations a n d t h e series o f i r r e d u c i b l e a n t a g o n i s m s w h i c h , already

on the level of the notion,

p r e v e n t t h i s t o t a l i t y f r o m fully a c t u a l i z i n g

i t s e l f ( t h e s p l i t b e t w e e n S t a t e a n d civil s o c i e t y o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h unity

o f the

S t a t e is u l t i m a t e l y

always

experienced

by individuals

the as

' i m p o s e d f r o m o u t s i d e ' , s o t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t s a r e n e v e r fully ' t h e m ­ s e l v e s ' in t h e S t a t e , a r e n e v e r a b l e fully t o i d e n t i f y t h e W i l l o f t h e S t a t e w i t h t h e i r o w n ) . A g a i n , H e g e l ' s p o i n t h e r e is n o t t h a t t h e S t a t e w h i c h w o u l d fully fit its n o t i o n is i m p o s s i b l e - i t is p o s s i b l e ; t h e c a t c h is, r a t h e r , t h a t it is no longer a State, but a religious community.

What one should change

is t h e n o t i o n o f t h e S t a t e i t s e l f - t h a t is, t h e v e r y s t a n d a r d b y m e a n s o f which o n e m e a s u r e s t h e deficiency o f actual states. The

struggle

for

ideologico-political h e g e m o n y

is

thus

always

the

THE TICKLISH

178

struggle for appropriation

SUBJECT

o f the terms that are 'spontaneously'

experi­

e n c e d as ' a p o l i t i c a l ' , as t r a n s c e n d i n g p o l i t i c a l b o u n d a r i e s . N o w o n d e r t h e n a m e o f t h e s t r o n g e s t dissident o p p o s i t i o n f o r c e in t h e f o r m e r E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n c o u n t r i e s was S o l i d a r i t y : a s i g n i f i e r o f t h e i m p o s s i b l e f u l l n e s s o f s o c i e t y i f e v e r t h e r e was o n e . I t w a s as if, i n t h o s e c o u p l e o f y e a r s , w h a t L a c l a u c a l l s d i e l o g i c o f e q u i v a l e n c e was b r o u g h t a l m o s t t o its e x t r e m e : ' C o m m u n i s t s i n p o w e r ' s e r v e d as the e m b o d i m e n t o f n o n - s o c i e t y , o f d e c a y a n d corruption, magically uniting everyone against themselves, including disaffected ' h o n e s t Communists'. Conservative nationalists accused them of

betraying

Polish interests

to the

Soviet master;

business-orientated

i n d i v i d u a l s saw i n t h e m a n o b s t a c l e t o t h e i r u n b r i d l e d c a p i t a l i s t activity; for

the

Catholic Church,

Communists

were

amoral

atheists; for

the

f a r m e r s , t h e y r e p r e s e n t e d t h e f o r c e o f v i o l e n t m o d e r n i z a t i o n w h i c h dis­ r u p t e d t h e i r way o f life; f o r t h e a r t i s t s a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l s , C o m m u n i s m was synonymous

in

their

everyday

e x p e r i e n c e with

oppressive

and

stupid

c e n s o r s h i p ; t h e w o r k e r s saw t h e m s e l v e s n o t o n l y e x p l o i t e d by t h e

Party

b u r e a u c r a c y but, even worse, humiliated

been

by c l a i m s t h a t t h i s h a d

d o n e o n t h e i r b e h a l f , in t h e i r o w n n a m e ; f i n a l l y , d i s i l l u s i o n e d o l d L e f t i s t s p e r c e i v e d t h e r e g i m e as t h e b e t r a y a l o f ' t r u e S o c i a l i s m ' . T h e i m p o s s i b l e political

a l l i a n c e b e t w e e n all t h e s e d i v e r g e n t a n d p o t e n t i a l l y a n t a g o n i s t i c

p o s i t i o n s was p o s s i b l e o n l y u n d e r t h e b a n n e r o f a s i g n i f i e r w h i c h s t o o d , as it w e r e , o n t h e v e r y b o r d e r w h i c h s e p a r a t e s t h e p o l i t i c a l f r o m t h e

pre-

p o l i t i c a l , a n d ' s o l i d a r i t y ' was 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 r o l e : i t was p o l i t i c a l l y o p e r a t i v e as d e s i g n a t i n g t h e ' s i m p l e ' a n d ' f u n d a m e n t a l '

unity

o f h u m a n b e i n g s w h i c h s h o u l d l i n k t h e m b e y o n d all p o l i t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s . N o w , h o w e v e r , w h e n t h i s m a g i c m o m e n t o f u n i v e r s a l s o l i d a r i t y is o v e r , t h e s i g n i f i e r w h i c h , i n s o m e p o s t - S o c i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s , is e m e r g i n g as t h e s i g n i f i e r o f w h a t L a c l a u c a l l s t h e ' a b s e n t f u l l n e s s ' o f s o c i e t y is honesty: it forms the focus o f the spontaneous ideology o f 'ordinaiy p e o p l e ' caught in t h e e c o n o m i c - s o c i a l t u r b u l e n c e i n w h i c h h o p e s o f a n e w fullness o f Society

which

should

follow

the

collapse

of

Socialism were

cruelly

b e t r a y e d , so t h a t i n t h e i r e y e s , t h e ' o l d g u a r d ' ( e x - C o m m u n i s t s ) a n d e x dissidents w h o e n t e r e d t h e ranks o f p o w e r j o i n e d in e x p l o i t i n g t h e m even m o r e than before under the b a n n e r of democracy and freedom. . . . T h e b a t t l e f o r h e g e m o n y , o f c o u r s e , is n o w f o c u s e d o n 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 give a s p i n to t h i s s i g n i f i e r : w h a t d o e s ' h o n e s t y ' m e a n ? F o r a c o n s e r v a t i v e , it m e a n s r e t u r n i n g t o t r a d i t i o n a l m o r a l a n d r e l i g i o u s v a l u e s , as w e l l as p u r g i n g t h e s o c i a l b o d y o f t h e r e m a i n d e r s o f t h e o l d r e g i m e ; f o r a L e f t i s t , s o c i a l j u s t i c e a n d r e s i s t a n c e to r a p i d p r i v a t i z a t i o n ; a n d s o f o r t h . T h e s a m e m e a s u r e - r e t u r n i n g l a n d t o t h e C h u r c h , f o r e x a m p l e - is t h u 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

179

' h o n e s t ' f r o m t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e s t a n d p o i n t a n d ' d i s h o n e s t ' f r o m t h e leftist s t a n d p o i n t - e a c h position silently ( r e ) d e f i n e s ' h o n e s t y ' to a c c o m m o d a t e it t o its o w n i d e o l o g i c o - p o l i t i c a l p o s i t i o n . I t w o u l d b e w r o n g , h o w e v e r , t o c l a i m t h a t t h e c o n f l i c t is u l t i m a t e l y a b o u t d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g s o f t h e t e r m ' h o n e s t y ' : w h a t g e t s l o s t i n t h i s ' s e m a n t i c c l a r i f i c a t i o n ' is t h a t e a c h p o s i t i o n c l a i m s t h a t their honesty is the only 'true' honesty: t h e s t r u g g l e is n o t s i m p l y a s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s , it is a s t r u g g l e i n h e r e n t t o the Universal itself' S o how does a particular c o n t e n t s u c c e e d in displacing a n o t h e r c o n t e n t as a s t a n d - i n f o r t h e U n i v e r s a l ? L a c l a u ' s a n s w e r is readability:

in a c o n c r e t e

s i t u a t i o n o f p o s t - S o c i a l i s m , ' h o n e s t y ' as t h e s i g n i f i c r o f t h e a b s e n t f u l l n e s s o f S o c i e t y will b e h e g e m o n i z e d b y 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 m a k e s t h e everyday e x p e r i e n c e o f e n g a g e d individuals m o r e c o n v i n c i n g l y ' r e a d a b l e ' - which e n a b l e s t h e m m o r e effectively to o r g a n i z e t h e i r l i f e - e x p e r i e n c e into

a

consistent

criterion,

narrative.

it d e p e n d s

on

O f course,

'readability'

ideological struggle:

the

is n o t

fact

a

that,

neutral

after

the

collapse o f t h e s t a n d a r d b o u r g e o i s narrative in t h e G e r m a n y o f t h e early 1930s, which Semitism

was u n a b l e

rendered

this

to

account

crisis ' m o r e

socialist-revolutionary narrative

is t h e

for

the

g l o b a l crisis,

Nazi

convincingly readable' c o n t i n g e n t result

anti-

than

the

o f a series o f

o v e r d e t e r m i n e d f a c t o r s . O r , to p u t it i n a n o t h e r way: this

'readability'

does not imply a simple relationship o f c o m p e t i t i o n between a multitude o f n a r r a t i v e s / d e s c r i p t i o n s a n d t h e extra-discursive reality, w h e r e t h e nar­ r a t i v e w h i c h is m o s t ' a d e q u a t e ' with r e g a r d t o r e a l i t y w i n s : t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p is c i r c u l a r a n d s e l f - r e l a t i n g : t h e n a r r a t i v e a l r e a d y p r e d e t e r m i n e s w h a t w e s h a l l e x p e r i e n c e as ' r e a l i t y ' . O n e is t e m p t e d t o p r o p o s e a way o f s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h i n k i n g o f L a c l a u ' s n o t i o n o f i d e o l o g i c a l u n i v e r s a l i t y as e m p t y , as t h e f r a m e w i t h i n different particular contents notion

o f ideological

tight

which

for h e g e m o n y , a n d the classic Marxist

universality

as

'false'

(privileging

a

particular

interest). B o t h o f t h e m bring into play the constitutive gap between

the

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 , a l b e i t i n a d i f f e r e n t way. F o r L a c l a u , t h i s g a p is t h e g a p between t h e a b s e n t f u l l n e s s o f t h e U n i v e r s a l a n d 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 n t t h a t a c t s as a s t a n d - i n f o r t h i s a b s e n t f u l l n e s s ; f o r M a r x , it is t h e g a p within 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 , t h a t is, t h e gap between the 'official'

c o n t e n t o f t h e U n i v e r s a l a n d its u n a c k n o w l ­

e d g e d p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , w h i c h involve a set o f e x c l u s i o n s . L e t us t a k e t h e c l a s s i c e x a m p l e o f h u m a n r i g h t s . T h e M a r x i s t s y m p t o m a l r e a d i n g c a n c o n v i n c i n g l y d e m o n s t r a t e 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 gives t h e s p e c i f i c b o u r g e o i s i d e o l o g i c a l s p i n to t h e n o t i o n o f h u m a n

rights:

THE

180

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

'universal h u m a n rights are in fact t h e right o f white, male, private owners t o e x c h a n g e f r e e l y o n t h e m a r k e t , e x p l o i t w o r k e r s a n d w o m e n , as w e l l as exert

p o l i t i c a l d o m i n a t i o n . . .' -

considers the hidden

tendentially,

at least, this

approach

' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' spin to b e constitutive o f t h e very

f o r m o f the Universal. A g a i n s t this q u i c k dismissal o f the universal f o r m i t s e l f as i d e o l o g i c a l ( c o n c e a l i n g a n u n a c k n o w l e d g e d p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t ) , L a c l a u i n s i s t s o n t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e e m p t y u n i v e r s a l i t y a n d its d e t e r m i n ­ ate c o n t e n t : the link b e t w e e n

the

e m p t y universal

notion

of

'human

r i g h t s ' a n d its o r i g i n a l p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t is c o n t i n g e n t - t h a t is to say, t h e m o m e n t t h e y w e r e f o r m u l a t e d , ' h u m a n r i g h t s ' s t a r t e d t o f u n c t i o n as a n empty signifier whose c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t could b e contested a n d -

widened

what a b o u t the h u m a n rights o f w o m e n , c h i l d r e n , m e m b e r s o f n o n -

w h i t e r a c e s , c r i m i n a l s , m a d m e n . . .? E a c h o f t h e s e s u p p l e m e n t a r y g e s t u r e s d o e s n o t s i m p l y apply t h e n o t i o n o f h u m a n r i g h t s to e v e r n e w ( w o m e n , b l a c k s . . . c a n also v o t e , o w n p r o p e r t y , p u b l i c life, e t c . ) , b u t r e t r o a c t i v e l y redefines

domains

actively p a r t i c i p a t e

the very notion of human

in

rights.

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

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 .

are 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 w h o s e e x a m p l e it i s .

1 0

T h e gap between the e m p t y signifier and the multitude o f particular c o n t e n t s w h i c h , i n t h e fight f o r h e g e m o n y , e n d e a v o u r to f u n c t i o n as t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h i s a b s e n t f u l l n e s s , is t h u s reflected itself

in t h e guise o f t h e gap

that separates

within

the particular

the

Particular

hegemonic

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 c o n t e n t o f an ideological universality from the symptom that

181

undermines

i t (say, s e p a r a t e s t h e b o u r g e o i s n o d o n o f j u s t a n d e q u i v a l e n t e x c h a n g e ' f r o m t h e e x c h a n g e b e t w e e n c a p i t a l a n d w o r k f o r c e as t h e p a r t i c u l a r e x c h a n g e t h a t i n v o l v e s e x p l o i t a t i o n p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as it is j u s t ' a n d ' e q u i v a l e n t ' ) . W e s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e c o n s i d e r t h r e e , n o t j u s t two, levels: t h e e m p t y versal

(justice'),

t h e particular

content

which

hegemonizes

the

U n i v e r s a l ( j u s t a n d e q u i v a l e n t e x c h a n g e ' ) , a n d t h e individual, tomatic

excess which

undermines

this h e g e m o n i c

content

Uni­

empty

the symp­ (exchange

b e t w e e n capital a n d w o r k f o r c e ) . O n e c a n s e e i m m e d i a t e l y in w h a t s e n s e the individual individual

is t h e

dialectical unity o f Universal a n d

(the symptomatic

excess)

Particular;

b e a r s witness to t h e gap

the

between

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 : t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e U n i v e r s a l is always ' f a l s e ' i n its c o n c r e t e e x i s t e n c e ( h e g e m o n i z e d b y s o m e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t which involves a series o f e x c l u s i o n s ) . L e t us m a k e t h e s a m e p o i n t f r o m y e t a n o t h e r p e r s p e c t i v e . S o m e y e a r s ago, Q u e n t i n Skinner pointed out that a possible discussion between traditional

liberal a n d

a Marxist radical about

the

scope o f the

a

term

'political' involves m o r e t h a n t h e m e a n i n g o f that t e r m . " F o r the liberal, t h e s p h e r e o f t h e p o l i t i c a l is r e s t r i c t e d t o a s p e c i f i c s p h e r e o f r e a c h i n g decisions which c o n c e r n the administration intimate

o f p u b l i c affairs - n o t o n l y

( s e x u a l ) interests, hut also art, s c i e n c e , even the e c o n o m y , a r e

o u t s i d e its s c o p e . F o r t h e M a r x i s t r a d i c a l , o f c o u r s e , t h e p o l i t i c a l p e r v a d e s e v e r y s p h e r e o f o u r lives, f r o m t h e s o c i a l t o t h e m o s t i n t i m a t e , a n d very

perception

grounded

o f something

as

'apolitical',

'private',

and

so

the is

in a d i s a v o w e d p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n . B o t h s t a n d a r d p h i l o s o p h i c a l

versions, 'realist' and

' n o m i n a l i s t ' , fail t o a c c o u n t f o r t h i s s t r u g g l e

t h e U n i v e r s a l . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e r e a l i s t a c c o u n t , t h e r e is a ' t r u e ' o f t h e n o t i o n o f t h e political to b e u n e a r t h e d o n c e we gain access to this c o n t e n t , different

on,

by a true t h e o i y , so that

we c a n m e a s u r e

h o w c l o s e t o it

theories o f the political have c o m e . T h e nominalist

on the contrary, reduces the whole p r o b l e m

for

content

to t h e different

account, nominal

d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e t e r m : t h e r e is n o r e a l c o n f l i c t ; t h e t w o p a r t i e s a r e s i m p l y vising t h e w o r d ' p o l i t i c a l ' i n a d i f f e r e n t s e n s e , c o n f e r r i n g o n it a d i f f e r e n t scope. What

both

a c c o u n t s miss, what

disappears

in b o t h

o f them,

is

the

a n t a g o n i s m , t h e struggle i n s c r i b e d i n t o t h e very h e a r t o f t h e 'thing i t s e l f . I n t h e r e a l i s t a c c o u n t , t h e r e is a t r u e c o n t e n t o f t h e u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n t o b e discovered,

and

the

struggle

is s i m p l y

the

conflict between

different

e r r o n e o u s r e a d i n g s o f it - t h a t is, it a r i s e s o u t o f o u r m i s p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e true c o n t e n t . I n the n o m i n a l i s t a c c o u n t , struggle a g a i n arises o u t o f a n

THE TICKLISH

182

SUBJECT

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 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

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 , this

very exclusion

excellence.

of something

from

the political

is a political

the

definition

gesture

how par

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.

Enter the Subject 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 of

hegemony -

which

sutures

the

Universal

to a

operation

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 factor,

this d o e s n o t

mean

that h e wants

to r e t u r n

as a

to t h e

political

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

r e v e l a t i o n is t h e u n a v o w e d

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

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 subjectivizat 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 the elementary gesture o f ideology. In

a way, e v e r y t h i n g

seems

to

1 2

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 consequences

o f the

Decision).

b u t t h e activity o f p u r s u i n g

I s it n o t

a fact, however,

that

the

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 political decision.

already

relies o n

a disavowed

-

ethico-

THE

184

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

Laclau a n d B a d i o u nevertheless share a h i d d e n r e f e r e n c e to Kant. T h a t is t o say, t h e u l t i m a t e philosophical

q u e s t i o n t h a t l u r k s b e h i n d all t h i s is

that o f Kantian formalism. T h e horizon

o f Laclau's central notion

of

h e g e m o n y is t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e g a p b e t w e e n t h e P a r t i c u l a r a n d t h e U n i v e r ­ sal: t h e U n i v e r s a l is n e v e r full; i t is a p r i o r i e m p t y , d e v o i d o f p o s i t i v e content; different

p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s strive t o fill t h i s g a p , b u t

particular that s u c c e e d s in e x e r t i n g the h e g e m o n i c function

every

remains a

t e m p o r a r y a n d c o n t i n g e n t s t a n d - i n t h a t is f o r e v e r s p l i t b e t w e e n its p a r t i c u ­ l a r c o n t e n t a n d t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y it r e p r e s e n t s . . . . D o w e n o t

encounter

h e r e t h e p a r a d o x i c a l l o g i c o f desire as c o n s t i t u t i v e l y impossible, s u s t a i n e d b y a constitutive lack (the a b s e n t fullness o f the e m p t y signifier) that c a n n e v e r b e s u p p l i e d b y a n y p o s i t i v e o b j e c t , t h a t is, b y a c o n s t i t u t i v e ' o u t o f j o i n t ' o f t h e P a r t i c u l a r w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e U n i v e r s a l . . .? W h a t , h o w e v e r , i f this i m p o s s i b l e d e s i r e t o m a k e u p f o r t h e l a c k , to o v e r c o m e t h e ' o u t o f j o i n t ' , is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e f a c t ? W h a t if, b e y o n d ( o r , r a t h e r , b e n e a t h ) it, o n e s h o u l d p r e s u p p o s e n o t the fullness o f a F o u n d a t i o n , b u t the s t r i v i n g : a n u n c a n n y active will to disrupt? Understanding,

emphasized

how,

opposite

( I t was H e g e l w h o , a p r o p o s o f

instead

of

complaining

about

abstract, negative quality o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , how U n d e r s t a n d i n g

the

replaces

t h e i m m e d i a t e f u l l n e s s o f life w i t h d r y a b s t r a c t c a t e g o r i e s , o n e

should

praise the infinite power

tearing

asunder

what

belongs

of Understanding

together

in

nature,

t h a t is c a p a b l e o f positing

as s e p a r a t e

what

r e m a i n s i n r e a l i t y j o i n e d t o g e t h e r . ) A n d is n o t t h e F r e u d i a n n a m e f o r t h i s a c t i v e will t o d i s r u p t t h e death drive? I n c o n t r a s t t o d e s i r e , w h i c h s t r i v e s t o regain the impossible balance between the Universal a n d the Particular t h a t is, f o r a p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t t h a t w o u l d fill t h e g a p b e t w e e n i t s e l f a n d t h e U n i v e r s a l - d r i v e t h u s a c t i v e l y wills a n d s u s t a i n s t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e Universal and the Particular.

Why Are Ruling Ideas N o t the Ideas o f T h o s e W h o Rule? 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

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 .

1 4

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 domination authentic against

popular

fierce

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

and exploitation. O f course Fascist ideology longing for a true

competition and

community and

'manipulates'

social

solidarity

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 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

particular rather,

c o n t e n t d i r e c t l y f i l l i n g in

the

very f o r m

the void

not

the

o f the

authentic

case of

empty

some

Universal;

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 latent dream-thought

the

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 ' e l a b o r a t e d by the ideological 'dream-work' text which continues

is

transformed/

into the explicit ideological

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

THE TICKLISH

186

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 example,

Christianity

-

how

did

it b e c o m e

the

ruling

ultimate

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 . . .)

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

and 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

destruction,

B o d y and

wiping-out,

the

extreme

o f the

'technologization',

last vestiges

mobilization,

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 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

aestheti­

o f an

c e d e n t e d technological mobilization o f society which disrupts

unpre­

'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, space -

b u t by a d o u b l e o p p o s i t i o n

non-patriotic

'deracinated'

to b o t h

' e x t r e m e s ' o f the social

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 when

they are directly c o u n t e r p o s e d ,

give us ' c l a s s a n t a g o n i s m '

187 a t its

p u r e s t . T h e c o n s t i t u t i v e l i e o f t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f t h e ' m i d d l e c l a s s ' is t h u s t h e s a m e as t h a t o f t h e t r u e P a r t y l i n e b e t w e e n t h e two e x t r e m e s o f ' r i g h t w i n g d e v i a t i o n ' a n d ' l e f t - w i n g d e v i a t i o n ' i n S t a l i n i s m : t h e ' m i d d l e c l a s s ' is, i n its v e r y ' r e a l ' e x i s t e n c e , t h e embodied

He, t h e d e n i a l o f a n t a g o n i s m - i n

p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t e r m s , t h e ' m i d d l e c l a s s ' is a fetish, tion

the impossible intersec­

o f Left a n d R i g h t which, by expelling b o t h poles o f the antagonism

into the position o f antisocial ' e x t r e m e s ' which c o r r o d e the healthy social body

(multinational corporations and

i t s e l f as t h e

neutral

common

ground

intruding immigrants), o f Society. In other

presents

words,

' m i d d l e c l a s s ' is t h e v e r y f o r m o f t h e d i s a v o w a l o f t h e f a c t t h a t

the

'Society

d o e s n ' t e x i s t ' ( L a c l a u ) - i n it, S o c i e t y does e x i s t . L e f t i s t s u s u a l l y b e m o a n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l i n e o f d i v i s i o n i n t h e c l a s s s t r u g g l e is as a r u l e b l u r r e d , d i s p l a c e d , falsified - m o s t blatantly in t h e c a s e o f rightist p o p u l i s m , w h i c h p r e s e n t s i t s e l f as s p e a k i n g o n b e h a l f o f t h e p e o p l e , w h i l e i n f a c t a d v o c a t i n g t h e interests o f t h o s e w h o rule. H o w e v e r , this c o n s t a n t d i s p l a c e m e n t a n d ' f a l s i f i c a t i o n ' o f t h e l i n e o f ( c l a s s ) d i v i s i o n is t h e ' c l a s s s t r u g g l e ' : a c l a s s s o c i e t y i n w h i c h t h e i d e o l o g i c a l p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e c l a s s d i v i s i o n was p u r e a n d d i r e c t w o u l d b e a h a r m o n i o u s s t r u c t u r e with n o struggle - o r , to put it in L a c l a u ' s t e r m s , c l a s s a n t a g o n i s m w o u l d t h e r e b y b e fully s y m b o l i z e d ; it w o u l d n o l o n g e r b e i m p o s s i b l e / r e a l , b u t a s i m p l e d i f f e r e n t i a l s t r u c t u r a l feature.

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

only d e m a n d e d

d e t e r m i n e d place in the hierarchical social edifice) 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 ,

not 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 oligarchy and

aristocracy -

even m o r e , they, t h e e x c l u d e d , those

ruling with

THE TICKLISH

188 no

fixed

place within

representatives,

the

Universality ('we -

SUBJECT

the social edifice, presented

stand-ins,

for

the "nothing",

the

the

the true

n o t c o u n t e d in the o r d e r - are

p e o p l e , we are All against o t h e r s w h o privileged interest'). In short,

t h e m s e l v e s as

W h o l e o f Society, for stand

only for their

political conflict designates

the

particular

the

tension

b e t w e e n t h e s t r u c t u r e d s o c i a l b o d y i n w h i c h e a c h p a r t h a s its p l a c e , a n d ' t h e p a r t o f n o p a r t ' w h i c h u n s e t t l e s this o r d e r o n a c c o u n t o f t h e p r i n c i p l e o f u n i v e r s a l i t y - o f w h a t B a l i b a r c a l l s egaliberte, equality

o f all m e n

qua

speaking

the

beings. Politics p r o p e r

empty

principled thus

always

involves a kind o f s h o r t circuit b e t w e e n the Universal a n d t h e Particular: t h e p a r a d o x o f a singulier

universel,

a s i n g u l a r w h i c h a p p e a r s as t h e s t a n d -

in for the Universal, destabilizing t h e ' n a t u r a l ' f u n c t i o n a l o r d e r o f rela­ t i o n s in

the social body. This identification

o f the

non-part

with

the

W h o l e , o f t h e p a r t o f s o c i e t y with n o p r o p e r l y d e f i n e d p l a c e w i t h i n it ( o r r e s i s t i n g t h e a l l o c a t e d s u b o r d i n a t e d p l a c e w i t h i n i t ) w i t h t h e U n i v e r s a l , is t h e e l e m e n t a r y g e s t u r e o f p o l i t i c i z a t i o n , d i s c e r n i b l e i n all g r e a t d e m o c r a t i c e v e n t s f r o m t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ( i n w h i c h k troisieme etat p r o c l a i m e d itself i d e n t i c a l to t h e N a t i o n clergy)

to

the

demise

as s u c h ,

against

o f ex-European

the

Socialism

aristocracy and (in

which

the

dissident

'forums' proclaimed themselves representative o f the entire society against the Party

nomenklatura).

In this p r e c i s e s e n s e , politics a n d d e m o c r a c y a r e s y n o n y m o u s : t h e b a s i c a i m o f a n t i d e m o c r a t i c p o l i t i c s always a n d b y d e f i n i t i o n is a n d was d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n - t h a t is, t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d t h a t ' t h i n g s s h o u l d g o b a c k to n o r m a l ' , with e a c h individual d o i n g his o r h e r p a r t i c u l a r j o b . . . . A n d , as R a n c i e r e p r o v e s therefore

not

a

against H a b e r m a s ,

rational

debate

the

between

struggle for o n e ' s voice to b e h e a r d

and

political struggle multiple

proper

interests,

but

is the

r e c o g n i z e d as t h e v o i c e o f a

l e g i t i m a t e p a r t n e r : w h e n t h e ' e x c l u d e d ' , f r o m t h e G r e e k demos t o P o l i s h workers, protested against the ruling elite (aristocracy o r t h e true stakes were n o t only t h e i r e x p l i c i t d e m a n d s better working conditions, etc.), but

nomenklatura),

(for h i g h e r wages,

t h e i r v e r y r i g h t to b e h e a r d

r e c o g n i z e d as a n e q u a l p a r t n e r i n t h e d e b a t e - i n P o l a n d , t h e l o s t t h e m o m e n t it h a d t o a c c e p t S o l i d a r i t y as a n e q u a l

and

nomenklatura

partner.

T h e s e sudden intrusions o f politics p r o p e r u n d e r m i n e R a n c i e r e ' s order o f police,

the

established

social o r d e r

in w h i c h

each

p a r t is

properly-

a c c o u n t e d for. R a n c i e r e , o f c o u r s e , e m p h a s i z e s h o w t h e l i n e o f s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n p o l i c e a n d p o l i t i c s is always b l u r r e d a n d c o n t e s t e d : in t h e M a r x i s t t r a d i t i o n , say, ' p r o l e t a r i a t ' c a n b e r e a d as t h e s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n o f t h e ' p a r t o f n o p a r t ' e l e v a t i n g its i n j u s t i c e i n t o t h e u l t i m a t e t e s t o f u n i v e r s a l i t y a n d ,

189

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

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 o f a post-political rational society. to police can be only a matter

17

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 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, towards

the reappropriation

o f the d e m o c r a t i c i m p e t u s by the

the reunification o f Germany, which m e a n t

thrust

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

w h o a r e involved in c o n t a c t with d e a d

is c a l l e d t h e flesh

burakumim

(butchers,

those

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 hiring

them,

or

parents

n o t o n l y d o c o m p a n i e s still a v o i d

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

Japanese

(or,

rather,

s o c i e t y , is t h e

non-political)

fact that

although

'corporate' voices are

functioning heard

on

of

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 reference

to

burakumin

to

expose

the

with No Bridge,

meaninglessness

used

o f the

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 honour

the

Emperor,

a relative o f hers

scratched

how, in o r d e r the

toilet used

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 t h e burakumin

d i d n o t a c t i v e l y politicize

their

as t h a t

the

position

o f singulier

their destiny, did n o t

universe!,,

'part o f n o part', they stand for the

society. . . . '

claiming

that,

to by

relic),

constitute

precisely

as

true universality o f J a p a n e s e

8

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 logic o f political conflict:

proper

THE TICKLISH

190 •

arche-politics:

'communitarian'

organically structured

SUBJECT

attempts

to define a traditional

close,

h o m o g e n e o u s social s p a c e that allows for

no

void in w h i c h t h e political m o m e n t - e v e n t c a n e m e r g e ; •

para-politics:

the attempt

t o d e p o l i t i c i z e p o l i t i c s ( t o t r a n s l a t e it i n t o

p o l i c e l o g i c ) : o n e a c c e p t s p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t , b u t r e f o r m u l a t e s it i n t o a c o m p e t i t i o n , within the representational space, b e t w e e n a c k n o w l e d g e d parties/agents, for the (temporary) occupation o f the place o f e x e c u ­ tive •

power;

1 9

Marxist (or Utopian

Socialist)

meta-politics:

p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t is fully

a s s e r t e d , but as a s h a d o w - t h e a t r e in w h i c h e v e n t s w h o s e p r o p e r p l a c e is o n A n o t h e r S c e n e ( o f e c o n o m i c p r o c e s s e s ) a r e p l a y e d o u t ; t h e ulti­ m a t e g o a l o f ' t r u e ' p o l i t i c s is t h u s its s e l f - c a n c e l l a t i o n , t h e tion

o f the

'administration

of people'

into

the

transforma­

'administration

of

t h i n g s ' w i t h i n a fully s e l f - t r a n s p a r e n t r a t i o n a l o r d e r o f c o l l e c t i v e W i l l ; - " •

the fourth f o r m , the m o s t c u n n i n g a n d radical version o f t h e disavowal ( n o t m e n t i o n e d b y R a n c i e r e ) , is w h a t I a m t e m p t e d t o c a l l

ultra-politics:

t h e a t t e m p t t o d e p o l i t i c i z e t h e c o n f l i c t b y b r i n g i n g it t o a n e x t r e m e via t h e d i r e c t m i l i t a r i z a t i o n o f p o l i t i c s - b y r e f o r m u l a t i n g it as t h e between

'Us' and

' T h e m ' , o u r E n e m y , w h e r e t h e r e is n o

war

common

g r o u n d f o r s y m b o l i c c o n f l i c t - it is d e e p l y s y m p t o m a t i c t h a t ,

rather

t h a n c l a s s struggle, t h e r a d i c a l R i g h t s p e a k s o f c l a s s ( o r s e x u a l ) warfare.'" 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 properly

traumatic

dimension

o f the

political: s o m e t h i n g

emerged

the 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 liberal

(i.e. f r o m

'political philosophy',

suspend

P l a t o ' s Republic)

t o t h e r e c e n t revival o f

'political philosophy'

was a n

attempt

the destabilizing potential o f the political, to disavow

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 political social body, forth.*

fixing

to

and/or

to a

the rules o f political c o m p e t i t i o n , and

preso

2

'Political

philosophy'

'defence-formation',

and

is t h u s ,

in

all its

different

forms,

a

kind

of

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

C h u r c h . T h i s a p p r o a c h , however, s e e m s to provoke justified criticism: are n o t t h e A r m y a n d t h e C h u r c h p r e c i s e l y e x a m p l e s o f t h e disavowal

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 h e two f o r m s o f s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n i n w h i c h t h e l o g i c o f c o l l e c t i v e d e l i b e r a t i o n a n d d e c i s i o n o n p u b l i c affairs w h i c h d e f i n e s t h e p o l i t i c a l s p a c e is r e p l a c e d b y a c l e a r h i e r a r c h i c a l c h a i n o f c o m m a n d ? Is t h i s n o t a p r o o f b y n e g a t i o n t h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is u n a b l e t o d e f i n e t h e p r o p e r l y political

s p a c e : t h e o n l y f o r m o f ' s o c i a b i l i t y ' it c a n

a r t i c u l a t e is t h e ' t o t a l i t a r i a n ' d i s t o r t i o n / o b f u s c a t i o n o f t h e p o l i t i c a l ? H a n n a h A r e n d t s e e m e d to p o i n t in this d i r e c t i o n w h e n s h e e m p h a s i z e d the distinction between political power a n d the m e r e exercise o f (social) v i o l e n c e : o r g a n i z a t i o n s run by d i r e c t n o n - p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t y - by an o r d e r of command

t h a t is n o t p o l i t i c a l l y g r o u n d e d

authority

s c h o o l ) - r e p r e s e n t e x a m p l e s o f v i o l e n c e [Gewalt],

(Army,

Church,

not o f political Power

in t h e s t r i c t s e n s e o f t h e t e r m . H e r e , h o w e v e r , it w o u l d b e p r o d u c t i v e

to

i n t r o d u c e 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 u b l i c s y m b o l i c L a w a n d its o b s c e n e supplement:

2 3

the notion o f the o b s c e n e superego double-supplement

of

P o w e r i m p l i e s t h a t there is no Power without violence. P o w e r always h a s t o r e l y o n a n o b s c e n e s t a i n o f v i o l e n c e ; p o l i t i c a l s p a c e is n e v e r ' p u r e ' , b u t always involves s o m e k i n d o f r e l i a n c e o n 'pre-political' v i o l e n c e . O f c o u r s e , the r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n p o l i t i c a l p o w e r a n d p r e - p o l i t i c a l v i o l e n c e is o n e o f m u t u a l i m p l i c a t i o n : n o t o n l y is v i o l e n c e t h e power,

(political) power

itself

necessary supplement

is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y

at

the

root

of

of

every

apparently 'non-political' relationship o f violence. T h e accepted violence and direct relationship o f subordination

in t h e A r m y , t h e C h u r c h ,

the

f a m i l y , a n d o t h e r ' n o n - p o l i t i c a l ' s o c i a l f o r m s is i n i t s e l f t h e ' r e i f i c a t i o n ' o f a c e r t a i n exhico-political

struggle a n d d e c i s i o n - a critical analysis s h o u l d

d i s c e r n t h e h i d d e n political

p r o c e s s t h a t s u s t a i n s all t h e s e ' n o n - ' o r

p o l i t i c a l ' r e l a t i o n s h i p s . I n h u m a n s o c i e t y , t h e p o l i t i c a l is t h e

'pre-

englobing

structuring p r i n c i p l e , so that every neutralization o f s o m e partial c o n t e n t as ' n o n - p o l i t i c a l ' is a p o l i t i c a l g e s t u r e par

excellence.

T h e (Mis) U s e s o f A p p e a r a n c e W i t h i n t h e s e f o u r disavowals o f d i e political m o m e n t p r o p e r ,

the

most

i n t e r e s t i n g a n d p o l i t i c a l l y p e r t i n e n t is t h e c a s e o f m e t a - p o l i t i c s , i n w h i c h

-

t o p u t it in t h e t e r m s o f 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 - t h e p l a c e o f t h e ' a g e n t ' is o c c u p i e d b y knowledge.

M a r x p r e s e n t e d his p o s i t i o n as t h a t

o f 'scientific m a t e r i a l i s m ' ; t h a t is, m e t a - p o l i t i c s is a p o l i t i c s w h i c h l e g i t i m i z e s i t s e l f b y a d i r e c t r e f e r e n c e t o t h e s c i e n t i f i c s t a t u s o f its k n o w l e d g e

(it is

THE TICKLISH

192

SUBJECT

this k n o w l e d g e which e n a b l e s meta-politics t o draw a line o f distinction b e t w e e n t h o s e i m m e r s e d in p o l i t i c o - i d e o l o g i c a l illusions a n d

the

Party

b a s i n g its h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n o n k n o w l e d g e o f a c t u a l s o c i o e c o n o m i c p r o c e s s e s ) . T h i s k n o w l e d g e ( o f class society a n d the relations o f p r o d u c ­ tion in M a r x i s m ) suspends

t h e c l a s s i c o p p o s i t i o n o f Sein

and

Sollen,

of

B e i n g a n d t h e O u g h t , o f w h a t Is a n d t h e e t h i c a l I d e a l : t h e e t h i c a l I d e a l t o w a r d s w h i c h t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y s u b j e c t s t r i v e s is d i r e c t l y g r o u n d e d i n ( o r coincides with)

the

social processes -

'objective', 'disinterested'

this c o i n c i d e n c e o p e n s u p

v i o l e n c e , s i n c e in t h i s way a c t s w h i c h r u n

scientific knowledge a space for

of

'totalitarian'

against the most

elementary

n o n n s o f e t h i c a l d e c e n c y c a n b e l e g i t i m i z e d as g r o u n d e d i n t h e ( i n s i g h t into) historical Necessity (the mass killing o f m e m b e r s o f the 'bourgeois c l a s s ' is j u s t i f i e d b y t h e s c i e n t i f i c i n s i g h t t h a t t h i s c l a s s is a l r e a d y i n i t s e l f ' c o n d e m n e d t o d i s a p p e a r ' , p a s t its ' p r o g r e s s i v e r o l e ' , e t c . ) . T h a t is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e s t a n d a r d d e s t r u c t i v e - e v e n m u r d e r ­ ous -

d i m e n s i o n o f strictly a d h e r i n g

to the ethical Ideal, and

modern

t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m : t h e t e r r o r i s m o f t h e J a c o b i n s i n t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n was grounded attempt

in their strict a d h e r e n c e to realize

t o t h e i d e a l o f egaliberte -

this i d e a ] d i r e c t l y , t o i m p o s e

c o i n c i d e n c e o f the p u r e s t idealism with

it o n

in

to reality;

their this

the most destructive violence,

a n a l y s e d a l r e a d y b y H e g e l in t h e f a m o u s c h a p t e r o f h i s

Phenomenology,

c a n n o t explain twentieth-century totalitarianism. W h a t the J a c o b i n s lacked was t h e r e f e r e n c e to o b j e c t i v e / n e u t r a l ' s c i e n t i f i c '

k n o w l e d g e o f history

l e g i t i m i z i n g t h e i r e x e r c i s e o f u n c o n d i t i o n a l p o w e r . I t is o n l y t h e L e n i n i s t revolutionary, not the J a c o b i n , who thus occupies the properlv perverted p o s i t i o n o f t h e p u r e i n s t r u m e n t o f h i s t o r i c a l N e c e s s i t y m a d e a c c e s s i b l e by m e a n s o f scientific knowledge.-

1

H e r e R a n c i e r e follows C l a u d e L e f o r t ' s i n s i g h t i n t o h o w t h e s p a c e for ( C o m m u n i s t ) t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m was o p e n e d b y ' d e m o c r a t i c i n v e n t i o n ' i t s e l f : t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m is a n i n h e r e n t p e r v e r s i o n o f d e m o c r a t i c l o g i c .

2 0

F i r s t , we

have t h e l o g i c o f t h e traditional M a s t e r w h o g r o u n d s his a u t h o r i t y in s o m e t r a n s c e n d e n t r e a s o n ( D i v i n e R i g h t , e t c . ) ; w h a t t h e n b e c o m e s visible with ' d e m o c r a t i c i n v e n t i o n ' is t h e g a p t h a t s e p a r a t e s t h e p o s i t i v e p e r s o n o f t h e Master

from

the

place

he

o c c u p i e s in

the

symbolic network

-

with

' d e m o c r a t i c i n v e n t i o n ' , t h e p l a c e o f P o w e r is p o s i t e d as o r i g i n a l l y empty, o c c u p i e d o n l y t e m p o r a r i l y a n d in a c o n t i n g e n t way by d i f f e r e n t subjects. I n o t h e r w o r d s , it n o w b e c o m e s e v i d e n t t h a t ( t o q u o t e M a r x ) p e o p l e d o n o t t r e a t s o m e b o d y as a k i n g b e c a u s e h e is a k i n g i n h i m s e l f ; h e is a k i n g because a n d as long as p e o p l e t r e a t h i m as o n e . T o t a l i t a r i a n i s m t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t this r u p t u r e

a c c o m p l i s h e d by t h e

'democratic invention':

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

193

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 instrumentalizes

his

role,

the

more

he

emphasizes

that

he

and

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

totalitarian

three

Master)

fit t h e

for the empty place o f Power, o f the 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 ' 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

(the

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,

(self-relating) negativity

functions

as a

is t h e

kind

point

o f radical

o f 'vanishing

mediator'

between

the

that

'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

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

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.

THE TICKLISH

194

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 nomenklatura

the

( 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

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

against

the

senior members

o f the

nomenklatura)

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

accused m e n

party

retained

delegates

present,

their s e n i o r posts -

nothing

happened:

something

the

two

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 stance o f the

social body

(the

intricate

network

o f family a n d

sub­ 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 existing network maintain

a new form

o f social relations -

this n e t w o r k

of executive power

o r rather,

o f social relations. F o r that

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

on to

p r e c i s e l y in o r d e r reason,

the

the to

Fascist

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

substance'

which

thoroughly

subverted

and

dismembered

(the inherited network o f relations), perturbing

deeply into the most fundamental social fabric.

2 6

the

'social

and

cutting

POLITICAL SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS V I C I S S I T U D E S Let

lis r e t u r n , h o w e v e r , t o R a n c i e r e ' s b a s i c e m p h a s i s o n

the

195 radical

ambiguity o f the Marxist notion o f the 'gap' between formal d e m o c r a c y (human

rights,

political freedom,

etc.)

and

the

economic

reality o f

e x p l o i t a t i o n a n d d o m i n a t i o n . O n e c a n r e a d this g a p b e t w e e n t h e ance' o f equality-freedom

'appear­

a n d t h e social reality o f e c o n o m i c , cultural,

a n d o t h e r d i f f e r e n c e s e i t h e r i n t h e s t a n d a r d ' s y m p t o m a t i c ' way ( t h e f o r m o f u n i v e r s a l r i g h t s , e q u a l i t y , f r e e d o m a n d d e m o c r a c y is s i m p l y a n e c e s s a r y b u t i l l u s o r y f o r m o f e x p r e s s i o n o f its c o n c r e t e s o c i a l c o n t e n t , t h e u n i v e r s e o f e x p l o i t a t i o n a n d c l a s s d o m i n a t i o n ) , o r in t h e m u c h m o r e s e n s e o f a t e n s i o n i n w h i c h t h e ' a p p e a r a n c e ' o f egaliberte,

subversive

p r e c i s e l y , is not a

' m e r e a p p e a r a n c e ' b u t e v i n c e s a n e f f e c t i v i t y o f its o w n , w h i c h a l l o w s i t t o set in m o t i o n t h e p r o c e s s o f t h e r e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f actual s o c i o - e c o n o m i c relations

b y way o f t h e i r

progressive

'politicization'.

(Why

shouldn't

w o m e n vote too? W h y s h o u l d n ' t working c o n d i t i o n s b e o f public political c o n c e r n ? , e t c . ) O n e is t e m p t e d h e r e t o u s e t h e o l d L e v i - S t r a u s s i a n t e r m 'symbolic efficiency':

the

appearance

o f egaliberte

is a s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n

w h i c h , as s u c h , p o s s e s s e s a n a c t u a l e f f i c i e n c y o f its o w n - o n e s h o u l d r e s i s t the properly cynical temptation

o f r e d u c i n g it t o a m e r e i l l u s i o n

that

c o n c e a l s a different actuality. The

distinction

simulacrum here.

2 7

between

appearance

and

the

postmodern

notion

of

as n o l o n g e r c l e a r l y 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 is c r u c i a l

T h e p o l i t i c a l as t h e d o m a i n o f a p p e a r a n c e ( o p p o s e d t o t h e s o c i a l

r e a l i t y o f c l a s s a n d o t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n s , t h a t is, o f s o c i e t y as t h e a r t i c u l a t e d s o c i a l b o d y ) h a s n o t h i n g i n c o m m o n with t h e p o s t m o d e r n n o t i o n t h a t we are entering

the

e r a o f u n i v e r s a l i z e d s i m u l a c r a in w h i c h

reality

itself

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 its s i m u l a t e d d o u b l e . T h e n o s t a l g i c l o n g ­ ing for the authentic e x p e r i e n c e o f b e i n g lost in the deluge o f simulacra ( d e t e c t a b l e i n V i r i l i o ) , as w e l l as t h e p o s t m o d e r n N e w W o r l d o f u n i v e r s a l i z e d s i m u l a c r a as t h e

assertion o f the Brave

sign

that we a r e

finally

g e t t i n g r i d o f t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l o b s e s s i o n with a u t h e n t i c B e i n g ( d e t e c t a b l e in V a t t i m o ) , b o t h miss the distinction between s i m u l a c r u m a n d

appear­

a n c e : w h a t g e t s l o s t i n t o d a y ' s ' p l a g u e o f s i m u l a t i o n s ' is n o t t h e f i r m , t r u e , non-simulated

Real, but

appearance

itself. T o p u t

it i n L a c a n i a n

terms:

s i m u l a c r u m is i m a g i n a r y ( i l l u s i o n ) , w h i l e a p p e a r a n c e is s y m b o l i c ( f i c t i o n ) ; w h e n t h e s p e c i f i c d i m e n s i o n o f s y m b o l i c a p p e a r a n c e starts t o d i s i n t e g r a t e , the Imaginary and the Real b e c o m e m o r e and m o r e indistinguishable. The

k e y t o t o d a y ' s u n i v e r s e o f s i m u l a c r a , i n w h i c h t h e R e a l is l e s s a n d

less d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m its i m a g i n a r y s i m u l a t i o n , lies in t h e r e t r e a t o f 'symbolic efficiency'. In s o c i o p o l i t i c a l t e r m s , this d o m a i n o f a p p e a r a n c e ( o f s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n ) is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h a t o f p o l i t i c s as d i s t i n c t f r o m

THE TICKLISH

196

SUBJECT

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

properly

appearances'

stands,

rather,

political space against the

for

the

onslaught

effort to maintain

the

o f the

all-

postmodern

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 Phenomenology:

has to r e a d H e g e l ' s famous

' 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

dictum

2 8

from

qua a p p e a r a n c e ' .

his 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 effectively

'appears'

in/through

it. H e r e

we

are

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 evoked

by the

French

Revolution

in

the

dimension

b a c k at the

enlightened

Kantian

enthusiasm

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,

' 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 ' 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 ,

o f a free

society,

of phenomena,

noumcnal dimension

appeared. but

those

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

guise

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

o f an

the

appearance

of Another

Dimension

which

interrupts

s t a n d a r d n o r m a l o r d e r o f a p p e a r a n c e s qua p h e n o m e n a . T h a t is a l s o t h e p r o b l e m w i t h c y b e r s p a c e a n d v i r t u a l r e a l i t y ( V R ) : w h a t V R t h r e a t e n s is not ' r e a l i t y ' , w h i c h is d i s s o l v e d i n t h e m u l t i p l i c i t y o f its s i m u l a c r a , b u t , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , appearance.

S o in o r d e r to c o u n t e r

the

s t a n d a r d f e a r t h a t c y b e r s p a c e V R u n d e r m i n e s r e a l i t y , it is n o t e n o u g h

to

insist o n t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n reality a n d t h e R e a l ( c l a i m i n g that V R can g e n e r a t e a 'sense o f reality', b u t n o t the i m p o s s i b l e R e a l ) ; o n e s h o u l d also i n t r o d u c e a distinction, correlative to t h e o n e b e t w e e n reality a n d t h e Real, within

the order

of appearance

itself -

the

distinction

between

p h e n o m e n a l reality a n d the ' m a g i c ' a p p e a r a n c e s ( o f A n o t h e r D i m e n s i o n ) w i t h i n it. I n s h o r t , o n e s h o u l d d i s t i n g u i s h h e r e b e t w e e n two c o u p l e s o f o p p o s i t e s w h i c h a r e a b s o l u t e l y n o t t o b e c o n f u s e d in t h e s i n g l e o p p o s i t i o n o f a p p e a r a n c e v e r s u s r e a l i t y : t h e c o u p l e o f r e a l i t y a n d its s i m u l a c r u m , a n d t h e c o u p l e o f t h e R e a l a n d a p p e a r a n c e . T h e R e a l is a g r i m a c e o f r e a l i t y : say, a d i s g u s t i n g l y c o n t o r t e d f a c e transpires/appears.

In

in w h i c h

the Real o f a deadly

this s e n s e , t h e R e a l i t s e l f is a n

rage

appearance,

an

e l u s i v e s e m b l a n c e w h o s e f l e e t i n g p r e s e n c e / a b s e n c e is d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e gaps a n d discontinuities o f t h e p h e n o m e n a l o r d e r o f reality. T h e

true

o p p o s i t i o n is t h u s b e t w e e n r e a l i t y / s i m u l a c r u m ( t h e two c o i n c i d e in V R ) a n d R e a l / a p p e a r a n c e . I n m o r e detail, o n e s h o u l d distinguish f o u r levels of appearance: •

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 ; •

appearance

in

the

sense o f symbolic fiction, that

is, in

Hegelese,

a p p e a r a n c e as e s s e n t i a l : say, t h e o r d e r o f s y m b o l i c c u s t o m s a n d titles ( ' t h e h o n o u r a b l e j u d g e ' , e t c . ) w h i c h is ' m e r e l y a n a p p e a r a n c e ' - i f w e d i s t u r b it, h o w e v e r , s o c i a l r e a l i t y i t s e l f d i s i n t e g r a t e s ; •

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

something beneath p h e n o m e n a l reality');

that

'there

is

THE

198 •

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

Freedom, o f the Supreme

G o o d , appears

from the p h e n o m e n a l perspective o f the

realm o f

as s u c h

finite

noumenal

(as n o u m e n a l )

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 unsurpassable meaning exactiy

ultimate

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

only within the

only

s u b j e c t : i n itself, i f w e g e t

same

the

temporal

way, w h a t

experience of a

K a n t was n o t

fully

finite

aware

subject:

o f is h o w

has in 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 collaboration

parties

which

o f enlightened

compete

for power

technocrats

is r e p l a c e d

(economists, public

by

the

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

necessary expert

and

free

knowledge

n e w issues, a r m e d

deliberation

that

takes

with

the

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

t h e o l d days o f ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' p o l i t i c a l d i v i s i o n , t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n ' r a d i c a l ' was r e s e r v e d e i t h e r f o r t h e e x t r e m e L e f t o r f o r t h e e x t r e m e R i g h t . T h e C e n t r e was, by d e f i n i t i o n , m o d e r a t e : m e a s u r e d by t h e o l d s t a n d a r d s ,

the

t e r m ' R a d i c a l C e n t r e ' is t h e s a m e n o n s e n s e as ' r a d i c a l m o d e r a t i o n ' . W h a t m a k e s N e w L a b o u r ( o r B i l l C l i n t o n ' s p o l i t i c s i n t h e U S A ) ' r a d i c a l ' is its radical a b a n d o n m e n t o f the ' o l d i d e o l o g i c a l divides', usually f o r m u l a t e d in the guise o f a p a r a p h r a s e o f D e n g X i a o p i n g ' s m o t t o f r o m the 1960s: 'It d o e s n ' t m a t t e r i f a c a t is r e d o r w h i t e ; w h a t m a t t e r s is t h a t it a c t u a l l y c a t c h e s m i c e ' : i n the s a m e vein, a d v o c a t e s o f New L a b o u r like to e m p h a ­ size t h a t o n e s h o u l d

take g o o d ideas without any p r e j u d i c e a n d

them, whatever their

( i d e o l o g i c a l ) origins. A n d what

are these

apply 'good

i d e a s ' ? T h e a n s w e r is, o f c o u r s e , ideas that work. I t is h e r e t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r the gap that separates a political act p r o p e r from the 'administration o f social matters' which r e m a i n s within the framework o f existing sociopoli­ t i c a l r e l a t i o n s : t h e p o l i t i c a l a c t ( i n t e r v e n t i o n ) p r o p e r is n o t s i m p l y s o m e ­ t h i n g that works well within t h e f r a m e w o r k o f t h e e x i s t i n g r e l a t i o n s , b u t s o m e t h i n g t h a t changes say t h a t

the very framework

g o o d ideas are

'ideas

that determines

that work'

means

how things work. T o

that o n e

accepts

in

advance the (global capitalist) constellation that d e t e r m i n e s what works (if, f o r e x a m p l e , o n e s p e n d s l o o m u c h m o n e y o n e d u c a t i o n o r h e a l t h c a r e , that

'doesn't work',

s i n c e it i n f r i n g e s t o o m u c h

on

the

conditions of

capitalist profitability). O n e c a n also p u t it in t e r m s o f t h e

well-known

d e f i n i t i o n o f p o l i t i c s as t h e

p o l i t i c s is,

'art o f the possible': authentic

r a t h e r , t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e , t h a t is, t h e a r t o f t h e impossible - it c h a n g e s t h e very

parameters

of

what

is

considered

'possible'

in

the

existing

2

constellation. '' o f t h e i m p o s s i b l e is e f f e c t i v e l y p r e c l u d e d ,

the

political (the space o f litigation in which the e x c l u d e d c a n protest

When

this d i m e n s i o n

the

w r o n g / i n j u s t i c e d o n e to t h e m ) f o r e c l o s e d from the symbolic returns in t h e R e a l , i n t h e g u i s e o f n e w f o r m s o f racism; t h i s ' p o s t m o d e r n

racism'

e m e r g e s as t h e u l t i m a t e c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h e p o s t - p o l i t i c a l s u s p e n s i o n o f the political, the reduction o f the State to a m e r e police-agent servicing the

(consensually established) needs o f market forces and

multicultur-

a l i s l t o l e r a n t h u m a n i t a r i a n i s m : t h e ' f o r e i g n e r ' w h o s e s t a t u s is n e v e r p r o p ­ erly ' r e g u l a t e d '

is t h e

indivisible

remainder

o f the transformation

o f the

d e m o c r a t i c political struggle into the post-political p r o c e d u r e o f n e g o ­ t i a t i o n a n d m u l t i c u l t u r a h s t p o l i c i n g . I n s t e a d o f t h e political ing class' d e m a n d i n g

subject 'work­

its u n i v e r s a l r i g h t s , w e g e l , o n t h e o n e h a n d ,

the

m u l t i p l i c i t y o f p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l s t r a t a o r g r o u p s , e a c h w i t h its p r o b l e m s (the dwindling

n e e d for m a n u a l workers, etc.) and, on

the other,

the

THE TICKLISH

200 immigrant,

ever m o r e

prevented

SUBJECT

from

politicizing

his p r e d i c a m e n t

of

exclusion.*" T h e obvious counter-argument

h e r e is t h a t t o d a y it is t h e ( p o l i t i c a l )

R i g h t t h a t is a c c o m p l i s h i n g t h e a c t s , b o l d l y c h a n g i n g t h e v e r y r u l e s o f w h a t is c o n s i d e r e d a c c e p t a b l e - a d m i s s i b l e in t h e s p h e r e o f p u b l i c d i s c o u r s e : f r o m t h e way R e a g a n i s m a n d T h a t c h e r i s m l e g i t i m i z e d t h e d e b a t e

about

c u r t a i l i n g w o r k e r s ' rights a n d social b e n e f i t s , u p to t h e g r a d u a l legitimiza­ t i o n o f t h e ' o p e n d e b a t e ' a b o u t N a z i s m i n r e v i s i o n i s t h i s t o r i o g r a p h y d la N o l t e (was i t r e a l l y s o b a d ? W a s n o t C o m m u n i s m w o r s e , t h a t is, c a n n o t Nazism

be

understood

as a

reaction

to

Leninism-Stalinism?). Here,

h o w e v e r , it is c r u c i a l t o i n t r o d u c e a f u r t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n : f o r L a c a n , a t r u e a c t d o e s n o t o n l y r e t r o a c t i v e l y c h a n g e t h e r u l e s o f t h e s y m b o l i c s p a c e ; it a l s o d i s t u r b s t h e u n d e r l y i n g f a n t a s y - a n d h e r e , c o n c e r n i n g this c r u c i a l d i m e n s i o n , F a s c i s m e m p h a t i c a l l y d o c s not p a s s t h e c r i t e r i o n o f t h e a c t . F a s c i s t ' R e v o l u t i o n ' is, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f a p s e u d o E v e n t , o f a s p e c t a c u l a r t u r m o i l d e s t i n e d to c o n c e a l t h e fact that, o n

the

m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l l e v e l ( t h a t o f t h e r e l a t i o n s o f p r o d u c t i o n ) , nothing

really

changes.

what

T h e F a s c i s t R e v o l u t i o n is t h u s t h e a n s w e r t o t h e q u e s t i o n :

d o w e h a v e t o c h a n g e s o t h a t , u l t i m a t e l y , n o t h i n g will r e a l l y c h a n g e ? O r

-

t o p u t it i n t e r m s o f t h e l i b i d i n a i e c o n o m y o f t h e i d e o l o g i c a l s p a c e - f a r from disturbing/'traversing'

t h e fantasy that u n d e r l i e s a n d sustains

the

capitalist social edifice, Fascist ideological revolution m e r e l y brings to the light the p h a n t a s m i c ' i n h e r e n t transgression' o f the ' n o r m a l '

bourgeois

i d e o l o g i c a l situation (the set o f implicit racist, sexist, etc., ' p r e j u d i c e s ' that e f f e c t i v e l y d e t e r m i n e t h e activity o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n it, a l t h o u g h t h e y a r e n o t publicly r e c o g n i z e d ) . 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 workers' protests against r e d u c i n g their rights a n d right-wing on

fidelity

together insistence

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 post-ideological universe. However,

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 n a l i d e n t i t y (ethnos tion;

while

for

o r habitat)

the

Left,

threatened the

today's

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 commu­

by the o n s l a u g h t o f globaliza­

dimension

under

threat

politicization, o f articulating 'impossible' u n / i w a / d e m a n d s f r o m within the existing s p a c e o f W o r l d O r d e r ) .

is

that

of

('impossible'

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 H e r e o n e s h o u l d o p p o s e globalization

a n d universalization:

201

globalization

( n o t o n l y in t h e s e n s e o f g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m , t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a g l o b a l w o r l d m a r k e t , b u t a l s o i n t h e s e n s e o f t h e a s s e r d o n o f ' h u m a n i t y ' as t h e global point o f r e f e r e n c e for h u m a n

rights,

legitimizing the violation o f

State sovereignty, from trade restrictions to direct military interventions, in parts o f the world w h e r e global h u m a n

rights

a r e v i o l a t e d ) is p r e c i s e l y

the n a m e for the e m e r g i n g post-political logic which progressively cludes the d i m e n s i o n o f universality that appears in politicization T h e p a r a d o x is t h a t t h e r e is n o Universal political litigation,

o f the

'part

of no

pre­

proper.

p r o p e r without the process o f part',

o f an

out-ofjoint

entity

p r e s e n t i n g / m a n i f e s t i n g i t s e l f 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 . One

should

link Ranciere's notion

excessive, non-functional p o s e d by B a l i b a r : talist'

3 1

o f post-politics to the n o t i o n

c r u e l t y as a f e a t u r e o f c o n t e m p o r a r y l i f e ,

a cruelty whose manifestations range from

racist a n d / o r

religious slaughter

to t h e

of pro­

'fundamen­

'senseless' outbursts

of

v i o l e n c e b y a d o l e s c e n t s a n d t h e h o m e l e s s in o u r m e g a l o p o l i s e s , a v i o l e n c e o n e is t e m p t e d

t o c a l l /rf-Evil, a v i o l e n c e g r o u n d e d

in n o utilitarian

or

i d e o l o g i c a l r e a s o n . A l l t h e talk a b o u t f o r e i g n e r s s t e a l i n g w o r k f r o m u s , o r t h e d i r e a t t h e y r e p r e s e n t to o u r W e s t e r n v a l u e s , s h o u l d n o t d e c e i v e u s : u n d e r c l o s e r e x a m i n a t i o n , it s o o n b e c o m e s c l e a r t h a t t h i s t a l k p r o v i d e s a rather

superficial

obtain

from

secondary

a skinhead

rationalization.

is t h a t

it m a k e s

The him

answer feel

we

good

to

ultimately beat

up

f o r e i g n e r s , t h a t t h e i r p r e s e n c e d i s t u r b s h i m . . . . W h a t we e n c o u n t e r

here

is i n d e e d

most

/rf-Evil,

that

is, Evil s t r u c t u r e d

and

motivated

by t h e

e l e m e n t a r y i m b a l a n c 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 t h e E g o and.

puissance,

b y t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n p l e a s u r e a n d t h e f o r e i g n b o d y o f jouissance

at t h e

v e r y h e a r t o f it. I d - E v i l t h u s s t a g e s t h e m o s t e l e m e n t a r y ' s h o r t c i r c u i t ' i n t h e s u b j e c t ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p to t h e p r i m o r d i a l l y missing o b j e c t - c a u s e o f his desire: w h a t ' b o t h e r s ' us in t h e ' o t h e r '

(Jew, J a p a n e s e , A f r i c a n , T u r k . . .)

is t h a t h e a p p e a r s t o e n j o y a p r i v i l e g e d r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e o b j e c t -

the

o t h e r e i t h e r p o s s e s s e s t h e o b j e c t - t r e a s u r e , h a v i n g s n a t c h e d it away f r o m us ( w h i c h is why we d o n ' t h a v e i t ) , o r h e p o s e s a t h r e a t t o o u r p o s s e s s i o n o f the object.

3 2

W h a t o n e s h o u l d s u g g e s t h e r e , a g a i n , is t h e H e g e l i a n ' i n f i n i t e j u d g e ­ m e n t ' asserting the speculative identity o f these 'useless' a n d

'excessive'

outbursts o f v i o l e n c e , which display n o t h i n g b u t a p u r e a n d n a k e d sublimated') universe

hatred o f O t h e r n e s s , a n d the post-political

o f tolerance o f difference,

in w h i c h

nobody

('non-

multiculturalist is e x c l u d e d .

Of

c o u r s e , I h a v e j u s t u s e d t h e t e r m ' n o n - s u b l i m a t e d ' in its u s u a l s e n s e w h i c h , in

this case, stands

for

the

exact opposite

o f its s t r i c t

psychoanalytic

THE TICKLISH

202

SUBJECT

m e a n i n g - in short, what takes p l a c e in t h e f o c u s i n g o f o u r h a t r e d

on

s o m e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e ( o f f i c i a l l y t o l e r a t e d ) O t h e r is t h e v e r y m e c h ­ a n i s m o f sublimation

a t its m o s t e l e m e n t a r y : t h e a l l - e n c o m p a s s i n g n a t u r e

o f the post-political C o n c r e t e Universality w h i c h a c c o u n t s for everybody at t h e level o f s y m b o l i c i n c l u s i o n , this multiculturalist vision-and-practice o f ' u n i t y i n d i f f e r e n c e ' ( ' a l l e q u a l , all d i f f e r e n t ' ) , l e a v e s o p e n , as t h e o n l y way t o m a r k t h e D i f f e r e n c e , t h e p r o t o - s u b l i m a t o r y g e s t u r e o f e l e v a t i n g a c o n t i n g e n t O t h e r ( o f race, sex, religion . . .) into the 'absolute O t h e r n e s s ' o f the i m p o s s i b l e T h i n g , the u l t i m a t e t h r e a t to o u r identity - this T h i n g w h i c h m u s t b e a n n i h i l a t e d i f w e a r e t o survive. T h e r e i n l i e s t h e p r o p e r l y H e g e l i a n p a r a d o x : t h e final a r r i v a l o f t h e t r u l y r a t i o n a l ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r ­ sality'

-

the

abolition

o f antagonisms,

the

negotiated coexistence o f different groups -

'mature'

universe

of

the

c o i n c i d e s w i t h its r a d i c a l

o p p o s i t e , with t h o r o u g h l y c o n t i n g e n t outbursts o f v i o l e n c e . H e g e l ' s f u n d a m e n t a l r u l e is t h a t ' o b j e c t i v e ' e x c e s s ( t h e d i r e c t r e i g n o f a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l i t y w h i c h i m p o s e s its l a w ' m e c h a n i c a l l y ' , w i t h c o m p l e t e d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e c o n c e r n e d s u b j e c t c a u g h t i n its w e b ) is always s u p p l e ­ mented

by the

'subjective' excess (the irregular,

arbitrary exercise o f

w h i m s ) . A n e x c e l l e n t i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h i s i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e is p r o v i d e d b y Balibar,

1 3

w h o d i s t i n g u i s h e s two o p p o s i t e b u t c o m p l e m e n t a r y m o d e s o f

e x c e s s i v e v i o l e n c e : t h e ' u l t r a - o b j e c t i v e ' ( ' s t r u c t u r a l ' ) v i o l e n c e t h a t is i n h e r ­ e n t in t h e social c o n d i t i o n s o f g l o b a l capitalism ( t h e ' a u t o m a t i c ' c r e a t i o n o f e x c l u d e d a n d d i s p e n s a b l e individuals, f r o m t h e h o m e l e s s to t h e u n e m ­ p l o y e d ) , a n d the 'ultra-subjective' v i o l e n c e o f newly e m e r g i n g e t h n i c a n d / or

religious

(in short:

racist)

'fundamentalisms'.

This

'excessive'

and

' g r o u n d l e s s ' v i o l e n c e i n v o l v e s its o w n m o d e o f k n o w l e d g e , t h a t o f i m p o ­ tent cynical reflection -

b a c k t o o u r e x a m p l e o f /d-Evil, o f a

skinhead

b e a t i n g u p f o r e i g n e r s : w h e n h e is r e a l l y p r e s s e d f o r t h e r e a s o n s f o r h i s v i o l e n c e , a n d i f h e is c a p a b l e o f m i n i m a l t h e o r e t i c a l r e f l e c t i o n , h e will s u d d e n l y start to talk like social workers, sociologists a n d social p s y c h o l o ­ gists, q u o t i n g d i m i n i s h e d s o c i a l m o b i l i t y , r i s i n g i n s e c u r i t y , t h e d i s i n t e g r a ­ tion o f p a t e r n a l authority, the lack o f m a t e r n a l love in his early c h i l d h o o d . . . in s h o r t , h e will p r o v i d e t h e m o r e o r l e s s p r e c i s e p s y c h o s o c i o l o g i c a l a c c o u n t o f his acts so d e a r to e n l i g h t e n e d liberals e a g e r to ' u n d e r s t a n d ' v i o l e n t y o u t h as t r a g i c v i c t i m s o f t h e i r s o c i a l a n d f a m i l i a l c o n d i t i o n s . H e r e the standard e n l i g h t e n e d formula o f the efficiency o f the 'critique o f ideology' from Plato onwards

( ' T h e y ' r e d o i n g it b e c a u s e t h e y d o n ' t

k n o w w h a t t h e y ' r e d o i n g ' - t h a t is, k n o w l e d g e i n i t s e l f is l i b e r a t i n g ; w h e n t h e e r r i n g s u b j e c t r e f l e c t s u p o n w h a t h e is d o i n g , h e will n o l o n g e r b e d o i n g i t ) is t u r n e d a r o u n d : t h e v i o l e n t s k i n h e a d ' k n o w s v e r y w e l l w h a t

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 he's doing, but he's nevertheless doing i t ' . knowledge embedded

M

203

T h e symbolically efficient

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 . T h e distinction b e t w e e n this excessive 'dysfunctional' v i o l e n c e a n d the o b s c e n e v i o l e n c e t h a t s e r v e s as t h e i m p l i c i t s u p p o r t o f a s t a n d a r d i d e o l o g i ­ c a l u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n is c r u c i a l h e r e

(when 'the rights o f m a n ' are

'not

really universal' b u t 'in fact the right o f white property-owning m a l e s ' , any a t t e m p t to d i s r e g a r d this i m p l i c i t u n d e r l y i n g set o f u n w r i t t e n rules that effectively

constrain

violence). Nowhere

the

universality

is t h i s c o n t r a s t

o f rights stronger

is m e t than

in

by outbursts the

case o f

of the

A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n s : a l t h o u g h they w e r e formally e n t i t l e d to p a r t i c i p a t e in p o l i t i c a l life by t h e m e r e f a c t o f b e i n g A m e r i c a n c i t i z e n s , t h e o l d p a r a ­ political d e m o c r a t i c racism p r e v e n t e d t h e i r actual participation by silently enforcing

their

exclusion

(via v e r b a l

and

physical threats,

etc.).

The

a p p r o p r i a t e a n s w e r t o t h i s s t a n d a r d e x c l u s i o n - f r o m - t h e - U n i v e r s a l was t h e g r e a t Civil R i g h t s m o v e m e n t a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e n a m e o f M a r t i n L u t h e r K i n g : it s u s p e n d e d

the implicit o b s c e n e supplement

tiiat

enacted

the

a c t u a l e x c l u s i o n o f B l a c k s f r o m f o r m a l u n i v e r s a l e q u a l i t y - o f c o u r s e , it was e a s y f o r s u c h a g e s t u r e t o g a i n t h e s u p p o r t o f t h e l a r g e m a j o r i t y o f t h e white liberal upper-class establishment, dismissing o p p o n e n t s low-class S o u t h e r n

rednecks. Today, however,

the

as

very terrain

dumb of

the

s t r u g g l e h a s c h a n g e d : t h e p o s t - p o l i t i c a l l i b e r a l e s t a b l i s h m e n t n o t o n l y fully a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e g a p b e t w e e n m e r e f o r m a l e q u a l i t y a n d its a c t u a l i z a t i o n / i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , it n o t o n l y a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e e x c l u s i o n a r y l o g i c o f i d e o l o g i c a l u n i v e r s a l i t y ; it e v e n a c t i v e l y

fights

false'

it b y a p p l y i n g t o it a vast

legal-psychological-sociological network o f measures, from identifying the specific p r o b l e m s o f every g r o u p a n d s u b g r o u p

(not only homosexuals

b u t African-American lesbians, African-American lesbian m o t h e r s , AfricanAmerican

unemployed

lesbian m o t h e r s . . .) up

to proposing

a set o f

m e a s u r e s ('affirmative action', e t c . ) to rectify the wrong. 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

THE

204

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 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

'metaphoric'

elevation o f h e r specific

'wrong'

into a stand-in

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 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

passages

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 plaint)

o f a particular

content - no wonder

group

to j u s t this d e m a n d ,

with

its

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

(com­

particular '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 return

o f the

repressed

of our

anaemic

violent outbursts liberal Western

signify

the

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 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 ' .

3 5

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 reversals

o f sublime

democratic

enthusiasm

about a series o f c o m i c 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; appeal

the civilized C z e c h s m o b i l i z e d by the

o f Havel a n d o t h e r cultural

icons suddenly

turned into

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

cheap

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? T h e hero o f Dashiell Hammett's

Maltese

Falcon,

the private

detective

S a m S p a d e , n a r r a t e s t h e s t o r y o f h i s b e i n g h i r e d t o find a m a n w h o

had

s u d d e n l y left his s e t t l e d j o b a n d f a m i l y , a n d v a n i s h e d . S p a d e is u n a b l e to

THE TICKLISH

206

SUBJECT

t r a c k h i m down, h u t a few years l a t e r h e a c c i d e n t a l l y e n c o u n t e r s t h e m a n i n a b a r i n a n o t h e r c i t y . U n d e r a n a s s u m e d n a m e , t h e m a n is l e a d i n g a life r e m a r k a b l y s i m i l a r t o t h e o n e h e f l e d f r o m

(a regular b o r i n g j o b , a

n e w wife a n d c h i l d r e n ) - d e s p i t e t h i s s i m i l a r i t y , h o w e v e r , h e is c o n v i n c e d t h a t h i s n e w b e g i n n i n g was n o t i n v a i n , t h a t it was w e l l w o r t h t h e t r o u b l e t o c u t his ties a n d start a n e w life. . . . P e r h a p s t h e s a m e g o e s f o r

the

passage from actually existing Socialism to acutally existing capitalism in ex-Communist East E u r o p e a n

countries: despite

betrayed

enthusiastic

e x p e c t a t i o n s , s o m e t h i n g did t a k e p l a c e i n b e t w e e n , i n t h e p a s s a g e i t s e l f , and

it is i n

mediator',

this E v e n t w h i c h

in this m o m e n t

t o o k place in

between,

this

o f democratic enthusiasm,

'vanishing

that we

should

l o c a t e t h e c r u c i a l d i m e n s i o n o b f u s c a t e d by l a t e r r e n o r m a l i z a t i o n . I t is c l e a r t h a t t h e p r o t e s t i n g c r o w d s i n t h e D D R , P o l a n d a n d t h e C z e c h R e p u b l i c ' w a n t e d s o m e t h i n g e l s e ' , a Utopian o b j e c t o f i m p o s s i b l e F u l l n e s s designated by a multiplicity o f n a m e s ('solidarity', ' h u m a n rights', e t c . ) , not w h a t t h e y a c t u a l l y g o t . T h e r e a r e two p o s s i b l e r e a c t i o n s t o t h i s between

expectations and

r e a l i t y ; t h e b e s t way t o c a p t u r e

them

gap is b y

r e f e r e n c e to t h e w e l l - k n o w n o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n fool a n d knave. T h e f o o l is a s i m p l e t o n , a c o u r t j e s t e r w h o is a l l o w e d t o tell t h e t r u t h p r e c i s e l y because

the

'performative

power'

(the

sociopolitical efficacy)

of

his

s p e e c h is s u s p e n d e d ; t h e k n a v e is t h e c y n i c w h o o p e n l y s t a t e s t h e t r u t h , a c r o o k w h o t r i e s t o s e l l t h e o p e n a d m i s s i o n o f h i s c r o o k e d n e s s as h o n e s t y , a s c o u n d r e l who admits the n e e d for illegitimate repression in o r d e r

to

m a i n t a i n s o c i a l s t a b i l i t y . F o l l o w i n g t h e fall o f S o c i a l i s m , t h e k n a v e is a n e o c o n s e r v a t i v e a d v o c a t e o f t h e f r e e m a r k e t , w h o c r u e l l y r e j e c t s all f o r m s o f s o c i a l s o l i d a r i t y as c o u n t e r p r o d u c t i v e s e n t i m e n t a l i s m ; w h i l e t h e f o o l is a m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t ' r a d i c a l ' social critic w h o , by m e a n s o f his ludic p r o c e d u r e s d e s t i n e d t o ' s u b v e r t ' t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r , a c t u a l l y s e r v e s as its s u p p l e m e n t . W i t h r e g a r d t o E a s t e r n E u r o p e , a k n a v e d i s m i s s e s t h e ' t h i r d way' p r o j e c t o f Neues

Forum

i n t h e e x - D D R as h o p e l e s s l y o u t d a t e d

utopianism,

e x h o r t s us t o a c c e p t c r u e l m a r k e t r e a l i t y ; w h i l e a f o o l i n s i s t s t h a t

and the

collapse o f S o c i a l i s m has actually o p e n e d up a T h i r d Way, a possibility left r

u n e x p l o i t e d by the W estern r e c o l o n i z a t i o n o f the East. T h i s c r u e l r e v e r s a l o f t h e s u b l i m e i n t o t h e r i d i c u l o u s was, o f c o u r s e , g r o u n d e d i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e was a d o u b l e m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g a t w o r k i n the public (self-)perception o f social protest m o v e m e n t s (from Solidarity t o Neues Forum)

in t h e last years o f E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n S o c i a l i s m . O n

o n e h a n d , t h e r e w e r e t h e a t t e m p t s o f t h e r u l i n g nomenklatura these

events

in

their

police/political

framework,

by

the

to reinscribe distinguishing

b e t w e e n ' h o n e s t critics' with w h o m o n e c o u l d discuss m a t t e r s in a c a l m ,

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

207

rational, depoliticized atmosphere, a n d a b u n c h o f extremist provocateurs w h o served foreign interests.

3 6

T h e b a t t l e was t h u s n o t o n l y f o r h i g h e r

wages a n d b e t t e r c o n d i t i o n s , b u t also - a n d a b o v e all - for t h e workers to b e a c k n o w l e d g e d as l e g i t i m a t e p a r t n e r s i n n e g o t i a t i n g w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the regime - the m o m e n t the powers that b e were forced to accept this,

t h e battle was i n a way already w o n .

3 7

When

these

movements

e x p l o d e d in a b r o a d mass p h e n o m e n o n , their d e m a n d s f o r f r e e d o m a n d d e m o c r a c y ( a n d solidarity a n d . . .) were also m i s p e r c e i v e d b y W e s t e r n c o m m e n t a t o r s w h o saw in t h e m c o n f i r m a t i o n that t h e p e o p l e o f the East also want what t h e p e o p l e in the W e s t already have: they automatically translated these demands freedom

into the Western liberal-democratic notion o f

(multiparty representational

political g a m e

cum g l o b a l

market

economy). Emblematic Rather,

to the point

the American

o f caricature

news r e p o r t e r ,

h e r e was t h e figure

on Tiananmen

Square

o f Dan in 1 9 8 9 ,

s t a n d i n g i n f r o n t o f a c o p y o f t h e S t a t u e o f L i b e r t y a n d c l a i m i n g that this s t a t u e says e v e r y t h i n g a b o u t w h a t t h e p r o t e s t i n g s t u d e n t s w e r e (in

short,

if you scratch

t h e yellow skin

demanding

o f a Chinese, you

find

an

A m e r i c a n ) . W h a t t h i s s t a t u e a c t u a l l y s t o o d f o r was a Utopian l o n g i n g t h a t h a d n o t h i n g to d o with t h e real U S A ( i n c i d e n t a l l y , it was t h e s a m e with the original immigrants

to America, for whom

t h e view o f t h e

statue

s t o o d f o r a Utopian l o n g i n g t h a t was s o o n c r u s h e d ) . T h e p e r c e p t i o n o f the A m e r i c a n m e d i a thus offered a n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f t h e reinscription o f t h e e x p l o s i o n o f w h a t , as w e h a v e s e e n , E t i e n n e B a l i b a r c a l l s (the unconditional

demand

for freedom-equality

which

egaliberte

explodes any

positive o r d e r ) within t h e c o n f i n e s o f a given o r d e r . Are we, then, c o n d e m n e d between

a knave

contours

o f this

fundamental

to the debilitating alternative o f choosing

a n d a f o o l , o r is t h e r e tertium

datur

a tertium

can be discerned

datur?

Perhaps

via r e f e r e n c e

the

to the

E u r o p e a n l e g a c y . W h e n o n e says ' E u r o p e a n l e g a c y ' , e v e r y

s e l f - r e s p e c t i n g leftist i n t e l l e c t u a l h a s t h e s a m e r e a c t i o n as J o s e p h G o e b b e l s h a d t o c u l t u r e as s u c h : h e r e a c h e s f o r h i s g u n a n d s t a r t s t o f i r e a c c u s a t i o n s o f proto-Fascist E u r o c e n t r i s t cultural i m p e r i a l i s m . . . . Is it possible, how­ e v e r , t o i m a g i n e a leftist a p p r o p r i a t i o n o f t h e E u r o p e a n p o l i t i c a l t r a d i t i o n ? Y e s , i f w e f o l l o w R a n c i e r e a n d i d e n t i f y as t h e c o r e o f t h i s t r a d i t i o n t h e u n i q u e g e s t u r e o f d e m o c r a t i c 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 : it w a s t h i s p o l i t i c i z a t i o n p r o p e r w h i c h r e - e m e r g e d violently in t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n S o c i a l i s m . F r o m m y own political past, I r e m e m b e r h o w , after f o u r j o u r n a l i s t s w e r e a r r e s t e d a n d b r o u g h t t o trial b y t h e Y u g o s l a v A r m y in Slovenia in 1 9 8 8 , I participated in the ' C o m m i t t e e f o r t h e protection

THE

208 of the

human

rights

TICKLISH

o f the four

SUBJECT

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 possible -

such

arrests would

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

existing Socialist regime. O u r

demand

no

longer

be

the abolition o f the

'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 manipulating

Committee, who were

behaving

'non-democratically'

and

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

global

starts

to function

as t h e

metaphoric

condensation

o f the

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

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 ' ,

o f society, in w h i c h

h a s its s p e c i f i c s t a t u s

every

( 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 providing

so o n -

for

the preferential treatment which should compensate for

o r racial injury?, a n d

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 proper

s o c i a l life as ' n o n - s u b s t a n t i a l '

the

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, 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

3 8

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 practice o f excluding the threatening

O t h e r ( s ) : F r a n c e for the

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 ' 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 ) ; h a n d , t h e r e is p o s t m o d e r n

multiculturalist

3 3

on the other

'identity polities', aiming

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 , into endless subgroups

at

divided

( 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 and

fluid,

shifting

identities, e a c h

insisting o n

the

right

hybrid

to assert

its

THE

210

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

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 '

can

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 ;

the

it o f t e n

depends

merely on

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

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 ,

p a s s i o n o f a c c e p t i n g t h e struggle,

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

p s e u d o - E v e n t o f t h e Nazi r e v o l u t i o n for t h e E v e n t itself. T o d a y , m o r e t h a n e v e r , o n e h a s t o i n s i s t t h a t t h e o n l y way o p e n t o t h e e m e r g e n c e o f a n E v e n t is t h a t o f b r e a k i n g t h e v i c i o u s c y c l e o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n - w i t h - p a r t i c u l a r i zation

by

(re)asserting the d i m e n s i o n

o f U n i v e r s a l i t y against

capitalist

globalization. B a d i o u draws an interesting parallel h e r e b e t w e e n o u r t i m e of American

global

domination

and

the

late R o m a n

E m p i r e , also

a

' m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t ' g l o b a l S t a t e i n w h i c h m u l t i p l e e t h n i c g r o u p s w e r e thriv­ ing, u n i t e d ( n o t by c a p i t a l , b u t ) by t h e n o n - s u b s t a n t i a l l i n k o f t h e R o m a n l e g a l o r d e r - s o w h a t w e n e e d t o d a y is t h e g e s t u r e t h a t w o u l d capitalist globalization from

the standpoint

undermine

o f u n i v e r s a l T r u t h , j u s t as

P a u l i n e Christianity did to t h e R o m a n g l o b a l E m p i r e . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , a r e n e w e d L e f t s h o u l d a i m a t fully e n d o r s i n g

Kierke­

gaard's p a r a d o x i c a l claim that, with regard to t h e tension b e t w e e n d i t i o n a n d m o d e r n i t y , Christianity

is on the side of modernity.

tra­

In his assertion

that authentic Faith c a n e m e r g e only w h e n o n e leaves p a g a n 'organicist' h u m a n i s m b e h i n d , K i e r k e g a a r d p r o m u l g a t e s a t h o r o u g h g o i n g reversal in the relationship between Inside and Outside

( i n n e r faith a n d

i n s t i t u t i o n ) . In his p a s s i o n a t e a n d v i o l e n t p o l e m i c s against

religious

Christendom',

h e d o e s n o t simply r e j e c t o b e d i e n c e to e x t e r n a l i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e l i g i o n o n b e h a l f o f a t r u e i n n e r f a i t h : K i e r k e g a a r d is w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h e s e two aspects (rituals o f the e x t e r n a l institution a n d a true i n n e r c o n v i c t i o n ) are s t r i c t l y c o d e p e n d e n t , t h a t t h e y f o r m t h e two s i d e s o f t h e ' m o d e r n a g e ' in w h i c h l i f e l e s s e x t e r n a l r i t u a l is s u p p l e m e n t e d b y t h e e m p t y s e n t i m e n t a l i s m o f the liberal religion o f inner conviction ('dogmas d o n ' t matter, what m a t t e r s is t h e a u t h e n t i c i n n e r r e l i g i o u s s e n t i m e n t ' ) . K i e r k e g a a r d ' s p o i n t is t h a t t r u e r e l i g i o n is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y m o r e ' i n n e r '

(it i n v o l v e s a n a c t o f

a b s o l u t e faith that c a n n o t e v e n b e e x t e r n a l i z e d i n t o the universal m e d i u m o f l a n g u a g e ) a n d m o r e e x t e r n a l ( w h e n I truly b e l i e v e , I a c c e p t that t h e s o u r c e o f m y f a i t h is n o t in m y s e l f ; t h a t , i n s o m e i n e x p l i c a b l e way, it c o m e s f r o m o u t s i d e , f r o m G o d H i m s e l f - i n H i s g r a c e , G o d a d d r e s s e d m e , it was n o t I w h o raised m y s e l f to H i m ) . I n o t h e r w o r d s , w e n o l o n g e r d w e l l i n t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n u n i v e r s e in w h i c h (ontologically)

lower elements spontaneously

move

and

tend

towards

t h e i r G o a l , t h e i m m o v a b l e G o o d : i n C h r i s t i a n i t y , it is G o d H i m s e l f w h o 'moves', who e m b o d i e s H i m s e l f in a t e m p o r a l / m o r t a l m a n . W h e n Kier­ k e g a a r d d e t e r m i n e s f a i t h as t h e p u r e i n t e r n a l i t y w h i c h

t h e b e l i e v e r is

u n a b l e t o s y m b o l i z e / s o c i a l i z e , t o s h a r e w i t h o t h e r s ( A b r a h a m is a b s o l u t e l y a l o n e in the face o f G o d ' s h o r r i b l e c o m m a n d t o s l a u g h t e r his son Isaac; h e is u n a b l e e v e n t o s h a r e h i s p a i n w i t h o t h e r s ) ; t h i s m e a n s t h a t w h a t , in h i s faith, is a b s o l u t e l y i n n e r , w h a t resists i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e s y m b o l i c m e d i a t i o n ,

THE

212

is t h e v e r y r a d i c a l externality

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

o f the religious Call: A b r a h a m

is u n a b l e

s h a r e G o d ' s h o r r i b l e i n j u n c t i o n w i t h o t h e r s p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as

to this

i n j u n c t i o n i n n o way e x p r e s s e s h i s ' i n n e r n a t u r e ' , b u t is e x p e r i e n c e d as a radically traumatic intrusion which attacks the subject from outside

and

w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t c a n n e v e r i n t e r n a l i z e , a s s u m e as ' h i s o w n ' , d i s c e r n a n y m e a n i n g i n it t o b e s h a r e d w i t h o t h e r s . T h e p o i n t is t h u s t h a t t h e s u b j e c t c a n n o t e x t e r n a l i z e G o d ' s i n j u n c t i o n precisely because he cannot W e can see now how Kierkegaard 'surmounts'

the ' m o d e r n

internalize age'

it.

oppo­

sition b e t w e e n e x t e r n a l lifeless ritual a n d p u r e i n n e r s e n t i m e n t a l c o n v i c ­ tion: n o t t h r o u g h a p s e u d o - H e g e l i a n synthesis, so that we re-establish an a u t h e n t i c s o c i a l life i n w h i c h ' e x t e r n a l ' s o c i a l r i t u a l s a r e a g a i n

permeated

with a u t h e n t i c i n n e r c o n v i c t i o n - t h a t is, i n w h i c h s u b j e c t s fully p a r t i c i p a t e i n o r g a n i c s o c i a l life ( t h e y o u n g H e g e l ' s v i s i o n o f t h e G r e e k

community

p r i o r to t h e s p l i t i n t o ' s u b j e c t i v e ' a n d ' o b j e c t i v e ' ) , b u t b y e n d o r s i n g

the

p a r a d o x o f a u t h e n t i c f a i t h in w h i c h r a d i c a l e x t e r n a l i t y c o i n c i d e s w i t h p u r e internality. Perhaps opposition

one

should

between

return

Socratic

here

to

the

reminiscence

well-known

and

Christian

Kierkegaardian repetition.

S o c r a t i c p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r i n c i p l e is t h e o n e o f r e m i n i s c e n c e : t h e

The Truth

a l r e a d y d w e l l s d e e p i n s i d e m e , a n d i n o r d e r t o d i s c o v e r it I h a v e o n l y t o l o o k d e e p i n t o m y soul, to g e t to ' k n o w m y s e l f . T h e C h r i s t i a n T r u t h , in c o n t r a s t , is t h e o n e o f R e v e l a t i o n , w h i c h is t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e o f r e m i ­ niscence: Truth

is n o t i n h e r e n t ,

i t is n o t

the

( r e ) d i s c o v e r y o f w h a t is

a l r e a d y i n m y s e l f , b u t a n E v e n t , s o m e t h i n g v i o l e n t l y imposed o n m e

from

t h e O u t s i d e t h r o u g h a t r a u m a t i c e n c o u n t e r t h a t shatters t h e very f o u n d a ­ tions o f my being. ( F o r that reason, the New Age Gnostic redefinition o f C h r i s t i a n i t y in t e r m s o f t h e p u r i f i c a t i o n is p r o f o u n d l y

S o u l ' s j o u r n e y o f i n n e r self-discovery

and

heretical, a n d should b e ruthlessly r e j e c t e d . )

A n d L a c a n , l i k e B a d i o u , o p t s f o r t h e C h r i s t i a n - K i e r k e g a a r d i a n view: i n c o n t r a s t t o m i s l e a d i n g first i m p r e s s i o n s , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t r e a t m e n t is, a t its most fundamental,

not t h e p a t h o f r e m e m b r a n c e , o f t h e r e t u r n t o

i n n e r r e p r e s s e d t r u t h , its b r i n g i n g t o l i g h t ; its c r u c i a l m o m e n t , 'traversing the fantasy', rather, designates the subject's (symbolic) his ( r e - ) c r e a t i o n ex nihilo, a j u m p

the

that o f rebirth,

t h r o u g h the 'zero-point' o f d e a t h drive

to t h e t h o r o u g h l y n e w s y m b o l i c c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f his b e i n g .

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

213

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 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

4 0

who elaborated the

levels o f universality w h i c h vaguely follow t h e L a c a n i a n

three

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 universality

of

the

the

intricate web o f global

relations);

the

fiction

that

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

regulates

'imagined

market

ideological

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 excess, setting in m o t i o n

permanent

insurrection

unconditional

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 serve

as

the

particular

fixed:

hegemonic

social role

the notion o f freedom

idea

(I a m

which

enables

us

poor

artisan,

but

a

to

and equality identify

can

with

our

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

later

the

incessant process o f social transformation

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

here

universal

'abstract'

the

social space. T h e

(potentially opposed

alternative

is: is

to c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t )

or

the '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

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 ducible: the excess o f abstract-negative-ideal destabilizing force,

u n i v e r s a l i t y , its

c a n n e v e r b e fully i n t e g r a t e d

whole o f a 'concrete universality'.

social

order)?

t h e t w o is i r r e ­

into the

unsetdingharmonious

41

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

i n v o l v e s its o w n

hegemonic

fiction

globalization through (or even

ideal)

of

the

market

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

THE

214

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

world o r d e r whose universal features o f m a r k e t , h u m a n rights a n d d e m o ­ cracy allow e a c h specific

'lifestyle'

to flourish

tension inevitably e m e r g e s b e t w e e n 'concrete

universality',

and

the

in its p a r t i c u l a r i t y . S o a

this p o s t m o d e r n ,

earlier

'concrete

post-nation-state,

universality'

of

the

nation-state. T h e s t o r y o f t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e n a t i o n - s t a t e is t h e s t o r y o f t h e ( o f t e n extremely violent)

'transubstantiation'

o f local c o m m u n i t i e s a n d

their

t r a d i t i o n s i n t o t h e m o d e r n n a t i o n qua ' i m a g i n e d c o m m u n i t y ' ; t h i s p r o c e s s involved

and/or

their

reinscription into the new e n c o m p a s s i n g 'invented tradition'. In

the

repression

o f authentic

other

words, 'national tradition'

local

is a s c r e e n t h a t c o n c e a l s not 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 b u t the true ethnic tradition W h a t c o m e s a f t e r is t h e

ways o f life

2

itself in its unbearable

factuality.*

(apparently) opposite 'postmodern'

process o f

r e t u r n i n g to m o r e local, s u b n a t i o n a l m o d e s o f identification;

however,

t h e s e n e w m o d e s o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a r e n o l o n g e r e x p e r i e n c e d as d i r e c t l y substantial - they are already a m a t t e r o f the free c h o i c e o f o n e ' s s t y l e ' . N o n e t h e less, it is n o t e n o u g h t o o p p o s e t h e p r e v i o u s

'life­

authentic

e t h n i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n to t h e p o s t m o d e r n a r b i t r a r y c h o i c e o f ' l i f e s t y l e s ' : t h i s o p p o s i t i o n fails to a c k n o w l e d g e t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h a t v e r y

previous

'authentic'

imposed

national

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was a n

'artificial', violently

p h e n o m e n o n , based on the repression o f previous local traditions. F a r f r o m b e i n g a ' n a t u r a l ' u n i t y o f s o c i a l life, a b a l a n c e d f r a m e , a k i n d o f A r i s t o t e l i a n entelechia t o w a r d s w h i c h all p r e v i o u s d e v e l o p m e n t a d v a n c e d , the

universal

form

o f nation-state

is, r a t h e r ,

a precarious,

temporary

b a l a n c e b e t w e e n the r e l a t i o n s h i p to a p a r t i c u l a r e t h n i c T h i n g (patriotism, pro p atria mori, e t c . ) a n d t h e ( p o t e n t i a l l y ) u n i v e r s a l f u n c t i o n o f t h e m a r k e t . On

the

one

identification

hand, into

the

nation-state

universal

'sublates'

'patriotic'

organic

local

identification; on

the

forms

of

other,

it

p o s i t s i t s e l f as a k i n d o f p s e u d o - n a t u r a l b o u n d a r y o f t h e m a r k e t e c o n o m y , d e l i m i t i n g ' i n t e r n a l ' f r o m ' e x t e r n a l ' c o m m e r c e - e c o n o m i c activity is t h u s 'sublimated',

r a i s e d to t h e l e v e l o f t h e e t h n i c T h i n g , l e g i t i m a t e d as a

p a t r i o t i c c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e n a t i o n ' s g r e a t n e s s . T h i s b a l a n c e is c o n s t a n t l y t h r e a t e n e d from b o t h sides: f r o m the side o f previous ' o r g a n i c ' forms o f particular identification which do not simply disappear but continue their s u b t e r r a n e a n life o u t s i d e t h e u n i v e r s a l p u b l i c s p h e r e ; a n d f r o m t h e s i d e o f t h e i m m a n e n t l o g i c o f C a p i t a l , w h o s e ' t r a n s n a t i o n a l ' n a t u r e is i n h e r ­ ently i n d i f f e r e n t to nation-state b o u n d a r i e s . A n d today's n e w

'fundamen­

talist' e t h n i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s involve a k i n d o f ' d e s u b l i m a t i o n ' , a p r o c e s s o f d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h i s p r e c a r i o u s u n i t y o f t h e ' n a t i o n a l e c o n o m y ' i n t o its

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

215

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 ­ 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

4 3

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

' 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 ' 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 . ) .

of

com­

4 4

Multiculturalism H o w , t h e n , d o e s the universe o f Capital r e l a t e to t h e f o r m o f nation-state i n o u r e r a o f g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m ? P e r h a p s t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p is b e s t d e s i g n a t e d as ' a u t o c o l o n i z a t i o n ' : with t h e d i r e c t m u l t i n a t i o n a l f u n c t i o n i n g o f C a p i t a l , we are n o l o n g e r d e a l i n g with the s t a n d a r d o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n m e t r o p o l i s a n d c o l o n i z e d c o u n t r i e s ; a g l o b a l c o m p a n y , as it w e r e , c u t s its u m b i l i c a l c o r d w i t h its m o t h e r - n a t i o n

and

t r e a t s its c o u n t r y o f o r i g i n

as s i m p l y

a n o t h e r t e r r i t o r y t o b e c o l o n i z e d . T h i s is w h a t is s o d i s t u r b i n g t o p a t r i o t i ­ cally o r i e n t a t e d right-wing populists, f r o m L e P e n to B u c h a n a n : t h e fact that the new multinationals have exactly the s a m e attitude towards

the

F r e n c h o r A m e r i c a n l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n as t o w a r d s t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f M e x ­ i c o , B r a z i l o r T a i w a n . Is t h e r e n o t 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

self-

r e f e r e n t i a l t u r n o f t o d a y ' s g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m , w h i c h f u n c t i o n s as a k i n d o f '

' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' , a f t e r n a t i o n a l c a p i t a l i s m a n d its i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t / c o l o n i a l i s t p h a s e ? At t h e b e g i n n i n g ( i d e a l l y , o f c o u r s e ) , t h e r e is c a p i t a l i s m within t h e c o n f i n e s o f a nation-state, a n d with t h e a c c o m p a n y i n g inter­ n a t i o n a l t r a d e ( e x c h a n g e b e t w e e n s o v e r e i g n n a t i o n - s t a t e s ) ; w h a t f o l l o w s is t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f c o l o n i z a t i o n , in w h i c h the c o l o n i z i n g c o u n t r y subordi­ nates

and

exploits

( e c o n o m i c a l l y , politically, culturally)

the

colonized

c o u n t r y ; t h e final m o m e n t o f t h i s p r o c e s s is t h e p a r a d o x o f c o l o n i z a t i o n , in w h i c h t h e r e a r e o n l y c o l o n i e s , n o c o l o n i z i n g c o u n t r i e s - t h e c o l o n i z i n g

THE

216

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 nations 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

particular

respect

culture.

In

for

local

other

cultures

words,

without

roots

multiculturalism

in

is

one's

a

own

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 t h e O t h e r t h e particular

to

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 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

of

universality

(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

p o l i t i c s as t h e

field

o f the

post-Marxist anti-essentialist n o t i o n

of

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

the s m o o t h circulation o f Capital - the m o m e n t some political interven­ tion

poses

a serious

threat

to

that,

an

elaborate

set o f

exclusionary

that the

multicultur-

m e a s u r e s q u a s h e s it. W h a t about the rather obvious counter-argument alist's

neutrality

is f a l s e ,

since

his

or

her

position

silently

privileges

E u r o c e n t r i s t c o n t e n t ? T h i s l i n e o f r e a s o n i n g is r i g h t , b u t f o r t h e

wrong

r e a s o n . T h e p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r a l b a c k g r o u n d o r r o o t s w h i c h always s u p p o r t t h e u n i v e r s a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t p o s i t i o n a r e n o t its ' t r u t h ' , h i d d e n

beneath

t h e m a s k o f u n i v e r s a l i t y ( ' m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t u n i v e r s a l i s m is r e a l l y E u r o c e n t r ­ ist. . . ' ) but, phantasmic

rather,

the opposite:

screen which

the

stain

o f particular

c o n c e a l s the fact that

r o o t s is

t h e s u b j e c t is

the

already

t h o r o u g h l y ' r o o t l e s s ' , t h a t h i s t r u e p o s i t i o n is t h e v o i d o f u n i v e r s a l i t y . L e t m e r e c a l l D a r i a n L e a d e r ' s e x a m p l e o f t h e m a n in a r e s t a u r a n t with his f e m a l e c o m p a n i o n , w h o , w h e n a s k i n g t h e w a i t e r f o r a t a b l e , says: ' B e d ­ r o o m for two, p l e a s e ! ' i n s t e a d o f ' T a b l e for two, please!'. O n e reverse the

standard Freudian

explanation

should

( ' O f c o u r s e , his m i n d

was

already o n the n i g h t o f s e x h e p l a n n e d after t h e m e a l ! ' ) : this i n t e r v e n t i o n o f the subterranean

s e x u a l f a n t a s y is, r a t h e r , t h e s c r e e n w h i c h s e r v e s as

t h e d e f e n c e against t h e o r a l drive w h i c h actually m a t t e r s to h i m than sex.

I n h i s a n a l y s i s o f t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n o f 1 8 4 8 ( i n The Class in France),

Marx provides a similar e x a m p l e o f such a double

the Party o f O r d e r which ported

more

4 5

Struggles

deception:

t o o k over after the R e v o l u t i o n publicly

t h e R e p u b l i c , y e t s e c r e d y it b e l i e v e d i n R e s t o r a t i o n -

sup­

members

used every o p p o r t u n i t y to m o c k R e p u b l i c a n rituals a n d to signal in every p o s s i b l e way w h e r e ' t h e i r h e a r t w a s ' . T h e p a r a d o x , h o w e v e r , was t h a t t h e t r u t h o f t h e i r activity l a y i n t h e e x t e r n a l f o r m t h e y p r i v a t e l y m o c k e d

and

d e s p i s e d : t h i s R e p u b l i c a n f o r m was n o t a m e r e s e m b l a n c e b e n e a t h w h i c h t h e R o y a l i s t d e s i r e l u r k e d - r a t h e r , it was t h e s e c r e t c l i n g i n g t o R o y a l i s m w h i c h e n a b l e d t h e m t o fulfil t h e i r a c t u a l h i s t o r i c a l f u n c t i o n : t o i m p l e m e n t b o u r g e o i s R e p u b l i c a n law a n d o r d e r . M a r x h i m s e l f m e n t i o n s h o w

mem­

b e r s o f the Party o f O r d e r derived i m m e n s e pleasure from their o c c a s i o n a l R o y a l i s t 'slips o f t h e t o n g u e ' a g a i n s t t h e R e p u b l i c ( r e f e r r i n g t o F r a n c e as a K i r g d o m i n t h e i r p a r l i a m e n t a r y d e b a t e s , e t c . ) : t h e s e slips o f t h e

tongue

a r t i c u l a t e d t h e i r p h a n t a s m i c i l l u s i o n s w h i c h s e r v e d as t h e s c r e e n e n a b l i n g t h e m t o b l i n d t h e m s e l v e s t o t h e s o c i a l r e a l i t y o f w h a t was g o i n g o n on the surface. And,

mutatis

mutandis,

clings to s o m e p a r t i c u l a r

the s a m e g o e s for today's capitalist, w h o cultural

heritage, identifying

i t as t h e

still

secret

s o u r c e o f his s u c c e s s ( J a p a n e s e e x e c u t i v e s f o l l o w i n g t e a c e r e m o n i e s

or

THE TICKLISH

218

SUBJECT

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

( 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 ghost.

The

conclusion

multiculturalism

to b e

drawn

is t h u s

that

the

(particular living)

the

problematic

of

(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 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

unrestrained

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 of postmodern

'cultural criticism', the very m e n t i o n

form

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 struggleproper

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

marginal identities and the tolerance o f differences. The

falsity

o f elitist multiculturalist

between content and ideological

4 6

liberalism

lies

in

the

form which already characterized the

project o f tolerant

universalism,

that

tension

first

o f Freemasonry:

great 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 )

organization

clearly c l a s h e s with

its f o r m

o f expression

and

( 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

l i m i t a t i o n s o f its e t h n i c i d e n t i t y ( ' c i t i z e n o f t h e w o r l d ' w i t h o u t a n c h o r s i n any particular ethnic c o m m u n i t y ) functions, narrow

elidst

upper-middle-class

circle

within

its own society, as a

clearly opposing

itself

to the

m a j o r i t y o f c o m m o n p e o p l e , d e s p i s e d f o r b e i n g c a u g h t in t h e i r

narrow

e t h n i c o r c o m m u n i t y confines. N o w o n d e r liberal multiculturalist toler­ a n c e is c a u g h t in t h e v i c i o u s c y c l e o f s i m u l t a n e o u s l y c o n c e d i n g too much a n d not enough

to the particularity o f the O t h e r ' s culture:

• 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 jouissance,

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

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 ) . • O n the o t h e r hand, the tolerant multiculturalist liberal sometimes t o l e r a t e s e v e n t h e m o s t b r u t a l v i o l a t i o n s o f h u m a n r i g h t s , o r is at l e a s t r e l u c t a n t to c o n d e m n

t h e m , afraid o f b e i n g a c c u s e d o f i m p o s i n g

one's

own values o n to t h e O t h e r . F r o m m y own youth, I recall Maoist students preaching

and

practising

the

'sexual

revolution';

when

they

were

r e m i n d e d that t h e C h i n a o f t h e Maoist Cultural R e v o l u t i o n involved an e x t r e m e l y 'repressive' attitude towards sexuality, they were quick to answer t h a t s e x u a l i t y plays a t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t r o l e in t h e i r l i f e - w o r l d , s o w e s h o u l d n o t i m p o s e o n t h e m o u r s t a n d a r d s o f w h a t is ' r e p r e s s i v e ' - t h e i r a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s s e x u a l i t y a p p e a r s ' r e p r e s s i v e ' o n l y by o u r W e s t e r n s t a n d a r d s . . . . D o we n o t e n c o u n t e r t h e s a m e stance today w h e n multiculturalists warn us n o t t o i m p o s e o u r E u r o c e n t r i s t n o t i o n o f u n i v e r s a l h u m a n righLs o n t o t h e O t h v r ? F u r t h e r m o r e , is n o t t h i s k i n d o f f a l s e ' t o l e r a n c e ' o f t e n e v o k e d b y s p o k e s m e n f o r m u l t i n a t i o n a l C a p i t a l itself, i n o r d e r t o l e g i t i m i z e t h e f a c t t h a t ' b u s i n e s s c o m e s first'? 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:

s p e c i f i c c u l t u r a l jouissance

i f t h e first a t t i t u d e is u n a b l e

to perceive the

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

THE TICKLISH

220

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 against

them

-

in

such

cases, r e f e r e n c e

to

the

'Western'

revolt

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 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 which

has

prevented

it f r o m

fully

'becoming

itself

-

two

antagonism

and

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

the

only

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 character

of each

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 identity?

I t is e a s y t o

praise

the

hybridity

'hybrid' 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

the

upper-middle-class

a c a d e m i c , always w i t h

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

matic pulverized existence explodes the paranoiac 'proto-Fascist' protec­ tive s h i e l d

of

fixed

identity:

what

is, f o r

the

concerned

subject,

an

e x p e r i e n c e o f the u t m o s t suffering a n d despair, the stigma o f exclusion, o f b e i n g u n a b l e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e affairs o f h i s c o m m u n i t y , is -

from

t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f t h e e x t e r n a l a n d w e l l , ' n o r m a l ' , a n d fully a d a p t e d postmodern

theoretician -

c e l e b r a t e d as t h e u l t i m a t e

assertion o f the

subversive desiring m a c h i n e . . . .

F o r a Leftist Suspension o f the Law 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

H e g e l i a n infinite judgement,

assumes

the

form

of

the

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)

populism).'

4 7

is B u c h a n a n

(the

lowest p o i n t

o f American

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

rightist

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

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 paranoiac,

48

inherently

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. P a r a d o x i c a l l y , t o d a y ' s t r u e c o n s e r v a t i v e s a r e , r a t h e r , leftist ' c r i t i c a l t h e ­ orists' w h o reject b o t h liberal multiculturalism a n d fundamentalist

popul­

ism - w h o clearly p e r c e i v e t h e c o m p l i c i t y b e t w e e n g l o b a l capitalism a n d ethnic

fundamentalism.

They

point

towards

a

third

domain,

which

b e l o n g s n e i t h e r to the global m a r k e t society n o r to the new forms o f ethnic fundamentalism:

t h e d o m a i n o f t h e political,

the public space o f

civil s o c i e t y , o f a c t i v e r e s p o n s i b l e c i t i z e n s h i p ( t h e fight f o r h u m a n r i g h t s ,

THE

222

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 attempt

appearance,

to k e e p o p e n

Although

resistance to 'instrumental

the space o f the political) s e e m

t h e last a p p r o a c h

is b a s e d

complicity between multiculturalism c r u c i a l q u e s t i o n : how are we to reinvent of globalization?

on

an

accurate

reason';

insight into

and fundamentalism, the political

the

inappropriate. the

it a v o i d s

space in today's

the

conditions

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 for the g o o d o f the N a t i o n .

4 9

m e n t i o n two films, Under Fire a n d Watch on the Rhine. during the Nicaraguan

self-sacrifice

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

revolution, when

to

T h e first t a k e s p l a c e

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

agony o f prolonged

bloodshed.

Professional

and

shorten

ethics, o f course,

the

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 on the Rhine, more

a c u t e : in

emigrants

Watch

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 the

involved

late in

the

1930s,

a fugitive

anti-Nazi

family o f G e r m a n

struggle

comes

political

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 distant

relatives, an

idyllic a i l - A m e r i c a n small-town middle-class

223 family;

soon, however, the G e r m a n s face an u n e x p e c t e d threat in the f o r m o f an acquaintance

o f the

American

family,

a Rightist who

blackmails

the

e m i g r a n t s a n d , t h r o u g h his c o n t a c t s with t h e G e r m a n E m b a s s y , e n d a n g e r s members

o f the

Underground

in

Germany

itself. T h e

father

of

the

e m i g r a n t family d e c i d e s to kill h i m , a n d t h e r e b y puts t h e A m e r i c a n family in a difficult m o r a l d i l e m m a : t h e i r e m p t y m o r a l i z i n g solidarity with v i c t i m s o f N a z i s m is o v e r ; n o w t h e y a c t u a l l y h a v e t o t a k e s i d e s a n d

the dirty

t h e i r h a n d s with c o v e r i n g u p t h e killing. . . . H e r e also, the family d e c i d e s o n t h e ' l e f t i s t ' o p t i o n . ' L e f t ' is d e f i n e d b y t h i s r e a d i n e s s t o s u s p e n d abstract m o r a l frame - or, to p a r a p h r a s e k i n d of political

suspension

the

K i e r k e g a a r d , to a c c o m p l i s h a

of the Ethical/'"

T h e l e s s o n o f all t h i s , w h i c h g a i n e d a c t u a l i t y a p r o p o s o f t h e W e s t e r n r e a c t i o n t o t h e B o s n i a n w a r , is t h u s t h a t t h e r e is n o w a y t o a v o i d

being

partial, since the n e u t r a l s t a n c e itself involves taking sides (in t h e c a s e o f t h e B o s n i a n war, t h e ' b a l a n c e d ' t a l k a b o u t B a l k a n e t h n i c ' t r i b a l w a r f a r e ' already endorses the Serbian standpoint): humanitarian

liberal equidis­

t a n c e c a n e a s i l y s l i p i n t o o r c o i n c i d e w i t h its o p p o s i t e a n d in e f f e c t t o l e r a t e the m o s t violent ' e t h n i c c l e a n s i n g ' . In short, the Leftist d o e s n o t simply v i o l a t e t h e L i b e r a l ' s i m p a r t i a l n e u t r a l i t y ; w h a t h e c l a i m s is t h a t there is no such neutrality:

t h a t t h e L i b e r a l ' s i m p a r t i a l i t y is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y b i a s e d . T h e

c l i c h e o f t h e l i b e r a l C e n t r e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t b o t h s u s p e n s i o n s , t h e r i g h t i s t a n d t h e leftist, u l t i m a t e l y a m o u n t t o t h e s a m e : t o a t o t a l i t a r i a n t h r e a t t h e r u l e o f law. T h e e n t i r e c o n s i s t e n c y o f t h e L e f t h i n g e s o n p r o v i n g o n t h e c o n t r a r y , e a c h o f t h e two s u s p e n s i o n s f o l l o w s a d i f f e r e n t While

the

R i g h t l e g i t i m i z e s its s u s p e n s i o n

universalist stance -

o f the

logic.

E t h i c a l b y its

t h a t is, b y a r e f e r e n c e t o its p a r t i c u l a r

to

that, anti-

(religious,

patriotic) identity which overrules any universal m o r a l o r legal standards - t h e L e f t l e g i t i m i z e s its s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e E t h i c a l p r e c i s e l y b y m e a n s o f a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e t r u e U n i v e r s a l i t y t o c o m e . O r - t o p u t it a n o t h e r w a y

-

the Left simultaneously accepts the antagonistic c h a r a c t e r o f society (there is n o n e u t r a l

p o s i t i o n , s t r u g g l e is c o n s t i t u t i v e ) and r e m a i n s

univcrsalist

( s p e a k i n g o n b e h a l f o f u n i v e r s a l e m a n c i p a t i o n ) : i n t h e leftist p e r s p e c t i v e , a c c e p t i n g t h e r a d i c a l l y a n t a g o n i s t i c - t h a t is, political life,

accepting

effectively

the

necessity o f 'taking

- character o f social

s i d e s ' , is t h e

o n l y way

to

be

universal.

H o w a r e we to c o m p r e h e n d this p a r a d o x ? It c a n b e c o n c e i v e d o n l y i f the antagonism,

is inherent

split i n t o

'false'

division

the

o f the

to universality

itself

c o n c r e t e universality

W h o l e into

functional

t h a t is, i f u n i v e r s a l i t y i t s e l f is that

parts,

legitimizes the and

the

existing

impossible/real

THE

224 demand

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

o f ' a b s t r a c t ' u n i v e r s a l i t y ( B a l i b a r ' s egaliberte

p o l i t i c a l g e s t u r e par excellence

again). T h e

leftist

(in contrast to the rightist slogan 'to e a c h

h i s o r h e r o w n p l a c e ' ) is t h u s t o q u e s t i o n t h e c o n c r e t e e x i s t i n g u n i v e r s a l o r d e r o n b e h a l f o f its s y m p t o m , o f t h e p a r t w h i c h , a l t h o u g h i n h e r e n t t o t h e e x i s t i n g u n i v e r s a l o r d e r , h a s n o ' p r o p e r p l a c e ' w i t h i n it (say, i l l e g a l immigrants o r the h o m e l e s s in o u r societies). T h i s p r o c e d u r e o f

identifying

with the symptom is t h e e x a c t a n d n e c e s s a r y o b v e r s e o f t h e s t a n d a r d c r i t i c o ideological move o f recognizing a particular content b e h i n d some abstract u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n , t h a t is, o f d e n o u n c i n g n e u t r a l u n i v e r s a l i t y as f a l s e ( ' t h e " m a n " o f h u m a n r i g h t s is a c t u a l l y t h e w h i t e m a l e p r o p e r t y - o w n e r . . . ' ) : o n e p a t h e t i c a l l y a s s e r t s ( a n d i d e n t i f i e s w i t h ) the point exclusion,

the 'abject', of the concrete

positive

order,

of inherent

exception/

as the only point

of true

universality. I t is e a s y t o s h o w t h a t , say, t h e s u b d i v i s i o n o f t h e p e o p l e w h o live i n a c o u n t r y i n t o 'full' citizens a n d t e m p o r a r y i m m i g r a n t workers

privileges

'full' citizens a n d e x c l u d e s i m m i g r a n t s f r o m t h e p u b l i c s p a c e p r o p e r ( j u s t as m a n a n d w o m a n a r e n o t two s p e c i e s o f a n e u t r a l u n i v e r s a l g e n u s o f h u m a n i t y , s i n c e t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e g e n u s as s u c h i n v o l v e s s o m e m o d e o f ' r e p r e s s i o n ' o f t h e f e m i n i n e ) ; m u c h m o r e p r o d u c t i v e , t h e o r e t i c a l l y as well as p o l i t i c a l l y ( s i n c e it o p e n s u p t h e w a y f o r t h e ' p r o g r e s s i v e ' s u b v e r t i n g o f h e g e m o n y ) , is t h e o p p o s i t e o p e r a t i o n

o f identifying

universality

with the

point of exclusion - i n o u r c a s e , o f s a y i n g ' w e a r e all i m m i g r a n t w o r k e r s ' . I n a h i e r a r c h i c a l l y s t r u c t u r e d society, t h e m e a s u r e o f true universality lies in t h e way p a r t s r e l a t e t o t h o s e ' a t t h e b o t t o m ' , e x c l u d e d b y a n d f r o m all others

( i n e x - Y u g o s l a v i a , f o r e x a m p l e , u n i v e r s a l i t y was r e p r e s e n t e d

by

A l b a n i a n a n d B o s n i a n M u s l i m s , l o o k e d d o w n o n b y all o t h e r n a t i o n s ) . The

recent pathetic statement

o f s o l i d a r i t y ' S a r a j e v o is t h e c a p i t a l o f

E u r o p e ' was a l s o a n e x e m p l a r y c a s e o f s u c h a n o t i o n o f e x c e p t i o n as e m b o d y i n g u n i v e r s a l i t y : t h e way e n l i g h t e n e d l i b e r a l E u r o p e r e l a t e d

to

S a r a j e v o b o r e w i t n e s s t o t h e way it r e l a t e d t o itself, t o its u n i v e r s a l n o t i o n . T h e e x a m p l e s w e h a v e e v o k e d m a k e i t c l e a r t h a t leftist u n i v e r s a l i s m p r o p e r d o e s n o t involve any kind o f r e t u r n to s o m e neutral content

(a c o m m o n

notion

o f humanity,

etc.);

rather,

universal

it r e f e r s

to

a

universal w h i c h c o m e s to exist ( w h i c h b e c o m e s ' f o r i t s e l f , to p u t it in H e g e l e s e ) o n l y i n a p a r t i c u l a r e l e m e n t w h i c h is s t r u c t u r a l l y d i s p l a c e d , ' o u t o f j o i n t ' : w i t h i n a g i v e n s o c i a l W h o l e , it is p r e c i s e l y t h e e l e m e n t w h i c h is p r e v e n t e d f r o m a c t u a l i z i n g its full p a r t i c u l a r i d e n t i t y t h a t s t a n d s f o r its u n i v e r s a l d i m e n s i o n . T h e G r e e k demos s t o o d f o r u n i v e r s a l i t y n o t b e c a u s e it c o v e r e d t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n ,

n o r b e c a u s e it o c c u p i e d

l o w e s t p l a c e w i t h i n t h e s o c i a l h i e r a r c h y , b u t b e c a u s e it had no proper

the place

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 within this hierarchy, tions

-

or,

to put

contradictions

b u t was a s i t e o f c o n f l i c t i n g , s e l f - c a n c e l l i n g d e t e r m i n a ­ it in

contemporary

(they were

addressed

terms,

a

site

as e q u a l s

-

participating

of

performative

c o m m u n i t y o f logos - i n o r d e r t o b e i n f o r m e d t h a t tiiey w e r e from

225

this c o m m u n i t y . . . ) . T o t a k e M a r x ' s c l a s s i c e x a m p l e ,

in

the

excluded

'proletariat'

s t a n d s f o r u n i v e r s a l h u m a n i t y n o t b e c a u s e it is t h e l o w e s t , m o s t e x p l o i t e d c l a s s , b u t b e c a u s e its v e r y e x i s t e n c e is a ' l i v i n g c o n t r a d i c t i o n ' - t h a t is, it gives b o d y t o t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i m b a l a n c e a n d i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f t h e c a p i t a l ­ ist s o c i a l W h o l e . W e c a n s e e , n o w , i n w h a t p r e c i s e way t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e U n i v e r s a l is o p p o s e d

to g l o b a l i s m : t h e universal d i m e n s i o n

'shines

t h r o u g h ' the s y m p t o m a t i c d i s p l a c e d e l e m e n t w h i c h b e l o n g s to t h e W h o l e w i t h o u t b e i n g p r o p e r l y its p a r t . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , c r i t i c i s m o f t h e p o s s i b l e ideological

functioning

o f the

notion

o f hybridity

advocate the return to substantial identities a s s e r t hybridity as the site of the

should

in

no

way

t h e p o i n t is p r e c i s e l y t o

Universal.^

I n s o f a r as n o r m a t i v e h e t e r o s e x u a l i t y s t a n d s f o r t h e g l o b a l O r d e r w i t h i n w h i c h e a c h s e x is a s s i g n e d its p r o p e r p l a c e , q u e e r d e m a n d s a r e n o t s i m p l y demands

t h a t t h e i r s e x u a l p r a c t i c e a n d l i f e s t y l e b e r e c o g n i z e d in

their

specificity, a l o n g s i d e o t h e r p r a c t i c e s , b u t s o m e t h i n g that unsettles t h e very g l o b a l o r d e r a n d its e x c l u s i o n a r y h i e r a r c h i c a l l o g i c ; p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , as ' o u t o f j o i n t ' with r e g a r d

to the

existing order,

queers stand

for

the

d i m e n s i o n o f U n i v e r s a l i t y ( o r , r a t h e r , can s t a n d f o r it, s i n c e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n is n e v e r d i r e c t l y i n s c r i b e d i n t o o n e ' s o b j e c t i v e s o c i a l p o s i t i o n , b u t i n v o l v e s the gesture o f subjectivization). J u d i t h B u t l e r

5 2

develops a powerful

m e n t against the abstract a n d politically regressive opposition e c o n o m i c struggle

and

the

'merely cultural'

q u e e r struggle

argu­

between

for

recog­

nition: far from b e i n g ' m e r e l y cultural', the social f o r m o f sexual repro­ d u c t i o n i n h a b i t s t h e very c o r e o f t h e social r e l a t i o n s o f p r o d u c t i o n ;

that

is, t h e n u c l e a r h e t e r o s e x u a l f a m i l y is a k e y c o m p o n e n t a n d c o n d i t i o n o f t h e capitalist relations o f o w n e r s h i p , e x c h a n g e , a n d so o n ; for that reason, t h e way q u e e r

political practice questions

and

undermines

normative

heterosexuality poses a potential threat to the capitalist m o d e o f produc­ t i o n itself. . . . M y r e a c t i o n t o t h i s t h e s i s is t w o f o l d : I fully e n d o r s e

queer

p o l i t i c s i n s o f a r as it ' m e t a p h o r i c i z e s ' its s p e c i f i c s t r u g g l e as s o m e t h i n g t h a t - i f its o b j e c t i v e s w e r e t o b e r e a l i z e d - u n d e r m i n e s t h e v e r y p o t e n t i a l s o f capitalism. H o w e v e r , I t e n d to t h i n k that, in t h e c o u r s e o f t h e o n g o i n g transformation

into the

'post-political' tolerant multiculturalist

t o d a y ' s c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m is a b l e t o n e u t r a l i z e q u e e r d e m a n d s , them

to

regime, absorb

as a s p e c i f i c 'way o f l i f e ' . Is n o t t h e h i s t o r y o f c a p i t a l i s m a l o n g

history o f how the p r e d o m i n a n t

i d e o l o g i c o - p o l i t i c a l f r a m e w o r k was a b l e

THE

226

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

to a c c o m m o d a t e ( a n d soften t h e subversive e d g e o f ) t h e m o v e m e n t s

and

d e m a n d s t h a t s e e m e d t o t h r e a t e n its v e r y survival? F o r a l o n g t i m e , s e x u a l l i b e r t a r i a n s t h o u g h t t h a t m o n o g a m o u s s e x u a l r e p r e s s i o n was n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e survival o f c a p i t a l i s m -

now we know that capitalism c a n n o t

only

t o l e r a t e , b u t even actively i n c i t e a n d e x p l o i t , f o r m s o f ' p e r v e r s e ' sexuality, n o t to m e n t i o n p r o m i s c u o u s i n d u l g e n c e in s e x u a l p l e a s u r e s . W h a t i f t h e s a m e d e s t i n y awaits q u e e r d e m a n d s ? " ' ent sexual practices and

identities

3

T h e r e c e n t p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f differ­

(from sadomasochism

to bisexuality

a n d drag p e r f o r m a n c e s ) , far from posing a t h r e a t to the p r e s e n t r e g i m e of biopower

(to use

the

Foucauldian

t e r m s ) , is p r e c i s e l y t h e f o r m

of

s e x u a l i t y t h a t is g e n e r a t e d b y t h e p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n s o f g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m , which clearly favour the m o d e o f subjectivity c h a r a c t e r i z e d by multiple shifting identifications. T h e k e y c o m p o n e n t o f t h e ' l e f t i s t ' p o s i t i o n is t h u s t h e e q u a t i o n o f t h e a s s e r t i o n o f Universalism

w i t h a m i l i t a n t , divisive

position o f o n e

engaged

in a struggle: true universalists are n o t t h o s e w h o p r e a c h g l o b a l t o l e r a n c e o f differences and passionate

fight

a l l - e n c o m p a s s i n g unity, b u t t h o s e w h o e n g a g e in

for

the

assertion

o f the

Truth

that

enthuses

a

them.

T h e o r e t i c a l , religious and political e x a m p l e s a b o u n d here: from St Paul, whose unconditional Christian universalism (everyone can b e

redeemed,

s i n c e , in t h e eyes o f Christ, t h e r e a r e n o J e w s a n d G r e e k s , n o m e n w o m e n . . .) m a d e

him into a proto-Leninist militant fighting

and

different

' d e v i a t i o n s ' , t h r o u g h M a r x ( w h o s e n o t i o n o f c l a s s s t r u g g l e is t h e n e c e s s a r y obverse o f the universalism o f his theory w h i c h aims at the

'redemption'

o f the whole o f humanity) a n d F r e u d , u p to great political

figures

- say,

w h e n D e G a u l l e , a l m o s t a l o n e i n E n g l a n d i n 1 9 4 0 , l a u n c h e d his c a l l f o r r e s i s t a n c e t o G e r m a n o c c u p a t i o n , h e was a t t h e s a m e t i m e p r e s u m i n g speak on

b e h a l f o f t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f F r a n c e , a n d , for

this very

to

reason,

i n t r o d u c i n g a r a d i c a l split, a f i s s u r e , b e t w e e n t h o s e w h o f o l l o w e d h i m a n d those who preferred the collaborationist 'Egyptian fleshpots'. T o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s w o r d s , it is c r u c i a l h e r e n o t t o t r a n s l a t e t h e t e r m s o f this s t r u g g l e (set in m o t i o n b y t h e v i o l e n t a n d c o n t i n g e n t a s s e r t i o n o f t h e n e w u n i v e r s a l T r u t h ) i n t o t h e t e r m s o f t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g , w i t h its g r o u p s a n d s u b g r o u p s , c o n c e i v i n g it as t h e s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n two s o c i a l e n t i t i e s d e f i n e d b y a s e r i e s o f p o s i t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; t h a t was t h e ' m i s t a k e ' of

Stalinism, which

reduced

the

class s t r u g g l e

to a struggle

between

' c l a s s e s ' d e f i n e d as s o c i a l g r o u p s w i t h a s e t o f p o s i t i v e f e a t u r e s ( p l a c e in the m o d e o f p r o d u c t i o n , e t c . ) . F r o m a truly r a d i c a l M a r x i s t p e r s p e c t i v e , although

t h e r e is a l i n k b e t w e e n

'proletariat'

' w o r k i n g c l a s s ' as a s o c i a l g r o u p

as t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e m i l i t a n t

fighting

for universal

and

Truth,

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

227

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 uals a s s u m e towards

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 ­

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

true

Universal

deny or ignore (as o p p o s e d

to

it. I n the

H e g e l e s e , the existence o f the

false

'concrete'

encompassing global Order o f Being) santly

divisive s t r u g g l e ;

Universality o f the

all-

is t h a t o f a n e n d l e s s a n d i n c e s ­

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 TruthE 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

revisionist historians' a r g u m e n t a t i o n caust

was

already

foreshadowed

by

is at

this

point

that

the

a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h e Nazi H o l o ­ the

Leninist

liquidation

of

the

THE TICKLISH

228

SUBJECT

ex-ruling classes (in b o t h cases p e o p l e w e r e killed simply b e c a u s e o f what they were, n o t because o f their deeds) misses the point. F o r that reason, the a n t i - C o m m u n i s t revisionist historian's thesis a c c o r d ­ i n g t o w h i c h t h e N a z i H o l o c a u s t d i d n o t o n l y f o l l o w i n time t h e C o m m u ­ n i s t p u r g e s o f t h e e n e m i e s o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n i n t h e S o v i e t U n i o n , b u t was a l s o c a u s a l l y c o n d i t i o n e d b y t h e m ( c o n c e i v e d as a r e a c t i o n o r , r a t h e r , a preventive strike against t h e m ) misses t h e point. T h e revisionists are quite right

to

stress

that

the

Nazi

struggle

repetition/copy o f the Communist

against

the Jewish plot

class struggle -

was

h o w e v e r , far

a

from

e x c u l p a t i n g t h e N a z i s , t h i s f a c t b r i n g s h o m e all t h e m o r e t h e d i f f e r e n c e between Nazism and

Communism:

what

for the

C o m m u n i s t s was

the

a n t a g o n i s m t h a t dwells in t h e very k e r n e l o f t h e social e d i f i c e was, in Nazi ideology,

'naturalized'

into

the

biological property

o f a specific race

( t h e J e w s ) . S o i n s t e a d o f t h e n o t i o n o f s o c i e t y as d i v i d e d / t r a v e r s e d b y t h e class struggle, in w h i c h the

notion

e v e r y b o d y is c o m p e l l e d t o t a k e s i d e s , w e

o f s o c i e t y as a c o r p o r a t e

body

threatened

by an

get

external

e n e m y : t h e J e w as t h e f o r e i g n i n t r u d e r . C o n s e q u e n t l y , it is t o t a l l y m i s ­ guided

to c o n c e i v e t h e

Communist

revolutionary terror and

the

Nazi

H o l o c a u s t as t h e two m o d e s o f t h e s a m e t o t a l i t a r i a n v i o l e n c e ( i n t h e case

the

gap

between

Us

and

Them,

the

enemy,

and

the

first

enemy's

a n n i h i l a t i o n , w e r e j u s t i f i e d i n t e r m s o f c l a s s d i f f e r e n c e - it is l e g i t i m a t e t o destroy m e m b e r s o f t h e o p p o s i n g class - a n d in t h e s e c o n d , in t e r m s o f r a c i a l d i f f e r e n c e - it is l e g i t i m a t e t o kill J e w s ) : t h e t r u e h o r r o r o f N a z i s m lies i n t h e very way i t d i s p l a c e d / n a t u r a l i z e d s o c i a l a n t a g o n i s m i n t o r a c i a l difference, m a k i n g t h e J e w s guilty b e c a u s e o f the s i m p l e fact that

they

were Jews, i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f what they did, o f how they subjectivized their condition.

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 like

fiadiou's

thought,

profoundly

C h r i s t o l o g i c a l : is n o t

universel the

is,

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 i n g w i t h this r e m a i n d e r , b y imitatio

229

Christi, c a n a p e r s o n ' r e a c h e t e r n i t y '

a n d b e c o m e effectively universal. A n d p e r h a p s this C h r i s t o l o g i c a l refer­ e n c e also m a k e s p a l p a b l e a possible limitation o f the political efficiency o f the gesture o f 'identification with the s y m p t o m ' . Christianity's entire theological edifice relies o n such an e x c r e m e n t a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - o n t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with t h e p o o r

figure

o f the suffering

C h r i s t d y i n g i n p a i n b e t w e e n t h e two t h i e v e s . T h e a r t i f i c e b y m e a n s o f w h i c h C h r i s t i a n i t y b e c a m e t h e r u l i n g i d e o l o g y was t o c o m b i n e t h i s r a d i c a l e x c r e m e n t a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h full e n d o r s e m e n t o f t h e e x i s t i n g h i e r a r ­ chical social order: 'rich and poor, h o n e s t m e n a n d sinners, masters and s l a v e s , m e n a n d w o m e n , n e i g h b o u r s a n d f o r e i g n e r s , w e a r e all u n i t e d i n Christ'. Although

this e x c r e m e n t a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i m p o s e d

compassion

a n d merciful care for the p o o r (the 'do n o t forget that they are also G o d ' s c h i l d r e n ' m o d f ) b y r e m i n d i n g t h e r i c h a n d p o w e r f u l t h a t t h e i r p o s i t i o n is precarious

and

contingent,

it n o n e

the

less c o n f i r m e d

them

in

this

position, a n d even p r o c l a i m e d ever)' o p e n r e b e l l i o n against the existing p o w e r r e l a t i o n s a m o r t a l s i n . T h e p a t h e t i c a s s e r t i o n ' W e a r e all

[Jews,

B l a c k s , gays, r e s i d e n t s o f S a r a j e v o . . . ] ' c a n t h u s w o r k i n a n e x t r e m e l y a m b i g u o u s way: it c a n also i n d u c e a h a s t y c l a i m t h a t o u r o w n p r e d i c a m e n t is i n f a c t t h e s a m e as t h a t o f t h e t r u e v i c t i m s , t h a t is, a f a l s e m e t a p h o r i c univcrsalization o f the fate o f the e x c l u d e d . S o o n a f t e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f S o l z h e n i t s y n ' s Gulag t r i l o g y i n t h e W e s t , it b e c a m e f a s h i o n a b l e i n s o m e ' r a d i c a l ' leftist c i r c l e s t o e m p h a s i z e h o w ' o u r e n u r e c o n s u m e r i s t W e s t e r n s o c i e t y is a l s o o n e g i g a n t i c Gulag, i n w h i c h w e a r e i m p r i s o n e d b y t h e c h a i n s o f t h e r u l i n g i d e o l o g y - a n d o u r p o s i t i o n is e v e n w o r s e , s i n c e we a r e u n a w a r e o f o u r t r u e p r e d i c a m e n t ' . In a r e c e n t discussion about clitoridectomy, a 'radical' feminist pathetically claimed t h a t W e s t e r n w o m e n a r c i n a way a l s o t h o r o u g h l y c i r c u m c i s e d , h a v i n g to u n d e r g o stressful diets, r i g o r o u s b o d y t r a i n i n g a n d painful b r e a s t - o r face­ lifting o p e r a t i o n s in o r d e r to r e m a i n attractive t o m e n . . . . A l t h o u g h , o f c o u r s e , t h e r e is i n b o t h c a s e s , a n e l e m e n t o f t r u t h i n t h e c l a i m s m a d e , t h e r e is n o n e

t h e less s o m e t h i n g f u n d a m e n t a l l y

faked in the

pathetic

statement o f a radical upper-middle-class student that 'the Berkeley cam­ p u s is a l s o a g i g a n t i c Gulag.

Is i t n o t d e e p l y s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t t h e

best-

k n o w n e x a m p l e o f s u c h a p a t h e t i c identification with the o u t c a s t / v i c t i m is J . F . K e n n e d y ' s ' I c h b i n e i n B e r l i n e r ' f r o m 1 9 6 3 - a s t a t e m e n t w h i c h is definitely n o t w h a t R a n c i e r e h a d in m i n d

(and, incidentally, a statement

which, because o f a grammatical error, means, when

retranslated

into

English, 'I am a d o u g h n u t ' ) ? T h e way o u t o f t h i s p r e d i c a m e n t s e e m s e a s y e n o u g h : t h e m e a s u r e o f

THE TICKLISH

230 the

authenticity o f the pathetic

SUBJECT

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n l i e s i n its s o c i o p o l i t i c a l

e f f i c i e n c y . T o w h a t e f f e c t i v e m e a s u r e s d o e s it a m o u n t ? I n s h o r t , h o w d o e s t h i s p o l i t i c a l s t a n c e o f singulier

universel a f f e c t w h a t R a n c i e r e c a l l s t h e police

s t r u c t u r e ? Is t h e r e a l e g i t i m a t e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n two ' p o l i c e s ( o r d e r s o f b e i n g ) ' : t h e o n e w h i c h is ( o r t e n d s t o b e ) s e l f - c o n t a i n e d , a n d t h e

one

w h i c h is m o r e o p e n t o t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l d e m a n d s ? Is t h e r e s o m e t h i n g l i k e a

'police o f polities'? O f course, the

Kantian

answer ( s h a r e d even by B a d i o u ) w o u l d b e that any d i r e c t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f police

(the Order o f Being)

with politics ( t h e T r u t h - E v e n t ) , a n y

pro­

c e d u r e b y m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e T r u t h p o s i t s i t s e l f d i r e c t l y as t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e structuring

p r i n c i p l e o f t h e s o c i o p o l i t i c a l O r d e r o f B e i n g , l e a d s t o its

o p p o s i t e , to t h e 'politics o f t h e p o l i c e ' , to r e v o l u t i o n a r y T e r r o r , w h o s e e x e m p l a r y c a s e is t h e S t a l i n i s t desastre. T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h e we

try t o

provide

the

pathetic

a s s e r t i o n o f t h e universel

identification

singulier,

with

the

moment

symptom,

the

with a d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t ( W h a t d o

p r o t e s t e r s w h o p a t h e t i c a l l y c l a i m ' W e a r e all i m m i g r a n t w o r k e r s ! ' a c t u a l l y want} W h a t is t h e i r demand

to the P o l i c e P o w e r ? ) , the o l d contrast b e t w e e n

t h e r a d i c a l u n i v e r s a l i s m o f egaliberte particular

identities reappears

and the

'postmodern'

assertion o f

w i t h a v e n g e a n c e , as is c l e a r f r o m

the

d e a d l o c k o f g a y p o l i t i c s , w h i c h f e a r s l o s i n g its s p e c i f i c i t y w h e n gays a r e a c k n o w l e d g e d by t h e p u b l i c d i s c o u r s e : d o y o u w a n t equal

rights o r

specific

rights t o s a f e g u a r d y o u r p a r t i c u l a r way o f life? T h e a n s w e r , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e p a t h e t i c g e s t u r e o f singulier

universel

e f f e c t i v e l y f u n c t i o n s as a

h y s t e r i c a l g e s t u r e m a d e t o a v o i d t h e d e c i s i o n b y postponing i n d e f i n i t e l y . T h a t is to say: t h e g e s t u r e o f singulier bombarding

the

Police/Power

edifice

with

its s a t i s f a c t i o n

universel

impossible

flourishes on

demands,

d e m a n d s w h i c h a r e ' m a d e t o b e r e j e c t e d ' ; its l o g i c is t h a t o f ' I n i n g that y o u d o this, I a m actually d e m a n d i n g

with

demand­

t h a t y o u d o n o t d o it,

b e c a u s e that's not it' T h e s i t u a t i o n h e r e is p r o p e r l y u n d e c i d a b l e : n o t o n l y is a r a d i c a l p o l i t i c a l p r o j e c t o f t e n ' b e t r a y e d ' b y a c o m p r o m i s e w i t h

the

Police Order

the

(the eternal c o m p l a i n t o f revolutionary radicals: o n c e

reformists take over, they c h a n g e only the f o r m a n d a c c o m m o d a t e t h e m ­ selves to t h e o l d m a s t e r s ) , t h e r e c a n also b e t h e o p p o s i t e c a s e o f p s e u d o r a d i c a l i z a t i o n , w h i c h fits t h e e x i s t i n g p o w e r r e l a t i o n s m u c h b e t t e r t h a n a modest reformist proposal.

5 4

T h e f u r t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n t o b e m a d e h e r e is b e t w e e n t h e two subjects o f the singulier-

enunciation

o f the statement

that asserts the

is this s t a t e m e n t t h e d i r e c t s t a t e m e n t o f the excluded

opposed universel

victim

itself

( o f demos i n o l d A t h e n s ; o f t h e troisieme etat i n t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ; o f Jews, Palestinians, Blacks, women,

gays . . .

today), which

proposes

its

POLITICAL SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS V I C I S S I T U D E S

231

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 non-part

claiming:

Nation...!]'

-

this

'We

are

the

true

Universal

reversal, a l t h o u g h

[the

apparently

excluded

People,

purely

Society,

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 as t h e

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

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 L a c a n i a n 'moi, la verite, parte).

(in the precise sense o f the

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 asserting

the

subordination

(the

belonging)

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 subjectivization

o f the

Substance

finite

to

gesture

of

Substance

f o r its e x a c t o p p o s i t e , f o r

itself. T h e r e i n

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 the latter's

modest

o f subject

a l s o lies t h e

core

the of

has to become man ( w i t h all

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

THE

232

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 . '

Embracing the Act 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

repression

traumatic stricto

sensu

kernel

in

psychoanalysis: denegation,

( c o i n c i d i n g with

the

return

o f the

disavowal, 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 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

in fidelity to t h e T r u d i - E v 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 Althusser had

in m i n d w h e n

he

what

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 to function

as a s t a n d - i n

for the

impossible Universal. T h u s we

starts have

various forms o f the opposition between Substance a n d Subject, between a positive

ontological order

(police, Being,

structure)

and

a gap

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

of

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

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 surnumfraire,

order

o f B e i n g , by t h e

necessary

order, by the constitutive p r e s e n c e o f a

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

THE

234

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 Hegelian opposition

not

be

misread

o f abstract and

as r e l y i n g o n

the

traditional

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 that

is, a

new

mode

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

o f its visibility

(say, a w o m a n

position,

'politicizes'

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 s p a c e as a c a s e o f political

her

family

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

disavowed message ' b e t w e e n the l i n e s ' ) the

(the

publicly

'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 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 public

discursive

s p a c e , its d e m a n d s

( 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

-

that

is, t o

to 'hear/understand'

reject/subvert

the power/police

( 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 discourse

machine

to reveal, to a c c e p t into discourse;

of the public

the the the

power/police

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) 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 . '

5 5

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 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

remain

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

THE TICKLISH

236 betrayal o r

'regression into terror'

SUBJECT

o f e v e r y r e v o l u t i o n , as i f t h e

p o s s i b l e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f egaliberte is t h e K h m e r R o u g e o r t h e Luminoso. O n e

is t e m p t e d

only

Sendero

t o c l a i m t h a t L e n i n i s t p o l i t i c s is t h e

true

c o u n t e r p o i n t t o this K a n t i a n m a r g i n a l i s t l e f t i s t a t t i t u d e w h i c h i n s i s t s o n its o w n i n h e r e n t i m p o s s i b i l i t y . T h a t is t o say: w h a t a t r u e L e n i n i s t a n d

a

p o l i t i c a l c o n s e r v a t i v e h a v e i n c o m m o n is t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y r e j e c t w h a t o n e c o u l d c a l l l i b e r a l leftist ' i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y '

(advocating grand

projects o f

solidarity, f r e e d o m , a n d so o n , yet d u c k i n g o u t w h e n o n e has to pay t h e price

for

them

in

the

guise

of concrete

and

often

'cruel'

political

m e a s u r e s ) : l i k e a n a u t h e n t i c c o n s e r v a t i v e , a t r u e L e n i n i s t is n o t a f r a i d o f t h e passage

a I'arte, o f a c c e p t i n g all t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s , u n p l e a s a n t as t h e y

m a y b e , o f r e a l i z i n g his p o l i t i c a l p r o j e c t . K i p l i n g ( w h o m B r e c h t a d m i r e d very m u c h ) despised British liberals w h o a d v o c a t e d f r e e d o m a n d j u s t i c e , while silently c o u n t i n g o n t h e Conservatives to d o t h e n e c e s s a r y dirty w o r k for t h e m ; the s a m e c a n b e said f o r t h e liberal Leftist's ( o r ' d e m o c r a t i c Socialist's')

relationship

to L e n i n i s t C o m m u n i s t s : liberal Leftists

reject

s o c i a l - d e m o c r a t i c ' c o m p r o m i s e ' , they w a n t a true r e v o l u t i o n , yet they shirk t h e a c t u a l p r i c e t o b e p a i d f o r it, a n d t h u s p r e f e r t o a d o p t t h e a t t i t u d e o f a B e a u t i f u l S o u l a n d k e e p t h e i r h a n d s c l e a n . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s false l i b e r a l leftist p o s i t i o n

(they want

true d e m o c r a c y for the

people,

but

w i t h o u t s e c r e t p o l i c e t o fight c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n , w i t h o u t t h e i r a c a d e m i c p r i v i l e g e s b e i n g t h r e a t e n e d . . . ) , a L e n i n i s t , l i k e a C o n s e r v a t i v e , is i n t h e s e n s e o f fully

assuming

the consequences

authentic

of his choice, o f b e i n g fully

a w a r e o f w h a t it a c t u a l l y m e a n s t o t a k e p o w e r a n d t o e x e r t it. I a m n o w in a p o s i t i o n t o s p e c i f y w h a t s e e m s t o m e t h e f a t a l w e a k n e s s o f the p r o t o - 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 positive o r d e r o f B e i n g ( o r of

service

des biens

or

unconditional

the

demand

f o r egaliberte w h i c h s i g n a l s t h e

o f the

p o l i t i c s as P o l i c e )

and

the

radical,

presence o f the

T r u t h - E v e n t ( o r t h e P o l i t i c a l ) , t h a t is, t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n t h e

global

social o r d e r a n d the d i m e n s i o n o f Universality p r o p e r , which cuts a line o f s e p a r a t i o n i n t o t h i s g l o b a l o r d e r : w h a t it 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 the

'excess' o f the founding

gesture o f the Master without which

the

p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f t h e service des biens c a n n o t m a i n t a i n i t s e l f . W h a t w e a r e a i m i n g a t h e r e is t h e ' n o n - e c o n o m i c a l ' e x c e s s o f t h e

Master over

the

s m o o t h f u n c t i o n i n g o f the positive p o l i c e o r d e r o f B e i n g . I n a pluralist society, t h e m a r g i n a l ' r a d i c a l ' parties o r political a g e n t s are a b l e to play t h e g a m e o f u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d s , o f ' w e w a n t this [ h i g h e r s a l a r i e s f o r teachers a n d doctors, better r e t i r e m e n t a n d social security c o n d i t i o n s . . . ] , pereat

mundus,

demand

-

l e a v i n g it t o t h e M a s t e r t o f i n d a way o f m e e t i n g

this u n c o n d i t i o n a l

demand

targets the political M a s t e r

their not

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

237

s i m p l y i n h i s c a p a c i t y as t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e service des biens, b u t i n h i s c a p a c i t y as g u a r a n t o r o f t h e survival o f t h e O r d e r . T h a t is t h e o t h e r c r u c i a l aspect o f the Master's position: h e does not shirk the responsibility o f breaking

the

egg when

people

demand

an

omelette

-

of

imposing

u n p o p u l a r b u t n e c e s s a r y m e a s u r e s . I n s h o r t , t h e M a s t e r is t h e o n e w h o forever relinquishes the right to claim: ' B u t I d i d n ' t want this!'

when

things go wrong. O f c o u r s e , t h i s p o s i t i o n is u l t i m a t e l y t h a t o f a n i m p o s t o r : h i s m a s t e r y is a n i l l u s i o n ; n o n e t h e l e s s , t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t s o m e o n e is r e a d y t o o c c u p y this u n t e n a b l e p l a c e has a pacifying effect o n his s u b j e c t s - we c a n i n d u l g e i n o u r p e t t y n a r c i s s i s t i c d e m a n d s , w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h e M a s t e r is h e r e t o g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e w h o l e s t r u c t u r e will n o t c o l l a p s e . T h e h e r o i s m o f a n authentic

Master

consists precisely in

his willingness

to

assume

this

i m p o s s i b l e p o s i t i o n o f u l t i m a t e responsibility, a n d to t a k e u p o n h i m s e l f the implementation

of unpopular measures which prevent

the

system

f r o m d i s i n t e g r a t i n g . T h a t was t h e g r e a t n e s s o f L e n i n a f t e r t h e B o l s h e v i k s t o o k power: in c o n t r a s t to hysterica] r e v o l u t i o n a r y fervour c a u g h t in the v i c i o u s c y c l e , t h e f e r v o u r o f t h o s e w h o p r e f e r t o stay i n o p p o s i t i o n prefer

(publicly or

secretly) to

avoid

the

burden

o f taking

and

over, o f

a c c o m p l i s h i n g t h e s h i f t f r o m s u b v e r s i v e activity t o r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r

the

s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f the social edifice, he heroically e m b r a c e d the o n e r o u s t a s k o f a c t u a l l y running

the State-

o f m a k i n g all t h e n e c e s s a r y c o m p r o m i s e s ,

b u t also taking t h e n e c e s s a r y harsh m e a s u r e s , to assure t h a t t h e B o l s h e v i k power would not collapse. S o w h e n R a n c i e r e o r B a d i o u d i s m i s s e s p o l i t i c s as a P o l i c e w h i c h m e r e l y t a k e s c a r e o f t h e s m o o t h service des biens, t h e y l e a v e o u t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s o c i a l O r d e r c a n n o t r e p r o d u c e i t s e l f i f it is c o n s t r a i n e d t o t h e t e r m s o f t h e service des biens: t h e r e m u s t b e O n e w h o a s s u m e s t h e ultimate

responsibility, inclusive o f a

necessary

compromises

or

break

the

ruthless letter

readiness

o f the

to

make

L a w in

order

the to

g u a r a n t e e t h e s y s t e m ' s survival; a n d i t is t o t a l l y e r r o n e o u s t o i n t e r p r e t t h i s f u n c t i o n as t h a t o f a n u n p r i n c i p l e d p r a g m a t i c s t i c k i n g t o p o w e r , w h a t e v e r t h e c o s t . T h e a d v o c a t e s o f t h e P o l i t i c a l as o p p o s e d t o P o l i c e fail to t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t this i n h e r e n t e x c e s s o f t h e M a s t e r which sustains the des biens itself: t h e y a r e u n a w a r e o f t h e f a c t t h a t w h a t t h e y a r e what

t h e y a r e p r o v o k i n g with

their unconditional

demand,

service fighting,

is not

the

'servicing o f goods', but the u n c o n d i t i o n a l responsibility o f the Master. In s h o r t , w h a t t h e y a r e u n a w a r e o f is t h a t t h e i r u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d egaliberte

for

remains within the confines o f the hysterical provocation a i m e d

THE TICKLISH

238

SUBJECT

at t h e M a s t e r , testing t h e limits o f his ability: ' C a n h e r e j e c t - o r m e e t

-

o u r d e m a n d s , a n d still m a i n t a i n t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f o m n i p o t e n c e ? ' . T h e t e s t o f t h e t r u e r e v o l u t i o n a r y , as o p p o s e d to t h i s g a m e o f h y s t e r i c a l p r o v o c a t i o n , is t h e

heroic readiness

to endure

the

conversion o f

the

subversive u n d e r m i n i n g o f the existing System into the p r i n c i p l e o f a n e w positive O r d e r w h i c h gives b o d y to this negativity - o r , in B a d i o u ' s t e r m s , the conversion o f Truth into B e i n g . ical terms,

the fear

5 6

T o p u t it i n m o r e a b s t r a c t p h i l o s o p h ­

of the impending

'ontologization'

of the

proper

p o l i t i c a l a c t , o f its c a t a s t r o p h i c t r a n s p o s i t i o n i n 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 , is a false f e a r t h a t r e s u l t s f r o m a k i n d o f p e r s p e c t i v e i l l u s i o n : it p u t s t o o m u c h t r u s t in t h e s u b s t a n t i a l p o w e r o f t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f B e i n g , o v e r l o o k i n g t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g is n e v e r s i m p l y g i v e n , b u t is itself g r o u n d e d positive

i n s o m e p r e c e d i n g A c t . There

ontologically

consistent

is no Order of Being

Whole, t h e false s e m b l a n c e o f s u c h a n

as a Order

relies o n the self-obliteration o f the Act. In o t h e r words, the gap o f the A c t is n o t i n t r o d u c e d i n t o t h e O r d e r o f B e i n g a f t e r w a r d s : it is t h e r e all t h e t i m e as t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t a c t u a l l y sustains

every O r d e r o f B e i n g .

Perhaps the ultimate philosophical formulation o f the political oppo­ s i t i o n p o l i c e / p o l i t i c s is D e r r i d a ' s o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n o n t o l o g y a n d tology, t h e i m p o s s i b l e l o g i c o f s p e c t r a l i t y t h a t f o r e v e r

heaun-

prevents/differs/

displaces the closure o f the ontological edifice: the p r o p e r deconstructionist g e s t u r e is t o m a i n t a i n t h e s p e c t r a l o p e n i n g , t o r e s i s t t h e t e m p t a t i o n o f its o n t o l o g i c a l c l o s u r e . A g a i n , it is e a s y t o t r a n s l a t e t h i s i n t o L a c a n e s e : s p e c t r a l i t y is a n o t h e r n a m e f o r t h e p h a n t a s m i c s e m b l a n c e t h a t fills

the

irreducible ontological gap. T h e properly Hegelian gesture here would be t o t u r n a r o u n d t h i s n o t i o n o f s p e c t r a l i t y as t h e i r r e d u c i b l e

supplement

w h i c h is t h e c o n d i t i o n o f ( i m ) p o s s i b i l i t y o f a n y o n t o l o g y : w h a t i f t h e r e is a n e e d f o r a minimal

ontological

support

of the very dimension

of spectrality,

for

s o m e i n e r t pen de reel w h i c h s u s t a i n s t h e s p e c t r a l o p e n i n g ? I n a way, H e g e l a g r e e s with K a n t t h a t t h e d i r e c t a t t e m p t t o a c t u a l i z e t h e a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y o f egaliberte ( w h a t K a n t w o u l d h a v e c h a r a c t e r i z e d as t h e p o l i t i c a l e q u i v a l e n t o f t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l m i s t a k e o f t r e a t i n g r e g u l a t i v e i d e a s as c o n s t i t u t i v e ) n e c e s s a r i l y e n d s in t e r r o r . T h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e m is t h a t e a c h d r a w s t h e o p p o s i t e c o n c l u s i o n : f o r K a n t , i t m e a n s t h a t egaliberte s h o u l d a n i n a c c e s s i b l e I d e a l t o c o m e , democratie

remain

d venir, slowly a p p r o a c h e d

but

always k e p t at a d i s t a n c e i n o r d e r t o a v o i d t h e M o n s t r o s i t y o f t h e a b s t r a c t a b s o l u t e n e g a t i v i t y ; w h i l e f o r H e g e l , it m e a n s t h a t t h i s m o n s t r o u s

moment

o f a b s o l u t e a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y , t h i s s e l f - d e s t r u c t i v e fury w h i c h w a s h e s away every positive

Order,

has

always-cdready

happened,

s i n c e it is t h e

very

foundation o f the positive rational o r d e r o f h u m a n society. In short, while,

POLITICAL

for

Kant,

future,

a

absolute future

SUBJECTIVIZATION

negativity

which

will

designates

never

turn

AND

an into

ITS VICISSITUDES

impossible the

moment

present,

for

239

of

Hegel

the it

d e s i g n a t e s a n i m p o s s i b l e m o m e n t o f t h e past, a p a s t w h i c h was n e v e r fully e x p e r i e n c e d as t h e p r e s e n t , the minimal

s i n c e its w i t h d r a w a l

o p e n s up

the space

(social) organization o f the Present. T h e r e are m a n y

for this e r u p t i o n o f a b s t r a c t negativity, f r o m A d a m ' s Fall, t h r o u g h a n d Christ's c r u c i f i x i o n , to t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n -

Socrates

in a l l t h e s e c a s e s , a

negative gesture corrosive o f the given (social) substantial order a higher, m o r e rational

for

names

grounded

order.

Notes 1. Is chis not also t h e version o f t h e L a c a n i a n 1SR ( I m a g i n a r y - S y m b o l i c - R c a l ) : tradition­ alism is c e n t r e d on imaginary G o o d e m b o d i e d in t h e c o m m u n i t y way o f life; m o d e r n i s m o n universal Duty; p o s t m o d e r n i s m o n t h e dissemination o f the Real? 2. What o n e e n c o u n t e r s in L y o t a r d is t h e ambiguity o f the L a c a n i a n Real as that which resists symbolization: o n t h e o n e h a n d , we have t h e dispersal o f t h e p u r e Multiple not yet t o t a l i z e d / h o m o g e n i z e d t h r o u g h s o m e form o f t h e symbolic O n e - e a c h such form o f symbolization is a l r e a d y exclusionary, it 'represses' t h e diffciend; o n t h e olhei h a n d , t h e ineffable has t h e form o f the absolute I n j u s t i c e / C r i m e , the Holocaust, t h e u n i q u e event which c a n n o t be put into words, w h e r e n o work o f symbolic m o u r n i n g c a n provide r e c o n c i l i a t i o n . (In ethical terms, this split is t h e split between t h e Real as pre-symbolic, p r e l a p s a r i a n , t h e i n n o c e n c e o f t h e multiple; a n d t h e Real as t h e singular, u n i q u e point o f absolute, ineffable Evil.) In t h e first c a s e , injustice is Ike net of symbolanlion of the pure Multiple itself which is by n a t u r e exclusionarv; in t h e s e c o n d case, injustice is t h e t r a u m a t i c p o i n t which, precisely, cnmiot b e symbolized. V i o l e n c e / i n j u s t i c e is thus simultaneouslv t h e act o f symbolization a n d that which eludes symbolization. . . . T h e solution t o this p a r a d o x is that between the primordial Real o f t h e p u r e Multiple a n d t h e symbolic universe t h e r e is a vanishing m e d i a t o r ' , t h e g e s t u r e o f / i n t h e Real that g r o u n d s symholization itself, the violent o p e n i n g itp o f a g a p in t h e Real which is not yet symbolic. 3. In his criticism o f D e r r i d a , L a c l a u e m p h a s i z e d t h e g a p between Derrida's global philosophical s t a n c e (differance, t h e u n a v o i d a b l e out-of-joinf of every identity, e t c . ) a n d his politics o f democratic a venir, o f o p e n n e s s towards t h e E v e n t o f irreducible O t h e r n e s s : why s h o u l d n ' t o n e draw, from t h e fact that identity is impossible, t h e opposite totalitarian' c o n c l u s i o n that, for that very r e a s o n , we n e e d a s t r o n g P o w e r t o prevent explosion a n d g u a r a n t e e a fragile m i n i m u m o f o r d e r ? ( S e e E r n e s t o L a c l a u , ' T h e T i m e is Orrt o f J o i n t ' , in Emnncipnl'wn(s), L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 6 . ) However, d o e s n o t t h e s a m e hold for L a c l a u himself.' Why shouldn't o n e , f r o m t h e notion o f a h e g e m o n y which involves t h e irreducible g a p between t h e Universal a n d t h e Particular, a n d thus t h e structural impossibility o f society, o p t for a 'strong' totalitarian politics that limits t h e effects o f this g a p as m u c h as possible.' 4. L a c l a u , ' T h e T i m e is O u t of Joint", p. 1 2 3 . 5. A n o t h e r n a m e f o r this short c i r c u i t between t h e Universal a n d the Particular, by m e a n s o f which a p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t h e g e m o n i z e s t h e Universal, is, o f c o u r s e , suture, t h e o p e r a t i o n of h e g e m o n v 'sutures' t h e e m p t v Universal to a particular c o n t e n t . F o r that r e a s o n , F.W.J. Sclrelliug must b e c o n s i d e r e d t h e o r i g i n a t o r o f t h e m o d e r n notion o f critique o f ideology: he was t h e first t o e l a b o r a t e t h e notion o f ' f a l s e ' unity a n d / o r universality. F o r him, 'evil' lies rrot irr t h e split (between (he Universal a n d t h e Particular) as such but, rather, irr

240

THE TICKLISH SUBJECT

t h e i r 'false'/distorted unity, that is, in a Universality that effectively privileges s o m e narrowp a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t a n d is i m p e n e t r a b l y ' a n c h o r e d ' in it. Schelling was thus the first to e l a b o r a t e t h e e l e m e n t a r y p r o c e d u r e o f the critique o f ideology: t h e gesture o f discerning, b e n e a t h t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f n e u t r a l universality (say, o f ' h u m a n rights'), the privileged p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t (say, white upper-middle-class m a l e s ) which ' h e g e m o n i z e s ' it. See P a r t I o f Slavoj Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 5 . 6. L a c l a u , ' T h e T i m e is O u t o f J o i n t ' , p p . 1 4 - 1 5 . 7. Ibid., p. 4 4 . 8. Ibid., p. 14. 9. L a c l a u develops this logic a p r o p o s o f t h e n o t i o n o f n a t i o n a l unity - see ibid., p p . 9 4 - 5 . 10. T h e p r o b l e m with J i i r g e n H a b e r m a s is that he a b a n d o n s this 'symptomal' a p p r o a c h to the Universal. J u s t recall his notion o f m o d e r n i t y as an 'unfinished project': what gets lost in H a b e r m a s ' s e n d e a v o u r t o realize the h i t h e r t o b l o c k e d potentials o f the E n l i g h t e n m e n t is the p r o p e r l y dialectical insight into how what look like e x t e r n a l e m p i r i c a l obstacles prevent­ ing the full realization o f t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t p r o j e c t a r e actually inherent to the veiy notion of this project. T h e f u n d a m e n t a l H e g e l i a n move is to t r a n s p o s e e x t e r n a l into internal limit: t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t is an 'unfinished project' n o t b e c a u s e o f c o n t i n g e n t e x t e r n a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s preventing its full i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , but 'in its very n o t i o n ' - t h e fully realized p r o j e c t o f E n l i g h t e n m e n t would u n d e r m i n e its very n o t i o n . 11. See Q u e n t i n Skinner, ' L a n g u a g e a n d Social C h a n g e ' , in Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics, O x f o r d : Polity Press 1 9 8 8 . 12. N o wonder' t h e e x a m p l e s which fit t h e o p e r a t i o n o f h e g e m o n y as d e s c r i b e d by L a c l a u m o s t perfectly a r e those o f rightist populism, from Fascism to P e r o n i s m : the royal e x a m p l e o f h e g e m o n y is t h e way a conservative attitude r e a p p r o p r i a t e s arrd inscribes p o p u l a r revolutionary motifs into its field. 13. L a c a n tries to d o almost t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e : in the last years o f his teaching, he desperately e n d e a v o u r e d to f o r m u l a t e the p r e c a r i o u s status o f an 'acephalous', desubjectivized knowledge which would n o l o n g e r rely on a previous T r u t h - E v e n t — L a c a n ' s n a m e for s u c h knowledge is drive. 14. This point is e l a b o r a t e d in detail in E t i e n n e Balibar, La crainle des masses, Paris: Galilee 1997. 15. This, p e r h a p s , expresses per negationem t h e f o r m u l a o f t r u e anti-Fascism today: t h e reversal o f t h e Fascist constellation, that is, t e c h n o l o g i c a l desacralization at t h e level o f ideology, s u p p l e m e n t e d by c o n c r e t e , ' m i c r o - p r a c t i c e ' , m o t i o n s to save a n d s t r e n g t h e n local ' o r g a n i c ' links. 16. H e r e I draw on J a c q u e s R a n c i e r e , La mesentenle, Paris: Galilee 1 9 9 5 . 17. O n e c a n see why tribal, pre-State societies, with all t h e i r a u t h e n t i c p r o t o - d e m o c r a t i c p r o c e d u r e s for d e c i d i n g c o m m o n m a t t e r s ( g a t h e r i n g o f all t h e p e o p l e , c o m m o n deliberation, discussion a n d vote, e t c . ) , a t e n o t yet democratic, n o t b e c a u s e politics as such involves society's self-alienation - n o t b e c a u s e politics is the s p h e r e elevated above c o n c r e t e social a n t a g o n i s m s (as the s t a n d a r d Marxist a r g u m e n t would c l a i m ) - but b e c a u s e t h e litigation in these prepolitical tribal g a t h e r i n g s lacks the p r o p e r l y political p a r a d o x o f singulier universel, o f the 'part of n o part' that p r e s e n t s itself as an i m m e d i a t e stand-in for universality as srrch. 18. T h e e x c r e m e n t a l identification o f t h e burakumin is crucial: when Sire Sumii saw h e r relative c h e r i s h i n g t h e E m p e r o r ' s e x c r e m e n t , h e r c o n c l u s i o n was that, in t h e s a m e way, following the tradition o f t h e 'king's two bodies' - o f the king's body standing for t h e social body as such - the burakumin, as t h e e x c r e m e n t o f t h e social body, should also be c h e r i s h e d . In o t h e r words, Sue Sumii took the structural h o m o l o g y between t h e two E m p e r o r ' s bodies m o r e literally a n d f u r t h e r than usual: even t h e lowest part ( e x c r e m e n t ) o f the E m p e r o r ' s body has to be r e d u p l i c a t e d in his o t h e r , sublime body, which stands for the body o f society. H e r p r e d i c a m e n t was similar to that o f P l a t o who, in I'armenides, bravely c o n f r o n t s t h e e m b a r r a s s i n g p r o b l e m o f the precise s c o p e o f the relationship between eternal f o r m s / i d e a 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

ITS V I C I S S I T U D E S

241

a n d t h e i r m a t e r i a l copies: which m a t e r i a l objects a r e 'ontologically c o v e r e d ' by e t e r n a l Ideas as their models? Is t h e r e also an e t e r n a l I d e a o f 'low' objects like m u d , filth o r e x c r e m e n t ? 19. T h i s para-politics, o f c o u r s e , has a series o f different successive versions: t h e m a i n r u p t u r e is t h e o n e between its classical a n d m o d e r n H o b b e s i a n f o r m u l a t i o n , which focuses o n t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f t h e social c o n t r a c t , t h e alienation o f individual rights in t h e e m e r g e n c e o f sovereign power. H a b e r m a s i a n o r Rawlsian ethics a r e p e r h a p s the last philosophical vestiges o f this attitude: t h e a t t e m p t to d e - a n t a g o n i z e politics by f o r m u l a t i n g c l e a r rules to be o b e v e d so that t h e a g o n i c p r o c e d u r e o f litigation does not e x p l o d e into politics p r o p e r . 2 0 . M o r e precisely, M a r x i s m is m o r e a m b i g u o u s , since t h e very t e r m 'political e c o n o m y ' also o p e n s up the s p a c e for t h e o p p o s i t e g e s t u r e o f i n t r o d u c i n g politics into t h e very h e a r t o f t h e e c o n o m y , t h a t is, o f d e n o u n c i n g t h e very 'apolitical' c h a r a c t e r o f the e c o n o m i c processes as the s u p r e m e ideological illusion. Class struggle d o e s n o t 'express' s o m e objective e c o n o m i c c o n t r a d i c t i o n , it is t h e very form of existence o f this c o n t r a d i c t i o n . T h i s ambiguityc a n also be f o r m u l a t e d in t h e t e r m s o f L a c a n ' s 'formulas o f s e x u a t i o n ' : we c a n r e a d the s t a t e m e n t 'even-thing is political' as the universal s t a t e m e n t which involves its point o f e x c e p t i o n , t h e objective e c o n o m i c p r o c e s s (so that the ferocious d i s c e r n m e n t o f a h i d d e n political s t a n c e in apparently apolitical sublime artistic o r ideological p r o d u c t s c a n g o h a n d in h a n d with t h e assertion o f t h e e c o n o m i c p r o c e s s as t h e point o f suspension o f the political), o r a c c o r d i n g to t h e logic o f 'non-all', that is, in the sense o f ' t h e r e is n o t h i n g which is n o t political' - h e r e , 'everything is political' m e a n s precisely that t h e r e is no way o f f o r m u l a t i n g / d e f i n i n g t h e political itself in a univocal universal way, since every s t a t e m e n t a b o u t the political is itself already 'politicized'. F r e d r i c J a m e s o n boldly asserts t h e p a r a d o x i c a l c o i n c i d e n c e between the m o s t e x t r e m e version o f neo-liberalism - the universal modelling o f h u m a n behaviour as utility-maximization - a n d Marxist socialism with its e m p h a s i s on the e c o n o m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n o f society, on the 'administration o f things', in that b o t h d o away with t h e n e e d for any political t h o u g h t p r o p e r : t h e r e is a Marxist political p r a c t i c e , but there is n o Marxist political t h o u g h t . F r o m this standpoint, t h e traditional c o m p l a i n t against M a r x i s m ( t h a t it lacks an a u t o n o m o u s political r e f l e c t i o n ) a p p e a r s m o r e as a strength than as a weakness - o r , as J a m e s o n c o n c l u d e s : ' [ w ] e have m u c h in c o m m o n with t h e neo-liberals, in fact virtually everything save the essentials!' ( F r e d r i c J a m e s o n , Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 2 , p. 2 6 5 - would it be possible, in this sense, to define t h e s t a n c e towards neo-conservatist c o m m u n i t a r i a n i s m as t h e obverse o n e , in so far as a Marxist has in c o m m o n with it only t h e essentials [ t h e n e e d for a h a r m o n i o u s o r g a n i c society]?) T h e c o u n t e r ­ a r g u m e n t would be that, p e r h a p s , this neglect o f the p r o p e r political d i m e n s i o n had very precise political c o n s e q u e n c e s for t h e history o f the C o m m u n i s t m o v e m e n t — d o n o t p h e n o m e n a like Stalinism indicate precisely a violent r e t u r n o f t h e r e p r e s s e d political dimension? 2 1 . T h e clearest indication o f this Schmittian disavowal o f the political is t h e p r i m a c y of e x t e r n a l politics (relations between sovereign states) o v e r internal politics ( i n n e r social a n t a g o n i s m s ) on which he insists: is n o t t h e relationship to an e x t e r n a l O t h e r as t h e E n e m y a w a y o f disavowing t h e internal struggle that traverses t h e social body? In c o n t r a s t to Schmitt, a leftist position s h o u l d insist o n t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l p r i m a c y o f t h e i n h e r e n t a n t a g o n i s m as constitutive o f t h e political. 2 2 . T h e m e t a p h o r i c f r a m e we use in o r d e r to a c c o u n t for the political p r o c e s s is thus never i n n o c e n t a n d n e u t r a l : it 'schematizes' t h e c o n c r e t e m e a n i n g o f politics. Ultra-politics has r e c o u r s e to t h e m o d e l o f warfare, politics is c o n c e i v e d as a form o f social warfare, as t h e relationship to ' T h e m ' , to an E n e m y . Arche-politics prefers to refer to the medical m o d e l : society is a c o r p o r a t e body, a n o r g a n i s m ; social divisions a r e like illnesses o f this o r g a n i s m that is, what we should fight, o u r e n e m y , is a c a n c e r o u s i n t r u d e r , a pest, a foreign parasite to be e x t e r m i n a t e d if the health o f t h e social body is to be re-established. Para-politics uses t h e m o d e l o f agonistic c o m p e t i t i o n which follows s o m e c o m m o n l y a c c e p t e d rules, like a sporting

242

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

event. Meta-politics relies on t h e m o d e l o f s c i e n t i f i c t e c h n o l o g i c a l instrumental p r o c e d u r e , while post-politics involves the m o d e l o f business negotiation a n d strategic compromise. 2 3 . See C h a p t e r 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, The. Plague of Fantasies, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 7 . 2 4 . Incidentally, this version o f ' f r e e d o m as c o n c e i v e d necessity', a l t h o u g h it may s o u n d 'Hegelian', is t h e very o p p o s i t e o f t h e p r o p e r l y H e g e l i a n speculative identification o f true F r e e d o m with Necessity: H e g e l i a n f r e e d o m is n o t t h e a c t o f freely a s s u m i n g t h e role o f the i n s t r u m e n t o f a p r e o r d a i n e d Necessity. 2 5 . See C l a u d e Lefort, I .invention dimoiraliijue, Paris: Fayard 1 9 8 1 . 2 6 . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e difference between capitalism a n d C o m m u n i s m is that C o m m u n i s m was p e r c e i v e d as an I d e a which t h e n failed in its realization, while capitalism f u n c t i o n e d 'spontaneously': t h e r e is n o Capitalist Manifesto. In t h e case o f C o m m u n i s m , we can thus play t h e g a m e o f finding the culprit, b l a m i n g t h e Party, Stalin, L e n i n , ultimately M a r x himself, for t h e millions o f d e a d , t h e i r 'lustration'; while in capitalism, t h e r e is n o b o d y o n w h o m o n e can pin guilt o r responsibility; things j u s t h a p p e n e d that way, a l t h o u g h capitalism has b e e n no less destructive in t e r m s o f h u m a n a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l costs, destroying aboriginal cultures, a n d so o n . 27. See R a n c i e r e , La mesentente, p p . 1 4 4 - G . 28. This crucial distinction between s i m u l a c r u m (overlapping with the R e a l ) a n d a p p e a r ­ a n c e is easily discernible in the d o m a i n o f sexuality, as t h e distinction between p o r n o g r a p h y a n d seduction: p o r n o g r a p h y 'shows it all', 'real sex', a n d for that very r e a s o n p r o d u c e s the m e r e s i m u l a c r u m o f sexuality; while the p r o c e s s o f s e d u c t i o n consists entirely in t h e play o f a p p e a r a n c e s , hints and promises, a n d t h e r e b y evokes the elusive d o m a i n o f t h e suprasensihlc sublime T h i n g . 2 9 . In this sense, even N i x o n ' s visit to C h i n a a n d t h e ensuing e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f d i p l o m a t i c relations between t h e U S A a n d C h i n a was a kind o f political a c t , in so far as it actually c h a n g e d t h e p a r a m e t e r s o f what was c o n s i d e r e d 'possible' ( o r 'feasible') in the d o m a i n o f international relations - yes, o n e could d o t h e unthinkable, a n d talk normally with the ultimate e n e m y . 3 0 . See R a n c i e r e , La mesenlente, p. 1G2. 3 1 . See Balibar, ' L a violence: idealite et c r u a u t e ' , ill La trainte ties masses. 3 2 . F o r a f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t o f this motif, see C h a p t e r 3 o f Slavoj Zizek, The Metastases of Enjoyment, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 5 . 3 3 . See Balibar, La craivte des masses, p p . 4 2 - 3 . 3 4 . F o r a m o r e detailed a c c o u n t o f this reflected cynical attitude, see C h a p t e r 3 o f Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder. 3 5 . See M a r i o Vargas Llosa, 'Hooligans, t h e p r o d u c t o f a high civilisation', The Independent, 2 7 J u n e 1 9 9 8 , T h e W e e k e n d Review, p. 5. 3 6 . This logic was b r o u g h t t o its absurd e x t r e m e in ex-Yugoslavia, in which t h e very notion o f a workers' strike was i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e , since, a c c o r d i n g to t h e ruling ideology, workers already rule in the s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e i r c o m p a n i e s - against w h o m , then, c o u l d they possibly strike? 37. T h e interesting point h e r e is how, in this struggle within Socialism in decay, t h e very t e r m 'political' f u n c t i o n e d in an inverted way: it was the C o m m u n i s t Party ( s t a n d i n g for the police logic) which 'politicized' t h e situation (speaking o f ' c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y t e n d e n c i e s ' , e t c . ) , while the opposition m o v e m e n t insisted o n their f u n d a m e n t a l l y 'apolitical', civic-ethical c h a r a c t e r : they just stood for 'simple values' of dignity, f r e e d o m , e t c . - n o wonder their main signifier was t h e 'apolitical' notion o f solidarity. 3 8 . T o pirt it in yet a n o t h e r way: s u b s t a n c e is a n a m e for the inert resistance of the falsity; when, for e x a m p l e , rational subjective insight tells us that s o m e notion is wrong, that it hinges on o u r m i s p e r c e p t i o n , o n o u r 'blind, superstitious prejudices', a n d this n o t i o n nevertheless inexplicably persists, we a r e d e a l i n g with a s u b s t a n c e . F a r from designating the T r u t h , substance is the inert persistence o f t h e false a p p e a r a n c e . F o r this r e a s o n , J u n g i a n archetypes point towards the dimension o f t h e 'psychic substance': they designate 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

ITS V I C I S S I T U D E S

243

d i m e n s i o n o f inerl psychic formations that r e t u r n again a n d again, a l t h o u g h we theoretically u n d e r m i n e d t h e m long a g o . 3 9 . A b r a h a m L i n c o l n ' s c o m m e n t on spiritualism ( ' F o r those who like t h a t sort o f thing, I should think it is just about the sort o f thing they would like') e x p r e s s e s this tautological c h a r a c t e r o f nationalist self-enclosure perfectly, a n d , for this r e a s o n , works even better if o n e uses it to c h a r a c t e r i z e nationalists, while it d o e s noC work if o n e applies it to a u t h e n t i c radical d e m o c r a t s : o n e cannot say o f a u t h e n t i c d e m o c r a t i c e n g a g e m e n t : ' F o r those w h o like that sort o f thing, it is just a b o u t the sort o f thing they would like.' 4 0 . See, especially, 'Les universels', in Balibar, La crainle dcs masses, p p . 421—54. 4 1 . H e r e , the parallel with L a c l a u ' s opposition between the logic o f difference - society as a differential symbolic s t r u c t u r e - a n d t h e logic o f a n t a g o n i s m - society as 'impossible', thwarted by an antagonistic split - is c l e a r . T o d a y , t h e tension between the logic o f difference a n d t h e logic o f a n t a g o n i s m takes the f o r m o f t h e tension between t h e liberal-democratic universe o f negotiation and the 'fundamentalist' universe o f t h e fight to t h e death between G o o d a n d Evil, Us and T h e m . 4 2 . W h e n , at the beginning o f this c e n t u i y , B e t a B a r t o k t r a n s c r i b e d h u n d r e d s o f H u n g a r ­ ian folk songs, he provoked the lasting animosity o f t h e partisans o f R o m a n t i c national revival precisely by literally e x e c u t i n g t h e i r p r o g r a m m e o f reviving a u t h e n t i c e t h n i c roots. . . . In Slovenia, the Catholic C h u r c h and nationalists paint an idyllic p i c t u r e o f the nineteenth-century countryside - so n o w o n d e r that when, a c o u p l e o f years a g o , the e t h n o l o g i c a l n o t e b o o k s o f a Slovene writer from that time (Janez 4 ' r d i n a ) w e r e published, they were largely ignored: they provide a p i c t u r e o f daily life in the c o u n t r y s i d e full of child fornication a n d rape, alcoholism, brutal violence. . . . 4 3 . O n e o f t h e m i n o r yet telltale events that b e a r witness to this 'withering-away' o f the nation-state is the slow spread o f the o b s c e n e institution o f private prisons in t h e USA a n d o t h e r W e s t e r n countries: the e x e r c i s e o f what should be the m o n o p o l y o f t h e State (physical violence and c o e r c i o n ) b e c o m e s the o b j e c t o f a c o n t r a c t between t h e State and a private c o m p a n y which e x e r t s c o e r c i o n on individuals for the sake o f profit — what we have h e r e is simply the e n d o f the m o n o p o l y on the legitimate use o f violence which ( a c c o r d i n g to Max W e b e r ) defines the m o d e r n State. 4 4 . See Scott Lash a n d J o h n Urry, Economies oj Signs and Space, L o n d o n : S a g e 1 9 9 4 . 4 5 . See Darian L e a d e r , Why Do Women Write More Letters Than They Post?, L o n d o n : F a b e r & F a b e r 1 9 9 6 , p p . 6 7 - 8 . T h e reversal at work in this a n e c d o t e q u o t e d by L e a d e r is beautifully illustrated in a r e c e n t G e r m a n publicity spot for M a g n u m , a b r a n d o f gigantic ice-cream-ona-stick. First we see a p o o r working-class c o u p l e passionately e m b r a c i n g ; w h e n they a g r e e to m a k e love, the girl sends the boy to t h e seaside shop nearby to buy a c o n d o m , so that they will be able to m a k e love safely. T h e boy goes into t h e c o r r i d o r with t h e c o n d o m vending m a c h i n e arrd notices a n o t h e r vending m a c h i n e close to it selling M a g n u m ; h e looks in his p o c k e t a n d n o t i c e s that he has only o n e 5-mark c o i n , e n o u g h for e i t h e r a c o n d o m or an ice c r e a m , n o t for b o t h . After s o m e m o m e n t s o f d e s p e r a t e hesitation, we see him passiorrarely licking t h e ice c r e a m , with the inscription o n t h e s c r e e n : ' S o m e t i m e s you have to get your priorities right!' O f special interest h e r e is t h e r a t h e r obvious phallic c o n n o t a t i o n o f the M a g n u m ice-cream-on-a-stick, the 'big' perris: when, irr t h e last shot, t h e boy is licking the ice c r e a m , his quick j e r k y gestures imitate an intense fellatio; so the m e s s a g e o f getting your priorities right c a n also be r e a d in a direel sexrral way: better t h e qtiasi-horrroerotic e x p e r i e n c e o f o r a l sex than the straight h e t e r o s e x u a l e x p e r i e n c e . . . . 4 6 . O n e can a r g u e , o f c o u r s e , that t h e c i r c u l a r m o v e m e n t o f Capital itself is already a symbolic p h e n o m e n o n , not s o m e t h i n g externally o p p o s e d to c u l t u r e (did rrot L a r a n e m p h a ­ size that the first c h a p t e r of Capital I is a magisterial e x e r c i s e in the logic o f the signifierr); while, on the o t h e r hand, crrltrrral p h e n o m e n a themselves a r e rro less sites o f material p r o d u c t i o n , c a u g h t irr the web o f s o c i o e c o n o m i c p o w e r relations. While fully e n d o r s i n g both these points, o n e should n o n e the less insist that t h e s o c i o e c o n o m i c logic o f Capital provides the global framework which ( o v e r ) d e t e r r n i n e s the totality o f cultural processes.

244

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

4 7 . A n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f infinite j u d g e m e n t in o u r techno-New-Age is: ' T h e spirit (tran­ s c e n d e n t a l illumination, awareness) is a capsule ( t h e so-called "cognitive e n h a n c e r " pill).' 4 8 . See Paul P i c c o n e , ' P o s t m o d e r n Populism', Telos 103 (Spring 1 9 9 5 ) . W e should also n o t e h e r e by Elizabeth Fox-Genovese's a t t e m p t to o p p o s e to upper-middle-class feminism interested in the p r o b l e m s o f literary and c i n e m a theory, lesbian rights, e t c . , the 'family feminism' which focuses o n t h e actual c o n c e r n s o f ordinary working w o m e n , a n d articulates c o n c r e t e questions o f how to survive within t h e family, with c h i l d r e n a n d a c a r e e r . See Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, Feminism Is Not the Stmy of My Life, New York: D o u b l e d a y 1 9 9 6 . 4 9 . T h e most c o n c i s e f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e rightist suspension o f public (legal) n o r m s was provided by E a m o n de Valera: ' T h e p e o p l e has n o right to d o wrong.' 5 0 . T h i s a c c e p t a n c e o f violence, this 'political suspension o f t h e E t h i c a l ' , is t h e limit o f t h a t which even t h e m o s t ' t o l e r a n t ' liberal s t a n c e is u n a b l e to trespass - witness the uneasiness o f 'radical' post-colonialist A f r o - A m e r i c a n studies a p r o p o s o f Frantz F a n o n ' s f u n d a m e n t a l insight into the unavoidability o f violence in t h e p r o c e s s o f actual d e c o l o n i z a t i o n . 5 1 . T h e universality we a r e speaking a b o u t is thus not a positive universality with a d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t but a n empty universality, a universality without a positive n o t i o n that would specify its c o n t o u r s , a universality that exists only in t h e guise o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e injustice d o n e to the p a r t i c u l a r subject who politicizes h i s / h e r p r e d i c a m e n t . T h e H a b e r m a sian answer to it would be, o f c o u r s e , that t h e very fact that subjects e x p e r i e n c e their p r e d i c a m e n t as 'unjust' points towards s o m e implicit n o r m a t i v e s t r u c t u r e that must be operative in their protest; R a n c i e r e ' s point, however, is that this is precisely t h e philosophical lure to be avoided: every translation o f this 'empty universality' into s o m e d e t e r m i n a t e positive c o n t e n t already betrays its radical c h a r a c t e r . 5 2 . See J u d i t h Butler, 'Merely Cultural', New Left Review 2 2 7 ( J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 1 9 9 8 ) , pp. 3 3 - 4 4 . 5 3 . B u t l e r e m p h a s i z e s that the difference which c h a r a c t e r i z e s a p a r t i c u l a r social move­ m e n t is not the e x t e r n a l difference from o t h e r m o v e m e n t s , but its internal self-difference following L a c l a u , I a m t e m p t e d to claim that this difference is the site o f the inscription o f the Universal - that Universality is, in its actual e x i s t e n c e , the violent, splitting self-difference, which prevents a p a r t i c u l a r m o m e n t from achieving its self-identity (say, t h e self-difference o f the q u e e r m o v e m e n t between its p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d s a n d its universal anti-capitalist t h r u s t ) . B u t l e r says that Universality is t h e site o f violent e r a s u r e a n d exclusion, a n d emphasizes how, for that r e a s o n , it should be resisted - differing with h e r , I a m t e m p t e d to say that, for the same reason, it should be endorsed. 5 4 . T h e r e i n lies t h e grain o f truth o f R i c h a r d Rorty's r e c e n t p o l e m i c s against 'radical' cultural studies elitists (see R i c h a r d Rorty, Achieving Our America, C a m b r i d g e , MA: H a r v a r d University Press 1 9 9 8 ) : u n d e r t h e p r e t e n c e o f radically questioning the mythical s p e c t r e o f Power, they perfectly fit t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e existing power relations, posing n o t h r e a t to t h e m whatsoever - o r , to p a r a p h r a s e W a l t e r B e n j a m i n ' s thesis, t h e i r d e c l a r e d attitude o f radical opposition to the existing social relations coexists with their p e r f e c t functioning within these relations, r a t h e r like t h e proverbial hysteric w h o perfectly fits the network o f exploita­ tion against which he c o m p l a i n s , a n d effectively e n d o r s e s its r e p r o d u c t i o n . 5 5 . I m m a n u e l Kant, ' P e r p e t u a l P e a c e : A Philosophical Sketch', in Kant's Political Writings, C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press 1 9 9 1 , p. 1 2 9 . 5 6 . It was o n e o f t h e m e r i t s o f Carl S c h m i t t t h a t he clearly identified this u n c o n d i t i o n a l will to a s s u m e responsibility as t h e kernel o f political authority beyond - o r , r a t h e r , b e n e a t h - t h e typical liberal legitimization o f those who e x e r t p o w e r by r e f e r e n c e to the s m o o t h servicing o f g o o d s .

PART III

From Subjection to Subjective Destitution

5

Passionate (Dis)Attachments, or, Judith Butler as a Reader of Freud

Why Perversion Is N o t Subversion 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 potential

o f perversions

are s o o n e r o r later l e d to t h e

subversive

denial

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

of

the

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 way w h i c h , in e f f e c t , a m o u n t s assert his undermine

authority

again

and

to a n a p p e a l a d d r e s s e d more

strongly,

while

ambiguous

to t h e M a s t e r to perverts

actually

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

THE

248 obfuscated

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 predominant

public

discourse, while

the

hysterical position

the

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 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 words,

the

pervert

precludes

a n s w e r ( t o w h a t b r i n g s puissance,

the

Unconscious because

he

knoxvs

to the O t h e r ) ; h e has n o doubts

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 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

our

other the

about

t h a t is, h e r

(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 'post-politics'

is t h e p e r v e r s e m o d e

of administering

perversion:

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 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

t o b e a s k e d is,

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 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

to possess

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

describes new p h e n o m e n a ,

lo note

how, when

o n e as a r u l e o v e r l o o k s t h e i r

one

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

THE TICKLISH

250

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

m a s t e r p i e c e o f the dialectical analysis o f the

of the New Music,

'class struggle in

that

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 modern

music, designated

by the

names

tendencies in

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 Anti1

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,

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

far

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

psychoanalysis an e x e m p l a r ) Against

the

7

Deleuze's critique o f

'Oedipal'

case o f t h e perverse rejection o f hysteria?

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

proverbial

figure

o f the

early

Christian

them. Simply recall the

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 oppressed

by t h e

power

but

emerges

h i m s e l f as t h e

product

is

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.-

it is as i f F o u c a u l t h i m s e l f t a c i t l y a c k n o w l e d g e s

continuity

o f resistance to

power

is n o t

enough

to

that

this

absolute

ground

effective

resistance to power, a resistance that would not be 'part o f the g a m e ' but would allow the s u b j e c t to assume a position that e x e m p t s h i m from

the

disciplinary/confessional m o d e o f power practised from early Christianity t o p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . F o u c a u l i t h o u g h t t h a t h e l o c a t e d s u c h a n e x c e p t i o n in Antiquity: the A n t i q u e notions o f the 'use o f pleasures' a n d 'care for the S e l f d o n o t yet i n v o l v e r e f e r e n c e t o a u n i v e r s a l L a w . H o w e v e r , t h e i m a g e o f A n t i q u i t y d e p l o y e d i n F o u c a u l t ' s last two b o o k s is stricio

sensu

phantas­

m i c , t h e f a n t a s y o f a d i s c i p l i n e w h i c h , e v e n i n its m o s t a s c e t i c v e r s i o n , n e e d s n o r e f e r e n c e to the symbolic L a w / P r o h i b i t i o n o f pleasures without sexuality. In his a t t e m p t to b r e a k o u t o f the vicious cycle o f p o w e r resistance, F o u c a u l t resorts to the myth o f a state ' b e f o r e the Fall' which

d i s c i p l i n e was s e l f - f a s h i o n e d , n o t

a procedure

imposed

by

and in the

THE TICKLISH

252 culpabilizing

universal

moral

order.

SUBJECT

In

this

phantasmic

Beyond,

one

e n c o u n t e r s t h e s a m e d i s c i p l i n a r y m e c h a n i s m s as l a t e r , o n l y i n a d i f f e r e n t modality, a kind o f correlate to Malinowski-Mead's mythical

description

o f non-repressed S o u t h Pacific sexuality. N o w o n d e r F o u c a u l t reads

pre-

C h r i s t i a n t e x t s i n a way w h i c h t o t a l l y d i f f e r s f r o m h i s u s u a l p r a c t i c e o f reading:

his l a s t t w o b o o k s a r e m u c h

closer to the standard

academic

' h i s t o r y o f i d e a s ' . I n o t h e r w o r d s , F o u c a u l t ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e S e l f in p r e C h r i s t i a n A n t i q u i t y is t h e n e c e s s a r y R o m a n t i c - n a i v e s u p p l e m e n t cynical description resistance overlap.

o f power

relations after the Fall, w h e r e

to

his

power

and

3

S o w h e n , i n Discipline

and Punish

a n d V o l u m e I o f The History

of

F o u c a u l t e n d l e s s l y v a r i e s t h e t h e m e o f p o w e r as p r o d u c t i v e , w i t h

Sexuality, respect

t o p o l i t i c a l a n d e d u c a t i o n a l p o w e r as well as p o w e r o v e r s e x u a l i t y ; w h e n he emphasizes again

and

again

h o w , in t h e c o u r s e o f t h e

nineteenth

c e n t u r y , 'repressive' a t t e m p t s to c a t e g o r i z e , discipline, e t c . sexuality, far from

constraining and limiting their object, 'natural'

sexuality, in fact

p r o d u c e d it a n d l e d t o its p r o l i f e r a t i o n ( s e x was a f f i r m e d as t h e

ultimate

' s e c r e t ' , t h e p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e , o f h u m a n a c t i v i t y ) , is h e n o t , i n a way, asserting the H e g e l i a n thesis o n h o w reflexive p r o b i n g into a t r a n s c e n d e n t I n - i t s e l f p r o d u c e s t h e v e r y i n a c c e s s i b l e X t h a t s e e m s f o r e v e r t o e l u d e iLs final g r a s p ? ( T h i s p o i n t c a n b e m a d e v e r y c l e a r l y a p r o p o s o f t h e m y s t e r i ­ ous 'dark c o n t i n e n t ' o f F e m i n i n e Sexuality allegedly eluding the grasp o f p a t r i a r c h a l d i s c o u r s e : is n o t t h i s m y s t e r i o u s B e y o n d t h e v e r y p r o d u c t m a l e d i s c o u r s e ? Is n o t F e m i n i n e M y s t e r y t h e u l t i m a t e male

of

fantasy?)

As f o r d i s c i p l i n i n g a n d c o n t r o l l i n g , F o u c a u l t ' s p o i n t is n o t o n l y h o w t h e o b j e c t t h e s e m e a s u r e s w a n t t o c o n t r o l a n d s u b d u e is a l r e a d y t h e i r (legal

and

criminal

measures

engender

their

own

forms

of

effect

criminal

t r a n s g r e s s i o n , e t c . ) : t h e very s u b j e c t w h o r e s i s t s t h e s e d i s c i p l i n a r y m e a s u r e s a n d t r i e s t o e l u d e t h e i r g r a s p is, i n his h e a r t o f h e a r t s , b r a n d e d b y t h e m , formed

by

them.

nineteenth-century

Foucault's

ultimate

example

workers' m o v e m e n t for the

would

have

been

the

'liberation o f work':

e a r l y l i b e r t a r i a n c r i t i c i s m s l i k e P a u l L a f a r g u e ' s Right

to Laziness

as

had already

p o i n t e d o u t , t h e W o r k e r w h o w a n t e d h i m s e l f l i b e r a t e d was t h e p r o d u c t o f d i s c i p l i n a r y e t h i c s , t h a t is, in h i s v e r y a t t e m p t t o g e t r i d o f t h e

domination

o f C a p i t a l , h e w a n t e d t o e s t a b l i s h h i m s e l f as t h e d i s c i p l i n e d w o r k e r

who

w o r k s f o r h i m s e l f , w h o is fully h i s o w n m a s t e r ( a n d t h u s l o s e s t h e r i g h t t o resist,

since

he

cannot

resist h i m s e l f . . . ) . O n

this

level, P o w e r

and

R e s i s t a n c e a r e e f f e c t i v e l y c a u g h t in a d e a d l y m u t u a l e m b r a c e : t h e r e is n o P o w e r without R e s i s t a n c e (in o r d e r to function, P o w e r n e e d s an X w h i c h e l u d e s its g r a s p ) ; t h e r e is n o R e s i s t a n c e w i t h o u t P o w e r ( P o w e r is a l r e a d y

PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS

253

formative o f that very k e r n e l o n b e h a l f o f w h i c h the o p p r e s s e d

subject

resists t h e h o l d o f P o w e r ) . T h e r e is t h u s n o t h i n g m o r e m i s g u i d e d t h a n t o a r g u e t h a t F o u c a u l t , i n V o l u m e 1 o f h i s History

of Sexuality,

o p e n s u p t h e way f o r i n d i v i d u a l s

to

rearticulate-resignify-displace the p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s they are c a u g h t in: the whole point and strength

o f his f o r c e f u l a r g u m e n t a t i o n

lies i n

his

c l a i m that r e s i s t a n c e s t o p o w e r a r e g e n e r a t e d by t h e very m a t r i x they s e e m to oppose.

In

other

words,

the

point

o f his n o t i o n

o f 'biopower'

p r e c i s e l y t o give a n a c c o u n t o f h o w d i s c i p l i n a r y ' p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s c o n s t i t u t e i n d i v i d u a l s directly, b y p e n e t r a t i n g i n d i v i d u a l b o d i e s a n d ing

the level of

subjectivization'

( t h a t is, t h e w h o l e

problematic

is can

bypass­ of

how

individuals i d e o l o g i c a l l y subjectivize t h e i r p r e d i c a m e n t , h o w they relate to t h e i r c o n d i t i o n s o f e x i s t e n c e ) . I t is t h e r e f o r e m e a n i n g l e s s , i n a way, t o criticize h i m for n o t r e n d e r i n g

this subjectivization t h e m a t i c : his w h o l e

p o i n t is t h a t i f o n e is t o a c c o u n t f o r s o c i a l d i s c i p l i n e a n d

subordination,

o n e has t o b y p a s s it! L a t e r , h o w e v e r ( s t a r t i n g f r o m V o l u m e I I o f h i s of Sexuality),

History

h e is c o m p e l l e d t o r e t u r n t o t h i s v e r y o s t r a c i z e d t o p i c o f

subjectivization: how individuals

subjectivize their condition,

r e l a t e t o i t - o r , t o p u t it in A l t h u s s e r i a n

how

thev

terms, how they are not only

individuals c a u g h t in disciplinary state a p p a r a t u s e s , b u t also i n t e r p e l l a t e d subjects. H o w , t h e n , d o e s F o u c a u l t r e l a t e to H e g e l ? A c c o r d i n g t o J u d i t h B u t l e r , t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two is t h a t H e g e l d o e s n o t t a k e t h e

4

proliferating

e f f e c t o f d i s c i p l i n a t o r y activity i n t o a c c o u n t : in H e g e l , f o r m a t i v e d i s c i p l i n ­ i n g s i m p l y w o r k s o n t h e b o d y t h a t is p r e s u p p o s e d as a n I n - i t s e l f , g i v e n as p a r t o f i n e r t h u m a n n a t u r e , a n d g r a d u a l l y ' s u b l a t e s ' / m e d i a t e s its i m m e ­ diacy; while F o u c a u l t e m p h a s i z e s how disciplining m e c h a n i s m s themselves s e t in m o t i o n a wild p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f w h a t t h e y e n d e a v o u r t o s u p p r e s s

and

r e g u l a t e : t h e v e r y ' r e p r e s s i o n ' o f s e x u a l i t y gives r i s e t o n e w f o r m s o f s e x u a l pleasure. . . ,

5

H o w e v e r , w h a t s e e m s t o b e m i s s i n g in F o u c a u l t , t h e

d i a l e c t i c i a n par excellence,

anti-

is p r e c i s e l y t h e p r o p e r l y H e g e l i a n s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l

t u r n in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n s e x u a l i t y a n d its d i s c i p l i n a t o r y c o n t r o l : n o t only does confessional self-probing unearth new forms o f sexuality the confessional

activity itself becomes sexualized,

gives rise to a satisfaction

of its

own: ' T h e r e p r e s s i v e law is n o t e x t e r n a l t o t h e l i b i d o t h a t it r e p r e s s e s , b u t the

repressive

law r e p r e s s e s

to the

extent

that

repression

becomes

a

1

l i b i d i n a l activity.' ' T a k e politically c o r r e c t p r o b i n g

into hate speech and

sexual

harass­

m e n t : t h e t r a p i n t o w h i c h t h i s e f f o r t falls is n o t o n l y t h a t i t m a k e s aware o f ( a n d thus g e n e r a t e s ) new f o r m s a n d layers o f h u m i l i a t i o n

us and

254 harassment replaced

(we l e a r n

by

THE

TICKLISH

that

'fat',

SUBJECT

'stupid',

'weight-challenged',

etc.);

'short-sighted'

the

catch

. . . are

is, r a t h e r ,

to

that

be this

c e n s o r i n g activity itself, b y a k i n d o f d e v i l i s h d i a l e c t i c a l r e v e r s a l , s t a r t s t o p a r d c i p a t e i n w h a t it p u r p o r t s t o c e n s o r a n d fight — is it n o t i m m e d i a t e l y e v i d e n t h o w , in d e s i g n a t i n g s o m e b o d y as ' m e n t a l l y c h a l l e n g e d ' i n s t e a d o f ' s t u p i d ' , a n i r o n i c d i s t a n c e c a n always c r e e p i n a n d give rise to a n e x c e s s o f h u m i l i a t i n g a g g r e s s i v i t y - o n e a d d s i n s u l t t o i n j u r y , as it w e r e , b y t h e s u p p l e m e n t a r y p o l i t e p a t r o n i z i n g d i m e n s i o n (it is w e l l k n o w n t h a t a g g r e s ­ sivity c o a t e d i n p o l i t e n e s s c a n b e m u c h m o r e p a i n f u l t h a n d i r e c t l y a b u s i v e w o r d s , s i n c e v i o l e n c e is h e i g h t e n e d by t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n t h e aggressive c o n t e n t a n d the polite surface form . . . ) . In short, what F o u cault's a c c o u n t o f the discourses that discipline a n d

regulate

sexuality

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 p r o c e s s b y m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e mechanism

i t s e l f b e c o m e s e r o t i c i z e d , t h a t is, c o n t a m i n a t e d

power

by what

it

e n d e a v o u r s t o ' r e p r e s s ' . I t is n o t e n o u g h t o c l a i m t h a t t h e a s c e t i c C h r i s t i a n s u b j e c t w h o , i n o r d e r t o fight t e m p t a t i o n , e n u m e r a t e s a n d c a t e g o r i z e s t h e various forms o f temptation,

actually p r o l i f e r a t e s t h e o b j e c t h e tries to

c o m b a t ; t h e p o i n t is, r a t h e r , to c o n c e i v e o f h o w t h e a s c e t i c w h o f l a g e l l a t e s in o r d e r

t o resist t e m p t a t i o n

finds s e x u a l pleasure

in t h i s v e r y a c t o f

inflicting wounds o n himself. T h e p a r a d o x a t w o r k h e r e is t h a t t h e - v e r y f a c t t h a t t h e r e is n o existing

positive

B o d y in

which

one

could

pre­

ontologically ground

our

resistance to disciplinary p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s m a k e s effective r e s i s t a n c e possible. T h a t Foucault and

is t o say: t h e

normative standard are

unable

to

standard

'post-structuralists'

Habermasian

ground

resistance

anisms themselves o p e n a surplus

against any

e x e m p t from the c o n t i n g e n t historical context, they to

the

F o u c a u l d i a n c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t is t h a t t h e generate

argument

i n g e n e r a l is t h a t s i n c e t h e y d e n y

in

up their

F e m i n i n e Essence (from

existing

power

edifice.

t h e s p a c e f o r r e s i s t a n c e , in s o f a r a s object.

The

repressive' disciplinary m e c h ­

Although

the

reference

t h e E t e r n a l F e m i n i n e to m o r e

to

they some

contemporary

f e m i n i n e w r i t i n g ) s e e m s to g r o u n d w o m e n ' s r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e m a s c u l i n e s y m b o l i c o r d e r , t h i s r e f e r e n c e n o n e t h e less c o n f i r m s f e m i n i n i t y as t h e pre-given f o u n d a t i o n u p o n w h i c h the m a s c u l i n e discursive m a c h i n e works -

h e r e r e s i s t a n c e is s i m p l y t h e r e s i s t a n c e o f t h e p r e - s y m h o l i c

t o its s y m b o l i c w o r k i n g - t h r o u g h .

foundation

If, h o w e v e r , o n e p o s i t s t h a t t h e

patriar­

chal e n d e a v o u r to contain a n d categorize femininity itself g e n e r a t e s forms o f r e s i s t a n c e , o n e o p e n s u p a s p a c e f o r a f e m i n i n e r e s i s t a n c e t h a t is n o l o n g e r r e s i s t a n c e o n b e h a l f o f t h e u n d e r l y i n g f o u n d a t i o n b u t r e s i s t a n c e as t h e a c t i v e p r i n c i p l e in e x c e s s o v e r t h e o p p r e s s i v e f o r c e .

PASSIONATE

(DIS) ATTACHMENTS

255

T o avoid the s t a n d a r d e x a m p l e o f sexuality, however, let us recall t h e formation o f national identity through

resistance to colonialist d o m i n a ­

t i o n : w h a t p r e c e d e s c o l o n i a l i s t d o m i n a t i o n is s e l f - e n c l o s e d e t h n i c a w a r e ­ n e s s , w h i c h l a c k s t h e s t r o n g will t o r e s i s t a n d t o a s s e r t its i d e n t i t y f o r c e f u l l y a g a i n s t t h e O t h e r ; o n l y as a r e a c t i o n t o c o l o n i a l i s t d o m i n a t i o n awareness transformed

i n t o a c t i v e p o l i t i c a l will t o a s s e r t o n e ' s

is t h i s national

identity against the o p p r e s s o r - anti-colonialist n a t i o n a l liberation move­ m e n t s a r e stricto sensu g e n e r a t e d b y c o l o n i a l i s t o p p r e s s i o n ; t h a t is t o say, it is this o p p r e s s i o n w h i c h b r i n g s a b o u t t h e s h i f t f r o m p a s s i v e e t h n i c selfa w a r e n e s s g r o u n d e d i n m y t h i c a l t r a d i t i o n t o t h e e m i n e n t l y m o d e r n will t o a s s e r t o n e ' s e t h n i c i d e n t i t y in t h e f o r m o f a n a t i o n - s t a t e . O n e is t e m p t e d t o say t h a t t h e will t o g a i n p o l i t i c a l i n d e p e n d e n c e f r o m t h e c o l o n i z e r i n t h e g u i s e o f a n e w i n d e p e n d e n t n a t i o n - s t a t e is t h e u l t i m a t e p r o o f t h a t t h e colonized

ethnic

group

is t h o r o u g h l y

integrated

into

universe o f the c o l o n i z e r . W e a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with

the

the

ideological

contradiction

b e t w e e n t h e e n u n c i a t e d c o n t e n t a n d t h e p o s i t i o n o f e n u n c i a t i o n : as f o r the enunciated content, the

anti-colonialist m o v e m e n t , o f course, con­

c e i v e s i t s e l f as a r e t u r n to p r e - c o l o n i a l r o o t s , a s a s s e r t i n g o n e ' s c u l t u r a l , etc., i n d e p e n d e n c e from t h e c o l o n i z e r - b u t t h e very f o r m o f this assertion is a l r e a d y t a k e n o v e r f r o m t h e c o l o n i z e r : it is t h e f o r m o f W e s t e r n n a t i o n state political a u t o n o m y - n o w o n d e r the C o n g r e s s Party in I n d i a , w h i c h l e d t o i n d e p e n d e n c e , was i n s t i g a t e d b y E n g l i s h l i b e r a l s a n d o r g a n i z e d b v I n d i a n i n t e l l e c t u a l s studying at O x f o r d . D o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d for t h e multitude o f quests for national sovereignty a m o n g the e t h n i c groups o f the ex-Soviet U n i o n ? A l t h o u g h

C h e c h e n s evoke their

hundred-year-old

s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t R u s s i a n d o m i n a t i o n , t o d a y ' s f o r m o f t h i s s t r u g g l e is c l e a r l y the o u t c o m e o f the

modernizing

effect

o f the Russian colonization o f

traditional C h e c h e n society. A g a i n s t B u t l e r , o n e is t h u s t e m p t e d t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t H e g e l was w e l l aware o f t h e r e t r o a c t i v e p r o c e s s by m e a n s o f w h i c h o p p r e s s i v e p o w e r itself g e n e r a t e s t h e f o r m o f r e s i s t a n c e - is n o t t h i s v e r y p a r a d o x c o n t a i n e d i n H e g e l ' s n o t i o n o f p o s i t i n g t h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , t h a t is, o f h o w t h e a c t i v i t y of

positing-mediating

does

not

merely

elaborate

the

presupposed

i m m e d i a t e - n a t u r a l G r o u n d , b u t t h o r o u g h l y t r a n s f o r m s t h e very c o r e o f its identity? T h e very In-itself to w h i c h

Chechens endeavour

to return

is

already m e d i a t e d - p o s i t 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 , w h i c h d e p r i v e d t h e m o f their ethnic roots. This argumentation ized

to repeat

the

may appear Eurocentrist, c o n d e m n i n g the colon­

European

imperalist pattern

by m e a n s

o f t h e very-

g e s t u r e o f r e s i s t i n g it - h o w e v e r , it is a l s o p o s s i b l e t o g i v e it p r e c i s e l y t h e

THE TICKLISH

256

SUBJECT

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

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 forces

t h a t will b r i n g

about

its d e m i s e .

the

antagonism, activates

( T h e situation

here

the

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

producing

key point an

is t h a t

through

the

effect

o f proliferation,

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

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 downfall.

of

of a

ultimate

7

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' reverse

the

Foucauldian

than

notion

its c a u s e . ) O n e

o f an

is t h u s t e m p t e d

all-encompassing power

to

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 , 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

the

8

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

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

the

less

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 b u t is h i s a u t o n o m o u s activity. . . self-effacing)

disavowal

also

him

This structure o f double (and thereby

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

THE TICKLISH

258

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

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

provided

with

a false

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 interpellation,

there

does

not

is p r e c i s e l y t h e the

interpellation/subjectivization

effect

and

Lacanian assertion repeat

p r o o f o f successful

o f a subject prior

the very ideological illusion

to 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 things,

is a l s o

that'

-

in

short,

imaginary'

distance

259 towards

symbolic

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is t h e v e r y s i g n o f its s u c c e s s . F o r L a c a n , however, the d i m e n s i o n o f subjectivity that eludes symbolic i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is not t h e i m a g i n a r y w e a l t h / t e x t u r e o f e x p e r i e n c e s w h i c h allows m e t o a s s u m e a n i l l u s o r y d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s m v s y m b o l i c i d e n t i t y : t h e L a c a n i a n ' b a r r e d s u b j e c t ' ( s ) is ' e m p t y '

n o t in t h e s e n s e o f s o m e

p s y c h o l o g i c o - e x i s t e n t i a l ' e x p e r i e n c e o f a void' but, r a t h e r , in t h e s e n s e o f a d i m e n s i o n o f self-relating negativity w h i c h a priori eludes the d o m a i n of vecu, o f lived e x p e r i e n c e . T h e o l d s t o r y o f t h e p r i n c e w h o d i s g u i s e s h i m s e l f as a s t a b l e b o y t o s e d u c e t h e p r i n c e s s , h i s b r i d e , in o r d e r t o b e s u r e t h a t s h e loves h i m f o r w h a t h e r e a l l y is, n o t f o r h i s t i t l e , is t h u s n o t a p p r o p r i a t e t o m a r k t h e d i s t i n c t i o n w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e : t h e L a c a n i a n s u b j e c t qua S is n e i t h e r

the

title

phantasmic object, that

which

constitutes my symbolic identity

nor

the

s o m e t h i n g in m e ' b e y o n d m y s y m b o l i c identities

which makes m e worthy o f the Other's desire. 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,

THE

260

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

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

simply

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 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

'doesn't exist' -

say, in t h e

Call o f G o d : Althusser's p o i n t

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 big O t h e r -

( o r ' p o s i t s ' ) this

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 O t h e r o f the power structure

1 2

-

big

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 t h a t / myself urn well aware of how, outside the grasp of my knowledge, circulate

which determine

my symbolic identity in the eyes of the social

fact

databases '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

performatively determine

factually

'inaccurate', none

the

less

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 ' .

F r o m Resistance to the Act 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 ' ) 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

1 1

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

261

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS

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: I f the u n c o n s c i o u s escapes from a given normative injunction, to what o t h e r injunction does it form an a t t a c h m e n t ? W h a t m a k e s us think that the u n c o n ­ scious is any less structured by the power relations that pervade cultural signifiers than is the language o f the subject? I f we find an a t t a c h m e n t to subjection at the level o f the u n c o n s c i o u s , what kind o f resistance is to be wrought from t h a t ?

11

T h e outstanding case o f such unconscious 'passionate attachments'

that

s u s t a i n P o w e r is p r e c i s e l y t h e i n h e r e n t r e f l e x i v e e r o t i c i z a t i o n o f r e g u l a t o r y p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s a n d p r o c e d u r e s t h e m s e l v e s : in a n o b s e s s i o n a l r i t u a l , t h e very p e r f o r m a n c e

o f the compulsive ritual

destined

to k e e p

illicit

t e m p t a t i o n a t b a y b e c o m e s t h e s o u r c e o f l i b i d i n a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . I t is t h u s t h e 'reflexivity' involved in the r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n r e g u l a t o r y p o w e r a n d s e x u a l i t y , t h e way r e p r e s s i v e r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e d u r e s t h e m s e l v e s a r e l i b i d i nally invested

and

function

as a s o u r c e

o f libidinal

satisfaction,

this

' m a s o c h i s t i c ' reflexive t u r n , w h i c h r e m a i n s u n a c c o u n t e d for in the stan­ d a r d notion o f the 'internalization' o f social n o r m s into psychic prohibi­ tions.

The

second

problem

with

the

quick

identification

of

the

U n c o n s c i o u s as t h e s i t e o f r e s i s t a n c e is t h a t e v e n i f w e c o n c e d e t h a t t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is t h e s i t e o f r e s i s t a n c e w h i c h f o r e v e r p r e v e n t s t h e

smooth

f u n c t i o n i n g o f p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s , t h a t is, t h a t i n t e r p e l l a t i o n — t h e s u b ­ j e c t ' s r e c o g n i t i o n i n h i s / h e r a l l o t t e d s y m b o l i c p l a c e - is always u l t i m a t e l y i n c o m p l e t e , failed, 'does such resistance d o anything to alter o r the dominant short:

expand

injunctions or interpellations o f subject formation?'

1 5

In

[t]his resistance establishes the i n c o m p l e t e c h a r a c t e r o f any effort

to p r o d u c e

a s u b j e c t by d i s c i p l i n a r y m e a n s , b u t

rearticulate the d o m i n a n t terms o f productive T h a t is t h e

it r e m a i n s u n a b l e

to

power'."'

k e r n e l o f B u t l e r ' s criticism o f L a c a n : a c c o r d i n g to

her.

L a c a n reduces resistance to the imaginary m i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f the symbolic s t r u c t u r e ; s u c h a r e s i s t a n c e , a l t h o u g h it thwarts the full s y m b o l i c realiz­ a t i o n , n e v e r t h e l e s s d e p e n d s o n it a n d

a s s e r t s it in its v e r y

u n a b l e t o r e a r t i c u l a t e its t e r m s : ' F o r t h e L a c a n i a n , t h e n , t h e

opposition, imaginary

s i g n i f i e s t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e d i s c u r s i v e - t h a t is, s y m b o l i c - c o n s t i t u t i o n of identity.'

1 7

Along these lines, she even qualifies the L a c a n i a n U n c o n ­

s c i o u s i t s e l f as i m a g i n a r y , t h a t is, as ' t h a t w h i c h t h w a r t s a n y e f f o r t o f t h e s y m b o l i c to c o n s t i t u t e s e x e d i d e n t i t y c o h e r e n t l y a n d fully, a n u n c o n s c i o u s i n d i c a t e d by t h e slips a n d i m a g i n a r y in l a n g u a g e ' .

1 8

gaps that

characterize the workings

of

the

A g a i n s t t h i s b a c k g r o u n d , it is t h e n p o s s i b l e t o

THE

262

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

c l a i m that, in L a c a n , 'psychic r e s i s t a n c e p r e s u m e s the c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e law i n its a n t e r i o r , s y m b o l i c f o r m a n d , i n t h a t s e n s e , c o n t r i b u t e s t o its status

quo.

defeat. •

In

such

a view,

resistance appears

doomed

to

perpetual

],>

T h e first t h i n g t o n o t e h e r e is t h a t B u t l e r s e e m s t o c o n f l a t e two r a d i c a l l y o p p o s e d u s e s o f t h e t e r m ' r e s i s t a n c e ' : o n e is t h e socio-criticaluse

(resistance

t o p o w e r , e t c . ) , t h e o t h e r t h e clinical use o p e r a t i v e i n p s y c h o a n a l y s i s ( t h e p a t i e n t ' s r e s i s t a n c e to a c k n o w l e d g i n g t h e u n c o n s c i o u s truth o f his symp­ t o m s , t h e m e a n i n g o f his d r e a m s , e t c . ) . W h e n L a c a n effectively d e t e r m i n e s resistance

as ' i m a g i n a r y ' ,

he

has

in

mind

the

misrecognition

of

the

s y m b o l i c n e t w o r k w h i c h d e t e r m i n e s us. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , f o r L a c a n , radical rearticulation o f the p r e d o m i n a n t

s y m b o l i c O r d e r is a l t o g e t h e r

p o s s i b l e - t h i s is w h a t h i s n o t i o n o f point de capiton

(die 'quilting point' o r

t h e M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r ) is a b o u t : w h e n a n e w point

de, ccipiton e m e r g e s , t h e

s o c i o - s y m b o l i c f i e l d is n o t o n l y d i s p l a c e d , its v e r y s t r u c t u r i n g

principle

c h a n g e s . O n e is t h u s t e m p t e d t o r e v e r s e t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n L a c a n and

F o u c a u l t as e l a b o r a t e d

by B u t l e r ( L a c a n c o n s t r a i n s r e s i s t a n c e

to

imaginary thwarting, while F o u c a u l t , w h o has a m o r e pluralistic n o t i o n o f d i s c o u r s e as a h e t e r o g e n e o u s f i e l d o f m u l t i p l e p r a c t i c e s , a l l o w s f o r a m o r e thorough

symbolic subversion

and

r e a r t i c u l a t i o n ) : it is F o u c a u l t

who

insists o n t h e i m m a n e n c e o f r e s i s t a n c e t o P o w e r , w h i l e L a c a n l e a v e s o p e n t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a r a d i c a l r e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f t h e e n t i r e s y m b o l i c f i e l d by m e a n s o f a n net p r o p e r , a p a s s a g e t h r o u g h ' s y m b o l i c d e a t h ' . I n s h o r t , it is L a c a n w h o allows us t o c o n c e p t u a l i z e t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n i m a g i n a r y r e s i s t a n c e (false t r a n s g r e s s i o n t h a t r e a s s e r t s t h e s y m b o l i c s t a t u s q u o

and

e v e n s e r v e s as 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 ) a n d a c t u a l s y m b o l i c r e a r t i c u l a t i o n via t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e R e a l o f a n act. O n l y o n this l e v e l - i f w e t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e L a c a n i a n n o t i o n s o f point

de capiton

a n d t h e a c t as r e a l — d o e s a m e a n i n g f u l

dialogue

with

B u t l e r b e c o m e p o s s i b l e . B u t l e r ' s m a t r i x o f s o c i a l e x i s t e n c e (as w e l l as L a c a n ' s ) is t h a t o f a f o r c e d c h o i c e : i n o r d e r t o e x i s t at all ( w i t h i n socio-symbolic s p a c e ) o n e has to a c c e p t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l

the

alienation, the

definition o f o n e ' s e x i s t e n c e in the terms o f the 'big O t h e r ' , the

predom­

inant

to

structure

however,

o f the

this s h o u l d

socio-symbolic s p a c e . As she

not constrain

us

to

(what she

is q u i c k

perceives as)

add, the

L a c a n i a n view a c c o r d i n g l o w h i c h t h e s y m b o l i c O r d e r is a g i v e n t h a t c a n b e e f f e c t i v e l y t r a n s g r e s s e d o n l y i f t h e s u b j e c t pavs t h e p r i c e o f p s y c h o t i c e x c l u s i o n ; s o t h a t o n t h e o n e h a n d w e h a v e f a l s e i m a g i n a r y r e s i s t a n c e to t h e s y m b o l i c N o r m a n d , o n t h e o t h e r , p s y c h o t i c b r e a k d o w n , with t h e full

PASSIONATE (DIS ) ATTACHMENTS

263

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 dialectics o f presupposing

fixity

o f the Symbolic the

Hegelian

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

pursued,

in

of death, can order

existence nevertheless

to e x p o s e

and open

be

risked, death c o u r t e d o r

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?-"

-

the

Lacanian

answer

is c l e a r :

'to

desire

something

other

than

its

c o n t i n u e d " s o c i a l e x i s t e n c e ' " , a n d t h u s t o fall ' i n t o s o m e k i n d o f d e a t h ' , t o risk a g e s t u r e b y m e a n s o f w h i c h d e a t h is ' c o u r t e d o r p u r s u e d ' , i n d i c a t e s p r e c i s e l y h o w L a c a n r c c o n c e p t u a l i z e d t h e F r e u d i a n d e a t h d r i v e as

the

e l e m e n t a r y f o r m o f t h e ethical act, t h e a c t as i r r e d u c i b l e t o a ' s p e e c h a c t ' which

r e l i e s f o r its p e r f o r m a t i v e

symbolic rules a n d / o r

power

on

the

pre-established

Is t h i s n o t t h e w h o l e p o i n t o f L a c a n ' s r e a d i n g o f Antigone. effectively

set o f

norms.

risks h e r e n t i r e s o c i a l e x i s t e n c e , d e f y i n g

Antigone

the socio-symbolic

p o w e r o f t h e City e m b o d i e d i n t h e r u l e r ( C r e o n ) , t h e r e b y ' f a l l i n g i n t o s o m e kind o f d e a t h ' (i.e. sustaining a symbolic death, e x c l u s i o n f r o m s o c i o - s y m b o l i c s p a c e ) . F o r L a c a n , t h e r e is n o e t h i c a l a c t p r o p e r

the

without

t a k i n g t h e risk o f s u c h a m o m e n t a r y - ' s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e b i g O t h e r " , o f t h e

THE

264

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

socio-symbolic n e t w o r k that g u a r a n t e e s t h e s u b j e c t ' s identity: a n a u t h e n t i c act o c c u r s o n l y w h e n t h e s u b j e c t risks a g e s t u r e t h a t is n o l o n g e r ' c o v e r e d u p ' b y t h e b i g O t h e r . L a c a n p u r s u e s all p o s s i b l e v e r s i o n s o f t h i s e n t e r i n g the

domain

'between

the

two

deaths':

not

only Antigone

after

her

e x p u l s i o n , b u t a l s o O e d i p u s at C o l o n n u s , K i n g L e a r , P o e ' s M r V a l d e m a r , and

so o n ,

up

to

Sygne from

Claudel's

Coufontaine

trilogy -

their

c o m m o n p r e d i c a m e n t is t h a t t h e y all f o u n d t h e m s e l v e s in t h i s d o m a i n o f the u n d e a d , ' b e y o n d d e a t h a n d life', in which the causality o f symbolic F a t e is s u s p e n d e d . O n e s h o u l d c r i t i c i z e B u t l e r f o r c o n f l a t i n g t h i s a c t i n its r a d i c a l d i m e n ­ sion with the p e r f o r m a t i v e r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f o n e ' s s y m b o l i c c o n d i t i o n via its r e p e t i t i v e d i s p l a c e m e n t s : d i e two a r e n o t t h e s a m e - t h a t is t o say, o n e should maintain the crucial distinction between a m e r e 'performative reconfiguration', hegemonic

a subversive

field

displacement

which

remains

within

the

a n d , as it w e r e , c o n d u c t s a n i n t e r n a l g u e r r i l l a w a r o f

turning the terms o f the h e g e m o n i c

field

a g a i n s t itself, and t h e

m o r e r a d i c a l act o f a t h o r o u g h r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e e n t i r e

much

field

which

r e d e f i n e s t h e v e r y c o n d i t i o n s o f s o c i a l l y s u s t a i n e d p e r f o r m a t i v i t y . I t is t h u s B u t l e r h e r s e l f w h o e n d s u p in a p o s i t i o n o f a l l o w i n g p r e c i s e l y f o r m a r g i n a l 'reconfigurations'

o f the

predominant

discourse -

who

remains

con­

s t r a i n e d t o a p o s i t i o n o f ' i n h e r e n t t r a n s g r e s s i o n ' , w h i c h n e e d s as a p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e t h e O t h e r in t h e guise o f a p r e d o m i n a n t d i s c o u r s e t h a t c a n 2

be only marginally displaced or transgressed. ' F r o m t h e L a c a n i a n s t a n d p o i n t , B u t l e r is t h u s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t o o o p t i ­ mistic

and

subversive

too

pessimistic. O n

potential

the

o f disturbing

one

the

hand

she

functioning

overestimates o f the

big

the

Other

t h r o u g h the practices o f performative r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n / d i s p l a c e m e n t : such practices ultimately s u p p o r t what they i n t e n d to subvert, since t h e very field

o f s u c h ' t r a n s g r e s s i o n s ' is a l r e a d y t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t , e v e n

engen­

d e r e d , by t h e h e g e m o n i c f o r m o f t h e big O t h e r - what L a c a n calls ' t h e big O t h e r '

are symbolic norms

and

their codified transgressions.

The

O e d i p a l o r d e r , this g a r g a n t u a n s y m b o l i c m a t r i x e m b o d i e d in a vast s e t o f i d e o l o g i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , r i t u a l s a n d p r a c t i c e s , is a m u c h t o o d e e p l y r o o t e d and

'substantial'

entity to b e effectively

undermined

by t h e

marginal

gestures o f performative displacement. O n the o t h e r hand, B u d e r does n o t allow for the radical gesture o f the t h o r o u g h h e g e m o n i c s y m b o l i c o r d e r i n its t o t a l i t y .

restructuring

o f the

PASSIONATE (DIS ) ATTACHMENTS

265

'Traversing the Fantasy' 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

minimum middle

is, a s s u m e s

la douleur

o f s u p p o r t to his b e i n g

term

' F a t h e r is b e a t i n g m e '

beaten'). This fundamental s c e n e o f passive suffering

d'exister,

and

thus

provides

(like Freud's primordially in

the

the

repressed

t r i a d o f ' A c h i l d is b e i n g

f a n t a s y is t h o r o u g h l y

inter-passive."

( s u b j e c t i o n ) is s t a g e d w h i c h

in it, a

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 foreclosure

performance:

is u l t i m a t e l y

assuming/staging

is it n o t a f a c t t h a t , i n t h e m ,

undone?

o f the

In

other

words,

what

phantasmic

scene

o f primordial

this very

if the

open

'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

'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

primordial 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

THE TICKLISH

266

SUBJECT

s y m b o l i c i d e n t i t y ( ' n i g g e r ' , ' b i t c h ' , e t c . ) - i t is n e v e r t h e l e s s p o s s i b l e f o r t h e m t o d i s p l a c e t h i s i d e n t i t y , t o r e c o n t e x t u a l i z e it, t o m a k e it w o r k f o r other purposes,

t o t u r n it a g a i n s t its h e g e m o n i c m o d e

o f functioning,

s i n c e s y m b o l i c i d e n t i t y r e t a i n s its h o l d o n l y b y its i n c e s s a n t r e p e t i t i v e r e enacting. W h a t L a c a n d o e s h e r e is t o i n t r o d u c e a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t w o t e r m s t h a t a r e i d e n t i f i e d in B u t l e r : t h e fundamental

fantasy

t h a t s e r v e s as t h e

u l t i m a t e s u p p o r t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g , a n d t h e symbolic identification

that

is a l r e a d y a s y m b o l i c r e s p o n s e t o t h e t r a u m a o f t h e p h a n t a s m i c ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' . T h e s y m b o l i c identity we a s s u m e in a f o r c e d c h o i c e , w h e n we r e c o g n i z e o u r s e l v e s i 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 , avowal o f t h e p h a n t a s m i c ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t '

relies o n

the

dis­

t h a t s e r v e s as its ulti­

m a t e s u p p o r t . ( I n a r m y life, f o r e x a m p l e , s u c h a ' p a s s i o n a t e

attachment'

is p r o v i d e d b y t h e h o m o s e x u a l l i n k w h i c h h a s t o b e d i s a v o w e d i f it is t o 1

r e m a i n operative.- ) T h i s leads to a further distinction b e t w e e n symbolic rearticulations, o r variations

on

the

fundamental

fantasy

that

do

not

a c t u a l l y u n d e r m i n e its h o l d ( l i k e t h e v a r i a t i o n s o n ' F a t h e r is b e a t i n g m e ' i n F r e u d ' s ' 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 ) , a n d t h e p o s s i b l e ' t r a v e r s i n g ' of, g a i n i n g a d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s , t h e v e r y f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y - t h e u l t i m a t e a i m 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 is f o r t h e s u b j e c t t o u n d o t h e

ultimate

'passionate attachment' that guarantees the consistency o f h i s / h e r being, a n d t h u s t o u n d e r g o w h a t L a c a n calls ' s u b j e c t i v e d e s t i t u t i o n ' . A t its m o s t fundamental,

the

primordial

'passionate

attachment'

to

the

scene o f

f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y is n o t ' d i a l e c t i c i z a b l e ' : it c a n o n l y b e t r a v e r s e d . Clint Eastwood's

Dirty Harry'

series o f

films

provides

an

exemplary

case o f t h e d i a l e c t i c a l r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n / v a r i a t i o n o f the fantasy: in t h e film,

the

m a s o c h i s t fantasy

is a l m o s t

directly a c k n o w l e d g e d

in

all

a m b i g u i t y , w h i l e i n s u b s e q u e n t i n s t a l m e n t s it l o o k s as i f E a s t w o o d

first its self­

c o n s c i o u s l y a c c e p t e d politically c o r r e c t criticism a n d displaced t h e fantasy to give t h e story a m o r e a c c e p t a b l e ' p r o g r e s s i v e ' flavour r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , h o w e v e r , the same fundamental

fantasy

i n all t h e s e

remains

operative.

W i t h all d u e r e s p e c t f o r t h e p o l i t i c a l e f f i c i e n c y o f s u c h r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , they thus d o n o t really disturb the hard p h a n t a s m i c c o r e , b u t even sustain it. A n d , i n c o n t r a s t t o B u t l e r , L a c a n ' s w a g e r is t h a t e v e n a n d

a l s o in

p o l i t i c s , it is p o s s i b l e t o a c c o m p l i s h a m o r e r a d i c a l g e s t u r e o f ' t r a v e r s i n g ' t h e very f u n d a m e n t a l

fantasy -

only such

gestures which disturb

this

1

p h a n t a s m i c c o r e a r e a u t h e n t i c acts.' '' T h i s c o m p e l s us t o r e d e f i n e t h e v e r y f u n d a m e n t a l

notion o f (social)

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n : b e c a u s e t h e p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t is o p e r a t i v e o n l y in so i a r as it is n o t o p e n l y a d m i t t e d ,

in s o far as w e m a i n t a i n o u r

distance

PASSIONATE (DIS ) ATTACHMENTS

267

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, love to a n o t h e r

agent

through

o f delegating

whom

the m e m b e r s ' hatred o r

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 towards

the object

( f o r this

reason,

the Church

t h e proper

distance

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 the p r o p e r

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with

the narrative

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

reality. F r o m

ruins

my youth, 1

( 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 an O t h e r ,

'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

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

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

distance

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 subjectivity outside

a n d r e s i s t a n c e : t h e r e is n o

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

THE TICKLISH

268

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 sociosymbolic 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

b e t r a y a l o f his f u n d a m e n t a l to

pay

for

entering

the

superego

manipulates

the

subject's

actual

' 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 socio-symbolic space,

and

assuming

had

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

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

his

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 In r e c e n t years, B u t l e r has e n d e a v o u r e d structionist'

to s u p p l e m e n t

criticism o f psychoanalysis by a

'positive'

h e r early 'con­ account

of

the

f o r m a t i o n o f ( m a s c u l i n e o r f e m i n i n e ) sexual identity, which draws o n the Freudian

mechanism of mourning

a n d m e l a n c h o l y . S h e relies h e r e

on

the o l d 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 f o r e c l o s u r e a n d r e p r e s s i o n : r e p r e s ­ s i o n is a n a c t p e r f o r m e d b y t h e s u b j e c t , a n a c t b y m e a n s o f w h i c h a s u b j e c t ( w h o is a l r e a d y t h e r e as a n a g e n t ) r e p r e s s e s p a r t o f his p s y c h i c c o n t e n t ; w h i l e f o r e c l o s u r e is a n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f e x c l u s i o n w h i c h g r o u n d s

the

s u b j e c t , a g e s t u r e o n w h i c h t h e very c o n s i s t e n c y o f the s u b j e c t ' s identity h i n g e s : this g e s t u r e c a n n o t b e ' a s s u m e d '

by t h e s u b j e c t , s i n c e s u c h

an

a s s u m p t i o n would involve the subject's disintegration. B u t l e r links this p r i m o r d i a l a n d constitutive f o r e c l o s u r e to h o m o s e x u ­ ality: it is t h e f o r e c l o s u r e o f t h e p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t to S a m e n e s s ( t o t h e p a r e n t o f t h e s a m e s e x ) w h i c h h a s t o b e s a c r i f i c e d i f t h e s u b j e c t is t o e n t e r t h e s p a c e o f t h e s o c i o - s y m b o l i c O r d e r a n d a c q u i r e a n i d e n t i t y i n it. T h i s leads to the m e l a n c h o l y constitutive o f t h e subject, i n c l u d i n g reflexive

turn which

defines subjectivity: o n e

represses the

the

primordial

a t t a c h m e n t - t h a t is, o n e s t a r t s t o h a t e t o l o v e t h e s a m e - s e x p a r e n t ;

then,

in a g e s t u r e o f reflexive reversal p r o p e r , this ' h a t e to love' t u r n s a r o u n d i n t o 'love to h a t e ' -

one

'loves to h a t e ' those w h o r e m i n d o n e o f the

p r i m o r d i a l l y l o s t o b j e c t s o f l o v e ( g a y s ) . . . . B u t l e r ' s l o g i c is i m p e c c a b l e i n its v e r y s i m p l i c i t y : F r e u d i n s i s t s t h a t t h e r e s u l t o f t h e l o s s o f a l i b i d i n a l object -

t h e way t o o v e r c o m e t h e m e l a n c h o l y a p r o p o s o f t h i s l o s s -

is

identification with the lost object: d o e s this n o t also h o l d for o u r s e x u a l i d e n t i t i e s ? Is n o t t h e ' n o r m a l ' h e t e r o s e x u a l i d e n t i t y t h e r e s u l t o f s u c c e s s ­ fully o v e r c o m i n g m e l a n c h o l y b y i d e n t i f y i n g w i t h t h e l o s t o b j e c t o f t h e s a m e s e x , w h i l e t h e h o m o s e x u a l is t h e o n e w h o r e f u s e s fully t o c o m e t o t e r m s w i t h t h i s l o s s , a n d c o n t i n u e s t o c l i n g t o t h e l o s t o b j e c t ? B u t l e r ' s first r e s u l t is t h u s t h a t t h e p r i m o r d i a l

F o r e c l o s u r e is n o t t h e p r o h i b i t i o n o f

incest: the prohibition o f incest already presupposes the p r e d o m i n a n c e o f

THE TICKLISH

270

SUBJECT

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 oedipal conflict presumes that h e t e r o s e x u a l desire has already b e e n accom­ plished, that the distinction between h e t e r o s e x u a l and h o m o s e x u a l has b e e n e n f o r c e d . . .; in this sense, the prohibition on incest presupposes t h e prohibi­ tion on homosexuality, for it presumes the heterosexualization o f desire. " 2

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: In this sense, the 'truest' lesbian m e l a n c h o l i c is the strictly straight woman, a n d the 'truest' gay male m e l a n c h o l i c is the strictly straight man. . . . T h e straight man becomes (mimes, cites, appropriates, assumes the status o f ) the man he 'never' loved and ' n e v e r ' grieved; the straight woman becomes the woman she 'never' loved and 'never' grieved.' 27

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: 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 f o r anima,

a

(animus

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 woman

he would

never

(a w o m a n ) : a m a n

be. He wouldn't be

caught

dead

'wants being

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

the her: 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 identification with m a s c u l i n i t y . '

271

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS 2 8

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

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 it that o n e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n

'passionate

attachment'

oscillates

which o n e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n - is

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:

1

D o c s it follow thai if o n e desires a woman, o n e is desiring from a m a s c u l i n e disposition, o r is that disposition retroactively attributed to the desiring position as a way o f retaining heterosexuality as the way o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g the separateness or alterity dial c o n d i t i o n s desire?-''

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 woman;

why

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 '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 lost our own sex in order, paradoxically,

to become if?"

having

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

loss is s t r i c t l y inherent,

n o t e x t e r n a l : t h e loss a w o m a n

has to a s s u m e in

o r d e r t o b e c o m e o n e is n o t t h e r e n u n c i a t i o n o f m a s c u l i n i t y b u t , p a r a d o x ­ ically, t h e l o s s o f s o m e t h i n g w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y , f o r e v e r p r e v e n t s h e r

from

fully b e c o m i n g a w o m a n - ' f e m i n i n i t y ' is a m a s q u e r a d e , a m a s k s u p p l e ­ m e n t i n g a f a i l u r e t o b e c o m e a w o m a n . O r - t o p u t it i n L a c l a u ' s t e r m s s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is t h e R e a l o f a n a n t a g o n i s m ,

-

not the Symbolic o f a

d i f f e r e n t i a l o p p o s i t i o n : s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is n o t t h e o p p o s i t i o n a l l o c a t i n g t o e a c h o f t h e two s e x e s its p o s i t i v e i d e n t i t y d e f i n e d in o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e o t h e r sex (so that w o m a n

is w h a t

man

is n o t , a n d

vice versa), but

c o m m o n L o s s o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h w o m a n is n e v e r fully a w o m a n

a

and

m a n is n e v e r fully a m a n - ' m a s c u l i n e ' a n d ' f e m i n i n e ' p o s i t i o n s a r e m e r e l y two m o d e s o f c o p i n g w i t h t h i s i n h e r e n t o b s t a c l e / l o s s . F o r that reason, the p a r a d o x o f 'having lost o u r own s e x in o r d e r

to

b e c o m e it' h o l d s even m o r e f o r s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e : what o n e has to lose in order

to assume sexual difference

qua

the

established set o f symbolic

o p p o s i t i o n s t h a t d e f i n e t h e c o m p l e m e n t a r y r o l e s o f ' m a n ' a n d ' w o m a n ' is s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e i t s e l f qua i m p o s s i b l e / r e a l . T h i s d i a l e c t i c a l p a r a d o x o f h o w a n e n t i t y c a n become X o n l y in s o f a r as i t h a s t o r e n o u n c e beingX

directly

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 y m b o l i c c a s t r a t i o n ' : t h e g a p b e t w e e n

t h e s y m b o l i c p l a c e a n d t h e e l e m e n t w h i c h fills it, t h e g a p o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h a n e l e m e n t c a n fill its p l a c e i n t h e s t r u c t u r e o n l y i n s o f a r as it is not directly this p l a c e . A l t h o u g h t h e title o f t h e r e c e n t b e s t s e l l e r Men are from Mars, from

Women are

Venus m a y a p p e a r t o p r o v i d e a v e r s i o n o f L a c a n ' s ' t h e r e is n o s e x u a l

relationship'

(no complementary

relationship

between

the

two

sexes,

since they are m a d e o f different, i n c o m p a t i b l e stuff), what L a c a n has in mind

is c o m p l e t e l y d i f f e r e n t :

men

and

women

are

not

incompatible

simply because they are 'from different planets', e a c h involving a different p s y c h i c e c o n o m y , a n d s o o n , b u t p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e t h e r e is a n i n e x t r i c a b l e a n t a g o n i s t i c l i n k b e t w e e n t h e m - t h a t is t o say, b e c a u s e t h e y a r e from

the

same planet

the

w h i c h is, as i t w e r e , s p l i t f r o m w i t h i n . I n o t h e r w o r d s ,

m i s t a k e o f t h e Men are from Mars,

Women are from Venus v e r s i o n o f ' 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 ' is t h a t i t c o n c e i v e s o f e a c h o f t h e two s e x e s as a fully c o n s t i t u t e d p o s i t i v e e n t i t y , w h i c h is g i v e n i n d e p e n d e n d y o f t h e o t h e r s e x a n d is, as s u c h , ' o u t o f s y n c ' w i t h it. L a c a n , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , g r o u n d s t h e impossibility o f s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p in t h e fact that t h e identity o f e a c h o f t h e two s e x e s is h a m p e r e d f r o m w i t h i n b y t h e a n t a g o n i s t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e o t h e r s e x w h i c h p r e v e n t s its full a c t u a l i z a t i o n . ' 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 ' n o t b e c a u s e t h e o t h e r s e x is t o o f a r away, t o t a l l y s t r a n g e to m e , b u t b e c a u s e it is too close to me, the f o r e i g n i n t r u d e r a t t h e v e r y h e a r t

PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS

273

o f m y ( i m p o s s i b l e ) identity. C o n s e q u e n t l y , e a c h o f the two sexes f u n c t i o n s as t h e i n h e r e n t o b s t a c l e o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h t h e o t h e r s e x is n e v e r 'fully itself: ' m a n ' is t h a t o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h w o m a n c a n n e v e r fully r e a l i z e herself a s a w o m a n , a c h i e v e h e r f e m i n i n e s e l f - i d e n t i t y ; a n d , v i c e v e r s a , 'woman' m a t e r i a l i z e s t h e o b s t a c l e w h i c h p r e v e n t s m a n ' s s e l f - f u l f i l m e n t . S o when w e c l a i m t h a t , i n o r d e r t o b e c o m e a m a n , o n e m u s t first l o s e o n e s e l f as man, t h i s m e a n s t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is a l r e a d y i n s c r i b e d i n t o t h e v e r y notion o f ' b e c o m i n g a m a n ' .

T h e Real o f Sexual Difference T h i s is t h e k e y p r o b l e m : w h e n p r i m a r y guarantor

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

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

w h i c h fixes t h e s u b j e c t ' s s e x u a l identity -

into

a symbolic

norm

' 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

THE TICKLISH

274

SUBJECT

into a c o u p l e o f o p p o s e d symbolic features: r e a s o n versus e m o t i o n , active v e r s u s p a s s i v e . . . ) always fails. S o w h e n B u t l e r c o m p l a i n s t h a t ' i t ' s a h e l l o f a t h i n g t o live i n t h e w o r l d b e i n g called the impossible real - b e i n g called the traumatic, the unthink­ able, the psychotic'/ 'outside':

1 2

t h e L a c a n i a n a n s w e r is t h a t , i n a s e n s e , everyone

is

those w h o think they are really 'inside' are, precisely, psychotics.

. . . I n s h o r t , L a c a n ' s w e l l - k n o w n d i c t u m a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h a m a d m a n is n o t o n l y a b e g g a r w h o t h i n k s h e is a k i n g b u t a l s o a k i n g w h o t h i n k s h e is a

king

(i.e. w h o

grounded

perceives

his

symbolic

mandate

'king'

as

directly

in t h e r e a l o f h i s b e i n g ) a p p l i e s a l s o t o h i s a s s e r t i o n o f t h e

i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p : a m a d m a n is t h e o n e w h o , f r o m t h e f a c t 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 ' , d r a w s t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e s e x u a l a c t ( t h e a c t o f c o p u l a t i o n ) is i m p o s s i b l e i n r e a l i t y - h e t h e r e b y confuses

the symbolic void

(the absence o f the symbolic 'formula'

of

s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p ) w i t h a g a p i n r e a l i t y - t h a t is, h e c o n f u s e s t h e o r d e r o f ' w o r d s ' a n d t h e o r d e r o f ' t h i n g s ' , w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y , is t h e m o s t e l e m e n ­ tary a n d s u c c i n c t d e f i n i t i o n o f p s y c h o s i s .

w

S o w h e n L a c a n e q u a t e s t h e R e a l with w h a t F r e u d calls ' p s y c h i c r e a l i t y ' , t h i s ' p s y c h i c r e a l i t y ' is n o t s i m p l y t h e i n n e r p s y c h i c life o f d r e a m s , w i s h e s , a n d s o o n , as o p p o s e d t o p e r c e i v e d e x t e r n a l r e a l i t y , b u t t h e h a r d c o r e o f primordial

' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t s ' , w h i c h a r e r e a l in t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e

o f resisting the m o v e m e n t o f symbolization a n d / o r dialectical mediation: . . . 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 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

the 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

not

('direcdy

that

'difference

of gender':

of a contingent

indicates the

the

status

o f sexual difference

socio-symbolic formation;

enigmatic domain

which

rather,

is

sexual

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 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

s h o r t : y e s , o f c o u r s e , t h e wav

we

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

THE TICKLISH

276

SUBJECT

the real. . . . My lamella represents h e r e the part o f a living b e i n g that is lost when that being is p r o d u c e d t h r o u g h the straits o f s e x . This organ-without-body

37

t h a t ' i s ' t h e n o n - s y m b o l i z e d l i b i d o is p r e c i s e l y

'asexual' - n e i t h e r masculine n o r f e m i n i n e but, rather, that which

both

s e x e s l o s e w h e n t h e y e n t e r s y m b o l i c s e x u a t i o n . L a c a n h i m s e l f p r e s e n t s his n o t i o n o f l a m e l l a as a m y t h o n a p a r w i t h P l a t o ' s m y t h ( i n Symposium)

on

the origins o f sexual difference, a n d o n e s h o u l d b e a r in m i n d the key d i f f e r e n c e : f o r L a c a n , w h a t t h e t w o s e x e s l o s e i n o r d e r t o b e O n e is n o t t h e c o m p l e m e n t a r y l o s t h a l f , b u t a n a s e x u a l t h i r d o b j e c t . O n e c o u l d say t h a t t h i s o b j e c t is m a r k e d b y a S a m e n e s s - h o w e v e r , t h i s S a m e n e s s is n o t the sameness o f the 'same sex,' but, rather, the mythical asexual S a m e n e s s , libido n o t yet m a r k e d by the c u t o f sexual d i f f e r e n c e . I n s o c i o e c o n o m i c t e r m s , o n e is t e m p t e d

; w

t o c l a i m t h a t C a p i t a l i t s e l f is

t h e R e a l o f o u r a g e . T h a t is t o say, w h e n M a r x d e s c r i b e s t h e m a d

self-

e n h a n c i n g c i r c u l a t i o n o f Capital, w h o s e solipsistic p a t h o f self-fecundation r e a c h e s its a p o g e e i n t o d a y ' s m e t a - r e f l e x i v e s p e c u l a t i o n s o n f u t u r e s , it is far t o o simplistic to claim t h a t the s p e c t r e o f this s e l f - e n g e n d e r i n g m o n s t e r w h i c h p u r s u e s its p a t h r e g a r d l e s s o f a n y h u m a n o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n c e r n is a n i d e o l o g i c a l a b s t r a c t i o n , a n d o n e s h o u l d n e v e r f o r g e t t h a t b e h i n d t h i s abstraction there are real p e o p l e a n d natural objects o n whose productive c a p a c i t i e s a n d r e s o u r c e s C a p i t a l ' s c i r c u l a t i o n is b a s e d , a n d o n w h i c h it f e e d s l i k e a g i g a n t i c p a r a s i t e . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h i s ' a b s t r a c t i o n ' is n o t o n l y i n o u r ( f i n a n c i a l s p e c u l a t o r ' s ) m i s p e r c e p t i o n o f s o c i a l r e a l i t y - it is ' r e a l ' in t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e o f d e t e r m i n i n g

the structure o f the

material

social processes themselves: the fate o f w h o l e strata o f p o p u l a t i o n s ,

and

s o m e t i m e s o f whole countries, c a n b e d e c i d e d by the 'solipsistic' speculat­ ive d a n c e o f C a p i t a l , w h i c h p u r s u e s its g o a l o f p r o f i t a b i l i t y i n a b e n i g n indifference

to

how

its m o v e m e n t

will a f f e c t

social reality.

Here

we

e n c o u n t e r the L a c a n i a n difference b e t w e e n reality a n d t h e Real: 'reality' is t h e s o c i a l r e a l i t y o f t h e a c t u a l p e o p l e i n v o l v e d in i n t e r a c t i o n a n d i n t h e p r o d u c t i v e p r o c e s s e s , w h i l e t h e R e a l is t h e i n e x o r a b l e ' a b s t r a c t '

spectral

logic o f Capital w h i c h d e t e r m i n e s w h a t g o e s o n in social reality. This

reference

to

the

Real

also

enables

us

to

answer

one

of

the

r e c u r r e n t c r i t i c i s m s o f L a c a n a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h h e is a f o r m a l i s t w h o , i n a K a n t i a n way, a s s e r t s a n a p r i o r i ' t r a n s c e n d e n t a l ' v o i d a r o u n d w h i c h t h e symbolic universe

is s t r u c t u r e d ,

a void which

can

then

b e filled by a

3

c o n t i n g e n t p o s i t i v e o b j e c t . ' ' S o is L a c a n a c t u a l l y a k i n d o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t Kantian, asserting the ontological priority o f the symbolic o r d e r over the c o n t i n g e n t m a t e r i a l e l e m e n t s w h i c h o c c u p y its p l a c e s ( c l a i m i n g , say, t h a t

PASSIONATE

277

(DIS) ATTACHMENTS

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 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 w i t h i n it is e n f r a m e d

forms appears

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 real: the

pathological contingent formation

that

sustains

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

the

a

as

priori

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 literally lose the

ground

from

p e r c e i v e reality d i s i n t e g r a t e s ; we

beneath

o u r feet. . . . P e r h a p s

the

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

best

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 (ask a certain

question, perform

a certain

something

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

THE TICKLISH

278

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 There

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

is a l s o p r o b a b l y

nothing

more

true spontaneous

scientific

than

the

' 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

Self. . . .

growing the

of

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

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 of

commodification

and

'alienated'

market

relations

the

predominance

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

innervvorldly

particular

by it -

there

content

in

is o n e which

exceptional the

very

'pathological',

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 Lacanian

notion

supplement

to

o f fantasy

the

(nbjet petit

a qua

nonexistence o f the

279

phantasmic

sexual

object)

as

a

relationship? Precisely

b e c a u s e t h e r e is n o u n i v e r s a l s y m b o l i c f o r m ( u l a ) o f a

complementary

r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e two s e x e s , a n y r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e m h a s t o ,:be s u p p l e m e n t e d b y a ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' p a r t i c u l a r s c e n a r i o , a k i n d o f p h a n ­ tasmic c r u t c h w h i c h c a n sustain o n l y o u r ' h a v i n g a c t u a l s e x with a n o t h e r p e r s o n ' - i f t h e k n o t o f t h e f a n t a s y is d i s s o l v e d , t h e s u b j e c t l o s e s h i s / h e r u n i v e r s a l c a p a c i t y t o e n g a g e i n s e x u a l activity. S o t h e c r i t i c i s m t h a t L a c a n <s a p r o t o - K a n t i a n f o r m a l i s t s h o u l d b e t u r n e d b a c k o n its p e r p e t r a t o r s - i t i s t h e ' s o c i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t s ' w h o a r e all t o o ' f o r m a l i s t ' : i n a n i m p e c c a b l y K a n t i a n way, t h e y p r e s u p p o s e

t h e c o n t i n g e n t s p a c e o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n as

simply given, a n d d o n o t ask H e g e l ' s key post-Kantian m e t a - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l question:

h o w d o e s this very s p a c e o f historicity, o f t h e m u l t i t u d e

c o n t i n g e n t m o d e s o f symbolization, sustain itself?

of

41

Masochistic Deception B u t l e r ' s e l a b o r a t i o n o f the l o g i c o f m e l a n c h o l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with

the

l o s t o b j e c t i n f a c t p r o v i d e s a t h e o r e t i c a l m o d e l w h i c h a l l o w s us t o a v o i d t h e ill-fated n o t i o n o f t h e ' i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n ' o f e x t e r n a l l y i m p o s e d s o c i a l n o r m s : w h a t t h i s s i m p l i s t i c n o t i o n o f ' i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n ' m i s s e s is t h e r e f l e x ­ ive t u r n b y m e a n s o f w h i c h , i n t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e s u b j e c t , e x t e r n a l power

( t h e p r e s s u r e it e x e r t s o n t h e s u b j e c t ) is n o t s i m p l y i n t e r n a l i z e d

b u t v a n i s h e s , is l o s t ; a n d t h i s l o s s is i n t e r n a l i z e d in t h e g u i s e o f t h e ' v o i c e o f c o n s c i e n c e ' , t h e i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n w h i c h gives b i r t h to t h e i n t e r n a l s p a c e itself: In the a b s e n c e o f explicit regulation, the subject e m e r g e s as o n e for whom power has b e c o m e voice, and voice, the regulatory instrument o f the psyche . . . the subject is p r o d u c e d , paradoxically, t h r o u g h this withdrawal o f power, its dissimulation a n d tabulation o f the psyche as a speaking topos.' 1

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

THE TICKLISH

280

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

rely

the

Outside,

opposing

p r e c i s e l y o n t h i s externalization the

Law, o f that which

his i n c l i n a t i o n s , thwarting

his goals)

o f the ex-timate inherent compulsion o f

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 which

o f external pressure,

creates so-called 'free

p r o b l e m a t i c o f fundamental

inner

fantasy:

to the

withdrawal-into-self

s p a c e ' . T h i s l e a d s us b a c k to

the

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' 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

that

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: 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 ,

4 3

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

for the subject to attain pleasure by a c c e p t i n g the p u n i s h m e n t f o r it b y t h e s u p e r e g o i n a d v a n c e - t h e f a k e d s p e c t a c l e o f

required

punishment

serves to d e m o n s t r a t e the u n d e r l y i n g R e a l o f p l e a s u r e . Just picture

the

standard

scene of moral

masochism:

the

everyday

m a s o c h i s t i c s u b j e c t o f t e n f i n d s it d e e p l y s a t i s f y i n g t o i m a g i n e t h a t a p e r s o n t o w h o m h e is d e e p l y a t t a c h e d will w r o n g l y a c c u s e h i m o f s o m e m i s d e e d ! o r a c c o m p l i s h s o m e s i m i l a r a c t o f m i s t a k e n a c c u s a t i o n ; t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n is p r o v i d e d by i m a g i n i n g t h e future s c e n e in w h i c h t h e b e l o v e d o t h e r , w h o h a s u n k n o w i n g l y i n j u r e d h i m , will d e e p l y r e g r e t h i s u n j u s t a c c u s a t i o n . . . . I t is t h e s a m e in m a s o c h i s t i c t h e a t r e : t h e m a s o c h i s t ' s passivity c o n c e a l s h i s activity ( h e is t h e d i r e c t o r w h o a r r a n g e s t h e s c e n e a n d t e l l s t h e

domina

w h a t to d o to h i m ) ; his m o r a l p a i n b a r e l y c o n c e a l s his active p l e a s u r e in t h e m o r a l victory that h u m i l i a t e s the o t h e r . S u c h an intricate s c e n e c a n take p l a c e o n l y within a s p a c e already o r g a n i z e d by the s y m b o l i c o r d e r : m a s o c h i s t i c t h e a t r e r e l i e s o n t h e contract b e t w e e n t h e m a s o c h i s t a n d h i s master (domina). T h e crucial question to b e raised h e r e c o n c e r n s the role o f d e c e p t i o n in the m a s o c h i s m o f the f u n d a m e n t a l

f a n t a s y : w h o m d o e s this s c e n e o f

s u f f e r i n g a n d s u b m i s s i o n s e r v e t o d e c e i v e ? T h e L a c a n i a n a n s w e r is t h a t t h e r e is a d e c e p t i o n a t w o r k o n t h i s l e v e l t o o : t h e f u n d a m e n t a l

fantasy

p r o v i d e s t h e s u b j e c t w i t h t h e m i n i m u m o f b e i n g , it s e r v e s as a s u p p o r t f o r h i s e x i s t e n c e - in s h o r t , its d e c e p t i v e g e s t u r e is ' L o o k , I s u f f e r , t h e r e f o r e I a m , I e x i s t , I p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f b e i n g . ' I t is t h u s n o t g u i l t a n d / o r p l e a s u r e , b u t e x i s t e n c e i t s e l f w h i c h is at s t a k e i n t h e

fundamental

f a n t a s y , a n d it is p r e c i s e l y t h i s d e c e p t i o n o f t h e f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y t h a t t h e a c t o f ' t r a v e r s i n g t h e f a n t a s y ' s e r v e s t o d i s p e l : by t r a v e r s i n g t h e f a n t a s y , the subject accepts the void o f bis n o n e x i s t e n c e . A n i c e L a c a n i a n e x a m p l e o f m a s o c h i s t i c d e c e p t i o n is t h a t o f t h e c i t i z e n o f a c o u n t r y i n w h i c h o n e ' s h e a d is c u t o f f i f o n e says p u b l i c l y t h a t

the

k i n g is s t u p i d ; i f t h i s s u b j e c t d r e a m s t h a t h i s h e a d is t o b e c u t off, t h i s d r e a m has n o t h i n g w h a t s o e v e r to d o with a n y k i n d o f d e a t h wish, e t c . , it simply m e a n s

that

t h e s u b j e c t t h i n k s h i s k i n g is s t u p i d -

t h a t is, t h e

p r e d i c a m e n t o f suffering masks the pleasure o f attacking the dignity o f the king. . . .

4 4

H e r e , pain a n d suffering are clearly the m a s q u e r a d e in t h e

service o f pleasure, destined to d u p e s u p e r e g o censorship. S u c h a strategy o f d e c e p t i o n , h o w e v e r , i n w h i c h a s c e n e o f p a i n a n d s u f f e r i n g is p u t i n the service o f the pleasure o f deceiving the superego, can function only o n t h e b a s i s o f a m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l ' s a d o m a s o c h i s t i c ' s t a n c e in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t e n g a g e s in fantasizing

a b o u t b e i n g e x p o s e d t o passive

painful

THE TICKLISH

282

SUBJECT

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 , pain

itself as the source of libidinal

45

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 , 'fantasization',

sexualization

generated

in o n e

and

and

masochism

all

coincide -

that

is, a r e

the same gesture o f 'turning around'.

detailed c o m m e n t a r y on

the three phases o f the Freudian

4 6

In

all his

' 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

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 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 ' . S o the passage from the initial, outward-directed

it

in

beaten

4 7

aggressivity (satisfac­

t i o n f o u n d in b e a t i n g a n o t h e r c h i l d o r o b s e r v i n g a p a r e n t b e a t i n g

him/

h e r ) t o t h e f o r e c l o s e d p h a n t a s m i c s c e n e in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t i m a g i n e s himself ' b e i n g b e a t e n b y t h e p a r e n t is c r u c i a l - t h e r o l e o f t h e first p h a s e is t h a t o f t h e p r o v e r b i a l ' g r a i n o f s a n d ' , t h e little p i e c e o f reality ( a s c e n e w i t n e s s e d in reality by t h e c h i l d ) , w h i c h triggers t h e p h a n t a s m i c f o r m a t i o n o f a scene that provides the co-ordinates o f the primordial

'passionate

a t t a c h m e n t ' . A g a i n , w h a t is p r i m o r d i a l l y r e p r e s s e d a n d , as s u c h , f o r e v e r i n a c c e s s i b l e to subjectivization (since subjectivization itself relies o n

this

r e p r e s s i o n ) is t h e s e c o n d p h a s e . S e v e r a l t h i n g s o c c u r s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n t h e p a s s a g e f r o m t h e first p h a s e t o t h e s e c o n d : •

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

passage f r o m pre-sexual aggressivity to p r o p e r l y s e x u a l i z e d ' p l e a s u r e in pain'; •

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 ; •

furthermore,

as f o r its c o n t e n t ,

this s c e n e s t a g e s a s i t u a t i o n

w h i c h I a s s u m e a passive p o s i t i o n o f b e i n g s u b j e c t e d to

within

humiliation

a n d pain, o r at least the position o f an impassive, i m p o t e n t observer. 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: . . . the process o f turning-around is not to b e t h o u g h t o f only at the level o f the c o n t e n t o f the fantasy, but in the very movement of fantasmatization. T h e shift to the reflexive is not only or even necessarily to give a reflexive c o n t e n t to the ' s e n t e n c e ' o f the fantasy; it is also and above all to reflect the action, internalize it, m a k e it e n t e r into o n e s e l f as fantasy. T o fantasize aggression is to turn it a r o u n d upon oneself, to aggress oneself: such is the m o m e n t o f autoerotism, in which the indissoluble b o n d between fantasy as such, sexuality, and the u n c o n ­ scious is c o n f i r m e d . 18

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

THE TICKLISH

284 p o s i t i o n o f ' se faire.

SUBJECT

. . ' , o f ' m a k i n g o n e s e l f . . .': s c o p i c d r i v e is n e i t h e r a

voyeuristic t e n d e n c y to s e e n o r t h e e x h i b i t i o n i s t i c t e n d e n c y t o b e s e e n by a n o t h e r , to e x p o s e o n e s e l f to a n o t h e r ' s eyes, b u t t h e ' m i d d l e v o i c e ' , t h e attitude o f ' m a k i n g o n e s e l f visible', o f deriving libidinal satisfaction from actively s u s t a i n i n g

the

scene o f one's own

passive s u b m i s s i o n .

Conse­

quently, f r o m the L a c a n i a n standpoint, this p r i m o r d i a l g e s t u r e o f 'fantasm a t i z a t i o n ' is t h e v e r y b i r t h p l a c e a n d t h e u l t i m a t e m y s t e r y o f w h a t K a n t a n d t h e e n t i r 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 r e f e r s t o as

'transcendental

i m a g i n a t i o n ' , this abyssal c a p a c i t y o f f r e e d o m t h a t e n a b l e s t h e s u b j e c t to d i s e n g a g e i t s e l f f r o m its i m m e r s i o n i n its s u r r r o u n d i n g s . L a t e r in his work, L a p l a n c h e e l a b o r a t e d this g e s t u r e o f reflexive 'fantasmatization'

into a theory o f the

original seduction

s c e n e as t h e

true

'primordial s c e n e ' o f psychoanalysis: a child impotently witnessing a s c e n e o f sexual interaction, or b e i n g h i m s e l f s u b m i t t e d to gestures (from parents o r o t h e r a d u l t s ) w h i c h p o s s e s s s o m e m y s t e r i o u s s e x u a l c o n n o t a t i o n t h a t is impenetrable

t o h i m . I t is i n t h i s g a p

that

human

sexuality a n d

the

U n c o n s c i o u s o r i g i n a t e : i n t h e f a c t t h a t a c h i l d ( e v e r y o n e o f u s ) is at s o m e point the i m p o t e n t observer, c a u g h t in s o m e sexualized situation

which

remains impenetrable to him, which he c a n n o t symbolize, integrate into the universe o f m e a n i n g

(observing parental coitus, being submitted

to

e x c e s s i v e m a t e r n a l c a r e s s i n g , e t c . ) . W h e r e , h o w e v e r , is t h e U n c o n s c i o u s i n all t h i s ? T h e U n c o n s c i o u s e n c o u n t e r e d h e r e , i n t h i s p r i m o r d i a l s c e n e o f s e d u c t i o n , is the adult's

(parent's)

Unconscious, not the child's: when

c h i l d is e x p o s e d t o e x c e s s i v e m a t e r n a l c a r e s s i n g , say, h e o b s e r v e s

a

that

M o t h e r h e r s e l f d o e s s o m e t h i n g t h a t g o e s b e y o n d w h a t s h e is fully a w a r e of, t h a t s h e d e r i v e s f r o m f o n d l i n g h i m a s a t i s f a c t i o n w h o s e b a s i s is b e y o n d h e r g r a s p . L a c a n ' s d i c t u m ' t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is t h e d i s c o u r s e o f t h e O t h e r ' is t h e r e f o r e t o b e t a k e n q u i t e l i t e r a l l y , b e y o n d t h e s t a n d a r d

platitudes

a b o u t h o w I a m n o t t h e s u b j e c t / m a s t e r o f m y s p e e c h , s i n c e it is t h e b i g O t h e r who speaks through m e , a n d so on: the primordial e n c o u n t e r o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is t h e e n c o u n t e r w i t h t h e O t h e r ' s i n c o n s i s t e n c y , w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t t h e [ p a r e n t a l ] O t h e r is n o t a c t u a l l y t h e m a s t e r o f h i s a c t s a n d w o r d s , t h a t h e e m i t s s i g n a l s o f w h o s e m e a n i n g h e is u n a w a r e , t h a t

he

p e r f o r m s a c t s w h o s e t r u e l i b i d i n a l t e n o r is i n a c c e s s i b l e t o h i m . O n e is thus t e m p t e d to r e p e a t h e r e H e g e l ' s f a m o u s d i c t u m t h a t t h e secrets o f the Egyptians ( t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e i r rituals a n d m o n u m e n t s , i m p e n e t r a b l e to o u r m o d e r n W e s t e r n gaze) were also secrets for the Egyptians themselves: the

whole

construction

o f the

scene

o f primordial

seduction

as

the

o r i g i n a l site o f s e x u a l i z a t i o n h o l d s o n l y i f w e p r e s u p p o s e t h a t it is n o t o n l y t h e o b s e r v i n g a n d / o r v i c t i m i z e d c h i l d f o r w h o m t h e s c e n e is i m p e n e t r a b l e

PASSIONATE (DIS ) A T T A C H M E N T S

285

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 and

confusion

were

to

be

only

on

the

side

of

the

enigma

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

there

natural

and

unproblematic

activity, t h e n

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,

p a r e n t a l s e x u a l display, far f r o m

unintentionally disturbing

the

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 4

adult

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

( o f the p e r p l e x e d gaze violently s h o c k e d , traumatized,

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 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 such,

if o n e subtracts from

'harassment'

by t h e

uncanny

harassment, against

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

sex as

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

THE

286

TICKLISH

s h o c k i n g i m p o s i t i o n , is b y d e f i n i t i o n

SUBJECT

desexualized,

turned into m e c h a n i c

coupling. F r o m m y y o u t h , I r e m e m b e r o b s c e n e r h y m i n g s o n g s five-year-old chil­ dren used to recite to each other, songs o f ridiculous sexual exploits w h o s e h e r o was a m y t h i c a l a n o n y m o u s

'cowboy'. O n e

o f these

songs

( w h i c h , o f c o u r s e , r h y m e s o n l y i n S l o v e n e ) w e n t as f o l l o w s : ' T h e c o w b o y w i t h o u t a h a t / is s c r e w i n g a w o m a n b e h i n d a t r e e . / H o w e v e r , w h e n s h e t r i e s t o e s c a p e h i m a n d r u n s away / h e f o r a b r i e f m o m e n t s e e s [ c a t c h e s a g l i m p s e o f ] h e r n a k e d a s s . ' T h e c h a r m - i f w e m a y p u t it t h a t w a y - o f t h i s c h i l d h o o d s o n g lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t , i n its p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e r e is n o t h i n g e s p e c i a l l y e x c i t i n g i n t h e a c t o f c o p u l a t i o n ; t h i s a c t s p e a k s f o r itself— w h a t is t r u l y e x c i t i n g , r a t h e r , is t h e b r i e f m o m e n t o f c a t c h i n g s i g h t o f a w o m a n ' s n a k e d ass. . . .

0 H

A n d , o f c o u r s e , m y p o i n t is t h a t t h i s c h i l d i s h s o n g is

b a s i c a l l y r i g h t : c o n t r a r y t o t h e s t a n d a r d view, w h i c h d e p i c t s c o p u l a t i o n as t h e m o s t e x c i t i n g , c l i m a c t i c m o m e n t o f s e x u a l activity, o n e s h o u l d i n s i s t t h a t , i n o r d e r f o r t h e s u b j e c t t o b e a r o u s e d in t h e first p l a c e a n d b e a b l e to p e r f o r m the act o f copulation, s o m e particular 'partial' e l e m e n t m u s t f a s c i n a t e h i m ( o r h e r ) - as, in t h e c a s e o f this s o n g , t h e b r i e f g l a n c e o f t h e n a k e d ass. ' 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 ' a l s o m e a n s t h a t t h e r e is no direct representation o f the act o f copulation which would immediately ' t u r n u s o n ' , t h a t s e x u a l i t y m u s t b e s u p p o r t e d b y p a r t i a l puissances

-

a

g l a n c e h e r e , a s q u e e z e o r t o u c h t h e r e - w h i c h i n f a c t s u s t a i n it. A g a i n , t h e a n s w e r t o t h e o b v i o u s c r i t i c i s m t h a t it is children

who have n o

proper

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e a c t o f c o p u l a t i o n i t s e l f - t h a t is, t h e i r h o r i z o n o f s e x u a l i t y is l i m i t e d

to e x p e r i e n c e s like c a t c h i n g a glance o f

p e r s o n ' s ass - is t h a t , a t a c e r t a i n p h a n t a s m i c l e v e l , we r e m a i n a n d n e v e r r e a l l y ' g r o w u p ' , i n s o f a r a s , f o r a truly g r o w n - u p a n d

another children mature

p e r s o n , t h e r e w o u l d b e a s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p - i n s o f a r , t h a t is, as h e o r s h e was a b l e t o c o p u l a t e ' d i r e c t l y ' , w i t h o u t t h e p h a n t a s m i c s u p p o r t o f s o m e s c e n e involving a partial o b j e c t .

5 1

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 impossible sexual relationship

the

curling blonde

the

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

287

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS

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 lovee 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 person's

dream.

l o n g e r m i s e r a b l e real p e o p l e , but The

silent witness, far f r o m

actors/agents

intruding

in

in an

another 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 lovem 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,

THE

288

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 point: while o n e

c o u l d claim that, for L a c a n also, the

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 ' d a r k s p o t ' o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance

this k e y

'birthplace' o f impenetrable

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? H e r e , o n e should return to the F r e u d i a n n o t i o n o f the original

Hilflosig-

heit ( h e l p l e s s n e s s / d i s t r e s s ) o f t h e i n f a n t . T h e first f e a t u r e t o b e n o t e d is t h a t t h i s ' d i s t r e s s ' c o v e r s two i n t e r c o n n e c t e d b u t n o n e t h e l e s s d i f f e r e n t levels: p u r e l y o r g a n i c h e l p l e s s n e s s ( t h e s m a l l c h i l d ' s i n a b i l i t y to survive, to satisfy h i s / h e r m o s t e l e m e n t a r y n e e d s , w i t h o u t t h e p a r e n t s ' h e l p ) , as w e l l as t h e t r a u m a t i c p e r p l e x i t y w h i c h o c c u r s w h e n t h e c h i l d is t h r o w n the position o f a helpless witness to sexual interplay b e t w e e n parents o r o t h e r adults, o r b e t w e e n a d u l t ( s )

into

his/her

a n d h i m s e l f : t h e c h i l d is

h e l p l e s s , w i t h o u t ' c o g n i t i v e m a p p i n g ' , w h e n h e o r s h e is c o n f r o n t e d t h e e n i g m a o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance, sexual gestures and innuendos

by

u n a b l e to s y m b o l i z e t h e m y s t e r i o u s

h e is w i t n e s s i n g . C r u c i a l f o r

'becoming

h u m a n ' is t h e o v e r l a p p i n g o f t h e two l e v e l s - t h e i m p l i c i t ' s e x u a l i z a t i o n ' o f t h e way a p a r e n t s a t i s f i e s a c h i l d ' s b o d i l y n e e d s (say, w h e n t h e m o t h e r feeds the child while caressing h i m excessively a n d the c h i l d detects in this e x c e s s t h e mystery o f s e x u a l

jouissance).

S o , back to Butler: the crucial question

c o n c e r n s the

s t a t u s o f t h i s o r i g i n a l a n d c o n s t i t u t i v e Hilflosigkeit: f o r t h e g a p o f t h e p r i m o r d i a l dis-aUachment phantasmic primordial we

turn

the

philosophical

is it n o t a n o t h e r

name

that triggers the n e e d for the

'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' ? In o t h e r words, what if

perspective

around

and

conceive o f the

obstacle

which

p r e v e n t s t h e i n f a n t f r o m fully f i t t i n g i n t o its e n v i r o n m e n t , o f t h i s o r i g i n a l ' o u t - o f - j o i n t ' , a l s o in its p o s i t i v e a s p e c t , as a n o t h e r n a m e f o r t h e v e r y a b y s s o f freedom, for that gesture o f 'disconnecting' which liberates a subject f r o m its d i r e c t 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 r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way — t r u e , t h e s u b j e c t is, as it w e r e , ' b l a c k m a i l e d ' i n t o p a s s i v e l y s u b m i t t i n g to s o m e f o r m o f 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 i n c e , o u t s i d e o f this, h e s i m p l y d o e s n o t e x i s t - h o w e v e r , t h i s n o n e x i s t e n c e is n o t d i r e c t l y t h e a b s e n c e o f e x i s t e n c e , b u t a c e r t a i n g a p o r void in t h e o r d e r o f b e i n g

PASSIONATE which

'is' the

s u b j e c t itself. T h e

provide for a m i n i m u m negativity' ment -

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS need

for

289

'passionate

attachment'

o f b e i n g i m p l i e s t h a t t h e s u b j e c t qua

to

'abstract

t h e p r i m o r d i a l g e s t u r e o f d i s - a t t a c h m e n t f r o m its e n v i r o n ­

is already

there. F a n t a s y is t h u s a d e f e n c e - f o r m a t i o n a g a i n s t

the

p r i m o r d i a l abyss o f d i s - a t t a c h m e n t , o f t h e loss o f ( t h e s u p p o r t i n ) b e i n g , w h i c h 'is' t h e s u b j e c t itself. A t this p r e c i s e p o i n t , t h e n , B u t l e r s h o u l d

be

s u p p l e m e n t e d : t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e s u b j e c t is n o t s t r i c t i y e q u i v a l e n t t o s u b j e c t i o n (in t h e s e n s e o f ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' , o f s u b m i s s i o n to s o m e figure o f t h e O t h e r ) , s i n c e f o r ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' to take p l a c e t h e g a p t h a t ' i s ' t h e s u b j e c t m u s t a l r e a d y b e t h e r e . O n l y i f t h i s g a p is a l r e a d y t h e r e c a n w e e x p l a i n h o w it is p o s s i b l e f o r t h e s u b j e c t t o e s c a p e t h e h o l d o f the fundamental

fantasy.

O n e c o u l d also link this o p p o s i t i o n o f a t t a c h m e n t a n d

dis-attachment

t o t h e o l d F r e u d i a n m e t a p s y c h 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 d r i v e : in

The Ego and

the Id, F r e u d h i m s e l f d e f i n e s

them

as t h e

opposition

between the forces o f c o n n e c t i o n / u n i t y and the forces o f d i s c o n n e c t i o n / d i s u n i t y . D i s - a t t a c h m e n t is t h u s t h e d e a t h d r i v e at its p u r e s t , t h e g e s t u r e o f ontological 'derailment' which throws t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g 'out o f j o i n t ' , the

gesture

o f dis-investment,

o f 'contraction'/withdrawal

i m m e r s e d i n t h e w o r l d , a n d p r i m o r d i a l a t t a c h m e n t is t h e to this n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e .

In

t h e last r e s o r t ,

from

being

counter-move

this n e g a t i v e

tendency

to

d i s r u p t i o n is n o n e o t h e r t h a n libido i t s e l f : w h a t t h r o w s a ( f u t u r e ) s u b j e c t ' o u t o f j o i n t ' is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e t r a u m a t i c e n c o u n t e r w i t h A p r o p o s o f this p r i m o r d i a l c o n c e i v e o f it as t h e e f f e c t

jouissance.™

gap, o n e s h o u l d avoid the t e m p t a t i o n o f the intervention

o f the

paternal

Prohibition that disturbs the incestuous dyad o f the child a n d

to

Law/

his/her

M o t h e r , c o m p e l l i n g t h e c h i l d to e n t e r t h e d i m e n s i o n o f symbolic castra­ tion/distance: the gap, the

experience o f the

'dismembered

b o d y ' , is

p r i m o r d i a l ; it is t h e e f f e c t o f t h e d e a t h d r i v e , o f t h e i n t r u s i o n o f s o m e e x c e s s i v e / t r a u m a t i c puissance pleasure

principle, and

that disturbs

the paternal

Law -

the

smooth

not unlike

b a l a n c e o f the the

imaginary

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e m i r r o r - i m a g e - is a n a t t e m p t t o g e n t r i f y / s t a b i l i z e this g a p . O n e s h o u l d n e v e r f o r g e t that, f o r L a c a n , t h e O e d i p a l L a w is u l t i m a t e l y in the service of the 'pleasure principle': pacification-normalization

which,

far

from

paternal

it is t h e a g e n c y o f

disturbing

the

b a l a n c e of

pleasure, 'stabilizes t h e i m p o s s i b l e ' , b r i n g i n g a b o u t the m i n i m a l c o n d i ­ tions

f o r t h e t o l e r a b l e c o e x i s t e n c e o f s u b j e c t s . ( M i s r e a d i n g s l i k e this sustain

t h e t e m p t a t i o n to write a k i n d o f n e g a t i v e i n t r o d u c t i o n to L a c a n , taking as t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t a f a l s e c l i c h e a b o u t h i m , a n d t h e n d e s c r i b i n g h i s a c t u a l p o s i t i o n t h r o u g h its r e c t i f i c a t i o n . A p a r t f r o m t h e a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d

THE

290

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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.)

F r o m Desire to Drive . . . and B a c k 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 , 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 . ' hard

in

hurtful

bonds'

is c l e a r l y e x c e s s i v e i n

i n s t r u c t i o n s : we p a s s f r o m jouissance

bonding

5 r >

the

T h e o r d e r to 'tie m e context o f Circe's

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

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 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

then

'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

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

can

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 explains

the

difference

in

the

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 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 to turn the

- 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

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 first

their

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

THE

292

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

wandering

fate

of being

around

in

caught

guilt

and

in

pain.

the

endless

repetitive

cycle

of

final

passing-away

of

the

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 is c o n d e m n e d

to eternal l o n g i n g -

die a n d

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. . . . This

gives u s

a

clue

to

p r e c i s e l y , is t h e complaint

the

paradigmatic

[Klage]

Wagnerian

song,

which,

o f t h e h e r o , e x p r e s s i n g his h o r r o r

at

b e i n g c o n d e m n e d to a life o f e t e r n a l suffering, to w a n d e r i n g a r o u n d

or

l i v i n g as t h e ' u n d e a d ' m o n s t e r , l o n g i n g f o r p e a c e in d e a t h

( f r o m its first

e x a m p l e , t h e D u t c h m a n ' s g r e a t i n t r o d u c t o r y m o n o l o g u e , to t h e of

the

dying

Tristan

and

the

two

great

complaints

o f the

lament

suffering

A m f o r t a s ) . A l t h o u g h t h e r e is n o g r e a t c o m p l a i n t b y W o t a n , B r t i n n h i l d e ' s f i n a l f a r e w e l l t o h i m - 'Ruhe,

rulie, du GotlF - p o i n t s i n t h e s a m e d i r e c t i o n :

w h e n t h e g o l d is r e t u r n e d t o t h e R h i n e , W o t a n is finally a l l o w e d t o d i e i n peace. T h e standard c o m m e n t a r y which emphasizes the alleged 'contra­ d i c t i o n ' i n t h e p l o t o f t h e Ring

( w h y d o t h e g o d s still p e r i s h ,

although r

t h e i r d e b t is p a i d , t h a t is, t h e g o l d is r e t u r n e d t o t h e R h i n e ? W a s n ' t t h i s unpaid d e b t the cause o f the gods' downfall?) therefore misses die point: the u n p a i d debt, the 'original sin' o f disturbing the natural

equilibrium,

is w h a t prevents W o t a n f r o m d y i n g - h e c a n d i e a n d find p e a c e o n l y a f t e r h e s e t t l e s h i s d e b t . O n e c a n a l s o s e e w h y Tannhduser

a n d Lohengrin

are

5 1

n o t truly W a g n e r i a n o p e r a s : ' t h e y lack a p r o p e r W a g n e r i a n h e r o . T a n n hauser

is ' t o o c o m m o n ' , s i m p l y s p l i t b e t w e e n

Elisabeth)

and

the

excess

o f earthly

erotic

p u r e spiritual enjoyment

love

(provided

(for by

V e n u s ) , u n a b l e to r e n o u n c e e a r t h l y pleasures while l o n g i n g to g e t rid o f them; Lohengrin, on

t h e c o n t r a r y , is ' t o o c e l e s t i a l ' , a d i v i n e

creature

( a r t i s t ) l o n g i n g t o live l i k e a c o m m o n m o r t a l w i t h a f a i t h f u l w o m a n

who

will t r u s t h i m a b s o l u t e l y . N e i t h e r o f t h e two is i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f a p r o p e r 7

W agnerian suffering.

hero,

condemned

to

the

'undead'

existence

of

eternal

5 7

S o W a g n e r i a n h e r o e s d o suffer f r o m 'sickness u n t o d e a t h ' , b u t in t h e strict K i e r k e g a a r d i a n s e n s e o f t h e t e r m . In his n o t i o n o f 'sickness u n t o

PASSIONATE (DIS ) ATTACHMENTS

293

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 (the

necessity to a b a n d o n

vain

aesthetic pleasures

and

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

o f this fact

work

for

his

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

contrary, involves the o p p o s i t e impossibility a t t a i n i n g jouissance,

the

the impossibility o f

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 l e s s o n o f d r i v e is t h a t we are condemned jouissance

not

to jouissance.

w h a t e v e r we d o ,

will s t i c k t o it; w e s h a l l n e v e r g e t r i d o f it; e v e n i n o u r

most

t h o r o u g h e n d e a v o u r t o r e n o u n c e it, it will c o n t a m i n a t e t h e v e r y e f f o r t t o g e t r i d o f it ( l i k e t h e a s c e t i c w h o p e r v e r s e l y e n j o y s f l a g e l l a t i n g h i m s e l f ) . A n d the p r o s p e c t o f c o n t e m p o r a r y g e n e t i c t e c h n o l o g y s e e m s to involve a h o m o l o g o u s K i e r k e g a a r d i a n h o r r o r : it r a i s e s t h e t e r r i f y i n g p r o s p e c t n o t o f d e a t h , b u t o f i m m o r t a l i t y . T h a t is t o say: w h a t m a k e s g e n e t i c m a n i p u l a t i o n s o u n c a n n y is n o t o n l y t h a t it will b e p o s s i b l e t o o b j e c t i v i z e o u r e x i s t e n c e e n t i r e l y ( i n t h e g e n o m e , I will b e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e f o r m u l a o f w h a t I ' o b j e c t i v e l y a m ' , t h a t is, a g e n o m e will f u n c t i o n as t h e u l t i m a t e v e r s i o n o f t h e o l d I n d i a n m y s t i c a l f o r m u l a 'Ta twarn atsi' - ' T h o u a r t t h a t ! ' ) b u t a l s o that,

in

a way, I will b e c o m e i m m o r t a l

r e p r o d u c i b l e , with m y d o u b l e s p o p p i n g 5

and

indestructible,

endlessly-

u p all a r o u n d m e t h r o u g h

clo­

1

n i n g . ' A g a i n , t h i s d o m a i n is t h a t o f d r i v e s : o f a s e x u a l i m m o r t a l i t y t h r o u g h e n d l e s s r e p e t i t i v e c l o n i n g . T h a t is t o say: t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t t o b e

made

h e r e is t o o p p o s e g e n e t i c c l o n i n g t o s e x u a l r e p r o d u c t i o n : g e n e t i c c l o n i n g s i g n a l s t h e e n d o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e as t h e i m p o s s i b l e / r e a l w h i c h s t r u c ­ t u r e s o u r lives, a n d , as s u c h , a l s o t h e e n d o f t h e s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e w h i c h we d w e l l as f i n i t e , m o r t a l

beings-of-language. This notion

s p e c t r a l u n d e a d e x i s t e n c e also allows us to a c c o u n t f o r t h e

in

of a

fundamental

p a r a d o x o f the F r e u d i a n / L a c a n i a n d e a t h drive: like the K i e r k e g a a r d i a n s i c k n e s s u n t o d e a t h , t h e d e a t h d r i v e is n o t t h e m a r k o f h u m a n

finitude,

THE

294

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

b u t its v e r y o p p o s i t e , t h e n a m e f o r ' e t e r n a l ( s p e c t r a l ) l i f e ' , t h e i n d e x o f a d i m e n s i o n in h u m a n e x i s t e n c e that persists for ever, b e y o n d o u r physical death, a n d o f which we c a n never rid ourselves. We

can

n o w s e e i n w h a t p r e c i s e s e n s e L a c a n is t o b e o p p o s e d

H e i d e g g e r : f o r L a c a n , t h e d e a t h d r i v e is p r e c i s e l y t h e u l t i m a t e name

for the dimension

immortality

traditional

metaphysics designated

to

Freudian as t h a t o f

- for a drive, a 'thrust', w h i c h persists b e y o n d t h e ( b i o l o g i c a l )

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 , b e y o n d t h e 'way o f a l l f l e s h ' . I n o t h e r words, in t h e d e a t h drive, t h e c o n c e p t ' d e a d ' s a m e way as 'heimlich'

in the F r e u d i a n

negation:

drive'

fiction

the

'death

calls the

designates

functions in e x a c d y

unheimlich, the

dimension

'undead', a strange, immortal,

the

as c o i n c i d i n g w i t h its o f what

indestructible

horror life

that

p e r s i s t s b e y o n d d e a t h . T h i s is t h e ' i n f i n i t y ' c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e L a c a n i a n t h e o r e t i c a l edifice: n o t t h e 'spurious ( b a d ) infinity' o f endlessly striving to a c h i e v e the final G o a l o r I d e a l t h a t forever e l u d e s o u r grasp, b u t a n e v e n worse i n f i n i t y o f jouissance

w h i c h persists f o r ever, s i n c e we c a n n e v e r g e t

r i d o f it. L a c a n ' s a n s w e r t o ' b a d i n f i n i t y ' is t h u s n o t t h e i d e a l i s t p s e u d o H e g e l i a n assertion o f a true positive infinity o f the Idea, but a gesture o f ' f r o m b a d t o w o r s e ' : t h e a s s e r t i o n o f a n even worse i n f i n i t y o f a n ' i n d i v i s i b l e r e m a i n d e r ' of jouissance

w h i c h always s t i c k s t o e v e r y t h i n g w e d o . . . .

H o w is s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e r e l a t e d t o t h i s ' u n d e a d ' d r i v e ? J a c q u e s - A l a i n 3

M i l l e r " e n d e a v o u r s to i n t r o d u c e s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e i n t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f psychoanalytic treatment: w o m e n

a r e n o t s o fully i d e n t i f i e d w i t h

their

f a n t a s y , ' n o t a l l ' o f t h e i r b e i n g is c a u g h t i n it; t h i s is w h y , f o r t h e m , i t is e a s i e r t o a c q u i r e a d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s f a n t a s y , t o t r a v e r s e it; w h i l e m e n , as a rule, c o m e up against a c o n d e n s e d phantasmic symptom',

the

basic

formula

o f jouissance

kernel, a

that

they

'fundamental

are

unable

to

r e n o u n c e , s o t h a t all t h e y c a n d o is a c c e p t it as a n i m p o s e d n e c e s s i t y . I n s h o r t , ' t r a v e r s i n g t h e f a n t a s y ' is c o n c e i v e d as f e m i n i n e , a n d

'identification

w i t h t h e s y m p t o m ' as m a s c u l i n e . ™ M i l l e r tackles t h e u n r e s o l v e d t e n s i o n b e t w e e n desire a n d drive discern­ i b l e i n this s o l u t i o n i n a n o t h e r V apparole

el

,

a sa limite dans l-interpretation, o f - d i a l o g u e ' as I'apparole, jouissance,

o f his c o n f e r e n c e s , ' L e m o n o l o g u e

w h e r e h e focuses o n L a c a n ' s o b s c u r e c l a i m 'le

de

pas-de-dialogue

par ou s'assure le reel'. M i l l e r r e a d s t h i s ' l a c k -

t h e s p e e c h t h a t f u n c t i o n s as t h e a p p a r a t u s o f

n o l o n g e r as t h e

means

of communicating

some

meaning;

apparole d o e s n o t i n v o l v e i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y , n o t e v e n as t h e e m p t y b i g O t h e r t h a t is p r e s e n t w h e n w e s p e a k i n a n ' i n t e r i o r m o n o l o g u e ' , t r y i n g t o c l a r i f y o u r t h o u g h t s ; n o t e v e n as t h e jouis-sense

o f h u r t i n g t h e O t h e r in t h e c o r e

of

injurious

h i s / h e r b e i n g , as is t h e c a s e w i t h

speech -

it i n v o l v e s

a

PASSIONATE

radically

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS

self-enclosed assertion

o f puissance

of

empty

s p e e c h . ( I n s h o r t , Vapparole is t o la parole w h a t lalangue I n s o f a r a s , i n Vapparole,

295 (meaningless)

is t o le

we a r e thus d e a l i n g with an

c i r c u i t o f t h e a p p a r a t u s w h i c h p r o d u c e s puissance,

langage.) idiotic-happy

is t h i s n o t t h e v e r y

d e f i n i t i o n o f drive} H o w , t h e n , d o e s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n l i m i t t h i s s e l f - e n c l o s e d c i r c u i t b y i n t r o d u c i n g t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e R e a l ? T h e R e a l h e r e is t h e impossible, the impossibility o f sexual relationship: the h a p p y b a b b l e o f Vapparole is a s e x u a l ; as s u c h , i t d o e s n o t i n v o l v e a n y e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e R e a l qua i m p o s s i b l e - t h a t is, o f s o m e t r a u m a t i c i n h e r e n t L i m i t . I n t e r p r e t a t i o n m u s t t h e r e f o r e ' s o b e r ' t h e s u b j e c t d o w n f r o m his blissful i m m e r s i o n in t h e b a b b l e o f I'apparole, a n d c o m p e l h i m t o c o n f r o n t t h e i m p o s s i b l e R e a l o f t h e h u m a n c o n d i t i o n . I n t e r p r e t a t i o n is c o n c e i v e d h e r e n o t a s u n l i m ­ ited/infinite

('there

is always a n e w w a y t o r e a d

a t e x t ' ) but, o n

c o n t r a r y , as t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f i n t r o d u c i n g a limit t o t h e

the

unconstrained

p l a y o f I'apparole. . . . T h e p r o b l e m w i t h t h i s r e a d i n g is t h a t i t i d e n t i f i e s I'apparole

with t h e u n c o n s t r a i n e d r e i g n o f t h e ' p l e a s u r e p r i n c i p l e ' w h i c h

p r e c l u d e s t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e R e a l . I n t h i s c a s e , h o w e v e r , I'apparole c o u l d nor b e i d e n t i f i e d with d r i v e , s i n c e d r i v e i n v o l v e s t h e R e a l o f t h e c o m p u l s i o n t o r e p e a t t h a t is b y d e f i n i t i o n ' b e y o n d t h e p l e a s u r e p r i n c i p l e ' . 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 its

satisfaction

in

the

repeated

circuit

( 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 communication of/and t h a t I'apparole introduction

of

puissance,

how

and

do

we

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 ,

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

(the L a c a n i a n version o f 'primary narcissism' prior lo the 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 drive; his very f o r m u l a

o f drive -

'se faire.

. .' -

perfect figure

already

of

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 selfaffection: 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

THE TICKLISH

296 e n d o f h i s Ecrits,

SUBJECT

' 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 ' : ' '

2

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?

mystical a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l traditions, from

Different

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 nonexistence'

-

that

is, t h e

fact

that

the

symbolic order

Other's

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

'graph

o f desire'"

3

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

w e l l - k n o w n p a r a d o x e s o f d e s i r e a r e e n g e n d e r e d i n t h i s way, f r o m ' I c a n ' t l o v e y o u u n l e s s I give y o u u p '

t o ' D o n ' t give m e w h a t I a s k y o u

for,

b e c a u s e t h a t ' s n o t it - d e s i r e is d e f i n e d b y t h i s ce nest pas ca: t h a t is, its m o s t e l e m e n t a r y a n d u l t i m a t e a i m is t o s u s t a i n i t s e l f as d e s i r e , i n its s t a t e o f non-satisfaction.

6 4

Drive, on the o t h e r hand, stands for the paradoxical

possibility that t h e s u b j e c t , forever p r e v e n t e d

from

a c h i e v i n g his G o a l

( a n d t h u s fully satisfying h i s d e s i r e ) , c a n n e v e r t h e l e s s f i n d s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e v e r y c i r c u l a r m o v e m e n t o f r e p e a t e d l y m i s s i n g its o b j e c t , o f c i r c u l a t i n g a r o u n d it: t h e g a p c o n s t i t u t i v e o f d e s i r e is t h u s c l o s e d ; t h e s e l f - e n c l o s e d l o o p o f a c i r c u l a r repetitive m o v e m e n t r e p l a c e s infinite striving. I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e , d r i v e e c j u a l s jouissartce,

s i n c e puissance

is, a t its m o s t e l e m e n ­

tary, ' p l e a s u r e in p a i n ' , t h a t is, a p e r v e r t e d p l e a s u r e p r o v i d e d b y t h e v e r y painful e x p e r i e n c e o f repeatedly missing o n e ' s g o a l .

6 5

T h e f a c t t h a t d r i v e is a ' b y - p r o d u c t ' is a l s o t o b e t a k e n a l s o i n t h e p r e c i s e m e a n i n g this t e r m h a s a c q u i r e d i n t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y t h e o r y o f r a t i o n a l action:

6 6

i n c o n t r a s t t o d e s i r e , w h i c h c a n b e c h a r a c t e r i z e d as a n i n t e n t i o n a l

attitude,

d r i v e is s o m e t h i n g i n w h i c h

acephalous

force which

persists

i n its

t h e s u b j e c t is c a u g h t , a k i n d o f repetitive

movement.

For

that

r e a s o n , o n e c a n p r o p o s e as t h e e t h i c a l m o t t o o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s t h e f a m o u s ne pas

ceder

sur

son

desir,

complementary motto,

'don't

compromise

your

desire"; while

the

' d o n ' t c o m p r o m i s e y o u r d r i v e ' , is m e a n i n g l e s s ,

s i n c e it is s u p e r f l u o u s : t h e p r o b l e m with d r i v e is n o t h o w n o t to b e t r a y it b u t , r a t h e r , h o w t o b r e a k its l o o p , t h e h o l d o f its i n e r t p o w e r o v e r u s . . . . F o r t h e s a m e r e a s o n , L a c a n s p e a k s o f t h e 'desire

o f t h e a n a l y s t ' , never o f

t h e 'drive o f t h e a n a l y s t ' : i n s o f a r a s t h e a n a l y s t is d e f i n e d by a c e r t a i n subjective attitude - that o f 'subjective destitution' - the specificity o f his position

can be determined

o n l y at t h e

l e v e l o f d e s i r e . D r i v e is p r e -

s u b j e c t i v e / a c e p h a l o u s , i t is n o t t h e n a m e of a s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e : o n e c a n o n l y a s s u m e a n a l t i t u d e towards

drive.

I n r e l i g i o u s t e r m s , t h i s p r o b l e m is t h e p r o b l e m o f d i f f e r e n t heresies. T h e C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h as a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y f u n c t i o n s as t h e

guar­

a n t e e o f h u m a n desire, which c a n thrive only u n d e r the p r o t e c t i o n o f the paternal

Law

(the

Name-of-the-Father):

far

from

prohibiting

bodily

p a s s i o n s ( s e x u a l i t y ) , t h e C h u r c h e n d e a v o u r s t o r e g u l a t e t h e m . I n its l o n g h i s t o r y , it h a s a l s o d e v e l o p e d a s e r i e s o f s t r a t e g i e s f o r ' d o m e s t i c a t i n g ' t h e e x c e s s o f puissance

w h i c h c a n n o t b e c o n t a i n e d i n t h e p a t e r n a l L a w (say,

t h e o p t i o n o p e n e d u p t o w o m e n t o b e c o m e n u n s a n d t h u s e n g a g e in a puissance

feminine

o f mystical e x p e r i e n c e s ) . T h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f the Cathar

h e r e s y (the h e r e s y i f e v e r t h e r e was o n e ) was p r e c i s e l y t o u n d e r m i n e

this

strategic

role

role

o f the

Church

in

regulating

sexual pleasure

(the

THE

298

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 s e x u a l r e u n i o n is i n c e s t u o u s ) .

6 7

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

jouissance

that

even

a m p l i f i e s it

is m u c h

more

(the

intense

ascetic mystic has than

the

usual

an

access

standard

to

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 infinitum,

prolonged

ad

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 -

interruptus

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. O u r u l t i m a t e r e s u l t is t h u s t h a t d e s i r e a n d d r i v e , i n a way, presuppose another,

one

o n e c a n n o t d e d u c e o n e f r o m t h e o t h e r . D r i v e is n o t s i m p l y t h e

l o o p o f s e l f - s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t e m e r g e s as a b y - p r o d u c t desire the result o f shrinking back from

o f desire, nor

is

t h e c i r c u i t o f d r i v e . W h a t if,

c o n s e q u e n t l y , d e s i r e a n d d r i v e a r e t h e t w o ways o f a v o i d i n g t h e d e a d l o c k o f negativity that 'is' the subject: by

finding

satisfaction in the repetitive

c i r c u l a r m o v e m e n t o f drive or, alternatively, by o p e n i n g u p t h e u n e n d i n g m e t o n y m i c s e a r c h f o r t h e l o s t o b j e c t o f d e s i r e ? T h e s e t w o ways - t h a t o f desire a n d t h a t o f drive subjectivity. S i n c e e n o u g h the notorious

i n v o l v e two t h o r o u g h l y d i f f e r e n t n o t i o n s o f theoretical eulogies have b e e n written

'subject o f desire'

(the subject divided/thwarted

s y m b o l i c L a w / P r o h i b i t i o n , t h e V o i d o f negativity c a u g h t in t h e

about by

the

eternal

s e a r c h f o r its l o s t o b j e c t - c a u s e - s a y i n g T a m a d e s i r i n g s u b j e c t ' e q u a l s s a y i n g ' I a m t h e l a c k , t h e g a p , i n t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g ' . . . ) , it is p e r h a p s time

to f o c u s o n t h e m u c h m o r e m y s t e r i o u s subjectivity b r o u g h t a b o u t by

t h e c i r c u l a r m o v e m e n t o f drive. L a c a n ' s f u n d a m e n t a l doxa a b o u t d r i v e is c l e a r e n o u g h , as w e h a v e s e e n : drive involves a k i n d o f self-reflexive t u r n , n o t a s i m p l e reversal o f the a c t i v e i n t o t h e p a s s i v e m o d e : say, i n t h e s c o p i c d r i v e , t h e d e s i r e ' t o s e e it a l l ' is n o t s i m p l y t u r n e d a r o u n d i n t o t h e p r o c l i v i t y t o b e s e e n b y

the

O t h e r , b u t i n t o t h e m o r e a m b i g u o u s m i d d l e w a y o f se faire voir, o f m a k i n g oneself-seen.

6 S

( T h i s reversal o f desire i n t o drive c a n also b e specified

a p r o p o s o f c h o i c e : a t t h e l e v e l o f t h e s u b j e c t o f d e s i r e , t h e r e is c h o i c e —

PASSIONATE (DIS)ATTACHMENTS

inclusive o f the fundamental

299

f o r c e d c h o i c e - t h a t is, t h e s u b j e c t

chooses,

w h i l e w e g o o n t o t h e l e v e l o f d r i v e w h e n t h e a c t o f c h o i c e is i n v e r t e d i n t o se [aire choisir, ' m a k i n g - o n e s e l f - c h o s e n ' , as i n p r e d e s t i n a t i o n , i n w h i c h t h e religious subject does n o t simply c h o o s e G o d , b u t ' m a k e s h i m s e l f c h o s e n ' b y H i m . O r - t o p u t i t a n o t h e r way - t h e o n l y - b u t c r u c i a l a n d h i g h e s t f r e e d o m I a m g r a n t e d i n d r i v e is t h e f r e e d o m t o c h o o s e t h e i n e v i t a b l e , freely

t o e m b r a c e m y D e s t i n y , w h a t will h a p p e n

H o w e v e r , w h a t k i n d - i f a n y - o f subjectivity

to m e

in any

case.)

d o e s this reversal o f d e s i r e

6

i n t o d r i v e involve? '-' T w o s e r i e s o f c i n e m a t i c a n d / o r l i t e r a r y e x a m p l e s a r e p e r h a p s b e s t suited to illustrate t h e p a r a d o x o f drive: • T h a t o f the time-loop in s c i e n c e

fiction

( t h e s u b j e c t travels i n t o t h e

past - o r the future - w h e r e h e e n c o u n t e r s a certain mysterious entity that e l u d e s h i s g a z e a g a i n a n d a g a i n , u n t i l it o c c u r s t o h i m t h a t t h i s ' i m p o s s ­ i b l e ' e n t i t y is tlie subject himself, o r - t h e o p p o s i t e c a s e - t h e s u b j e c t t r a v e l s i n t o t h e p a s t with t h e e x p r e s s p u r p o s e o f e n g e n d e r i n g h i m s e l f , o r i n t o t h e future

to witness his own

death . . . ) . In order

e x a m p l e s l i k e Back to the Future, crucial ingredient

to avoid the

standard

l e t us r e c a l l D a v i d L y n c h ' s Lost Highway.

o f Lynch's universe

is a p h r a s e ,

a signifying

A

chain,

w h i c h r e s o n a t e s as a R e a l t h a t p e r s i s t s a n d always r e t u r n s - a k i n d o f b a s i c f o r m u l a t h a t s u s p e n d s a n d c u t s a c r o s s t h e l i n e a r f l o w o f t i m e : i n Dune, is ' T h e s l e e p e r m u s t a w a k e ' , i n Twin Peaks, ' T h e owls a r e n o t w h a t s e e m ' , i n Blue Velvet, ' D a d d y w a n t s t o f u c k ' ; a n d , o f c o u r s e , in Lost

it

they

Highway,

t h e p h r a s e w h i c h c o n t a i n s t h e first a n d t h e l a s t s p o k e n w o r d s i n t h e f i l m , ' D i c k L a u r e n t is d e a d ' , a n o u n c i n g t h e d e a t h o f t h e o b s c e n e figure

( M r Eddy) - the entire narrative o f the

film

paternal

takes place in

the

s u s p e n s i o n o f time b e t w e e n t h e s e two m o m e n t s . A t t h e b e g i n n i n g , F r e d , the h e r o , h e a r s these words o n t h e i n t e r p h o n e in his h o u s e ; at the

end,

j u s t b e f o r e r u n n i n g away, h e h i m s e l f s p e a k s t h e m i n t o t h e i n t e r p h o n e s o w e h a v e a c i r c u l a r s i t u a t i o n - first a m e s s a g e w h i c h is h e a r d b u t

-

not

u n d e r s t o o d by the h e r o , t h e n t h e h e r o h i m s e l f p r o n o u n c i n g this m e s s a g e . In

short,

the

whole

e n c o u n t e r i n g himself

film

is b a s e d

as i n t h e f a m o u s

on

the

impossibility o f the

time-warp

hero

s c e n e in s c i e n c e - f i c t i o n

novels w h e r e t h e h e r o , travelling b a c k in t i m e , e n c o u n t e r s h i m s e l f in an earlier time. . . . D o we n o t have h e r e a situation

like the o n e in psychoanalysis, in

w h i c h , a t t h e b e g i n n i n g , t h e p a t i e n t is t r o u b l e d b y s o m e o b s c u r e , i n d e ­ cipherable but persistent message -

the symptom -

w h i c h , as it w e r e ,

b o m b a r d s h i m from outside; t h e n , at the c o n c l u s i o n o f the t r e a t m e n t , the p a t i e n t is a b l e t o a s s u m e t h i s m e s s a g e as h i s o w n , t o p r o n o u n c e it i n t h e

THE TICKLISH

300

SUBJECT

first p e r s o n s i n g u l a r ? T h e t e m p o r a l l o o p t h a t s t r u c t u r e s Lost Highway

is

thus the very l o o p o f psychoanalytic t r e a t m e n t in which, after a l o n g d e t o u r , we r e t u r n to o u r starting p o i n t f r o m a n o t h e r p e r s p e c t i v e . I n his v e r y first

Seminar,

Lacan

invokes

this

temporal-loop

structure

of

the

s y m p t o m w h e n h e e m p h a s i z e s t h a t t h e F r e u d i a n s y m p t o m is l i k e a s i g n a l b e a r i n g a m e s s a g e t h a t c o m e s not, as o n e w o u l d e x p e c t , f r o m t h e 'deeplyb u r i e d p a s t ' o f a n c i e n t t r a u m a s , b u t f r o m t h e ( S u b j e c t ' s ) future future

in

which,

through

the

work

o f psychoanalytic

m e a n i n g o f t h i s s y m p t o m will b e r e a l i z e d .

7 0

- from the

treatment,

(In this s e n s e , t h e

the

above-

m e n t i o n e d 360-degree shot o f the passionately e m b r a c i n g couple

from

H i t c h c o c k ' s Vertigo, i n t h e c o u r s e o f w h i c h t h e b a c k g r o u n d b e h i n d

them

t r a n s p o s e s us f r o m

the present -

M a d e l e i n e in h e r ordinary

Scottie kissing J u d y r e f a s h i o n e d

hotel room -

to the past -

Scottie

into

kissing

M a d e l e i n e h e r s e l f j u s t b e f o r e h e r s u i c i d a l l e a p f r o m t h e o l d b a r n at t h e J u a n Bautista Mission - a n d t h e n b a c k to the present, perfectly illustrates d r i v e ' s t e m p o r a l l o o p , t h e way its m o v e m e n t is f o l d e d i n t o i t s e l f . P e r h a p s , t h e n , t h e ' v e r t i g o ' o f t h e f i l m ' s t i d e u l t i m a t e l y i n d i c a t e s t h e way S c o t t i e is c a u g h t up in drive's endless l o o p . ) • 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 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 . Wes Craven's supreme

Wlien a Stranger

sudden into the standpoint

7 1

In

Calls, a l s o , w e a r e t h r o w n all o f a

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 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 .

7 2

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

( f r o m F r e d W i l c o x ' s The Forbidden

Planet

our

unacknowledged

fantasies

to Andrei Tarkovsky's

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

Solaris)?

( 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 c o m e true, to m a t e r i a l i z e t h e m . . . ,

them

7 S

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

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 the presence o f a lack a n d / o r

the

signal

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 ontological:

the

embodying

o n t o l o g i c a l p e r f e c t i o n , is stricto

Sphere-Thing

appears

to

us

as s o m e t h i n g

sensu

pre-

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 AfricanA 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

THE

302

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

it! Y o u k n o w v e r y w e l l t h a t there is nothing

in the sphere!'

T h a t is t o say:

n o t h i n g but what the subject h i m s e l f puts t h e r e - or, to q u o t e

Hegel's

c l a s s i c f o r m u l a t i o n a b o u t t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e B e y o n d : ' I t is m a n i f e s t t h a t b e h i n d t h e s o - c a l l e d c u r t a i n w h i c h is s u p p o s e d t o c o n c e a l the i n n e r world,

there

o u r s e l v e s , as m u c h

in

is n o t h i n g order

that

to b e s e e n unless

we g o b e h i n d

w e m a y s e e , as t h a t

something behind there which can be seen.'

there

may

7 6

S o it is c r u c i a l t o b e a r i n m i n d t h a t p r e c i s e l y as R e a l , as t h e s i b l e T h i n g , t h e S p h e r e is a n e n d t y o f pure

it be

semblance,

impos­

a n e n t i t y t h a t is ' i n

i t s e l f a n a m o r p h i c a l l y distorted, a n u n d u l a t i n g , scintillating, out-of-focus s u r f a c e c o n c e a l i n g ( o r s u s t a i n e d b y ) N o t h i n g - as such,

it is t h e p e r f e c t

n e u t r a l m e d i u m f o r f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s i e s . Sphere a l s o m a k e s it c l e a r h o w t h e n o t i o n o f a Z o n e o r T h i n g i n w h i c h o u r d e s i r e s a r e d i r e c t l y r e a l i z e d is t o b e l o c a t e d in t h e l i n e a g e o f t h e o l d fairy-tale t h e m e o f t h r e e wishes analysed by F r e u d

(the peasant

to w h o m

a fairy g r a n t s

three

wishes

w i s h e s f o r a s a u s a g e ; h i s wife w i s h e s t h a t t h e s a u s a g e s h o u l d b e s t u c k t o his n o s e f o r the stupidity o f s u c h a wish; t h e n t h e y use t h e o n l y r e m a i n i n g wish to g e t the s a u s a g e b a c k f r o m

the nose on

to t h e t a b l e . . . ) . T h e

i n s i g h t b e n e a t h t h i s t h e m e is, o f c o u r s e , t h a t o f t h e i n c o m m e n s u r a b i l i t y b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t ' s t r u e d e s i r e a n d its f o r m u l a t i o n i n a

determinate

d e m a n d : o u r d e s i r e is n e v e r a c t u a l l y i n t h e e x p l i c i t w i s h w e a r e a b l e t o f o r m u l a t e - t h a t is, w e n e v e r t r u l y d e s i r e w h a t w e wish f o r o r will -

for

t h a t r e a s o n , t h e r e is n o t h i n g m o r e h o r r i b l e - m o r e u n d e s i r a b l e , p r e c i s e l y -

than a T h i n g that inexorably actualizes o u r true desire. . . . F o r

reason,

the

immediately

o n l y way t o e v o k e d e s i r e

is t o o f f e r

the

object

retract it, as i n t h e n i c e s e d u c t i o n s c e n e f r o m Brassed

and

that then

Off, w h e n ,

i n f r o n t o f h e r h o u s e l a t e i n t h e e v e n i n g , t h e g i r l says t o t h e m i n e r w h o m s h e i n t e n d s to s e d u c e : ' W o u l d y o u c a r e to c o m e i n t o m y p l a c e f o r a c u p of coffee?' any!'

' W e l l , I d o n ' t d r i n k c o f f e e . . . .' ' N o p r o b l e m , I h a v e n ' t

got

7 7

T h u s t h e c o i n c i d e n c e o f u t t e r a l t e r i t y w i t h a b s o l u t e p r o x i m i t y is c r u c i a l f o r t h e T h i n g : t h e T h i n g is e v e n m o r e ' o u r s e l v e s ' , o u r o w n i n a c c e s s i b l e kernel, than

the

Unconscious -

i t is a n

Otherness which

directly 'is'

ourselves, staging the p h a n t a s m i c c o r e o f o u r being. T h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t h e T h i n g t h u s fails n o t b e c a u s e i t is t o o a l i e n , t h e h a r b i n g e r o f a n Intellect infinitely surpassing o u r limited abilities, playing s o m e perverse g a m e s with us w h o s e r a t i o n a l e r e m a i n s f o r e v e r o u t s i d e o u r g r a s p , b e c a u s e it b r i n g s us t o o c l o s e t o w h a t , i n o u r s e l v e s , m u s t r e m a i n

but at a

d i s t a n c e i f we a r e t o s u s t a i n t h e c o n s i s t e n c y o f o u r s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e . I n its v e r y O t h e r n e s s , t h e T h i n g g e n e r a t e s s p e c t r a l p h e n o m e n a t h a t o b e y o u r

PASSIONATE

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS

303

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?

F r e u d ' s t e r m Triebschicksale,

In

this p r e c i s e s e n s e , o n e

can claim

that

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 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 temporal

loop,

recall

the

standard

tragic science-fiction t h e m e

of

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 retroactively c h a n g e

(undo)

the

catastrophic present;

all o f a

in the

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 present through his retroactive intervention he wanted

in the past produced

the very

a

thus

the

catastrophe

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

THE

304

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

the closed circle o f auto-affection, o f the subject's b o d y affecting

itself

v d t h i n t h e d o m a i n o f S a m e n e s s - as w e h a v e s e e n , d o e s n o t L a c a n h i m s e l f s u g g e s t , as t h e s u p r e m e m e t a p h o r o f d r i v e , l i p s k i s s i n g t h e m s e l v e s ? O n e s h o u l d b e a r in m i n d , h o w e v e r , t h a t this reflexive r e v e r s a l - i n t o - s e l f c o n s t i ­ tutive o f drive relies o n succinct definition

a fundamental,

c o n s t i t u t i v e failure.

o f the reversal constitutive o f drive

The

is t h e

most

moment

w h e n , in o u r e n g a g e m e n t in a p u r p o s e f u l activity (activity d i r e c t e d

towards

s o m e g o a l ) , t h e w a y t o w a r d s t h i s g o a l , t h e g e s t u r e s w e m a k e t o a c h i e v e it, s t a r t t o f u n c t i o n as a g o a l i n i t s e l f , as its o w n a i m , as s o m e t h i n g t h a t b r i n g s its o w n

satisfaction.

This closed

repetitive m o v e m e n t that

finds

loop

o f circular satisfaction,

of

the

s a t i s f a c t i o n i n its o w n c i r c u l a r l o o p , t h u s

n o n e t h e l e s s r e l i e s o n t h e f a i l u r e t o a c h i e v e t h e g o a l w e w e r e a i m i n g at: d r i v e ' s s e l f - a f f e c t i o n is n e v e r fully s e l f - e n c l o s e d , it r e l i e s o n s o m e r a d i c a l l y i n a c c e s s i b l e X t h a t f o r e v e r e l u d e s its g r a s p - t h e d r i v e ' s r e p e t i t i o n is t h e r e p e t i t i o n o f a f a i l u r e . A n d - b a c k t o G e r m a n I d e a l i s m - is n o t t h e s a m e failure

clearly discernible in

Bewusstsein,

the

very f u n d a m e n t a l

structure

of

Selbst-

o f s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s ? Is it n o t c l e a r a l r e a d y i n K a n t t h a t t h e r e

is transcendental

s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s , that I a m aware o f ' m y s e l f o n l y in so

f a r as I a m u l t i m a t e l y i n a c c e s s i b l e to m y s e l f i n m y n o u m e n a l

(transcendent)

d i m e n s i o n , as t h e T o r H e o r I t ( t h e T h i n g ) t h a t t h i n k s ' ( K a n t ) ? S o t h e b a s i c l e s s o n o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s is t h a t it is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f full s e l f - t r a n s p a r e n c e a n d s e l f - p r e s e n c e : I a m a w a r e o f m y s e l f , I a m c o m p e l l e d t o t u r n r e f l e x i v e l y o n t o m y s e l f , o n l y i n s o f a r as I c a n never

' e n c o u n t e r m y s e l f in m y n o u m e n a l

actually a m .

dimension,

as t h e T h i n g

W e can now pinpoint the opposition between the subject o f desire the

I

7 8

subject o f drive: while

the

subject o f desire

is g r o u n d e d

in

and 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 attraction'

the subject

itself. T h e

standard

heterosexual

'fatal

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

a t w h i c h t h e ' i m p o s s i b l e ' T h i n g s u b j e c t i v i z e s itself. I n his s h o r t e s s a v o n t h e ' S i l e n c e o f t h e S i r e n s ' , F r a n z K a f k a a c c o m p l i s h e d s u c h a r e v e r s a l : his p o i n t is t h a t U l y s s e s was i n f a c t s o a b s o r b e d i n h i m s e l f , i n h i s o w n l o n g i n g , that h e did n o t n o d c e that the Sirens did n o t sing, b u t j u s t stared at h i m , 7 1

t r a n s f i x e d b v h i s i m a g e . ' A n d a g a i n , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t h e r e is t h a t t h i s r e v e r s a l is n o t s y m m e t r i c a l : t h e s u b j e c t i v i t y o f t h e s u b j e c t i v i z e d S i r e n s is not

t h e s a m e as t h e

subjectivity o f the m a l e 7

irresistible l o o k o f the W o m a n - T h i n g . W hen

desire desire

transfixed

by

the

s u b j e c t i v i z e s itself,

w h e n it is s u b j e c t i v e l y a s s u m e d , t h e f l o w o f w o r d s is s e t i n m o t i o n , s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t is f i n a l l y a b l e to a c k n o w l e d g e it, t o i n t e g r a t e it i n t o its s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e ; w h e n d r i v e s u b j e c t i v i z e s itself, w h e n t h e s u b j e c t s e e s i t s e l f as t h e d r e a d f u l T h i n g , t h i s o t h e r s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n is, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , s i g n a l l e d b y t h e s u d d e n o n s e t o f silence t h e s u b j e c t disengages

- t h e i d i o t i c b a b b l e o f jouissance

is i n t e r r u p t e d ,

i t s e l f f r o m its flow. T h e s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n o f d r i v e is

t h i s v e r y w i t h d r a w a l , t h i s p u l l i n g away f r o m t h e T h i n g t h a t I m y s e l f a m , t h i s r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t the Monster

out there is myself.

T h e s u b j e c t o f d r i v e is t h u s r e l a t e d t o t h e s u b j e c t o f d e s i r e , as O e d i p u s at C o l o n n u s is r e l a t e d t o t h e ' s t a n d a r d ' O e d i p u s w h o u n k n o w i n g l y k i l l e d his f a t h e r a n d m a r r i e d h i s m o t h e r : h e is t h e s u b j e c t w h o g o t b a c k his o w n m e s s a g e f r o m t h e O t h e r a n d was c o m p e l l e d t o a s s u m e h i s a c t , t h a t is, t o i d e n t i f y h i m s e l f as t h e Evil T h i n g h e was l o o k i n g f o r . W a s t h i s r e c o g n i t i o n r e a s o n e n o u g h f o r h i m t o b l i n d h i m s e l f ? I t is h e r e t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is t o b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t : p e r h a p s a w o m a n is m o r e a b l e t o e n d u r e t h i s identification

o f the

core o f one's

b e i n g with

the

L o u v r e , a c o u p l e o f y a r d s t o t h e l e f t o f t h e Mono among much head

of John

Evil T h i n g . I n Lisa,

m o r e a c c l a i m e d p a i n t i n g s , is L u i n i ' s Salome the Baptist.

Bernardino

Luini

(1480-1532),

the

inconspicuous is brought

the

a follower o f

L e o n a r d o i n M i l a n , s e n t i m e n t a l i z e d L e o n a r d o ' s style: h e is k n o w n f o r h i s s e r i e s o f p o r t r a i t s o f t h e V i r g i n M a r y , p a i n t e d as a b e a u t i f u l ,

somewhat

d r e a m y f i g u r e . T h e s u r p r i s e o f b i s ' S a l o m e ' is t h a t S a l o m e h e r s e l f is d r a w n i n t h e s a m e style as h i s V i r g i n M a r y s : a l t h o u g h t h e m o m e n t d e p i c t e d is a b h o r r e n t ( S a l o m e is b r o u g h t J o h n ' s h e a d o n a p l a t t e r , a n d t h e is d o m i n a t e d

painting

b y t h e two h e a d s , S a l o m e ' s a n d J o h n ' s , a g a i n s t t h e

dark

b a c k g r o u n d ) , t h e e x p r e s s i o n o n S a l o m e ' s f a c e is f a r f r o m e c s t a t i c . S h e is n o t o n t h e v e r g e o f e m b r a c i n g t h e h e a d a n d k i s s i n g it wildly - t h e

finally

obtained

here'

partial

o b j e c t (a strict e q u i v a l e n t

to t h e

m e n t i o n e d i n t h e p a s s a g e q u o t e d f r o m H e g e l ' s Jenaer

'bloody head Realphilosophie).

e x p r e s s i o n is r a t h e r m e l a n c h o l i c , c o n s t r a i n e d , h e r g a z e unspecified distant point for, the

finally

n o w that s h e has g o t what

fixed

Her on

s h e was

some asking

o b t a i n e d o b j e c t is n o t ' s w a l l o w e d ' b u t m e r e l y e n c i r c l e d ,

306

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 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

get

subject

o f drive.

Notes 1. F r a n c o i s Regnault, Conferences d'e.slhe.lxque. lacaniennr, Paris: A g a l m a 1 9 9 7 . 2. Michel F o u c a u l t , Discipline, and Punish, New Y o r k : V i n t a g e 1 9 7 9 , p. 3 0 . H e r e F o u c a u l t enables us to specify Althusser's definition o f interpellation as t h e p r o c e s s which t r a n s f o r m s individuals into subjects: these mysterious individuals whose status r e m a i n s unspecified in Allhusser a r e t h e objects a n d the p r o d u c t o f disciplinary m i c r o - p r a c t i c e s ; they a r e the bodily 'stuff o n which these p r a c t i c e s work. In o t h e r words, interpellation is t o t h e subject what individuals a r e to t h e disciplinary m i c r o - p r a c t i c e s . 3. O f c o u r s e , in the above criticism we have f o c u s e d o n the specific F o u c a u t d i a n n o t i o n o f poweT a n d resistance f r o m Discipline, and Punish a n d V o l u m e ] o f History of Sexuality: in these two books, the notion o f P o w e r r e m a i n s c o n f i n e d to the p r o c e d u r e o f d i s c i p l i n e c o n f e s s i o n - c o n t r o l that took s h a p e in early Christianity. W h e n , in his later interviews, F o u c a u l t speaks a b o u t power a n d c o u n t e r - p o w e r , h e imperceptibly c h a n g e s t h e t e r r a i n and m o v e s to a kind o f Nietzschean g e n e r a l o n t o l o g y o f power: p o w e r is everywhere a n d everything; it is t h e very air we b r e a t h e , the very stuff o f o u r lives. T h i s g e n e r a l o n t o l o g y o f p o w e r also involves a different n o t i o n o f subject as the 'fold' o f power; this subject is n o l o n g e r t h e Self which, while waiting to be liberated f r o m the repressive power, is effectively c o n s t i t u t e d by it. 4. Judith B u t l e r , The Psychic Life of Power, S t a n f o r d , CA: Stanford Universitv Press 1 9 9 7 , p. 4 3 . ' 5. Is not this bodily excess g e n e r a t e d by t h e disciplinatory m e c h a n i s m s t h e L a c a n i a n phis-de-jouh* Is the fact that H e g e l d o e s n o t take this e x c e s s into a c c o u n t , t h e n , n o t c o r r e l a t i v e to t h e fact, e m p h a s i z e d by L a c a n , that H e g e l misses t h e surplus-enjoyment which keeps t h e servant in t h e position o f servitude? 6. Butler, The Psychic Life of Power, p. 4 9 . 7. M a r x m a d e t h e s a m e point about capitalism: it will m e e t its e n d n o t b e c a u s e o f resistance to it from e x t e r n a l forces o f pre-capitalist tradition, but b e c a u s e o f its u l t i m a t e inability to m a s t e r a n d restrain its own i n h e r e n t a n t a g o n i s m - as M a r x put it, t h e limit o f capitalism is Capital itself, n o t the islands o f resistance that still e l u d e its c o n t r o l (sexuality, n a t u r e , old cultural traditions). 8. O n this o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t o f Power, see C h a p t e r s 1 a n d 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, The Plague, of Fantasies, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 7 . 9. Is this oscillation n o t discernible also in F o u c a u l t ' s shifting from o n e political e x t r e m e t o its opposite: from fascination with the I r a n i a n Revolution to i m m e r s i o n in t h e radical lifestyle o f the San F r a n c i s c o gay c o m m u n i t y ? 10. Butler, The, Psychic Life, of Power, p. 4 7 . 11. Do we n o t e n c o u n t e r h e r e t h e s a m e d o u b l e disavowal as in M a r x i a n c o m m o d i t y fetishism? First, a c o m m o d i t y is deprived o f its bodily a u t o n o m y a n d r e d u c e d to a m e d i u m which e m b o d i e s social relations; t h e n this n e t w o r k o f social relations is p r o j e c t e d i n t o a c o m m o d i t y as its direct m a t e r i a l property, as if a c o m m o d i t y has a c e r t a i n value in itself, o r as if m o n e y is in itself a universal equivalent. 12. This point has already b e e n m a d e by Mark P o s t e r in The Second Media Age, C a m b r i d g e : Polity Press 1 9 9 5 . 13. Significantly, B u t l e r identifies 'subject' with t h e symbolic position o c c u p i e d within this

PASSIONATE

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS

307

s p a c e , while she reserves t h e t e r m 'psyche' for the l a r g e r unity also e n c o m p a s s i n g what, in t h e individual, resists being i n c l u d e d in t h e symbolic s p a c e . 14. Butler, The Psychic Life of Power, p. 8 8 . 15. Ibid. 16. Ibid., p. 8 9 . 17. Ibid., p p . 9 6 - 7 . 18. Ibid., p. 9 7 . H e r e B u t l e r blatantly c o n t r a d i c t s L a c a n , for w h o m t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is 'the O t h e r ' s discourse', that is, symbolic, vol imaginary - isn't L a c a n ' s best-known single line 'the U n c o n s c i o u s is s t r u c t u r e d like a l a n g u a g e ' ? 'Slips a n d gaps' a r e t h o r o u g h l y symbolic for L a c a n ; they c o n c e r n the ( m i s ) f u n c t i o n i n g o f the signifying network. T h e situation is t h e r e f o r e t h e e x a c t obverse o f what B u t l e r claims: it is not t h e U n c o n s c i o u s which is t h e imaginary resistance to the symbolic Law; on the c o n t r a r y , it is consciousness, the conscious ego, which is the a g e n c y o f the i m a g i n a r y m i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f a n d resistance to t h e u n c o n s c i o u s symbolic Law! 19. Ibid., p. 9 8 . 2 0 . Ibid., p p . 2 8 - 9 . 2 1 . Is this n o t also the p r o b l e m o f t h e ' m a r g i n a l ' h o m o s e x u a l position, which functions only as t h e transgression o f the h e t e r o s e x u a l p r e d o m i n a n t n o r m , a n d thus needs, relies o n , this n o r m as its i n h e r e n t presupposition? Witness Butler's obviously e x a g g e r a t e d insistence o n how h o m o s e x u a l i t y is an e x p e r i e n c e which, for m o s t individuals, involves t h e loss o f one's identity, as if t o i m a g i n e o n e s e l f e n g a g e d in a h o m o s e x u a l act is still an u n h e a r d - o f t r a u m a t i c e x p e r i e n c e today; witness t h e uneasiness e x p e r i e n c e d by q u e e r s when they a r e t h r e a t e n e d n o t by c e n s o r s h i p , but by t h e permissive attitude o f being simply a n d indifferently a c c e p t e d , n o l o n g e r e x p e r i e n c e d as a t r a u m a t i c subversion - as if the)- a r e s o m e h o w deprived o f their subversive sting. . . . 22. F o r an e x p l a n a t i o n o f this t e r m , see C h a p t e r 3 o f Ziz.ek, The PUigue of Fantasies. 2 3 . Butler, The Psychic Life of Power, p. 1 0 5 . 24. See C h a p t e r 2 o f Zizek, The Plague of Fantasies. 2 5 . T h e s t a n d a r d L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f the act focuses on t h e g e s t u r e o f retroactively c h a n g i n g its own discursive ( p r e ) c o n d i t i o n s , t h e 'big O t h e r ' on which it relies, the back­ g r o u n d against which it o c c u r s : a n act p r o p e r 'miraculously' c h a n g e s the very s t a n d a r d by which we m e a s u r e a n d value o u r activity; that is, it is synonymous with what Nietzsche called 'transvaluation o f values'. In this p r e c i s e sense, an a c t involves t h e c h o i c e o f 'the W o r s t [If phe}': t h e a c t o c c u r s when the c h o i c e o f (what, within the situation, a p p e a r s as) the W o r s t c h a n g e s t h e very s t a n d a r d s o f what is g o o d o r bad. In politics, for e x a m p l e , the usual form o f the p r a g m a t i c liberal centrists' c o m p l a i n t is that o n e should n o t be t o o radical a n d g o t o o far in advocating gay rights o r minority rights o r . . . ; that o n e should take into a c c o u n t what majority opinion is still able to swallow, and so on; in such a c o n t e x t , o n e a c c o m p l i s h e s an act p r o p e r when o n e m a k e s precisely what t h e p r a g m a t i c centrist c o n s i d e r s a c a t a s t r o p h i c c h o i c e o f t h e 'impossible', a n d w h e n this g e s t u r e miraculously affects the f r a m e o f what is c o n s i d e r e d a c c e p t a b l e ' . However, t h e later L a c a n goes a step f u r t h e r a n d locates t h e act at an even m o t e radical level, that o f disturbing the very f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy as the ultimate framework of our world-experience. 2 6 . Butler, The Psychic Lift: of Power, p. 1 3 5 . 27. Ibid., pp. 1 4 7 , 1 4 6 - 7 . 2 8 . Ibid., p p . 1 3 7 - 8 . 29. Ibid., p. 1 6 5 . 30. Ibid., p. 1 6 6 . 3 1 . Ibid., p. 1 6 5 . 32. See Butler's interview with P e t e r O s b o r n e in ,4 Critical Sense, ed. P e t e r O s b o r n e , L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e 1 9 6 6 , p. 8 3 . 3 3 . A n o t h e r way o f putting it is that for the psychotic, as for t h e C a t h a r heretics, e v e w sexual act is incestuous.

308

THE TICKLISH SUBJECT

3 4 . J . L a p l a n c h e a n d J . - B . Pontalis, The Language

of Psychoanalysis,

London: Karnac 1988,

p. 3 1 5 . 3 5 . Symbolic c a s t r a t i o n is thus s o m e h o w t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e o f t h e well-known p a t h o l o g i c a l p h e n o m e n o n o f a p e r s o n w h o feels a limb he n o l o n g e r has (like the proverbial soldier w h o still feels t h e pain in t h e leg h e lost in b a t t l e ) : symbolic castration designates, r a t h e r , t h e stale in which o n e d o e s n o t feel ( o r r a t h e r , m o r e precisely, o n e d o e s nol m a n i p u l a t e freely a n d m a s t e r ) t h e o r g a n ( p e n i s ) o n e actually still possesses. . . . 3 6 . Butler, The Psychic Life of Power, p. 9 2 . 37. J a c q u e s L a c a n , 'Positions o f the U n c o n s c i o u s ' , in Reading Seminar XI, e d . R i c h a r d Feldstein, B r u c e Fink a n d M a i r e J a a n u s , Albany, NY: S U N Y Press 1 9 9 5 , p. 2 7 4 . 3 8 . Incidentally, in psychoanalysis t h e status o f t h e body is n o t merely 'psychosomatic', that is, the body is n o t t r e a t e d m e r e l y as t h e m e d i u m o f the inscription o f s o m e symbolic impasse, as in t h e c a s e o f c o n v e r s i o n hysteria: a l t h o u g h psychoanalysis rejects a d i r e c t bodily causality o f psychic troubles (such an a p p r o a c h r e d u c e s psychoanalysis to t h e constraints o f the medical o r d e r ) , it n o n e t h e less insists o n how a p a t h o l o g i c a l psychic p r o c e s s always refers to the Real o f s o m e o r g a n i c d i s t u r b a n c e , which functions as the proverbial grain o f sand triggering t h e p r o c e s s o f t h e crystallization o f t h e s y m p t o m . W h e n I have a violent t o o t h a c h e , t h e t o o t h itself s o o n b e c o m e s t h e o b j e c t o f narcissistic libidinat investment: I suck it, e n c i r c l e it with my t o n g u e , t o u c h a n d inspect it with my fingers, look at it with t h e aid o f a m i r r o r , a n d so on - in short, the pain o f t h e t o o t h a c h e itself turns into t h e s o u r c e o f jimLssiince. Along the s a m e lines, S a n d o r F e r c n c z i r e p o r t e d the e x t r e m e c a s e o f a m a n whose testicle had to be r e m o v e d b e c a u s e o f a d a n g e r o u s infection: this r e m o v a l ('real' c a s t r a t i o n ) triggered the o n s l a u g h t o f p a r a n o i a , since it resuscitated - actualized, gave a s e c o n d life to l o n g - d o r m a n t h o m o s e x u a l fantasies ( t h e s a m e often goes for rectal c a n c e r ) . In cases like these, the cause o f p a r a n o i a lies not in the subject's inability to sustain the loss o f his virility, o f his phallic m a l e posture; what he is in fact unable to sustain is, r a t h e r , the c o n f r o n t a t i o n with his f u n d a m e n t a l passive fantasy, which forms t h e 'primordially r e p r e s s e d ' ( f o r e c l o s e d ) ' o t h e r s c e n e ' o f his subjective identity, a n d was all o f a s u d d e n actualized in his very physical reality. See P a u l - L a u r e n t Assoun, Corps el Sympldme, vol. I: Cliniifue du Corps, Paris: A n t h r o p o s 1997,'pp. 3 4 - 4 3 . 3 9 . This criticism o f formalism is usually c o u p l e d with the opposite criticism: with t h e critical notion that L a c a n is t o o b r a n d e d by a specific historical c o n t e n t , t h e p a t r i a r c h a l Oedipal m o d e o f socialization, elevating it into a t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a priori o f h u m a n history. 4 0 . It was Alfred S o h n - R e t h e l , a 'fellow-traveller' o f the Frankfurt School, w h o d e s c r i b e d in detail this idea o f the c o m m o d i t y f o r m as t h e s e c r e t g e n e r a t o r o f t h e universal form o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l subjectivity. S e e Alfred S o h n - R e t h e l , Geistige und kbrperliche. Arbeit, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp 1970. 4 1 . In his criticism o f L a c a n , H e n r y Staten p r o p o s e s a specific version o f this point (see Eros in Mourning, B a l t i m o r e , MD: J o h n s H o p k i n s University Press 1 9 9 5 ) . A c c o r d i n g to Staten, L a c a n inscribes h i m s e l f into t h e Platonic—Christian lineage which devalues all positiveempirical objects subjected to t h e cycle 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 : f o r L a c a n , as for Plato, every finite positive o b j e c t is a m e r e s e m b l a n c e / l u r e which betrays t h e truth o f desire. L a c a n s merit consists in t h e fact that h e brings this P l a t o n i c rejection o f all finite material objects as worthy o f love to its truth, c o n c e a l e d by Plato: finite e m p i r i c a l objects a r e noi fragile copies o f ( o r stand-ins f o r ) t h e i r e t e r n a l Models - b e n e a t h o r b e y o n d t h e m t h e r e is nothing, that is, they a r e place-holders o f a p r i m o r d i a l Void, o f N o t h i n g n e s s . T o put it in Nietzsche's terms, L a c a n thus reveals t h e nihilistic e s s e n c e o f the metaphysical longing for eternal Objects b e y o n d the earthly cycle 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 : t h e desire for these Objects is the desire for Nothingness, that is, t h e s e O b j e c t s a r e m e t a p h o r s o f D e a t h . H e r e Staten r e d u c e s L a c a n to a p o s t m o d e r n a d v o c a t e o f the impossibility o f the a u t h e n t i c e n c o u n t e r with a T h i n g : n o positive o b j e c t ever adequately fills in o r fits the structural void which sustains desire; all we ever get a r e furtive s e m b l a n c e s , so we a r e c o n d e m n e d to the r e p e a t e d e x p e r i e n c e o f ce n'est pas (o. . . . W h a t is missing h e r e is t h e obverse o f this logic o f

PASSIONATE

(DIS)ATTACHMENTS

309

t h e p r i m o r d i a l Void which c a n never be filled by an a d e q u a t e object: t h e correlative notion o f an excessive, sumumeraire object for which t h e r e is n o p l a c e in t h e symbolic s t r u c t u r e . If, for L a c a n , desire is effectively sustained by a Void which c a n never be filled, libido, on the c o n t r a r y , is t h e Real o f an excessive object which r e m a i n s forever o u t o f j o i n t , in s e a r c h o f its p r o p e r place'. 4 2 . B u t l e r , The Psychic Life of Power, pp. 1 9 7 - 8 . 4 3 . S e e Gilles Deletize, Coldness and Cruelty, New York: Z o n e 1 9 9 1 . 4 4 . In an otherwise critical review o f my first book, J e a n j a c q u e s L e c e t c l e c l a i m e d , if he [Zizek] d o e s not know a b o u t c o n t e m p o r a r y philosophy, I [ L e c e r c l e ] a m the bishop o f Ulan B a t o r ' . Now let us imagine a follower o f m i n e who, d u e to an a t t a c h m e n t to m e , is unable openly to a d m i t to himself that h e has n o t i c e d s o m e serious faults in my knowledge o f c o n t e m p o r a r y philosophy - if this disciple fantasizes a b o u t L e c e r c l e dressed u p as t h e bishop o f U l a n B a t o r , this simply m e a n s that he thinks m y knowledge o f c o n t e m p o r a r y philosophyis flawed. . . . 4 5 . In a m o r e detailed e l a b o r a t i o n , o n e s h o u l d also distinguish f u r t h e r between t h e two m o d e s o f clinical m a s o c h i s m : o n the o n e h a n d the p r o p e r l y p e r v e r s e ' c o n t r a c t u a l ' maso­ chism, that is, the masochism o f a subject who is able to 'externalize' his fantasv. to pass to t h e a c t a n d realize his masochistic s c e n a r i o in an actual interactioir with a n o t h e r subject; orr t h e o t h e r h a n d , the (hysterical) secret m a s o c h i s t i c d a y d r e a m i n g which is u n a b l e to e n d u r e its actualization - when the c o n t e n t o f such s e c r e t masochistic d a y d r e a m i n g s is i m p o s e d on t h e subject irr reality, t h e resrrlt can be c a t a s t r o p h i c : from u t t e r humiliation a n d s h a m e to t h e disintegration o f his self-identity. 4 6 . See J e a n L a p l a n c h e , Life and Death in. Psychoanalysts, B a l t i m o r e , MD: J o h n s H o p k i n s Lmiversily Press 1 9 7 6 . 47. Q u o t e d from Jean L a p l a n c h e , 'Aggressiveness arrd S a d o m a s o c h i s m ' , in Essential Papers on Masai hism, ed. Margaret A.F. Hanly, New York: New York L niversitv Press 1 9 9 5 . p. 122. 4 8 . Ibid. 4 9 . D o e s n o t this constellation also provide t h e e l e m e n t a r y m a t r i x of the p r o b l e m a t i c o f (religious) predestination} W h e n the child asks himself 'Whv was I b o r n ? W h y did thev want m e ? ' , o n e c a n n o t satisfy him by simply answering: ' B e c a u s e we loved you a n d warned to have you!' H o w could my p a r e n t s love m e when I did not yet exist? Is it not that they have to love m e ( o r hate m e - in short, p r e d e s t i n e my fate) a n d then c r e a t e m e , just as t h e P r o t e s t a n t G o d decides t h e fate o f a h u m a n being p r i o r to his birth? 5 0 . Incidentally, why is t h e cowboy without a hat} A p a r t from t h e fact that, in Slovene, 'without a hat' rhymes with 'is fucking', o n e c o u l d p r o p o s e as the reason for this e n i g m a t i c f e a t u r e that, in t h e perspective o f m a l e c h i l d r e n , fucking a w o m a n is c o n s i d e r e d a n o n manly, subservient activity - by d o i n g it, o n e humiliates o n e s e l f by "servicing' t h e w o m a n , a n d it is this humiliating aspect, this loss o f m a l e dignity, that is signalled by losing orre's hat. Seeing the w o m a n ' s ass is thus perceived as a kind o f r e v e n g e for h e r humiliation o f the m a n : now it's h e r t u r n to pay for enticing him t o firck h e r . . . . 5 1 . This glimpse at the naked ass, which is t o be read in exactly the s a m e way as Freud's f a m o u s e x a m p l e o f the 'glance on the nose' f r o m his article on fetishism, tells us w h e r e the mistake o f t h e fetishist pervert lies: this mistake is correlative to t h e mistake o f t h e s t a n d a r d h e t e r o s e x u a l stance that dismisses partial objects as m e r e foreplays to t h e real thing' ( t h e sexual act itself). F r o m the c o r r e c t insight that t h e r e is n o ( d i r e c t ) sexual relationship - thai all we have as supports o f orrr e n j o y m e n t a r e fetishistic partial objects that fill the void ot the impossible sexual relationship - the fetishist draws t h e mistaken c o n c l u s i o n that these partial objects a r e directly- t h e thing itself, that o n e c a n get rid o f the r e f e r e n c e to t h e impossible sexual a c t a n d slick to t h e partial objects themselves. T h e solution is thus to maintain the tension between the void o f the sexiral relationship a n d t h e partial objects that s u p p o r t o u r e n j o y m e n t : a l t h o u g h all we have a r e these partial o b j e c t s / s c e n e s , they n o n e the less rely on the tension with the absent sexual act - they p r e s u p p o s e t h e r e f e r e n c e to t h e void o f the (impossible) act. T

310

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

5 2 . See J a c q u e s L a c a n , ' T h e Subversion o f the Subject a n d t h e Dialectics o f Desire', in Ecrits: A Selection, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 7 7 . 5 3 . It would also be very p r o d u c t i v e t o link the F r e u d i a n Hilflosigkeit t o t h e Kantian n o t i o n o f the Sublime, especially t h e d y n a m i c Sublime, which also expresses s o m e t h i n g like t h e Kantian 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 : t h e s c e n e o f a m a n r e d u c e d to a particle o f dust with w h o m e n o r m o u s powers o f n a t u r e a r e playing, yet observing this fascinating s p e c t a c l e from t h e safety o f a m i n i m a l d i s t a n c e , a n d thus enjoying it as a passive observer - isn't this t h e satisfaction provided by t h e fact that I observe myself r e d u c e d to an i m p o t e n t particle o f dust, that I see myself r e d u c e d t o a helpless e l e m e n t o v e r w h e l m e d by gigantic forces b e y o n d my c o m p r e h e n s i o n ? 5 4 . T h i s topic o f reflexivity is already a n n o u n c e d a n d f o r m u l a t e d in B u t l e r ' s first book, h e r e x c e l l e n t essay on H e g e l Subjects of Desire (New York: C o l u m b i a University Press 1 9 8 7 ) . 5 5 . The Odyssey of Homer, X I I , 1 6 0 - 6 4 , trans. R i c h m o n d L a t t i m o r e , New York: H a r p e r 1991. 5 6 . See Michael T a n n e r , Wagner, L o n d o n : F l a m i n g o 1 9 9 7 . 5 7 . A f u r t h e r opposition c a n be m a d e h e r e between two ultimate W a g n e r i a n l a m e n t s , that o f t h e dying Tristan a n d that o f A m f o r t a s in Parsifal - this opposition c o n c e r n s t h e i r different relation to t h e O e d i p a l t r i a n g u l a t i o n . Tristan r e p r o d u c e s t h e s t a n d a r d O e d i p a l situation (stealing Isolde, a w o m a n w h o belongs to a n o t h e r m a n , from t h e p a t e r n a l figure o f King M a r k ) , while - as C l a u d e Levi-Strauss p o i n t e d o u t - t h e underlying s t r u c t u r e o f Parsifal is anti-Oedipal, t h e reversal o f O e d i p u s . In 1'arsifal, t h e l a m e n t is p e r f o r m e d by the paternal figure o f Amfortas, finally delivered by Parsifal. In Tristan, t h e dignified Mark forgives T r i s t a n at the e n d for his transgressive passion, while in Parsifal, t h e 'asexual' y o u n g Parsifal, this 'pure fool', delivers the p a t e r n a l A m f o r t a s from t h e painful c o n s e q u e n c e s o f his transgressive sin (allowing himself to be s e d u c e d by K u n d r y ) . This reversal, this d i s p l a c e m e n t o f the stain o f transgression from son to f a t h e r , is what makes Parsifal a properly modern work o f a r t , leaving behind t h e traditional O e d i p a l p r o b l e m a t i c of t h e son transgressing t h e p a t e r n a l prohibition, rebelling against p a t e r n a l authority. 5 8 . O n a m u c h m o r e m o d e s t level o f everyday life, t h e s a m e h o r r o r is often e n c o u n t e r e d by anyone who works with a P C : what r e m a i n s so u n c a n n y a b o u t a P C is not only that, d u e to a virus o r s o m e m a l f u n c t i o n , we c a n lose o r inadvertently e r a s e the result o f h o u r s a n d days o f work, but also t h e o p p o s i t e p r o s p e c t : o n c e you have written s o m e t h i n g a n d it is registered in your P C , it is practically impossible really to e r a s e it: as we all know, even if you d o apply the delete function to s o m e text, t h e t e x t r e m a i n s in the c o m p u t e r ; it is just that it is n o l o n g e r registered - for that r e a s o n , c o m p u t e r s have t h e function undelete, which gives you a fair c h a n c e o f r e c o v e r i n g t h e t e x t you stupidly d e l e t e d . A simple P C thus c o n t a i n s a kind o f ' u n d e a d ' spectral d o m a i n o f d e l e t e d texts which nevertheless c o n t i n u e t o lead a shadowy e x i s t e n c e between the two d e a t h s ' , officially deleted but still t h e r e , waiting to be r e c o v e r e d . T h a t is t h e ultimate h o r r o r o f t h e digital universe: in it, everything r e m a i n s f o r e v e r inscribed; it is practically impossible really to g e t rid of, to e r a s e , a text. . . . 5 9 . See Jacques-Alain Miller, 'Des semblants d a n s la relation e n t r e les sexes', La Cause freudienne 3 6 , Paris 1 9 9 7 , p p . 7 - 1 5 . 6 0 . H e r e Miller s e e m s to r e n o u n c e the notion o f s y m p t o m as sinthome, t h e knot o f jouissance beyond fantasy, which persists even when t h e subject traverses h i s / h e r f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy, a n d to r e d u c e t h e s y m p t o m to a ' c o n d e n s e d ' kernel o f fantasy that regulates the subject's access to jouissance. 6 1 . Jacques-Alain Miller, ' L e m o n o l o g u e d e Y apparole', pp. 7 - 1 8 .

La Cause freudienne

3 4 , Paris 1 9 9 6 ,

6 2 . See J a c q u e s L a c a n , 'Du "Trieb" d e F r e u d an desir du psychanalyste', in EcnLs, Paris: Editions du Seuil 1 9 6 6 , pp. 8 5 1 - 4 . 6 3 . See J a c q u e s L a c a n , Ecrits: A Selection.

T h e Subversion o f the Subject a n d the Dialectics o f Desire', in

6 4 . J e n n y Holzer's f a m o u s truism ' P r o t e c t m e from what I want' expresses very precisely

PASSIONATE

(DIS) ATTACHMENTS

311

t h e f u n d a m e n t a l ambiguity involved in t h e fact that desire is always t h e desire o f t h e O t h e r . It c a n be r e a d e i t h e r as ' P r o t e c t m e f r o m t h e excessive self-destructive desire in m e that I myself a m n o t able to d o m i n a t e ' - that is, as a n i r o n i c r e f e r e n c e to the s t a n d a r d m a l e chauvinist wisdom that a w o m a n , left to herself, gets c a u g h t in self-destructive furv, so t h a t she must be p r o t e c t e d from h e r s e l f by b e n e v o l e n t m a l e d o m i n a t i o n ; o r in a m o r e radical way, as indicating t h e fact that in today's p a t r i a r c h a l society w o m a n ' s desire is radically alienated, that s h e desires what m e n e x p e c t h e r to desire, that she desires to be desired, a n d so o n - in this case, ' P r o t e c t m e from what I want' m e a n s ' W h a t ] want is already i m p o s e d on m e by t h e p a t r i a r c h a l socio-symbolic o r d e r that tells m e what to desire, so t h e first c o n d i t i o n o f my liberation is t h a t I break u p the vicious cycle o f my a l i e n a t e d desire a n d learn to f o r m u l a t e my desire in a n a u t o n o m o u s way.' T h e p r o b l e m , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t this s e c o n d r e a d i n g implies a r a t h e r naive opposition between ' n e l e r o n o m o u s ' a l i e n a t e d desire a n d truly a u t o n o m o u s desire - what if desire as such is desire o f t h e o t h e r ' , so that t h e r e is ultimately n o way to break o u t o f t h e hysterical d e a d l o c k o f 'I d e m a n d o f you t o refuse what I d e m a n d o f you, b e c a u s e t h a t is n o t «'/'? 6 5 . Even if drive is thus c o n c e i v e d as a s e c o n d a r y by-product o f desire, o n e c a n still maintain that desire is a d e f e n c e against drive: t h e p a r a d o x is that desire functions as a defence against its own product, against its own 'pathological' o u t g r o w t h , t h a t is, against the suffocating jouissance provided by drive's self-enclosed c i r c u l a r m o v e m e n t . 6 6 . See J o n Elster, Sour Grapes, C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e University Press 1 9 8 2 . 67. A c c o r d i n g to C a t h a r t e a c h i n g , o u r terrestrial world was c r e a t e d by t h e Devil, that is, t h e C r e a t o r who, at the b e g i n n i n g o f the Bible, forms t h e world we know ( t h e o n e who says 'Let t h e r e be light!', e t c . ) is n o n e o t h e r than t h e Devil himself 6 8 . See C h a p t e r X I V o f J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 7 9 . 6 9 . H e r e I draw on Alenka Z u p a n c i c ' s unpublished p a p e r , ' L a subjectivation sans sujet'. 70. '. . what we see in t h e r e t u r n o f t h e repressed is t h e effaced signal o f s o m e t h i n g which only takes on its value in t h e future, t h r o u g h its symbolic realization, its integration into t h e history o f the subject' ( T h e Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book I: Freud's Papers on Technique, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 8 8 , p. 1 5 9 ) . 7 1 . C o n c e r n i n g t h e ultimate e x a m p l e o f t h e M o n s t r o u s T h i n g in c o n t e m p o r a r y p o p u l a r culture, that o f t h e Alien, Ridley Scott m e n t i o n s in a n interview that if he w e r e t o be allowed to film the sequel to his Alien, h e would tell the story from t h e Alien's perspective. 72. F o r a closer analysis o f this subjectivization o f t h e T h i n g in Psycho, see Slavoj Zizek, ' H i t c h c o c k ' s Universe', in Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Lacan (But Were Afraid lo Ask Hitchcock), e d . Slavoj Zizek, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 3 . 7 3 . A l t h o u g h it m a y a p p e a r difficult to i m a g i n e a m o r e different film t h a n Levinson's own Wag the Dog from t h e s a m e year, a r e n o t t h e two films n o n e t h e less c o n n e c t e d ? Is n o t the S p h e r e the Z o n e in which, o n c e we e n t e r it, t h e tail itself ( o u r p h a n t a s m i c shadows) wags t h e dog ( o u r Selves that a r e s u p p o s e d to c o n t r o l o u r personalities)? Wag the Dog, t h e story o f t h e public relations specialists who c o n c o c t t h e m e d i a s p e c t a c l e o f a war with Albania in o r d e r t o distract public a t t e n t i o n f r o m t h e sexual s c a n d a l in which the P r e s i d e n t got involved j u s t weeks before his re-election, a n d Sphere thus b o t h deal with t h e p o w e r o f the p u r e p h a n t a s m i c s e m b l a n c e , with the way p h a n t a s m i c s e m b l a n c e c a n s h a p e o u r ( e x p e r i e n c e of) reality itself. 74. J a c q u e s L a c a n , Le Siminaire, livre VIII: Le transfert, Paris: Seuil 1 9 9 1 , pp. 9 7 - 1 1 6 . 7 5 . W e find a r o u g h equivalent to it in W o o d y Allen's Deconstructing Hairy, in which Robin Williams plays t h e c h a r a c t e r who is, as it were, ontologically a blob, b l u r r e d , out o f focus: his c o n t o u r s a r e o u t of focus n o t only for the subject who looks at him, not only w h e n he is part o f the generally blurred b a c k g r o u n d - they a r e also b l u r r e d when he stands a m o n g p e o p l e whom we can perceive quite clearly. This i d e a (unfortunately a hapax, a n o t i o n that c a n in fact be used only o n c e ) o f a p e r s o n who is in himself a n a m o r p h i c , for w h o m t h e r e is n o p r o p e r perspective that would m a k e his c o n t o u r s c l e a r (even when he h i m s e l f looks at his

312

THE TICKLISH SUBJECT

hands, they a p p e a r blurred to h i m ) , expresses, in a naive but a d e q u a t e way, the L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f a stain constitutive o f reality itself. 7 6 . Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit, O x f o r d : O x f o r d University Press 1 9 7 7 , p. 1 0 3 . 77. Unfortunately, Sphere m a r s the purity o f its insight by retranslating it into c o m m o n New A g e wisdom: at the e n d , the t h r e e surviving h e r o e s d e c i d e that since even for t h e m , t h r e e highly e d u c a t e d civilized h u m a n s , c o n t a c t with the S p h e r e (i.e. the o p p o r t u n i t y to translate into reality, to materialize, t h e i r i n n e r m o s t fears a n d d r e a m s ) led to s u c h (self-) destructive results, it is b e t t e r for t h e m to f o r g e t ( e r a s e f r o m their m e m o r i e s ) their e n t i r e e x p e r i e n c e o f the S p h e r e - humanity is n o t yet spiritually m a t u r e e n o u g h for such a device. T h e ultimate message o f the film is thus the r e s i g n e d conservative thesis that, in o u r imperfect state, it is b e t t e r not to p e n e t r a t e t o o d e e p into o u r i n n e r m o s t secrets - if we did so, we m i g h t unleash t r e m e n d o u s destructive forces. . . . 7 8 . See C h a p t e r 1 o f Slavoj Zizek, Turning With the Negative, D u r h a m , NC: Duke University Press 1 9 9 3 . 7 9 . See Franz Kafka, ' T h e Silence o f the Sirens', in Homer: A Collection of Critical Essays, ed. G e o r g e Steiner a n d R o b e r t Fagles, E n g l e w o o d Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall 1 9 6 3 . F o r a L a c a n i a n r e a d i n g o f this Kafka text, see R e n a t a Salecl, ' T h e Silence o f the F e m i n i n e jou'issnnce, in Slavoj Zizek, ed., Cogito and the Unconscious, D u r h a m , N C : D u k e University Press 1 9 9 8 .

6

Whither Oedipus?

The Three Fathers 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 (the

pacifying

Ego

Ideal,

the

point

o f ideal

identification

people 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 same

time, however,

Western dynamic it s o w e d

the

seeds

creative individualism; o f the

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

subsequent

at

the

'crisis o f

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 m o m e n t it is p o s i t e d as s u c h , t h e t u r n s i n t o a n o b s c e n e jouisseur

figure

the

o f paternal authority potentially

( 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

p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e F r e u d was ' t h e s o n o f h i s V i c t o r i a n t i m e s ' — as

many

h i s t o r i c i s t c r i t i c s o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s a r e n e v e r t i r e d o f r e p e a t i n g - h e was a b l e t o e x p r e s s its u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e , w h i c h r e m a i n s i n v i s i b l e i n its ' n o r m a l ' f u n c t i o n i n g . T h e o t h e r g r e a t e x a m p l e o f t h e state o f crisis as t h e historical m o m e n t

which

allows f o r a n

insight into

universality

only is, o f

course, that o f Marx, w h o articulated the universal logic o f t h e historical d e v e l o p m e n t o f h u m a n i t y o n t h e b a s i s o f h i s a n a l y s i s o f c a p i t a l i s m as t h e e x c e s s i v e ( i m b a l a n c e d ) s y s t e m o f p r o d u c t i o n . C a p i t a l i s m is a c o n t i n g e n t m o n s t r o u s f o r m a t i o n w h o s e v e r y ' n o r m a l ' s t a t e is p e r m a n e n t

dislocation,

a kind o f 'freak o f history', a social system c a u g h t in the vicious s u p e r e g o c y c l e o f i n c e s s a n t e x p a n s i o n - y e t p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , it is t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e entire preceding 'normal' history.

3

In his early theory o f the historicity o f the O e d i p u s c o m p l e x , L a c a n thus already establishes the c o n n e c t i o n between the psychoanalytic prob­ lematic

of Oedipus

subject's integration psychological

as t h e into

topoi o n

elementary

form

the symbolic order,

how modernity

c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s - o n how, in m o d e r n

o f 'socialization', o f and

the standard

is c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y

individualist

societies, subjects are n o

longer

fully i m m e r s e d i n ( a n d i d e n t i f i e d w i t h ) t h e p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l p l a c e which

they were b o r n ,

but

can -

in p r i n c i p l e , at least -

the

socio-

move

into freely

b e t w e e n different ' r o l e s ' . T h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e m o d e r n 'abstract' individ­ u a l w h o r e l a t e s t o h i s p a r t i c u l a r 'way o f l i f e ' as t o s o m e t h i n g w i t h w h i c h h e is n o t d i r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d - w h i c h , t h a t is, d e p e n d s o n a s e t o f c o n t i n g e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; this f u n d a m e n t a l

e x p e r i e n c e that the particularities o f my

b i r t h a n d social status ( s e x , r e l i g i o n , wealth, e t c . ) d o n o t d e t e r m i n e

me

fully, d o n o t c o n c e r n m y i n n e r m o s t i d e n t i t y - r e l i e s o n m u t a t i o n i n t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x : o n t h e u n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e two s i d e s o f paternal authority ( E g o Ideal a n d the prohibitive s u p e r e g o ) in o n e a n d the same person o f the 'real father' described above. A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f t h i s d u a l i t y is t h e c r u c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e ' b i g O t h e r ' qua t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r , t h e a n o n y m o u s c i r c u i t r y w h i c h

mediates

any intersubjective c o m m u n i c a t i o n and induces an irreducible 'alienation' as t h e p r i c e f o r e n t e r i n g its c i r c u i t , a n d t h e s u b j e c t ' s ' i m p o s s i b l e ' r e l a t i o n ­ s h i p t o a n O t h e r n e s s w h i c h is n o t y e t t h e s y m b o l i c b i g O t h e r b u t

the

O t h e r qua t h e R e a l T h i n g . T h e p o i n t is t h a t o n e s h o u l d n o t i d e n t i f y t h i s Real T h i n g

t o o hastily with

the

incestuous object o f desire

rendered

i n a c c e s s i b l e by s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n (i.e. t h e m a t e r n a l T h i n g ) ; this T h i n g is, r a t h e r , Father himself, n a m e l y , t h e o b s c e n e YdXhvc-jouissance

p r i o r to his

m u r d e r and subsequent elevation into the agency o f symbolic

authority

(Name-of-the-Father).

narrative,

T h i s is why,

on

the

level o f mythical

WHITHER OEDIPUS?

315

F r e u d felt the c o m p u l s i o n to s u p p l e m e n t the O e d i p a l myth with a n o t h e r mythical narrative, that o f the 'primordial father' [ T&T])

( i n Totem

and

Taboo

- t h e l e s s o n o f t h i s m y t h is t h e e x a c t o b v e r s e o f t h a t o f O e d i p u s ;

t h a t is t o say, h e r e , f a r f r o m h a v i n g t o d e a l w i t h t h e f a t h e r w h o i n t e r v e n e s as t h e T h i r d , t h e a g e n t w h o p r e v e n t s d i r e c t c o n t a c t w i t h t h e i n c e s t u o u s o b j e c t ( a n d s o s u s t a i n s t h e i l l u s i o n t h a t h i s a n n i h i l a t i o n w o u l d give u s f r e e a c c e s s t o t h i s o b j e c t ) , it is t h e k i l l i n g o f t h e F a t h e r - T h i n g ( t h e o f t h e O e d i p a l wish) w h i c h gives rise to s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n f a t h e r r e t u r n s as h i s N a m e ) . A n d w h a t o c c u r s i n t o d a y ' s 'decline o f Oedipus' the

return

of

figures

realization (the

dead

much-decried

( d e c l i n e o f p a t e r n a l s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y ) is p r e c i s e l y which

'primordial father', from

function

according

to

the

logic

'totalitarian' political L e a d e r s to the

s e x u a l h a r a s s e r - why? W h e n t h e

of

the

paternal

' p a c i f y i n g ' s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y is sus­

p e n d e d , t h e o n l y w a y t o a v o i d t h e d e b i l i t a t i n g d e a d l o c k o f d e s i r e , its inherent

i m p o s s i b i l i t y , is t o l o c a t e t h e

c a u s e o f its i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y in

d e s p o t i c figure w h i c h s t a n d s f o r t h e p r i m o r d i a l jouisseur.

a

we c a n n o t e n j o y

b e c a u s e lie a p p r o p r i a t e s all e n j o y m e n t . . . . We

c a n n o w s e e , in what,

O e d i p u s t o T&T:

precisely, consists the

c r u c i a l shift

from

in the ' O e d i p u s c o m p l e x ' , the parricide (and the incest

with the m o t h e r ) has t h e status o f t h e u n c o n s c i o u s desire - we, o r d i n a r y ( m a l e ) s u b j e c t s , all d r e a m a b o u t it, s i n c e t h e p a t e r n a l

figure

prevents our

a c c e s s t o t h e m a t e r n a l o b j e c t , d i s t u r b s o u r s y m b i o s i s w i t h it; w h i l e O e d i p u s h i m s e l f is t h e e x c e p t i o n a l f i g u r e , t h e O n e w h o a c t u a l l y did it. I n T&T,

on

t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e p a r r i c i d e is n o t t h e o b j e c t o f o u r d r e a m s , t h e g o a l o f o u r u n c o n s c i o u s wish - i t is, as F r e u d e m p h a s i z e s a g a i n a n d a g a i n , a p r e h i s ­ t o r i c f a c t w h i c h ' r e a l l y h a d t o h a p p e n ' : t h e m u r d e r o f t h e f a t h e r is a n e v e n t w h i c h h a d to take p l a c e in reality in o r d e r f o r t h e passage

from

a n i m a l s t a t e t o C u l t u r e t o t a k e p l a c e . O r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way i n t h e s t a n d a r d O e d i p u s m y t h , O e d i p u s is the exception

who did w h a t w e all

m e r e l y d r e a m a b o u t ( k i l l h i s f a t h e r , e t c . ) ; w h i l e i n T&fT this universally s h a r e d c r i m e g r o u n d e d

we all did it, a n d

h u m a n community. . . . In short,

t h e t r a u m a t i c e v e n t is n o t s o m e t h i n g w e d r e a m a b o u t , e n t e r t a i n i n g its f u t u r e p r o s p e c t , b u t n e v e r r e a l l y h a p p e n s a n d t h u s , v i a its p o s t p o n e m e n t , sustains the state o f C u l t u r e

( s i n c e t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f this wish, i.e. t h e

c o n s u m m a t i o n o f the i n c e s t u o u s link with the m o t h e r , would abolish the symbolic d i s t a n c e / p r o h i b i t i o n that defines the universe o f Culture); the t r a u m a t i c e v e n t is, r a t h e r , w h a t ahvays-already

had to happen

the

moment

we a r e within t h e o r d e r o f C u l t u r e . S o h o w a r e we t o e x p l a i n t h a t , a l t h o u g h w e d i d a c t u a l l y kill t h e f a t h e r , the

outcome

is n o t

the

longed-for

incestuous

union?

T h e r e , in

this

THE

316

TICKLISH

p a r a d o x , lies t h e c e n t r a l t h e s i s o f T&fT:

SUBJECT

the actual bearer o f prohibition,

w h a t p r e v e n t s o u r a c c e s s t o t h e i n c e s t u o u s o b j e c t , is n o t t h e l i v i n g b u t t h e dead f a t h e r , t h e f a t h e r w h o , a f t e r h i s d e a t h , r e t u r n s as h i s N a m e , t h a t is, as t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f t h e s y m b o l i c L a w / P r o h i b i t i o n . W h a t t h e m a t r i x o f T&T

a c c o u n t s f o r is t h u s t h e s t r u c t u r a l n e c e s s i t y o f t h e p a r r i c i d e :

the

passage from direct brutal force to the rule o f symbolic authority, o f the p r o h i b i t o r y L a w , is always g r o u n d e d

in a (disavowed) act o f primordial

c r i m e . T h a t is t h e d i a l e c t i c o f ' Y o u c a n p r o v e t h a t y o u l o v e m e o n l y b y b e t r a y i n g m e ' : t h e f a t h e r is e l e v a t e d i n t o t h e v e n e r a t e d s y m b o l o f L a w o n l y after his betrayal a n d m u r d e r . T h i s p r o b l e m a t i c also o p e n s u p

the

vagaries o f i g n o r a n c e - n o t the subject's, b u t the big O t h e r ' s : 'the father is d e a d , b u t h e is n o t a w a r e o f i t ' , t h a t is, h e d o e s n ' t k n o w t h a t h i s l o v i n g followers have

(always-already) b e t r a y e d h i m . O n

the other hand,

this

m e a n s t h a t t h e f a t h e r ' r e a l l y t h i n k s t h a t h e is a f a t h e r ' , t h a t h i s a u t h o r i t y e m a n a t e s directly from his p e r s o n , n o t m e r e l y from the e m p t y symbolic p l a c e h e o c c u p i e s a n d / o r fills. W h a t t h e f a i t h f u l f o l l o w e r s h o u l d c o n c e a l f r o m t h e p a t e r n a l f i g u r e o f t h e L e a d e r is p r e c i s e l y t h i s g a p b e t w e e n

the

L e a d e r in the i m m e d i a c y o f his p e r s o n a l i t y a n d the s y m b o l i c p l a c e

he

occupies, the gap on

account o f which father

qua e f f e c t i v e

person

is

u t t e r l y i m p o t e n t a n d r i d i c u l o u s ( e x e m p l a r y h e r e , o f c o u r s e , is t h e f i g u r e o f K i n g L e a r , w h o was c o n f r o n t e d v i o l e n t l y w i t h t h i s b e t r a y a l a n d

the

e n s u i n g u n m a s k i n g o f his i m p o t e n c e - d e p r i v e d o f his s y m b o l i c tide, h e is r e d u c e d t o a r a g i n g o l d i m p o t e n t f o o l ) . T h e h e r e t i c l e g e n d a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h C h r i s t h i m s e l f o r d e r e d J u d a s t o b e t r a y h i m ( o r a t l e a s t , l e t h i m k n o w h i s w i s h e s b e t w e e n t h e l i n e s . . . ) is t h e r e f o r e w e l l f o u n d e d : t h e r e , i n this necessity o f the betrayal o f t h e G r e a t M a n w h i c h a l o n e c a n assure his f a m e , lies t h e u l t i m a t e mystery o f P o w e r . T h e relationship between Michael Collins a n d E a m o n de Valera in the fight

for Irish i n d e p e n d e n c e illustrates a n o t h e r aspect o f this necessity o f

b e t r a y a l . I n 1 9 2 1 , D e V a l e r a ' s p r o b l e m w a s t h a t h e saw t h e n e c e s s i t y o f c o n c l u d i n g a d e a l w i t h t h e B r i t i s h g o v e r n m e n t , as w e l l as t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c results o f t h e r e t u r n to a state o f war, yet h e did n o t w a n t to c o n c l u d e this d e a l h i m s e l f , a n d t h u s t a k e full p u b l i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r it, b e c a u s e t h i s w o u l d f o r c e h i m to display his i m p o t e n c e , his l i m i t a t i o n , publicly ( h e was well aware that t h e British g o v e r n m e n t would

n e v e r c o n c e d e two k e y

d e m a n d s : t h e separate status o f the six U l s t e r c o u n t i e s a n d the r e n u n c i a ­ t i o n o f I r e l a n d a s a R e p u b l i c , t h a t is, t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e B r i t i s h K i n g as s o v e r e i g n o v e r t h e C o m m o n w e a l t h , a n d

thus also over I r e l a n d ) . I n

o r d e r to retain his charisma, h e h a d to m a n i p u l a t e a n o t h e r (Collins) into concluding

the

deal, reserving for himself

the freedom

to disavow

it

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

317

p u b l i c l y , w h i l e l a t e r s i l e n t l y a c c e p t i n g its t e r m s - in this way, t h e s e m b l a n c e o f h i s c h a r i s m a w o u l d b e s a v e d . D e V a l e r a h i m s e l f was h e a r d t o say o f C o l l i n s a n d o t h e r m e m b e r s o f the Irish delegation to t h e L o n d o n n e g o ­ 4

t i a t i o n s : ' W e m u s t h a v e s c a p e g o a t s ' . C o l l i n s ' s t r a g e d y was t h a t h e r e a d i l y a s s u m e d this r o l e o f ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' , o f the subject w h o s e c o m p r o ­ m i s i n g p r a g m a t i c s t a n c e e n a b l e s t h e M a s t e r to retain h i s m e s s i a n i c c h a ­ r i s m a : "You m i g h t say t h e t r a p is s p r u n g , '

5

h e wrote a f t e r h e h a d

agreed

to h e a d the L o n d o n d e l e g a t i o n , while after signing the treaty h e said, with dark premonition:

'I m a y have s i g n e d m y actual d e a t h - w a r r a n t . '

0

The

c l i c h e o f t h e post-revolutionary p r a g m a t i c l e a d e r who betrays the revol­ u t i o n a r y i d e a l i s t is t h u s r e v e r s e d : it is t h e p a s s i o n a t e n a t i o n a l i s t i d e a l i s t (De V a l e r a ) who exploits a n d t h e n betrays the pragmatic realist, the true founding

7

figure.

H o w , h o w e v e r , is t h i s r e v e r s a l p o s s i b l e ? I n t h e T c V T m a t r i x , t h e r e is still s o m e t h i n g m i s s i n g : it is n o t e n o u g h t o h a v e t h e m "

1 < j

e r e d father return­

i n g as t h e a g e n c y o f s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n - i n o r d e r f o r t h i s p r o h i b i t i o n t o b e e f f e c t u a l , a c t u a l l y to e x e r t its p o w e r ,

it m u s t

D

e

sustained

by a

p o s i t i v e a c t o f W i l l i n g . T h i s i n s i g h t p a v e d t h e way f o r t h e f u r t h e r a n d last F r e u d i a n v a r i a t i o n o n t h e O e d i p a l m a t r i x , t h e o n e in Moses

[MafM],

in w h i c h w e a r e

also d e a l i n g with

d u a l i t y , h o w e v e r , is n o t t h e s a m e as t h e o n e i n T&Tare not the pre-symbolic o b s c e n e / n o n - c a s t r a t e d (dead)

father

qua

the

and

two p a t e r n a l

Monotheism figures;

h e r e , t h e two

father-Jouissartce

bearer o f symbolic authority

(the

this figures

and

the

Name-of-the-

F a t h e r ) , but the old Egyptian Moses, the o n e who imposed m o n o t h e i s m who

dispensed

with

old polytheistic superstitions

and

introduced

n o t i o n o f a universe d e t e r m i n e d a n d r u l e d bv a u n i q u e rational

-

the

Order,

a n d t h e S e m i t i c M o s e s , w h o is a c t u a l l y n o n e o t h e r t h a n J e h o v a h ( Y a h w c h ) , t h e j e a l o u s G o d w h o d i s p l a y s v e n g e f u l r a g e w h e n H e f e e l s b e t r a y e d by H i s people. In short, who

MofM

is ' b e t r a y e d '

and

reverses the m a t r i x o f

p r i m o r d i a l Father-Jouissance symbolic

authority,

TcfT

yet again: the father

k i l l e d b y h i s f o l l o w e r s / s o n s is not t h e

the

obscene

b u t t h e very 'rational' f a t h e r w h o e m b o d i e s figure

which

s t r u c t u r e o f t h e u n i v e r s e [logos].

personifies

the

unified

rational

Instead o f the o b s c e n e primordial

pre-

s y m b o l i c f a t h e r r e t u r n i n g a f t e r h i s m u r d e r i n t h e g u i s e o f its N a m e , o f s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y , we n o w h a v e t h e s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y [logos]

betrayed,

k i l l e d by h i s f o l l o w e r s / s o n s , a n d t h e n r e t u r n i n g i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e j e a l o u s a n d unforgiving superego

figure

o f G o d full o f m u r d e r o u s r a g e .

s

I t is

o n l y h e r e , after this s e c o n d reversal o f the O e d i p a l m a t r i x , that we r e a c h the well-known Pascalian distinction between t h e (God

qua

the universal structure

o f logos,

tk>d o f P h i l o s o p h e r s

identified

w i t

h

the

rational

THE TICKLISH

318

SUBJECT

structure o f the universe) a n d the G o d o f Theologists (the G o d o f love and

hate,

the

inscrutable

'dark

God'

of

capricious

'irrational'

Predestination). 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 G o d is not t h e s a m e as t h e o b s c e n e p r i m o r d i a l Father-Jouisseur. w i t h a knowledge

in contrast to the primordial father

o f jouissance,

m i s i n g G o d is t h a t H e says ' N o ! ' t o jouissance ferocious ignorance

endowed

the f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f this u n c o m p r o ­

{'laferoce

ignorance

— t h i s is a G o d p o s s e s s e d b y J

de Yahvf' ),

by an a t t i t u d e o f 'I

refuse to k n o w , I d o n o t w a n t t o h e a r , a n y t h i n g a b o u t y o u r dirty s e c r e t ways o f jouissance

and

\ a G o d who banishes the universe o f traditional

s e x u a l i z e d w i s d o m , a u n i v e r s e i n w h i c h t h e r e is still a s e m b l a n c e o f t h e ultimate jouissance,

harmony the

between

the

big O t h e r

(the

n o t i o n o f m a c r o c o s m as r e g u l a t e d

symbolic order) by s o m e

and

underlying

s e x u a l t e n s i o n b e t w e e n m a l e a n d f e m a l e ' p r i n c i p l e s ' {Yin a n d Yang,

Light

a n d D a r k n e s s , E a r t h a n d H e a v e n ) . T h i s is t h e p r o t o - e x i s t e n t i a l i s t G o d whose e x i s t e n c e — to apply to H i m anachronistically Sartre's definition o f m a n - d o e s n o t s i m p l y c o i n c i d e w i t h H i s e s s e n c e (as w i t h t h e m e d i e v a l G o d o f St T h o m a s Aquinas), but precedes His essence; for that reason, H e s p e a k s i n t a u t o l o g i e s , n o t o n l y c o n c e r n i n g H i s o w n quidditas w h a t I a m ' ) , b u t a l s o a n d a b o v e a l l i n w h a t c o n c e r n s logos,

('I a m

t h e reasons

for

w h a t H e is d o i n g - o r , m o r e p r e c i s e l y , f o r H i s i n j u n c t i o n s , f o r w h a t H e is asking us to d o o r p r o h i b i t i n g us to d o : the i n e x o r a b l e i n s i s t e n c e o f His o r d e r s is u l t i m a t e l y g r o u n d e d i n a n ' I t is s o because

I say it is so\'. I n s h o r t ,

t h i s G o d is t h e G o d o f p u r e W i l l , o f t h e c a p r i c i o u s abyss t h a t l i e s b e y o n d a n y g l o b a l r a t i o n a l o r d e r o f logos,

a G o d w h o d o e s n o t h a v e t o account

for

anything H e does. I n the history o f p h i l o s o p h y , this c r a c k in the g l o b a l r a t i o n a l e d i f i c e o f t h e m a c r o c o s m i n w h i c h t h e D i v i n e W i l l a p p e a r s was first o p e n e d u p b y D u n s S c o t u s ; b u t it was F . W . J . S c h e l l i n g t o w h o m w e o w e t h e m o s t p i e r c i n g d e s c r i p t i o n s o f this h o r r i f y i n g abyss o f Will. S c h e l l i n g o p p o s e d t h e W i l l to t h e ' p r i n c i p l e o f s u f f i c i e n t r e a s o n ' : p u r e W i l l i n g is always s e l f - i d e n t i c a l , it r e l i e s o n l y o n its o w n a c t - ' I w a n t it b e c a u s e I w a n t i t ! ' . I n h i s d e s c r i p t i o n s , radiating an awesome poetic beauty, Schelling emphasizes how people

are horrified when

they e n c o u n t e r a person

whose

ordinary behaviour

d i s p l a y s s u c h a n u n c o n d i t i o n a l W i l l : t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g f a s c i n a t i n g , p r o p ­ e r l y h y p n o t i c , a b o u t it; o n e is as i f b e w i t c h e d b y it. . . . S c h e l l i n g ' s e m p h a s i s on

t h e abyss o f p u r e W i l l i n g , o f c o u r s e , t a r g e t s H e g e l ' s a l l e g e d

l o g i c i s m ' : w h a t S c h e l l i n g w a n t s t o p r o v e is t h a t t h e H e g e l i a n l o g i c a l s y s t e m is i n i t s e l f impotent

'pan-

universal

- it is a s y s t e m o f p u r e potentialities

and,

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

319

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 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 .

1 0

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 figure

o f the

'real father'.

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 '

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

THE

32U

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

actually to

count

as s u c h ,

has

to b e

o f s y m b o l i c r u l e s , i f i t is

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 d i t i o n a l ) tyranny

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

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 heroism,

when

our

fidelity t o t h e

Cause

c o m p e l s us

to transgress

of

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

becomes

learns

aware

that

o f the

Communism

was

an

positivity o f a s i m p l e

ideological mirage,

and

ethical

the

life

outside

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 t h a t is, t h e y w e r e

OEDIPUS?

321

not t r a g i c h e r o e s , b u t s o m e t h i n g m o r e h o r r i b l e

and

s i m u l t a n e o u s l y m o r e c o m i c a l : they w e r e d e p r i v e d o f t h e very dignity t h a t w o u l d c o n f e r o n t h e i r f a t e its p r o p e r l y t r a g i c d i m e n s i o n . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , A n t i g o n e c a n n o t s e r v e as t h e m o d e l f o r r e s i s t a n c e t o S t a l i n i s t p o w e r : i f w e use h e r like this, we r e d u c e t h e Stalinist t e r r o r to j u s t a n o t h e r version o f tyranny. A n t i g o n e m a i n t a i n s the r e f e r e n c e to the big O t h e r ' s desire

(to

a c c o m p l i s h the s y m b o l i c ritual a n d bury h e r d e c e a s e d b r o t h e r properly) as o p p o s e d t o t h e t y r a n t ' s ( p s e u d o - ) L a w - t h e r e f e r e n c e w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y , is lacking i n t h e S t a l i n i s t s h o w t r i a l s . I n h u m i l i a t i n g t h e v i c t i m , t h e S t a l i n i s t t e r r o r deprives h i m o f t h e very d i m e n s i o n w h i c h c o u l d c o n f e r s u b l i m e b e a u t y o n h i m : t h e v i c t i m g o e s b e y o n d a c e r t a i n t h r e s h o l d , h e 'loses his d i g n i t y ' a n d is r e d u c e d

t o a p u r e s u b j e c t b e r e f t o f agalma,

'destitute',

u n a b l e t o r e c o m p o s e t h e n a r r a t i v e o f his l i f e . T h u s t e r r o r is n o t t h e p o w e r o f c o r r u p t i o n t h a t u n d e r m i n e s t h e e t h i c a l a t t i t u d e f r o m o u t s i d e ; r a t h e r , it u n d e r m i n e s it f r o m w i t h i n , b y m o b i l i z i n g a n d e x p l o i t i n g t o its u t m o s t t h e i n h e r e n t g a p o f t h e e t h i c a l p r o j e c t itself, the

gap

that

separates

symbolic dimension

the

ethical Cause

qua

real from

Cause

in

its

( v a l u e s , e t c . ) o r - t o p u t it i n p o l i t i c o - l e g a l t e r m s

-

the gap that separates the G o d o f the p u r e act o f decision from the G o d o f positive P r o h i b i t i o n s a n d C o m m a n d m e n t s . D o e s n o t the K i e r k e g a a r d ian suspension

o f the

( s y m b o l i c ) E t h i c a l also involve a m o v e

beyond

t r a g e d y ? T h e e t h i c a l h e r o is t r a g i c , w h e r e a s t h e k n i g h t o f F a i t h d w e l l s i n t h e h o r r i b l e d o m a i n b e y o n d o r b e t w e e n t h e t w o d e a t h s , s i n c e h e (is r e a d y t o ) s a c r i f i c e ( s ) w h a t is m o s t p r e c i o u s t o h i m , h i s objet petit a (in t h e c a s e o f Abraham,

his s o n ) . I n

other

words,

Kierkegaard's

point

is n o t

that

A b r a h a m is f o r c e d t o c h o o s e b e t w e e n h i s d u t y t o G o d a n d h i s d u t y t o h u m a n i t y (such a c h o i c e r e m a i n s simply t r a g i c ) , b u t that h e has to c h o o s e b e t w e e n t h e two f a c e t s o f duty' t o G o d , a n d t h e r e b y t h e two f a c e t s o f G o d H i m s e l f : G o d as u n i v e r s a l ( t h e s y s t e m o f s y m b o l i c n o r m s ) a n d G o d as t h e point o f absolute singularity that suspends the d i m e n s i o n o f the Universal. F o r this p r e c i s e r e a s o n , D e r r i d a ' s r e a d i n g o f ( K i e r k e g a a r d ' s r e a d i n g o f ) A b r a h a m ' s g e s t u r e i n Donner

la mart,™ w h e r e

he interprets

Abraham's

s a c r i f i c e n o t as a h y p e r b o l i c e x c e p t i o n b u t as s o m e t h i n g w h i c h all o f us p e r f o r m a g a i n a n d a g a i n , e v e r y day, i n o u r m o s t c o m m o n e t h i c a l e x p e r i ­ e n c e , s e e m s t o fall s h o r t . A c c o r d i n g t o D e r r i d a , e v e r y t i m e we c h o o s e to o b e y a d u t y t o s o m e i n d i v i d u a l , w e n e g l e c t - f o r g e t - o u r d u t y t o all o t h e r s ( s i n c e tout autre est tout autre, e v e r y o t h e r p e r s o n is w h o l l y o t h e r ) — i f I a t t e n d to m y own c h i l d r e n , I sacrifice t h e c h i l d r e n o f o t h e r m e n ; i f I h e l p t o f e e d a n d c l o t h e this o t h e r p e r s o n , I a b a n d o n o t h e r o t h e r s , a n d so o n . W h a t gets lost in this r e d u c t i o n o f A b r a h a m ' s p r e d i c a m e n t to a k i n d o f

THE

322

TICKLISH

H e i d e g g e r i a n c o n s t i t u t i v e g u i l t o f Dasein

SUBJECT

which can never use/actualize

all its p o s s i b i l i t i e s is t h e s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l n a t u r e o f t h i s p r e d i c a m e n t : A b r a ­ h a m ' s d e a d l o c k d o e s n o t l i e i n t h e f a c t t h a t , o n b e h a l f o f t h e u l t i m a t e tout autre ( G o d ) , h e h a s t o s a c r i f i c e a n o t h e r tout autre, h i s m o s t b e l o v e d e a r t h l y c o m p a n i o n (his s o n ) but, r a t h e r , in the fact that, o n b e h a l f o f his L o v e f o r G o d , h e h a s t o s a c r i f i c e w h a t the very religion grounded

in his faith

orders

him to love. T h e s p l i t is t h u s i n h e r e n t i n f a i t h itself; i t is t h e s p l i t b e t w e e n t h e S y m b o l i c a n d t h e R e a l , b e t w e e n t h e symbolic e d i f i c e o f f a i t h a n d p u r e , u n c o n d i t i o n a l act o f f a i t h - the only way to prove your faith what this very faith

the

is to betray

orders you to love.

T h e Demise o f Symbolic Efficiency 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, be

'synchronized'. O n e

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

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 welldefined

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 living e n t i t y ) .

1 4

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

attributes direct m a t e r i a l efficacy to words.) In short, the ' 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 s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o t h e n o t i o n o f b e l i e f , o f s y m b o l i c t r u s t , o f c r e d e n c e , o f t a k i n g w h a t o t h e r s say ' a t f a c e v a l u e ' . In o n e o f the M a r x B r o t h e r s '

films,

G r o u c h o M a r x , c a u g h t in a lie,

answers angrily: ' W h o m d o you believe, y o u r eyes o r my words?' T h i s a p p a r e n t l y a b s u r d l o g i c e x p r e s s e s p e r f e c t l y t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e sym­ b o l i c o r d e r , in w h i c h t h e s y m b o l i c m a s k - m a n d a t e m a t t e r s m o r e t h a n t h e d i r e c t reality o f the individual w h o wears this m a s k a n d / o r a s s u m e s this m a n d a t e . T h i s f u n c t i o n i n g involves t h e s t r u c t u r e o f fetishistic disavowal: T k n o w v e r y w e l l t h a t t h i n g s a r e t h e way I s e e t h e m

[ 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 n o n e t h e less I treat h i m with r e s p e c t , s i n c e h e w e a r s t h e i n s i g n i a o f a j u d g e , s o t h a t w h e n h e s p e a k s , it is t h e L a w i t s e l f w h i c h s p e a k s t h r o u g h h i m . ' S o , i n a way, I a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e h i s w o r d s , n o t m y e y e s - t h a t is t o say, I b e l i e v e i n A n o t h e r S p a c e ( t h e d o m a i n o f p u r e s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y ) w h i c h m a t t e r s m o r e t h a n t h e r e a l i t y o f its s p o k e s m e n . T h e c y n i c a l r e d u c t i o n t o r e a l i t y t h e r e f o r e falls s h o r t : w h e n a j u d g e s p e a k s , t h e r e is i n a way m o r e t r u t h i n h i s w o r d s ( t h e w o r d s o f t h e I n s t i t u t i o n o f Law) t h a n in t h e d i r e c t reality o f t h e p e r s o n o f t h e j u d g e - i f o n e limits o n e s e l f t o w h a t o n e s e e s , o n e s i m p l y m i s s e s t h e p o i n t . T h i s p a r a d o x is w h a t L a c a n is a i m i n g a t w i t h h i s 'fcs non-dupes

errent': t h o s e w h o d o n o t l e t

themselves b e c a u g h t in the symbolic d e c e p t i o n / f i c t i o n a n d c o n t i n u e to b e l i e v e t h e i r eyes a r e t h e o n e s w h o e r r m o s t . W h a t a cynic w h o ' b e l i e v e s o n l y h i s e y e s ' m i s s e s is t h e e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e s y m b o l i c fiction

fiction,

t h e way t h i s

structures o u r e x p e r i e n c e o f reality.

T h e s a m e g a p is a t w o r k i n o u r m o s t i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h

our

n e i g h b o u r s : w e b e h a v e as if w e d o n o t k n o w t h a t t h e y a l s o s m e l l b a d , s e c r e t e e x c r e m e n t , a n d so o n - a m i n i m u m o f idealization, o f fetishizing d i s a v o w a l , is t h e b a s i s o f o u r c o e x i s t e n c e . A n d d o e s n o t t h e s a m e d i s a v o w a l account for the sublime beauty o f the idealizing gesture discernible from A n n e F r a n k to A m e r i c a n C o m m u n i s t s w h o believed in the Soviet U n i o n ? A l t h o u g h we k n o w t h a t Stalinist C o m m u n i s m was a n a p p a l l i n g t h i n g , we nevertheless admire the victims o f the M c C a r t h y witch-hunt who heroically persisted in their b e l i e f in C o m m u n i s m a n d s u p p o r t for the Soviet U n i o n . T h e l o g i c h e r e is t h e s a m e as t h a t o f A n n e F r a n k w h o , i n h e r d i a r i e s , expresses b e l i e f in horrors perpetrated assertion o f belief

the ultimate

goodness of mankind

in s p i t e o f t h e

against J e w s in W o r l d W a r II: w h a t m a k e s s u c h (in the essential g o o d n e s s o f m a n k i n d ; in the

an

truly

h u m a n c h a r a c t e r o f t h e S o v i e t r e g i m e ) s u b l i m e is t h e v e r y g a p b e t w e e n it a n d t h e o v e r w h e l m i n g f a c t u a l e v i d e n c e a g a i n s t it, t h a t is, t h e a c t i v e will to disavow

t h e a c t u a l s t a t e o f t h i n g s . P e r h a p s t h e r e i n lies t h e m o s t e l e m e n t a r y

THE

324 meta-physical

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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

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 3

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

1 6

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 fiction,

different); he

continues

to believe the

'word',

the

symbolic

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 child, etc.) to the cynical attitude o f a fundamental

distrust towards

(a 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

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

you 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. efficient symbolic

fiction

In the case o f the

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

equation o f Knowledge and Goodness

against

the

standard

Platonic

(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

the p r o b l e m now? Y o u know you're n o t a grain o f c o r n but a h u m a n b e i n g who c a n ' t b e swallowed by a hen!', the m a d m a n k n o w I ' m n o l o n g e r a g r a i n o f c o r n , b u t does the hen?'

answered: 'Yes, / . . . T h i s story,

n o n s e n s i c a l at t h e level o f factual reality, w h e r e you are e i t h e r a g r a i n o r n o t , is a b s o l u t e l y s e n s i b l e i f o n e r e p l a c e s ' a g r a i n ' w i t h s o m e f e a t u r e

that

d e t e r m i n e s m y symbolic i d e n t i t y . D o n o t s i m i l a r t h i n g s h a p p e n all t h e t i m e in o u r dealings with d i f f e r e n t levels o f b u r e a u c r a c y ? Say a high-level office c o m p l i e s with m y d e m a n d a n d gives m e a h i g h e r tide; h o w e v e r , it takes s o m e time for the d e c r e e to b e properly e x e c u t e d a n d r e a c h the lowerlevel a d m i n i s t r a t i o n w h i c h actually takes c a r e o f t h e b e n e f i t s f r o m

this

t i t l e ( h i g h e r s a l a r y , e t c . ) — w e all k n o w t h e f r u s t r a t i o n c a u s e d b y a l o w e r b u r e a u c r a t w h o casts a g l a n c e at t h e d e c r e e we c o n f r o n t h i m with

and

retorts indifferently: 'Sorry, I h a v e n ' t b e e n p r o p e r l y i n f o r m e d a b o u t this n e w m e a s u r e yet, so I c a n ' t h e l p y o u . . .'. I s n ' t this a bit l i k e t e l l i n g you: ' S o r r y , t o us y o u ' r e still a g r a i n o f c o r n , n o t y e t a h u m a n b e i n g ' ? I n s h o r t , t h e r e is a c e r t a i n m y s t e r i o u s m o m e n t a t w h i c h a m e a s u r e o r a d e c r e e actually b e c o m e s operative, registered by t h e big O t h e r o f the symbolic institution. T h e mysterious c h a r a c t e r o f this m o m e n t c a n b e s t b e illustrated by a funny t h i n g that h a p p e n e d d u r i n g t h e last e l e c t i o n c a m p a i g n in S l o v e n i a , w h e n a m e m b e r o f t h e r u l i n g p o l i t i c a l p a r t y was a p p r o a c h e d b y a n e l d e r l y lady f r o m his local c o n s t i t u e n c y , a s k i n g h i m f o r h e l p . S h e was c o n v i n c e d t h a t t h e s t r e e t n u m b e r o f h e r h o u s e ( n o t t h e s t a n d a r d 1 3 , b u t 2 3 ) was b r i n g i n g h e r b a d l u c k - t h e m o m e n t h e r h o u s e g o t this n e w n u m b e r , d u e to s o m e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n , m i s f o r t u n e s s t a r t e d t o afflict

her

(burglars b r o k e in, a s t o r m t o r e t h e r o o f off, n e i g h b o u r s b e g a n to a n n o y h e r ) , s o s h e a s k e d t h e c a n d i d a t e t o b e s o k i n d as t o a r r a n g e w i t h

the

municipal authorities for the n u m b e r to b e c h a n g e d . T h e c a n d i d a t e m a d e a s i m p l e s u g g e s t i o n t o t h e lady: w h y d i d n ' t s h e d o it a l o n e ? W h y d i d n ' t s h e simply r e p a i n t o r r e p l a c e t h e p l a t e with t h e s t r e e t n u m b e r h e r s e l f by, f o r e x a m p l e , a d d i n g a n o t h e r n u m b e r o r l e t t e r (say, 2 3 A o r 2 3 1 i n s t e a d o f 2 3 ) ? T h e o l d lady a n s w e r e d : ' O h , I tried t h a t a c o u p l e o f weeks a g o ; I m y s e l f r e p l a c e d t h e o l d p l a t e w i t h a n e w o n e w i t h t h e n u m b e r 2 3 A , b u t it didn't

work - m y b a d l u c k is still w i t h m e ; y o u c a n ' t c h e a t it, it h a s t o b e

d o n e p r o p e r l y , by t h e r e l e v a n t state i n s t i t u t i o n . ' T h e 'it' w h i c h c a n n o t b e d u p e d i n t h i s way is t h e L a c a n i a n 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 . T h i s , t h e n , is w h a t s y m b o l i c e f f i c i e n c y is a b o u t : i t c o n c e r n s t h e m i n i ­ mum

o f 'reification' on

a c c o u n t o f w h i c h i t is n o t e n o u g h

f o r u s , all

c o n c e r n e d individuals, to k n o w s o m e fact in o r d e r to b e o p e r a t i v e -

'it',

t h e s y m b o l i c i n s t i t u t i o n , m u s t also k n o w / ' r e g i s t e r ' this fact i f t h e p e r f o r -

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

327

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 tion/registration:

inscrip­

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

dismissing the factual testimony o f my eyes.

word

without

hesitation,

1 7

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

quite consistent to designate 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 The Postman

as a failed

blockbuster,

while //

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

The Postman.

than

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 overtranslate

the vulgar expressions -

say, w h e n

a character on

to

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 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 the

THE

328 observers. T a k e

the

two

TICKLISH

dead

SUBJECT

celebrities Princess Diana and

Mother

T e r e s a . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e c l i c h e , D i a n a , e v e n w h e n s h e was e n g a g e d i n h e r c h a r i t i e s , was b a s k i n g i n m e d i a a t t e n t i o n , c a r e f u l l y m a n i p u l a t i n g m e d i a t i c dissemination

o f the

innermost

d e t a i l s o f h e r p r i v a t e life

(her secret

patronage o f the M o r t o n b i o g r a p h y ) ; while M o t h e r T e r e s a , a true saint, was silently d o i n g h e r c h a r i t a b l e j o b o u t s i d e t h e m e d i a l i m e l i g h t , in t h e h e l l i s h s l u m s o f C a l c u t t a . . . . T h e p r o b l e m with this o p p o s i t i o n , h o w e v e r , is t h a t we all knew about Mother

Teresa silently doing her work outside the focus

of the media — t h i s , p r e c i s e l y , is w h a t s h e w a s f a m o u s f o r ; t h i s i m a g e o f h e r c r e a t e d b y t h e m e d i a is w h y s h e w a s r e c e i v e d b y h e a d s o f s t a t e a n d h a d a state funeral. . . . S o the very o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n D i a n a o n a

shopping

s p r e e with h e r n e w b o y f r i e n d a n d M o t h e r T e r e s a t a k i n g c a r e o f m o r t a l l y ill b e g g a r s i n h e r

g r e y C a l c u t t a h o s p i t a l is a m e d i a t i c o p p o s i t i o n

par

excellence. H e r e t h e g a p b e t w e e n r e a l i t y a n d t h e o r d e r o f its s y m b o l i c r e g i s t r a t i o n is c r u c i a l - t h e g a p o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h s y m b o l i c r e g i s t r a t i o n is u l t i m a t e l y c o n t i n g e n t . L e t m e m e n t i o n the r e c e n t t r e n d to portray the President o f t h e U S A as a b r u t a l m u r d e r e r (Absolute

Power, Murder

at 1600):

this t r e n d

f l o u t s a p r o h i b i t i o n t h a t was i n f o r c e u n t i l q u i t e r e c e n t l y : e v e n a c o u p l e o f y e a r s a g o , a film l i k e t h i s w o u l d h a v e b e e n u n t h i n k a b l e . I t is l i k e t h e detective in a T V series who, s o m e t i m e in the r e q u i r e d to b e a n o b l e

figure:

1 9 6 0 s , was n o

longer

h e c o u l d b e a c r i p p l e , a gay, a w o m a n . . . .

T h i s s u d d e n a p p e r c e p t i o n t h a t t h e p r o h i b i t i o n d o e s n ' t m a t t e r is c r u c i a l : y o u c a n h a v e a P r e s i d e n t w h o is a m u r d e r e r ,

b u t t h e p r e s i d e n c y still

r e t a i n s its c h a r i s m a . . . . T h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t it was s i m p l y ' l i k e t h i s a l l the

time':

it w a s l i k e t h i s in itself, b u t n o t for i t s e l f . I f o n e h a d m a d e a

film

l i k e Absolute Power i n t h e 1 9 5 0 s , t h e i d e o l o g i c a l i m p a c t w o u l d h a v e b e e n t o o t r a u m a t i c ; a f t e r t h e s h i f t in t h e s y s t e m o f s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n ,

the

personal

has

honesty o f the

President

no

longer matters,

the

system

a c c o m m o d a t e d to the c h a n g e . . . . W i t h e v e r y s o c i a l shift, o n e s h o u l d l o o k f o r t h i s c r u c i a l s y m b o l i c c h a n g e : in the hippie era, b u s i n e s s m e n c o u l d wear j e a n s , b e bearded, a n d so on, b u t n e v e r t h e l e s s b e r u t h l e s s p r o f i t e e r s . T h i s m o m e n t o f c h a n g e is t h e crucial m o m e n t accommodate

at w h i c h t h e system restructures

its r u l e s i n o r d e r

itself to new c o n d i t i o n s by i n c o r p o r a t i n g

the

to

originally

s u b v e r s i v e m o m e n t . T h i s , t h e n , is t h e t r u e u n d e r l y i n g s t o r y b e n e a t h

the

d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e Hayes C o d e o f self-censorship in H o l l y w o o d - within a b r i e f s p a n i n t h e 1 9 6 0 s , all o f a s u d d e n , ' e v e r y t h i n g b e c a m e p o s s i b l e ' , t h e t a b o o s w e r e falling a l m o s t day by day ( e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e s to drugs, t o t h e s e x u a l act, to h o m o s e x u a l i t y , to racial t e n s i o n , u p t o t h e s y m p a t h e t i c

WHITHER OEDIPUS? portrayal nothing

o f Communists); none really c h a n g e d . H e r e

the

329

less, ' t h e s y s t e m ' s u r v i v e d

c a p i t a l i s m is m u c h

more

intact:

flexible

than

C o m m u n i s m , w h i c h was u n a b l e t o a f f o r d s u c h r a d i c a l a l l e v i a t i o n s : w h e n G o r b a c h e v gradually tried to e a s e t h e constraints in o r d e r to s t r e n g t h e n the system, t h e system disintegrated. T h e b i g O t h e r is t h u s t h e o r d e r o f t h e l i e , o f l y i n g s i n c e r e l y . T a k e B i l l C l i n t o n a n d M o n i c a L e w i n s k y : w e all k n o w ( o r at l e a s t s u r m i s e ) t h a t t h e y d i d it; n e v e r t h e l e s s we s u p p o r t C l i n t o n as l o n g as this c a n b e c o n c e a l e d f r o m t h e big O t h e r ' s g a z e . . . . S o h e r e we have the p a r a d o x o f t h e big O t h e r a t its p u r e s t . T h e m a j o r i t y o f p e o p l e b e l i e v e t h e r e was s o m e t h i n g b e t w e e n t h e t w o o f t h e m ; t h e y b e l i e v e t h a t C l i n t o n was l y i n g w h e n

he

d e n i e d it; n o n e t h e less, t h e y s u p p o r t h i m . A l t h o u g h ( t h e y a s s u m e d t h a t ) C l i n t o n l i e d w h e n h e d e n i e d his s e x u a l affair with ' t h a t w o m a n ' , M o n i c a L e w i n s k y , h e lied sincerely, w i t h i n n e r c o n v i c t i o n , s o m e h o w b e l i e v i n g in h i s very lie, taking

it s e r i o u s l y -

s e r i o u s l y , s i n c e it d e s i g n a t e s ideological

statement.

this p a r a d o x the

i t s e l f is t o b e

key e l e m e n t o f the

taken

efficiency

quite of

I n o t h e r w o r d s , as l o n g as C l i n t o n ' s l i e is

an not

p e r c e i v e d / r e g i s t e r e d b y t h e b i g O t h e r , as l o n g as it is p o s s i b l e f o r h i m to k e e p u p a p p e a r a n c e s ( o f p r e s i d e n t i a l ' d i g n i t y ' ) , t h e very f a c t t h a t we all know (or presume)

t h a t h e is l y i n g s e r v e s as a f u r t h e r g r o u n d

p u b l i c ' s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with h i m - n o t o n l y d o e s the p u b l i c ' s

for

the

awareness

t h a t h e is l y i n g , a n d t h a t t h e r e a c t u a l l y was s o m e t h i n g g o i n g o n b e t w e e n h i m a n d M o n i c a L e w i n s k y , n o t h u r t h i s p o p u l a r i t y , it e v e n a c t i v e l y b o o s t s it. O n e s h o u l d n e v e r f o r g e t t h a t t h e L e a d e r ' s c h a r i s m a is s u s t a i n e d b y t h e very f e a t u r e s (signs o f w e a k n e s s , o f c o m m o n ' h u m a n i t y ' ) t h a t m a y s e e m t o u n d e r m i n e it. T h i s t e n s i o n was d e f t l y m a n i p u l a t e d a n d b r o u g h t t o its e x t r e m e b y H i t l e r : i n h i s s p e e c h e s in f r o n t o f l a r g e c r o w d s , h e r e g u l a r l y s t a g e d t h e a c t o f ' l o s i n g h i s c o o l ' , o f e n g a g i n g in a h y s t e r i c a l a c t i n g o u t , helplessly s h o u t i n g a n d waving his h a n d s , like a s p o i l t c h i l d f r u s t r a t e d

by

t h e fact t h a t his d e m a n d s a r e n o t i m m e d i a t e l y gratified - a g a i n , t h e s e very features which s e e m e d to c o n t r a d i c t the L e a d e r ' s i m p a s s i o n e d

dignity

s u s t a i n e d the c r o w d ' s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with h i m . All t h e s e p a r a d o x e s h a v e a f u n d a m e n t a l b e a r i n g o n t h e w a y c y b e r s p a c e affects the s u b j e c t ' s s y m b o l i c identity. T h e p o o r m a d m a n w h o m e t a h e n a d o p t e d t h e a t t i t u d e o f 'I k n o w very well that I a m a m a n , b u t . . . [ d o c s t h e b i g O t h e r k n o w i t ? ] ' - i n s h o r t , h e b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e c h a n g e in i d e n t i t y h a d n o t yet b e e n registered by the big O t h e r , that for the big O t h e r

he

was still a g r a i n o f c o r n . N o w , l e t u s i m a g i n e a r a t h e r c o m m o n c a s e o f a shy a n d

inhibited

man

c o m m u n i t y in w h i c h

who,

in

cyberspace, participates

he adopts the screen persona

of a

in

a

virtual

promiscuous

THE

330

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,

promiscuous

woman,

so why

shouldn't

doing

things

I briefly indulge I could

never do

in

posing

in

real life?' —

as

a

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 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

any

'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,

c o n t i n g e n t reasons that have nothing

to d o with

but a

fiction

which,

its i n h e r e n t

for

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

331

OEDIPUS?

vided by t h e r e c e n t t r e n d s in Christianity. Christianity p r o p e r - t h e b e l i e f i n C h r i s t ' s R e s u r r e c t i o n - is t h e h i g h e s t r e l i g i o u s e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e p o w e r o f symbolic

fiction

as t h e m e d i u m o f u n i v e r s a l i t y : t h e d e a t h o f t h e ' r e a l '

C h r i s t is ' s u b l a t e d ' i n t h e H o l y S p i r i t , t h a t is, i n t h e s p i r i t u a l

community

o f b e l i e v e r s . T h i s a u t h e n t i c k e r n e l o f C h r i s t i a n i t y , first a r t i c u l a t e d b y S t P a u l , is u n d e r a t t a c k t o d a y : t h e d a n g e r c o m e s i n d i e g u i s e o f t h e N e w A g e G n o s t i c / d u a l i s t ( m i s ) r e a d i n g , w h i c h r e d u c e s t h e R e s u r r e c t i o n to a m e t a ­ p h o r o f t h e ' i n n e r ' s p i r i t u a l g r o w t h o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s o u l . W h a t is l o s t t h e r e b y is t h e v e r y c e n t r a l t e n e t o f C h r i s t i a n i t y , a l r e a d y e m p h a s i z e d H e g e l : t h e b r e a k with t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t l o g i c o f S i n a n d

by

Punishment,

t h a t is, t h e b e l i e f i n t h e miracle o f G r a c e w h i c h r e t r o a c t i v e l y ' u n d o e s '

our

p a s t s i n s . T h i s is t h e ' g o o d n e w s ' o f t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t : t h e m i r a c l e o f the

creatio

ex nihilo,

o f a N e w B e g i n n i n g , o f s t a r t i n g a n e w life

n o t h i n g ' , is p o s s i b l e . (Creatio

'from

ex nihilo, o f c o u r s e , is f e a s i b l e o n l y w i t h i n a

s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e , as t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a n e w s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n w h i c h e r a s e s t h e p a s t o n e . ) A n d t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is t h a t t h i s N e w B e g i n n i n g is p o s s i b l e o n l y t h r o u g h D i v i n e G r a c e - its i m p e t u s m u s t c o m e f r o m

outside;

i t is n o t t h e r e s u l t o f m a n ' s i n n e r e f f o r t t o o v e r c o m e h i s / h e r l i m i t a t i o n s a n d elevate h i s / h e r soul a b o v e e g o t i s t i c m a t e r i a l interests; in this p r e c i s e s e n s e , t h e p r o p e r l y C h r i s t i a n N e w B e g i n n i n g is a b s o l u t e l y i n c o m p a t i b l e with t h e p a g a n G n o s t i c p r o b l e m a t i c o f the ' p u r i f i c a t i o n o f the soul'. S o w h a t is a c t u a l l y a t s t a k e i n r e c e n t N e w A g e p o p - G n o s t i c e n d e a v o u r s reassert a k i n d o f 'Christ's s e c r e t t e a c h i n g ' b e n e a t h t h e official

to

Pauline

d o g m a is t h e e f f o r t t o u n d o t h e ' E v e n t - C h r i s t ' , r e d u c i n g i t t o a c o n t i n u a ­ tion o f the preceding Gnostic lineage. A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t o f t h i s G n o s t i c ( m i s ) r e a d i n g o f C h r i s t i a n i t y is the growing

obsession o f popular

Christ's alleged t o m b a n d / o r

p s e u d o - s c i e n c e with

progeny

the

mystery o f

( f r o m his a l l e g e d m a r r i a g e

with

M a r y M a g d a l e n e ) - b e s t s e l l e r s l i k e The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, o r The Tomb of God, w h i c h f o c u s o n t h e r e g i o n a r o u n d R e n n e s - l e - C h a t e a u i n t h e south o f F r a n c e , weaving into a large c o h e r e n t narrative the Grail myth, Cathars, Templars, F r e e m a s o n s . . . : these narratives endeavour

to sup­

p l a n t t h e d i m i n i s h i n g p o w e r o f t h e symbolic fiction o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t ( t h e c o m m u n i t y o f b e l i e v e r s ) w i t h t h e bodily Reed o f C h r i s t a n d / o r h i s d e s c e n d ­ ants. A n d again, t h e fact that C h r i s t left his b o d y o r bodily b e h i n d serves the p u r p o s e o f u n d e r m i n i n g

descendants

the Christian-Pauline

narra­

tive o f R e s u r r e c t i o n : C h r i s t ' s b o d y was n o t a c t u a l l y r e s u r r e c t e d ; ' t h e t r u e m e s s a g e o f J e s u s was l o s t with t h e R e s u r r e c t i o n ' . a l l e g e d l y l i e s in p r o m o t i n g

1 8

This 'true message'

'the path o f self-determination, 1

as

distinct

f r o m o b e d i e n c e to t h e written w o r d ' : " r e d e m p t i o n results f r o m t h e soul's

332

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 o p m e n t s ever-increasingly affect o u r life-world:

20

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 l a n g u a g e we a c t u a l l y s p e a k

it u n d e r e s t i m a t e s

to t h e

the

resistance o f

conscious regulation

o f its

the

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 sexual

mores

( w h a t is t h e p r o p e r ,

imposition

o f W e s t e r n v a l u e s ? ) , in

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

standard

to

the

universal

case, we d o

have

norm

at o u r

by t h e

specific

disposal s o m e

situation.

universally

In

this

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

(re)invention

open without

and even

unending the

symbolic

(re) negotiation

semblance o f some

preceding

and 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 r u l e s supplant

the lack of a fundamental

Law /Prohibition:

(re)invented

they e n d e a v o u r

provide the viable frame o f i n t e r a c t i o n for narcissistic post-Oedipal jects.

I t is as i f t h e

lack o f the

big O t h e r

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

is s u p p l a n t e d

'small big Others' on

by

to

sub­

'ethical

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 ' , 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

that

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 would

really b e

a

'true

father'

and

adequately

embody

his

who

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

' i m m a t u r e ' adolescents c o m p e t i n g with their fathers.

psychic

economy,

2 1

T h e Risk Society a n d Its E n e m i e s T h e fundamental d e a d l o c k e m b o d i e d in t h e e x i s t e n c e o f different 'ethical committees' society'.

2 2

is t h e

focus

o f the

recently popular

theory

o f the

'risk

T h e p a r a d i g m a t i c e x a m p l e s o f risks to w h i c h this t h e o r y refers

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

335

are global warming, the h o l e in the o z o n e layer, m a d cow disease,

the

danger

the

o f using

unforeseen

nuclear

power

plants

as

the

source

o f energy,

c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the application o f genetics to

agriculture,

a n d s o o n . A l l t h e s e c a s e s e x e m p l i f y w h a t a r e u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as ' l o w p r o b a b i l i t y - h i g h c o n s e q u e n c e ' r i s k s : n o o n e k n o w s h o w g r e a t t h e risks a r e ; t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e g l o b a l c a t a s t r o p h e is s m a l l - h o w e v e r , i f t h e c a t a s t r o p h e d o e s o c c u r , it will b e r e a l l y t e r m i n a l . B i o l o g i s t s w a r n us the i n c r e a s e d use o f chemicals in o u r food

and

that

drugs can m a k e

the

h u m a n race extinct not because o f a direct ecological catastrophe,

but

s i m p l y b y r e n d e r i n g u s i n f e r t i l e - t h i s o u t c o m e s e e m s i m p r o b a b l e , y e t it w o u l d b e c a t a s t r o p h i c . T h e n e x t c r u c i a l f e a t u r e is t h a t t h e s e n e w are so-called 'manufactured

risks': they result

from

human

threats

economic,

t e c h n o l o g i c a l a n d scientific i n t e r v e n t i o n s i n t o n a t u r e , w h i c h disrupt nat­ ural

processes so radically that

i t is n o

responsibility by letting nature itself

find

longer

elude

the

a way t o r e - e s t a b l i s h t h e

possible

to

lost

b a l a n c e . I t is a l s o a b s u r d t o r e s o r t t o a N e w A g e t u r n a g a i n s t s c i e n c e , s i n c e these threats are, for the m o s t part, invisible, u n d e t e c t a b l e , without

the

diagnostic tools o f science. All today's

notions o f ecological threat, from

the h o l e in the

ozone

layer to h o w fertilizers a n d c h e m i c a l f o o d additives are t h r e a t e n i n g fertility, a r e strictly d e p e n d e n t o n scientific i n s i g h t (usually o f t h e

our most

a d v a n c e d k i n d ) . A l t h o u g h t h e effects o f t h e ' h o l e in t h e o z o n e layer' a r e o b s e r v a b l e , t h e i r c a u s a l e x p l a n a t i o n t h r o u g h r e f e r e n c e t o t h i s ' h o l e ' is a s c i e n t i f i c h y p o t h e s i s : t h e r e is n o d i r e c t l y o b s e r v a b l e ' h o l e ' u p t h e r e i n t h e sky. T h e s e r i s k s a r e t h u s g e n e r a t e d b y a k i n d o f s e l f - r e f l e x i v e l o o p , t h a t is, t h e y a r e n o t e x t e r n a l risks ( l i k e a g i g a n t i c c o m e t f a l l i n g o n E a r t h ) b u t t h e u n f o r e s e e n o u t c o m e o f individuals' our

t o c o n t r o l t h e i r lives a n d

supreme scientific

technological and scientific endeav­

increase their productivity.

Perhaps

e x a m p l e o f the dialectical reversal by m e a n s o f which insight,

instead

o f simply

magnifying

our

the

a

new

domination

over

n a t u r e , g e n e r a t e s n e w risks a n d u n c e r t a i n t i e s is p r o v i d e d b y t h e p r o s p e c t that, in a d e c a d e

o r two, g e n e t i c s will n o t o n l y b e a b l e t o i d e n t i f y

individual's c o m p l e t e genetic inheritance, but even manipulate

an

individual

g e n e s t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y to effect t h e d e s i r e d results a n d c h a n g e s (to eradi­ c a t e a t e n d e n c y towards c a n c e r , a n d so o n ) . F a r f r o m resulting in

total

predictability a n d certainty, however, this very radical self-objectivization ( t h e s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h , i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e g e n e t i c f o r m u l a , I will b e a b l e to

confront

what

I 'objectively a m ' )

will g e n e r a t e

even

more

radical

u n c e r t a i n t i e s a b o u t what the actual psychosocial effects o f s u c h k n o w l e d g e a n d its a p p l i c a t i o n s will b e . ( W h a t will b e c o m e o f t h e n o t i o n s o f f r e e d o m

336

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 mongering and

between

the

'excess' o f scare­

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 factories,

and

proceed

gradually'

o f thousands

is c l e a r l y m e a n i n g l e s s . '

2 3

Again,

of 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} 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

His role

(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

a n d S , ) : t h e r e is n o

2

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

imposed on me.-

4

to a c c o m p l i s h freely what

is i n a n y c a s e

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 anxietyprovoking 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

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 tee

that

the

involvement

democratic of

politicization

thousands

of

o f crucial decisions, the

concerned

individuals,

will

make

guaran­ active

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 haunted

knowing what

(if anything)

h e is g u i l t y o f : I a m

forever

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

is always t h e d a n g e r t h a t o u r activity will d i s r u p t a n d d i s t u r b t h e s t a b l e c y c l e o f n a t u r a l r e p r o d u c t i o n ) , o r o n T r a d i t i o n as t h e s u b s t a n t i a l f o r m o f c u s t o m s t h a t p r e d e t e r m i n e o u r lives. H o w e v e r , t h e b r e a k is m o r e r a d i c a l . A l t h o u g h t h e d i s s o l u t i o n o f all t r a d i d o n a l l i n k s is t h e s t a n d a r d t h e m e o f nineteenth-century Marx

capitalist

modernization,

repeatedly

described

by

( t h e ' a l l t h a t is s o l i d m e l t s i n t o a i r ' t h e m e ) , t h e w h o l e p o i n t o f

M a r x ' s a n a l y s i s is t h a t t h i s u n h e a r d - o f d i s s o l u t i o n o f a l l t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m s , far f r o m

bringing a b o u t a society in which individuals

run

t h e i r lives

c o l l e c t i v e l y a n d f r e e l y , e n g e n d e r s its o w n f o r m o f a n o n y m o u s D e s t i n y i n the guise o f m a r k e t relations. O n the o n e h a n d , t h e m a r k e t does involve a f u n d a m e n t a l d i m e n s i o n o f risk: it is a n i m p e n e t r a b l e m e c h a n i s m w h i c h c a n , i n a w h o l l y u n p r e d i c t a b l e way, r u i n t h e e f f o r t o f a n h o n e s t w o r k e r a n d m a k e a sleazy s p e c u l a t o r r i c h - n o b o d y k n o w s w h a t t h e final o u t c o m e o f s p e c u l a t i o n will b e . H o w e v e r , a l t h o u g h o u r a c t s c a n h a v e and unintended ordinated

unforeseen

c o n s e q u e n c e s , t h e n o t i o n still p e r s i s t s t h a t t h e y a r e c o ­

by t h e

infamous

'invisible h a n d

o f the

market',

the

p r e m i s s o f f r e e - m a r k e t i d e o l o g y : e a c h o f us p u r s u e s h i s / h e r interests, a n d

the

ultimate

result o f this c l a s h a n d

basic

particular

interaction

of

the

m u l t i p l i c i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l a c t s a n d c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e n d o n s is g l o b a l w e l f a r e . I n t h i s n o t i o n o f t h e ' c u n n i n g o f R e a s o n ' , t h e b i g O t h e r s u r v i v e s as t h e s o c i a l S u b s t a n c e i n w h i c h w e all p a r t i c i p a t e b y o u r a c t s , as t h e m y s t e r i o u s spectral a g e n c y that s o m e h o w re-establishes the b a l a n c e . T h e fundamental

M a r x i s t i d e a , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h i s

figure

o f the big

O t h e r , o f t h e a l i e n a t e d s o c i a l S u b s t a n c e - t h a t is, t h e a n o n y m o u s

market

as t h e m o d e r n f o r m o f F a t e - c a n b e s u p e r s e d e d , a n d s o c i a l life

brought

u n d e r the control o f humanity's

' c o l l e c t i v e i n t e l l e c t ' . I n t h i s way, M a r x

r e m a i n e d w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s o f t h e 'first m o d e r n i z a t i o n ' , w h i c h a i m e d a t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a s e l f - t r a n s p a r e n t s o c i e t y r e g u l a t e d by t h e ' c o l l e c t i v e i n t e l l e c t ' ; n o w o n d e r t h i s p r o j e c t f o u n d its p e r v e r t e d r e a l i z a t i o n i n a c t u a l l y existing S o c i a l i s m , w h i c h - despite the e x t r e m e u n c e r t a i n t y o f a n individ­ u a l ' s f a t e , a t l e a s t i n t h e times o f p a r a n o i a c p o l i t i c a l p u r g e s - was p e r h a p s the

most radical attempt

to s u s p e n d

the

uncertainty

that

pertains

to

c a p i t a l i s t m o d e r n i z a t i o n . R e a l S o c i a l i s m ' s ( m o d e s t ) a p p e a l is b e s t e x e m ­ plified by the e l e c t i o n slogan o f S l o b o d a n Milosevic's Socialist Party in the first

'free'

elections in

Serbia: 'With

us,

there

is n o

uncertainty!'

a l t h o u g h life was p o o r a n d d r a b , t h e r e was n o n e e d t o w o r r y a b o u t

the

f u t u r e ; e v e r y o n e ' s m o d e s t e x i s t e n c e was g u a r a n t e e d ; t h e P a r t y t o o k c a r e o f e v e r y t h i n g - t h a t is, all d e c i s i o n s w e r e m a d e b y T h e m . D e s p i t e

their

c o n t e m p t for t h e r e g i m e , p e o p l e n o n e t h e less h a l f - c o n s c i o u s l y t r u s t e d ' T h e m ' , r e l i e d o n ' T h e m ' , b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e r e was s o m e b o d y h o l d i n g all

THE

340

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 it is, bareness stripped o f s i g n i f i c a n c e . 25

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 actually existing Socialism:

r e a l i t y was n o t

really 'ours'

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);

(the

in

ordinary

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

'Invisible H a n d ' establishes

the

'postmodern'

risk s o c i e t y , is t h a t t h e r e is

w h o s e m e c h a n i s m , b l i n d as it m a y balance; no

properly kept, n o

fictional

Other

Scene

in

which

no

be, somehow

re­

the

are

accounts

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 properly 'postmodern'

the

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

agency which

one

paradigm

are

desperately

c o u l d legitimately elevate into

looking the

for

position

another of

the

WHITHER

341

OEDIPUS?

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 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,

our

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 penetrate

k n o w l e d g e t e a c h i n g us h o w to

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

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 Unbehagen

their the

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

THE TICKLISH

342

SUBJECT

gap b e t w e e n the subjects' sticking to the o l d notions o f personal responsi­ bility a n d identity (like f i x e d g e n d e r r o l e s a n d t h e family s t r u c t u r e )

and

t h e n e w situation o f fluid, shifting i d e n t i t i e s a n d c h o i c e s . W h a t t h e a d v e n t o f t h e ' r i s k s o c i e t y ' a f f e c t s is n o t s i m p l y T r a d i t i o n o r s o m e o t h e r reliable symbolic frame o f r e f e r e n c e , b u t t h e symbolic Insti­ tution itself in the m u c h m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l sense o f t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r : with t h e a d v e n t o f t h e risk society, t h e

performative

d i m e n s i o n o f s y m b o l i c t r u s t a n d c o m m i t m e n t is p o t e n t i a l l y

undermined.

T h e p r o b l e m w i t h 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 is t h u s t h a t t h e y u n d e r e s t i ­ m a t e t h e r a d i c a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h i s c h a n g e : w i t h all t h e i r i n s i s t e n c e o n h o w , in today's

r i s k s o c i e t y , r e f l e x i v i t y is u n i v e r s a l i z e d , s o t h a t N a t u r e

and

T r a d i t i o n n o l o n g e r exist, in all t h e i r talk a b o u t the ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n ­ m e n t ' d o i n g away w i t h t h e n a i v e c e r t a i n t i e s o f t h e first w a v e o f m o d e r n i ­ zation, they leave intact t h e subject's f u n d a m e n t a l their subject remains

the

modern

m o d e o f subjectivity:

subject, able to reason

and

reflect

freely, to d e c i d e o n a n d s e l e c t h i s / h e r set o f n o r m s , a n d so o n . H e r e , t h e e r r o r is t h e s a m e as t h a t o f f e m i n i s t s w h o w a n t

to d o

away w i t h

the

O e d i p u s c o m p l e x , a n d so o n , a n d n e v e r t h e l e s s e x p e c t the basic f o r m o f s u b j e c t i v i t y t h a t was g e n e r a t e d b y t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x ( t h e s u b j e c t f r e e t o r e a s o n a n d d e c i d e , e t c . ) t o survive i n t a c t . I n s h o r t , w h a t i f it is n o t t h e p o s t m o d e r n pessimists w h o c o m e to their c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n c l u s i o n b e c a u s e t h e y m e a s u r e t h e n e w w o r l d w i t h o l d s t a n d a r d s ; w h a t if, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t is t h e o r i s t s o f t h e risk s o c i e t y t h e m s e l v e s w h o u n p r o b l e m a t i c a l l y r e l y o n t h e fact that, in the c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f s y m b o l i c T r u s t , t h e reflexive s u b j e c t o f t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t s o m e h o w , i n e x p l i c a b l y , survives intact? T h i s d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e b i g O t h e r is t h e d i r e c t r e s u l t o f u n i v e r s a l i z e d reflexivity:

notions

like

'trust'

all r e l y o n

a minimum

of

non-reflected

a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e s y m b o l i c I n s t i t u t i o n - u l t i m a t e l y , t r u s t always i n v o l v e s a l e a p o f faith: w h e n I trust s o m e b o d y , I trust h i m b e c a u s e I simply take h i m at his word, n o t f o r r a t i o n a l r e a s o n s w h i c h tell m e t o trust h i m . T o say ' I t r u s t y o u b e c a u s e I h a v e d e c i d e d , u p o n r a t i o n a l r e f l e c t i o n , t o t r u s t y o u , ' i n v o l v e s t h e s a m e p a r a d o x as t h e s t a t e m e n t ' H a v i n g w e i g h e d u p t h e reasons for a n d against, I d e c i d e d to o b e y m y father.' S y m p t o m a t i c o f this disintegration o f fundamental

T r u s t is t h e r e c e n t r i s e o f a U S C h r i s t i a n

revival g r o u p t h a t q u i t e a d e q u a t e l y c a l l s i t s e l f ' t h e P r o m i s e - K e e p e r s ' : t h e i r p l e a is a d e s p e r a t e a p p e a l t o m e n t o a s s u m e a g a i n t h e i r s y m b o l i c m a n d a t e o f responsibility, o f the b u r d e n o f decision, against the weak a n d hysterical f e m a l e s e x u n a b l e t o c o p e w i t h t h e s t r e s s e s o f c o n t e m p o r a r y life.

The

p o i n t t o b e m a d e a g a i n s t this is n o t o n l y t h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h

the

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

343

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 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

themselves

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

'familialization'

of public

are

not

professional

autonomous

subjects, the

progressive

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 immaturity: schools - even universities - increasingly assume functions;

corporations

provide

a new family h o m e ,

and

and

therapeutic so o n .

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

The

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

THE

344

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;

'familialized',

on

the

other

hand,

public

t h a t is, s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t e

professional

life

becomes

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 predominant

the

'autonomous'

critical subject a b l e to c o n f r o n t

the

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 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

o f p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y is

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 patriarchal

relations

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

of domination;

we

are

dealing,

rather,

with

the

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

345

g e n u i n e p a r a d o x o f the freely c h o s e n M a s t e r / S l a v e form o f c o e x i s t e n c e which provides a d e e p libidinal sadsfacdon. T h u s t h e s t a n d a r d s i t u a t i o n is r e v e r s e d : w e n o l o n g e r h a v e t h e p u b l i c O r d e r o f hierarchy, repression a n d severe regulation, subverted by secret acts o f l i b e r a t i n g t r a n s g r e s s i o n (as w h e n we l a u g h at o u r p o m p o u s M a s t e r privately, b e h i n d his b a c k ) ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , we have p u b l i c social r e l a t i o n s a m o n g free a n d e q u a l individuals, w h e r e the 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' some

extreme

becomes

the

form secret

o f stricdy regulated

domination

and

transgressive

o f libidinal

satisfaction,

source

to

submission the

o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t to t h e p u b l i c s p h e r e o f f r e e d o m a n d equality. T h e r i g i d l y c o d i f i e d M a s t e r / S l a v e r e l a t i o n s h i p t u r n s u p as t h e v e r y f o r m o f ' i n h e r e n t t r a n s g r e s s i o n ' o f s u b j e c t s l i v i n g i n a s o c i e t y i n w h i c h all f o r m s o f l i f e a r e e x p e r i e n c e d as a m a t t e r o f t h e f r e e c h o i c e o f a l i f e s t y l e . A n d t h i s p a r a d o x i c a l r e v e r s a l is t h e p r o p e r t o p i c o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s : p s y c h o a n a l y s i s d e a l s n o t w i t h t h e s e v e r e a u t h o r i t a r i a n f a t h e r w h o f o r b i d s y o u to e n j o y , b u t with t h e o b s c e n e f a t h e r w h o e n j o i n s y o u t o e n j o y , a n d t h u s r e n d e r s y o u i m p o t e n t o r f r i g i d m u c h m o r e e f f e c t i v e l y . T h e U n c o n s c i o u s is n o t s e c r e t r e s i s t a n c e a g a i n s t t h e L a w ; t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is t h e p r o h i b i t i v e L a w itself. S o t h e a n s w e r o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s t o t h e r i s k s o c i e t y topos o f t h e g l o b a l r e f l e x i v i z a t i o n o f o u r lives is n o t t h a t t h e r e is n o n e t h e less s o m e p r e r e f l e x i v e s u b s t a n c e c a l l e d t h e U n c o n s c i o u s w h i c h resists r e f l e x i v e m e d i a ­ tion;

the

a n s w e r is t o e m p h a s i z e

another

mode

o f reflexivity that

is

n e g l e c t e d by theorists o f t h e risk society, t h e reflexivity at the very c o r e o f the F r e u d i a n subject. T h i s reflexivity spoils the g a m e o f the

postmodern

s u b j e c t free to c h o o s e a n d r e s h a p e his identity. As we h a v e a l r e a d y s e e n , there are n u m e r o u s

variations o n

this reflexivity in psychoanalysis: in

h y s t e r i a , t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f s a t i s f y i n g d e s i r e is r e f l e x i v e l y i n v e r t e d

into

t h e desire for n o n s a t i s f a c t i o n , the desire to m a i n t a i n desire itself unsatis­ fied; in o b s e s s i o n a l n e u r o s i s , we a r e

d e a l i n g with

'repressive' regulation

o f desire into

the

'masochistic'

turn,

which

reflexive

through

desire the

the

for

reversal o f the

regulation

repressive

-

this

regulatory

p r o c e d u r e s t h e m s e l v e s a r e l i b i d i n a l l y i n v e s t e d a n d f u n c t i o n as a s o u r c e o f libidinal satisfaction, provides the key to h o w power m e c h a n i s m s function: r e g u l a t o r y p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s r e m a i n o p e r a t i v e o n l y i n s o far as t h e y a r e secretly sustained by t h e very e l e m e n t they e n d e a v o u r to 'repress'. P e r h a p s t h e ultimate e x a m p l e o f the universalized reflexivity o f o u r lives ( a n d t h e r e b y o f 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 e loss o f s y m b o l i c efficiency)

is a p h e n o m e n o n

known

to m o s t psychoanalysts today:

g r o w i n g i n e f f i c i e n c y o f p s y c h o a n a l y t i c interpretation.

the

Traditional psycho-

THE

346

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 unfortunate

to s o m e

psychoanalytic theory.

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

The

(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 and

relies o n

some

minimal

'pre-reflexive' substantial

support

from 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 ,

interpretative

faced

with

interventions,

this d e a d l o c k even

some

o f the

inefficiency o f

psychoanalysts

who

their

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) 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

and

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 a c t (say, o f c l o s i n g t h e s e s s i o n ) .

2 8

WHITHER

347

OEDIPUS?

S o , in terms o f the Frankfurt S c h o o l , the c h o i c e we are facing

apropos

o f t h e s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y is a g a i n t h a t b e t w e e n A d o r n o / H o r k h e i m e r

and

H a b e r m a s . H a b e r m a s ' s c r u c i a l b r e a k w i t h A d o r n o a n d H o r k h e i m e r is t o reject

their fundamental

notion

of the

dialectic

of Enlightenment:

for

H a b e r m a s , p h e n o m e n a like totalitarian political r e g i m e s o r the so-called alienation o f modern

life a r e u l t i m a t e l y g e n e r a t e d n o t b y t h e

inherent

d i a l e c t i c s o f t h e v e r y p r o j e c t o f m o d e r n i t y a n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t , b u t b y its n o n c o n s e q u e n t realization - they b e a r witness to t h e fact that remained

an unfinished

project. In contrast, A d o r n o a n d

modernity

Horkheimer

r e m a i n faithful to t h e o l d H e g e l i a n a n d M a r x i s t d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e d u r e o f r e a d i n g t h e t r o u b l i n g e x c e s s t h a t o c c u r s in t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f s o m e g l o b a l p r o j e c t as t h e s y m p t o m a l p o i n t at w h i c h t h e t r u t h o f t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t e m e r g e s : t h e o n l y way t o r e a c h t h e t r u t h o f s o m e n o t i o n o r p r o j e c t is t o f o c u s o n w h e r e this p r o j e c t w e n t w r o n g .

It's t h e Political As

for

the

'postmodern'

E c o n o m y , Stupid!

socioeconomic relations

of domination

that

go

with

the

c o n s t e l l a t i o n , t h e p u b l i c i m a g e o f B i l l G a t e s is w o r t h y o f 2

s o m e c o m m e n t ; ' ' w h a t m a t t e r s is n o t f a c t u a l a c c u r a c y (is G a t e s r e a l l y l i k e t h a t ? ) b u t t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t a c e r t a i n figure s t a r t e d t o f u n c t i o n as a n i c o n , filling s o m e p h a n t a s m i c slot - i f the features d o n o t c o r r e s p o n d ' t r u e ' G a t e s , t h e y a r e all t h e m o r e i n d i c a t i v e o f t h e u n d e r l y i n g

to

the

phantasmic

s t r u c t u r e . G a t e s is n o t o n l y n o l o n g e r t h e p a t r i a r c h a l F a t h e r - M a s t e r , h e is also n o l o n g e r the c o r p o r a t e B i g B r o t h e r r u n n i n g a rigid empire,

dwelling o n

secretaries and

bureaucratic

the

i n a c c e s s i b l e t o p floor, g u a r d e d by a h o s t o f

deputees.

H e is, r a t h e r , a k i n d o f little brother, h i s v e r y

o r d i n a r i n e s s f u n c t i o n s as t h e i n d i c a t i o n o f its o p p o s i t e , o f s o m e m o n s t r o u s d i m e n s i o n s o u n c a n n y t h a t it c a n n o l o n g e r b e r e n d e r e d p u b l i c i n

the

g u i s e o f s o m e s y m b o l i c t i t l e . W h a t w e e n c o u n t e r h e r e , m o s t v i o l e n t l y , is t h e d e a d l o c k o f t h e D o u b l e w h o is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y l i k e o u r s e l v e s and

the

h a r b i n g e r o f an u n c a n n y , p r o p e r l y m o n s t r o u s d i m e n s i o n - i n d i c a t i v e o f t h i s is t h e way t i t l e - p a g e s , d r a w i n g s o r p h o t o m o n t a g e s p r e s e n t G a t e s : as a n o r d i n a r y guy, w h o s e d e v i o u s s m i l e n o n e t h e less i m p l i e s a w h o l l y d i f f e r e n t underlying dimension o f monstrosity beyond representation which threat­ e n s t o s h a t t e r his o r d i n a r y - g u y i m a g e .

3 0

I n t h i s r e s p e c t , it is a l s o a c r u c i a l

f e a t u r e o f G a t e s - a s - i c o n t h a t h e is ( p e r c e i v e d a s ) t h e e x - h a c k e r w h o

made

it - o n e s h o u l d c o n f e r o n t h e t e r m ' h a c k e r ' all its s u b v e r s i v e / m a r g i n a l / anti-establishment c o n n o t a t i o n s o f those who want to disturb the

smooth

THE

348

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

functioning o f large b u r e a u c r a t i c corporations. At the p h a n t a s m i c level, t h e u n d e r l y i n g n o t i o n h e r e is t h a t G a t e s is a s u b v e r s i v e m a r g i n a l h o o l i g a n w h o h a s t a k e n o v e r a n d d r e s s e s h i m s e l f u p as a r e s p e c t a b l e c h a i r m a n . I n Bill G a t e s , t h e Littie B r o t h e r , t h e a v e r a g e ugly guy, thus c o i n c i d e s w i t h a n d c o n t a i n s t h e f i g u r e o f t h e Evil G e n i u s w h o a i m s f o r t o t a l c o n t r o l of our

lives. I n o l d J a m e s B o n d m o v i e s t h i s Evil G e n i u s w a s still

an

e c c e n t r i c figure, dressed u p extravagantly o r in a p r o t o - C o m m u n i s t Maoist g r e y u n i f o r m - in t h e c a s e o f G a t e s , t h i s r i d i c u l o u s c h a r a d e is n o l o n g e r n e e d e d ; t h e Evil G e n i u s t u r n s o u t t o b e t h e o b v e r s e o f t h e o r d i n a r y g u y n e x t d o o r . I n o t h e r w o r d s , w h a t w e e n c o u n t e r i n t h e i c o n o f B i l l G a t e s is a k i n d o f reversal o f t h e t h e m e o f t h e h e r o e n d o w e d with s u p e r n a t u r a l p o w e r s , b u t i n h i s e v e r y d a y life a c o m m o n , c o n f u s e d , c l u m s y g u y ( S u p e r ­ m a n , w h o i n h i s o r d i n a r y e x i s t e n c e is a c l u m s y b e s p e c t a c l e d j o u r n a l i s t ) : h e r e it is t h e b a d g u y w h o is c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y t h i s k i n d o f s p l i t .

31

The

o r d i n a r i n e s s o f B i l l G a t e s is t h u s n o t o f t h e s a m e o r d e r as t h e e m p h a s i s o n the so-called ordinary h u m a n features o f the traditional

patriarchal

M a s t e r . T h e fact t h a t this t r a d i t i o n a l M a s t e r n e v e r lived u p to his m a n d a t e - t h a t h e was always i m p e r f e c t , m a r k e d b y s o m e f a i l u r e o r w e a k n e s s -

not

o n l y d i d n o t i m p e d e h i s s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y , b u t e v e n s e r v e d as its s u p p o r t , bringing h o m e the constitutive gap b e t w e e n the purely formal

function

o f s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y a n d t h e e m p i r i c a l i n d i v i d u a l w h o o c c u p i e s its p o s t . I n c o n t r a s t t o this g a p , B i l l G a t e s ' s o r d i n a r i n e s s p o i n t s t o a

different

n o t i o n o f authority, that o f the o b s c e n e s u p e r e g o that operates in

the

Real. T h e r e is a n o l d E u r o p e a n f a i r y - t a l e t h e m e o f d i l i g e n t d w a r v e s

(usually

c o n t r o l l e d b y a n evil m a g i c i a n ) w h o d u r i n g t h e n i g h t , w h i l e p e o p l e asleep, e m e r g e from their hiding-place a n d accomplish their work

are (put

the h o u s e in order, c o o k the meals . . .) so that when p e o p l e wake up in the m o r n i n g , they find their work magically d o n e . T h i s t h e m e t h r o u g h R i c h a r d W a g n e r ' s Rhinegold,

persists

( t h e N i b e l u n g s w h o w o r k in

their

u n d e r g r o u n d caves, driven by t h e i r c r u e l m a s t e r , the d w a r f A l b e r i c h ) to F r i t z L a n g ' s Metropolis,

i n w h i c h t h e e n s l a v e d i n d u s t r i a l w o r k e r s live a n d

work d e e p b e n e a t h the earth's surface to p r o d u c e wealth for the

ruling

c a p i t a l i s t s . T h i s m a t r i x o f ' u n d e r g r o u n d ' slaves d o m i n a t e d b y a m a n i p u l a ­ tive evil M a s t e r b r i n g s u s b a c k t o t h e o l d d u a l i t y o f t h e two m o d e s o f t h e Master, the public symbolic Master a n d

t h e s e c r e t Evil M a g i c i a n

who

actually pulls the strings a n d d o e s his w o r k d u r i n g t h e night: a r e n o t t h e two B i l l s w h o n o w r u n t h e U S A , C l i n t o n a n d G a t e s , t h e u l t i m a t e e x e m p l i ­ fications

o f this duality? WTien t h e

s u b j e c t is e n d o w e d

with

symbolic

a u t h o r i t y , h e a c t s as a n a p p e n d i x t o h i s s y m b o l i c t i t l e - t h a t is t o say,

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

349

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 phantom-like, spectral o m n i p o t e n c e .

3 2

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-oft 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 S o , i n a way, o n e is t e m p t e d

'attitude'. to reverse M a r x ' s f a m o u s formula:

in

350

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

c o n t e m p o r a r y c a p i t a l i s m , the objective market assume the phantasmagorical

'relations between things' tend to

form of pseudo-personalized

'relations between

people'.

N o , B i l l G a t e s is n o g e n i u s , g o o d o r b a d , h e is j u s t a n o p p o r t u n i s t

who

k n e w h o w t o s e i z e t h e m o m e n t a n d , as s u c h , t h e r e s u l t o f t h e c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m r u n a m o k . T h e q u e s d o n is n o t ' H o w d i d G a t e s d o i t ? ' b u t ' H o w is t h e c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m s t r u c t u r e d , w h a t is w r o n g w i t h it, t h a t a n can

achieve such disproportionate

power?' A p h e n o m e n o n

individual

like that o f

B i l l G a t e s t h u s s e e m s t o i n d i c a t e its o w n s o l u t i o n : o n c e w e a r e

dealing

with a g i g a n t i c g l o b a l n e t w o r k f o r m a l l y o w n e d by a single individual

or

c o r p o r a t i o n , is it n o t a f a c t t h a t o w n e r s h i p b e c o m e s , i n a way, i r r e l e v a n t t o its f u n c t i o n i n g ( t h e r e is n o l o n g e r a n y w o r t h w h i l e c o m p e t i t i o n ; p r o f i t is g u a r a n t e e d ) , s o t h a t it b e c o m e s p o s s i b l e s i m p l y t o c u t o f f t h i s h e a d a n d t o s o c i a l i z e t h e e n t i r e n e t w o r k w i t h o u t g r e a t l y d i s t u r b i n g its f u n c t i o n i n g ? D o e s n o t such an act a m o u n t to a purely formal conversion that simply b r i n g s t o g e t h e r w h a t , de facto, a l r e a d y b e l o n g s t o g e t h e r - t h e c o l l e c t i v e o f individuals a n d t h e g l o b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n a l n e t w o r k they a r e all u s i n g

-

a n d w h i c h t h u s f o r m s t h e s u b s t a n c e o f t h e i r s o c i a l lives? 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 debate

and

control, then

generating

the

spectre

public

democratic

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

d e v e l o p a n d use productive capacities at t h e disposal o f society would s o m e h o w b e m a d e by the e n t i r e collective o f the p e o p l e affected by such decisions? T h e o r i s t s o f t h e risk society often e v o k e the n e e d to c o u n t e r a c t the r e i g n o f t h e ' d e p o l i t i c i z e d ' g l o b a l m a r k e t with a m o v e towards radical repoliticization,

w h i c h will t a k e c r u c i a l d e c i s i o n s away f r o m s t a t e

planners

a n d experts a n d put t h e m into the h a n d s o f the individuals a n d concerned

themselves

(through

groups

the revitalization o f active citizenship,

b r o a d public d e b a t e , a n d so o n ) - however, they stop short o f putting in q u e s t i o n t h e very basics o f t h e a n o n y m o u s logic o f m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s a n d global

capitalism, which

'neutral'

Real

depoliticized.

imposes

itself

a c c e p t e d b y all p a r t i e s

today m o r e and,

and

as s u c h ,

more

more

as

and

the

more

3 4

Two recent English

films,

b o t h stories a b o u t the traumatic

disintegra­

t i o n o f old-style w o r k i n g - c l a s s m a l e i d e n t i t y , e x p r e s s two o p p o s i n g v e r s i o n s o f t h i s d e a d l o c k o f d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n . Brassed

O/ffocuses on the relationship

between 'real' political struggle (the miners' struggle against pit

closures legitimized in

terms

threatened

o f technological progress)

and

the

idealized symbolic expression o f the m i n e r s ' c o m m u n i t y , their brass band. A t first, t h e two a s p e c t s s e e m t o b e o p p o s e d : t o t h e m i n e r s c a u g h t u p i n t h e s t r u g g l e f o r e c o n o m i c survival, t h e ' O n l y m u s i c m a t t e r s ! ' a l t i t u d e o f t h e i r old b a n d m a s t e r dying o f l u n g c a n c e r l o o k s like a vain

fetishized

i n s i s t e n c e o n t h e e m p t y s y m b o l i c f o r m d e p r i v e d o f its s o c i a l s u b s t a n c e . O n c e the m i n e r s lose their political struggle, however, the 'Music matters' attitude, t h e i r i n s i s t e n c e o n playing a n d p a r t i c i p a t i n g in a n a t i o n a l c o m ­ petition, turns into a defiant symbolic gesture, a p r o p e r act o f asserting fidelity

t o t h e i r p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e — as o n e o f t h e m p u t s it, w h e n t h e r e ' s n o

h o p e , t h e r e a r e o n l y p r i n c i p l e s t o f o l l o w . . . . I n s h o r t , t h e act o c c u r s w h e n we r e a c h this crisscross or, r a t h e r , s h o r t c i r c u i t o f levels, so that i n s i s t e n c e on

the

empty

form

itself

(we'll c o n t i n u e

playing

in o u r

brass

band,

w h a t e v e r h a p p e n s . . . ) b e c o m e s t h e s i g n o f fidelity t o t h e c o n t e n t ( t o t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e c l o s u r e s , f o r t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e m i n e r s ' way o f life). T h e m i n e r s ' c o m m u n i t y b e l o n g s to a t r a d i t i o n c o n d e m n e d to disap­ p e a r - n o n e t h e l e s s , it is p r e c i s e l y h e r e t h a t o n e s h o u l d a v o i d t h e t r a p o f accusing the miners o f standing for the old reactionary male-chauvinist w o r k i n g - c l a s s way o f life: t h e p r i n c i p l e o f c o m m u n i t y d i s c e r n i b l e h e r e is well worth

fighting

The Full Monty, Lights

f o r , a n d s h o u l d b y n o m e a n s b e left t o t h e e n e m y . o u r s e c o n d e x a m p l e , is - l i k e Dead

Poets Society o r City

- o n e o f t h o s e f i l m s w h o s e e n t i r e n a r r a t i v e l i n e m o v e s t o w a r d s its

f i n a l c l i m a c t i c m o m e n t - i n t h i s c a s e , t h e five u n e m p l o y e d m e n ' s

'full

M o n t y ' a p p e a r a n c e i n t h e s t r i p t e a s e c l u b . T h e i r final g e s t u r e - ' g o i n g t o

352

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

the e n d ' , revealing t h e i r p e n i s e s to the p a c k e d hall - involves a n act w h i c h - a l t h o u g h i n a way o p p o s i t e t o t h a t o f Brassed

Off - u l t i m a t e l y a m o u n t s t o

t h e s a m e thing: to t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e loss. T h e h e r o i s m o f t h e final g e s t u r e i n The Full

Monty

is n o t t h a t o f p e r s i s t i n g i n t h e s y m b o l i c f o r m

( p l a y i n g i n t h e b a n d ) w h e n its s o c i a l s u b s t a n c e d i s i n t e g r a t e s b u t , o n

the

contrary, o f a c c e p t i n g what, from the perspective o f the m a l e workingc l a s s e t h i c , c a n n o t b u t a p p e a r as t h e u l t i m a t e h u m i l i a t i o n : r e a d i l y g i v i n g away f a l s e m a l e d i g n i t y .

(Recall the

famous

bit o f dialogue

near

b e g i n n i n g , w h e n o n e o f t h e h e r o e s says t h a t a f t e r s e e i n g w o m e n

the

urinating

in a s t a n d i n g position, h e finally u n d e r s t a n d s t h a t they a r e lost; t h a t t h e i r - m e n ' s - t i m e is o v e r . ) T h e t r a g i c o m i c d i m e n s i o n o f t h e i r p r e d i c a m e n t lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e c a r n i v a l e s q u e s p e c t a c l e ( o f s t r i p p i n g ) is p e r f o r m e d n o t by t h e u s u a l w e l l - e n d o w e d s t r i p t e a s e d a n c e r s b u t b y o r d i n a r y d e c e n t a n d shy m i d d l e - a g e d m e n w h o a r e d e f i n i t e l y n o t b e a u t i f u l - t h e i r

heroism

is t h a t t h e y a g r e e t o p e r f o r m t h e a c t , a l t h o u g h t h e y a r e a w a r e t h a t t h e i r physical

appearance

is n o t

appropriate

t o it. T h i s g a p

between

the

performance and the obvious inappropriateness o f the performers confers o n t h e a c t its p r o p e r l y s u b l i m e d i m e n s i o n - f r o m t h e v u l g a r

amusement

o f stripping, their act b e c o m e s a kind o f spiritual exercise in

abandoning

false

pride.

(Although

informed, just

prior

to

the

oldest

their

among

show,

that

them, he

their

has

got

ex-foreman,

is

new j o b ,

he

a

n e v e r t h e l e s s d e c i d e s t o j o i n h i s m a t e s i n t h e a c t o u t o f fidelity: t h e p o i n t o f t h e s h o w is t h u s n o t m e r e l y t o e a r n t h e m u c h - n e e d e d m o n e y , b u t a matter o f principle.) What one should Brassed

b e a r i n m i n d , h o w e v e r , is t h a t b o t h

acts, t h a t o f

Off a n d t h a t o f The Full Monty, a r e t h e a c t s o f l o s e r s - t h a t is t o say,

two m o d e s o f c o m i n g t o t e r m s w i t h t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c loss: i n s i s t i n g o n t h e e m p t y f o r m as fidelity t o t h e l o s t c o n t e n t ( ' W h e n t h e r e ' s n o h o p e , o n l y p r i n c i p l e s r e m a i n ' ) ; h e r o i c a l l y r e n o u n c i n g t h e last vestiges o f false n a r c i s ­ sistic d i g n i t y a n d

accomplishing the

act for which

o n e is g r o t e s q u e l y

i n a d e q u a t e . A n d t h e s a d t h i n g is t h a t , i n a way, t h i s is o u r s i t u a t i o n t o d a y : today, after t h e b r e a k d o w n

o f the Marxist n o t i o n that capitalism itself

g e n e r a t e s t h e f o r c e t h a t will d e s t r o y i t i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e p r o l e t a r i a t , n o n e o f the critics o f capitalism, n o n e o f those who describe so convincingly the

deadly vortex into which

drawing

us,

has

the

any well-defined

s o - c a l l e d p r o c e s s o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n is notion

o f how

we

can

get

rid

of

capitalism. I n short, I a m n o t p r e a c h i n g a s i m p l e r e t u r n to t h e o l d n o t i o n s o f c l a s s s t r u g g l e a n d s o c i a l i s t r e v o l u t i o n : t h e q u e s t i o n o f h o w i t is r e a l l y p o s s i b l e t o u n d e r m i n e t h e g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m is n o t a r h e t o r i c a l o n e - m a y b e it is not r e a l l y p o s s i b l e , a t l e a s t n o t i n t h e f o r e s e e a b l e f u t u r e .

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

353

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 obfuscates

the

harsh

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

reality o f today's

capitalism; o r it accepts

that

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

g a m e will b e fully r e s p e c t e d

and

the

employees'

(global capitalist)

'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 victim

o f the

demise

historical o p p o n e n t

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 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

throughout

most of our

century,

ultimate

thus

its

reformist

great 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 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

respon­ '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

with

today's

post-politics

increasingly undermines undermining

of the economy. T h a t is t o say: i f t h e ('administration the

o f social affairs')

possibility o f a p r o p e r

problem is t h a t

political act,

it

this

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 o u t all o v e r , f o c u s e d

on

particular

issues

bursting

(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 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 , remain immobilized.

3 5

ensure

t h a t it will

So, instead o f celebrating the new freedoms

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 crucial

to focus o n

what

remains

the same

in

and more

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 ; 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

further­

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

355

OEDIPUS?

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 today, e m p h a s i z i n g

'reifkation':

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

d e n o u n c e d as ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' . icized economy is the disavoiued

3 7

towards

an

Other

dismissed

and

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 '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

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

according

to

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 groups

o f the

1960s: in

institutional logic -

both

cases we

t h a t is, t h e u l t i m a t e

are

d e a l i n g with

splinter

radical

anti-

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 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

the

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 social

rights

difficult

and

welfare

to abstain f r o m

against

the

irony when

onslaught one

the m i n i m u m

o f globalization:

sees a radical Leftist

of

it is

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

THE TICKLISH

356

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 impact o f the postmodern

fully a c k n o w l e d g e

the

tremendous

liberating

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 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

quasi-

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

reuniting

multitude

the

features

of communicative o f interactive

media

computer,

in

a single

apparatus

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

body, so that we are already o w n e d by a c o r p o r a t i o n without even b e i n g a w a r e o f it. T h e p r o s p e c t w e a r e c o n f r o n t i n g is t h u s t h a t b o t h t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n a l n e t w o r k w e u s e a n d t h e g e n e t i c l a n g u a g e w e a r e m a d e o f will b e o w n e d a n d c o n t r o l l e d by c o r p o r a d o n s

(or even a corporation) out o f public

c o n t r o l . A g a i n , d o e s n o t t h e very absurdity o f this p r o s p e c t - t h e private c o n t r o l o f t h e very public base o f o u r c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d

reproduction,

t h e v e r y n e t w o r k o f o u r s o c i a l b e i n g - i m p o s e a k i n d o f s o c i a l i z a t i o n as t h e o n l y s o l u t i o n ? I n o t h e r w o r d s , is n o t

the impact o f the so-called

information revolution on capitalism the ultimate exemplification o f the old M a r x i a n thesis that

'at a certain stage o f their d e v e l o p m e n t ,

the

m a t e r i a l p r o d u c t i v e forces o f society c o m e i n t o conflict with the existing r e l a t i o n s o f p r o d u c t i o n , o r - w h a t is b u t a l e g a l e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e s a m e t h i n g - w i t h t h e p r o p e r t y r e l a t i o n s w i t h i n w h i c h t h e y h a v e b e e n at w o r k hitherto'?

1 8

D o n o t t h e two p h e n o m e n a w e h a v e m e n t i o n e d ( t h e u n p r e ­

d i c t a b l e g l o b a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f d e c i s i o n s m a d e by private c o m p a n i e s ; the patent absurdity o f 'owning' a p e r s o n ' s g e n o m e o r the m e d i a individuals u s e f o r c o m m u n i c a t i o n ) , t o w h i c h o n e s h o u l d a d d at l e a s t t h e a n t a g o n i s m c o n t a i n e d i n t h e n o t i o n o f o w n i n g ( s c i e n t i f i c ) knowledge

(since knowledge

is b y n a t u r e n e u t r a l t o its p r o p a g a t i o n , t h a t is, i t is n o t w o r n o u t b y its s p r e a d a n d universal u s e ) , e x p l a i n why today's capitalism h a s to r e s o r t to m o r e a n d m o r e a b s u r d s t r a t e g i e s t o sustain sphere

of information,

property inventing

and

and

market

ever

new

the economy

thus to contain within

relations modes

the

demon

o f preventing

it has the

of scarcity

the frame

free

in the

o f private

unleashed copying

(say, byof

digit-

alized i n f o r m a t i o n ) ? In short, does n o t the p r o s p e c t o f the informational ' g l o b a l v i l l a g e ' s i g n a l d i e end o f m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s ( w h i c h a r e b y d e f i n i t i o n , based

on

the

logic o f scarcity),

at least in

the

sphere

of

digitalized

information? A f t e r t h e d e m i s e o f S o c i a l i s m , t h e u l t i m a t e f e a r o f W e s t e r n c a p i t a l i s m is t h a t a n o t h e r n a t i o n o r e t h n i c g r o u p will b e a t t h e W e s t o n its o w n c a p i t a l i s t t e r m s , c o m b i n i n g t h e p r o d u c t i v i t y o f c a p i t a l i s m w i t h a f o r m o f s o c i a l mores f o r e i g n t o us in t h e W e s t : in t h e 1 9 7 0 s , t h e o b j e c t o f f e a r a n d f a s c i n a t i o n was J a p a n ; w h i l e n o w , a f t e r a s h o r t i n t e r l u d e o f f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h S o u t h East Asia, attention

is f o c u s i n g m o r e a n d m o r e o n C h i n a as t h e

next

s u p e r p o w e r , c o m b i n i n g capitalism with the C o m m u n i s t political structure. S u c h f e a r s u l t i m a t e l y give r i s e t o p u r e l y p h a n t a s m i c f o r m a t i o n s , l i k e t h e image o f C h i n a surpassing authoritarian phantasmic

t h e W e s t i n p r o d u c t i v i t y w h i l e r e t a i n i n g its

s o c i o p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e - o n e is t e m p t e d t o d e s i g n a t e combination

the

'Asiatic m o d e

of

capitalist

this

production'.

358

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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

capitalism c o m e s n o t from

is C a p i t a l

itself: the

outside, from

the

danger

to

Western

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

359

OEDIPUS?

guess, by m e a n s o f o p i n i o n p o l l s , 'what t h e p e o p l e want', a n d offer t h e m that? E v e n in t h e o r y , d o e s n ' t t h e s a m e h o l d f o r cultural studies in A n g l o - S a x o n d o m a i n , o r for t h e very t h e o r y o f t h e risk s o c i e t y ? are

less a n d

less involved

themselves to writing

in

short

substantial

theoretical work,

'interventions'

which

4 0

the

Theorists

restraining

mostly display

their

anxiety to follow the latest t h e o r e t i c a l t r e n d s (in f e m i n i s m , for e x a m p l e , perspicacious theorists soon realized that radical social constructionism g e n d e r as p e r f o r m a t i v e l y e n a c t e d , a n d s o o n -

is o u t ; t h a t p e o p l e

-

are

g e t t i n g t i r e d o f it; s o t h e y s t a r t t o r e d i s c o v e r p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , t h e U n c o n ­ s c i o u s ; i n p o s t c o l o n i a l s t u d i e s , t h e l a t e s t t r e n d is t o o p p o s e m u l t i c u l t u r a l ­ i s m as a false s o l u t i o n . . . ) . T h e p o i n t is t h u s n o t s i m p l y t h a t

cultural

s t u d i e s o r risk s o c i e t y t h e o r y is i n s u f f i c i e n t o n a c c o u n t o f its c o n t e n t : a n i n h e r e n t c o m m o d i f i c a t i o n is d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e v e r y f o r m o f t h e s o c i a l m o d e o f f u n c t i o n i n g o f w h a t are s u p p o s e d to b e t h e latest f o r m s o f t h e American or European

a c a d e m i c Left.

This

r e f l e x i v i t y , w h i c h is a l s o a

c r u c i a l p a r t o f t h e ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y , ' is w h a t t h e t h e o r i s t s o f t h e r e f l e x i v e 4

risk s o c i e t y t e n d t o l e a v e o u t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n . '

R e t u r n s in t h e R e a l The

fundamental

l e s s o n o f Dialectic

of Enlightenment

is t h e r e f o r e

still

r e l e v a n t t o d a y : it b e a r s d i r e c t l y o n w h a t t h e o r i s t s o f t h e risk s o c i e t y a n d r e f l e x i v e m o d e r n i z a t i o n p r a i s e as t h e a d v e n t o f t h e ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n ­ ment'. Apropos from

the

o f this s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t , with s u b j e c t s d e l i v e r e d

weight

o f Nature

and/or

Tradition,

the

question

of

their

unconscious 'passionate attachments' must b e raised again - the so-called 'dark

phenomena'

(burgeoning

fundamentalisms,

neo-racisms,

etc.)

w h i c h a c c o m p a n y t h i s ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ' c a n i n n o way b e d i s m i s s e d as s i m p l e r e g r e s s i v e p h e n o m e n a , as r e m a i n d e r s o f t h e p a s t t h a t will s i m p l y vanish

when

individuals

assume

the

full

i m p o s e d o n t h e m by the s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y .

freedom

and

responsibility

4 2

P r o p o n e n t s o f the ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t ' praise Kant - so the question o f ' K a n t a v e c S a d e ' a r i s e s a g a i n . S a d e ' s a c h i e v e m e n t was t o e x t e n d

the

utilitarian logic o f instrumentalization

to t h e very i n t i m a t e relations o f

s e x : s e x is n o

c o n f i n e d to the private

longer a phenomenon

sphere,

e x e m p t f r o m t h e u t i l i t a r i a n c r u e l t y o f p u b l i c p r o f e s s i o n a l life; it m u s t a l s o b e m a d e part o f the utilitarian rules o f equivalent e x c h a n g e that structure w h a t H e g e l c a l l e d civil s o c i e t y . W i t h t h e s o - c a l l e d s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ,

the

a t t i t u d e t h a t was h i t h e r t o r e s e r v e d f o r p u b l i c as o p p o s e d

life

to private

THE TICKLISH

3b0

SUBJECT

( 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

capitalist m a r k e t

the

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 , 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 .

4 3

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

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

indi­

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 patriarchal o r d e r that i n t r o d u c e d

modern

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 -

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 vision

o f the

emerging

s o c i e t y as

that

o f proto-psychotic

such (the

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 the

o f the new post-Oedipal

new forms o f domination

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

emerging from

postmodern

for

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 called "culture o f c o m p l a i n t ' ,

4 4

OEDIPUS?

361

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 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

anything:

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

unfathomable

State)

to indemnify

surplus-enjoyment

me

-

for what? F o r the

very

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

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

me

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 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 Consequently,

this

'culture

of complaint'

accomplishes

is c o r r e l a t i v e t o

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 tary a s p e c t s o f t h e d i s t u r b e d

relationship towards

4

the act

itself '

sado-maso

complemen­

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 traumatize

scenarios

the hysterical

( o f humiliation,

rape,

v i c t i m i z a t i o n . . .)

which

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

p r o h i b i t s a c c e s s t o jouissance jouissance

agency which

(so h e can only fantasize a b o u t the o b s c e n e

h i d d e n b e n e a t h the figure o f the L a w ) ; while for the

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 directly assume jouissance)

the

r o l e o f this o b s c e n e O t h e r

as t h e

pervert,

(so h e c a n

instrument

of

THE

362

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 -

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

is t h u s

the

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

cynical

o f any

distrust

public

ideology, indulges

without

p a r a n o i a c fantasies a b o u t conspiracies, threats, a n d

displaying

restraint

in

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 allpowerful a g e n t actually 'pulls the strings' a n d runs the show: b e h i n d 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

the

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 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 rather,

as a k i n d

of

floating

signifier which

can

classes'

function,

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 leftwing 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 o f the p o p u l a t i o n ) .

4 8

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 from

Mars, w o m e n

are

from

Venus'):

according

to t h i s , t h e r e

is

are 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 from

this p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e

OEDIPUS?

ultimate

origin

363

o f today's

c r i s i s is n o t

the

d i f f i c u l t y i n o v e r c o m i n g t h e t r a d i t i o n o f f i x e d s e x u a l r o l e s , b u t t h e dis­ turbed b a l a n c e in m o d e r n m a n , w h o puts excessive emphasis o n the malerational-conscious

aspect,

neglecting the

female-compassionate

aspect.

A l t h o u g h t h i s t e n d e n c y s h a r e s its a n t i - C a r t e s i a n a n d a n t i - p a t r i a r c h a l b i a s with

feminism,

it rewrites

the

feminist

agenda

into

a

reassertion

of

a r c h e t y p a l f e m i n i n e r o o t s r e p r e s s e d in o u r c o m p e t i t i v e m a l e m e c h a n i s t i c u n i v e r s e . A f u r t h e r v e r s i o n o f t h e real O t h e r is t h e

figure

o f t h e f a t h e r as

s e x u a l harasser o f his y o u n g d a u g h t e r s , t h e focal p o i n t o f so-called False M e m o r y S y n d r o m e : h e r e , also, the suspended

father

symbolic authority -

o f a symbolic fiction

that

is, t h e e m b o d i m e n t

as t h e

agent o f -

' r e t u r n s i n t h e R e a l ' ( w h a t c a u s e s s u c h c o n t r o v e r s y is t h e c o n t e n t i o n o f those who advocate r e m e m o r a t i o n o f c h i l d h o o d sexual abuses that sexual h a r a s s m e n t by t h e f a t h e r is n o t m e r e l y f a n t a s i z e d o r , at l e a s t , a n i n d i s s o l ­ u b l e m i x t u r e o f fact a n d fantasy, b u t a plain fact, s o m e t h i n g which, in the majority o f families, 'really h a p p e n e d '

in t h e d a u g h t e r ' s c h i l d h o o d -

obstinacy

less o b s t i n a t e

murder

comparable of

the

to F r e u d ' s

'primordial

no

father'

as

a

real

insistence on

event

in

an the

humanity's

prehistory). I t is e a s y t o d i s c e r n h e r e t h e l i n k b e t w e e n F a l s e M e m o r y S y n d r o m e a n d a n x i e t y : F a l s e M e m o r y S y n d r o m e is a s y m p t o m a t i c f o r m a t i o n t h a t e n a b l e s t h e s u b j e c t to e s c a p e a n x i e t y by taking r e f u g e in t h e a n t a g o n i s t i c r e l a t i o n ­ s h i p w i t h t h e p a r e n t a l O t h e r - h a r a s s e r . T h a t is t o say: o n e s h o u l d b e a r i n m i n d t h a t f o r L a c a n , a n d i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e F r e u d i a n doxa, a n x i e t y d o e s n o t e m e r g e w h e n t h e o b j e c t - c a u s e o f d e s i r e is l o s t (as w h e n w e s p e a k o f ' c a s t r a t i o n - a n x i e t y ' , u s u a l l y e x p r e s s i n g t h e f e a r t h a t t h e m a l e s u b j e c t will b e d e p r i v e d o f his virile m e m b e r , o r e v e n o f b i r t h a n x i e t y e x p r e s s i n g t h e fear o f being separated emerges when

from

the m o t h e r )

-

on

the contrary, anxiety

( a n d s i g n a l s t h a t ) t h e o b j e c t - c a u s e o f d e s i r e is t o o c l o s e ,

w h e n a n d i f w e c o m e t o o n e a r it. W e c a n a p p r e c i a t e L a c a n ' s finesse h e r e : in c o n t r a s t to 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 f e a r h a s a d e t e r m i ­ n a t e o b j e c t ( o f w h i c h w e a r e a f r a i d ) , w h i l e a n x i e t y is a d i s p o s i t i o n

that

l a c k s a n y p o s i t i v e / d e t e r m i n a t e o b j e c t s e r v i n g as its c a u s e , f o r L a c a n it is fear

which, contraiy to misleading

appearances,

is a c t u a l l y w i t h o u t

a

d e t e r m i n a t e o b j e c t - c a u s e ( w h e n I h a v e a d o g p h o b i a , say, I d o n o t f e a r t h e d o g as s u c h , b u t t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a b l e ' a b s t r a c t ' v o i d b e h i n d h i m ) ; w h i l e a n x i e t y does h a v e a d e t e r m i n a t e o b j e c t - c a u s e - i t is t h e v e r y o v e r p r o x i m i t y o f t h i s o b j e c t t h a t t r i g g e r e d it. . . .

4 W

T o g e t this p o i n t c l e a r , w e h a v e t o b e a r i n m i n d o n c e m o r e t h a t i n the

Lacanian perspective

desire

is u l t i m a t e l y t h e

Other's

desire:

the

364

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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?

The Empty Law 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 tion

formula­

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:

. . . the law is n o l o n g e r regarded as d e p e n d e n t on the G o o d , but on the contrary, the G o o d itself is m a d e to d e p e n d on the law. T h i s m e a n s that the law n o l o n g e r has its foundation in s o m e h i g h e r p r i n c i p l e from which it would derive its authority, but that it is self-grounded a n d valid solely by virtue o f its own form. . . . Kant, by establishing T H E LAW as an ultimate g r o u n d o r principle, added an essential dimension to m o d e r n thought: the o b j e c t o f the

WHITHER

365

OEDIPUS?

law is by definition unknowable a n d elusive. . . . Clearly T H E LAW, as defined by its pure form, without substance o r object o f any d e t e r m i n a t i o n whatsoever, is such that n o o n e knows n o r can know what it is. It o p e r a t e s without m a k i n g itself known. It defines a realm o f transgression where o n e is already guilty, a n d where o n e oversteps the b o u n d s without knowing what they are, as in t h e case o f O e d i p u s . Even guilt and p u n i s h m e n t do not tell us what the law is, but leave it in a state o f indeterminacy equalled only by the e x t r e m e specificity o f t h e punishment. " 5

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 motives. K a n t thus a n n o u n c e s

pathological

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

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 . . . .

5 1

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. T h e gap t h a t separates this K a n t i a n version o f the s u b j e c t r e i n v e n t i n g t h e rules o f his e t h i c a l c o n d u c t f r o m t h e p o s t m o d e r n F o u c a u l d i a n version is e a s i l y d i s c e r n i b l e : a l t h o u g h

they both

assert that ethical j u d g e m e n t

u l t i m a t e l y displays t h e s t r u c t u r e o f a e s t h e t i c j u d g e m e n t (in w h i c h , i n s t e a d o f simply applying a universal rule to a particular situation, o n e has to (re)invent

the

universal

rule

in e a c h

unique

concrete situation),

for

F o u c a u l t t h i s s i m p l y m e a n s t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is t h r o w n i n t o a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h h e has to s h a p e his e t h i c a l p r o j e c t with n o s u p p o r t in a n y t r a n s c e n d ­ e n t a l ) L a w ; w h i l e f o r K a n t t h i s v e r y a b s e n c e o f L a w - in t h e s p e c i f i c s e n s e

366

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 and

their underlying

Law/Prohibidon: only when

invented

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 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

the

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 remain

must

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

reasonable application o f the (re)invention

o f rules

in his 'use o f pleasures'

'pleasure

follows

an

(in short,

a

p r i n c i p l e ' ) ; while in Kant, the

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

disavowal

inscrutable

of the Unconscious:

Call o f Duty into

immanence)

relies o n

the

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

S e l f , h i s ' u s e o f p l e a s u r e s ' is s u s t a i n e d b y t h e u n c o n s c i o u s

unconditional

s u p e r e g o i n j u n c t i o n t o e n j o y - is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e p r o o f t h e f e e l i n g o f g u i l t w h i c h h a u n t s h i m w h e n h e fails i n h i s p u r s u i t o f p l e a s u r e ? D o e s n o t t h e f a c t t h a t - a c c o r d i n g t o m o s t o p i n i o n p o l l s - p e o p l e f i n d less a n d less a t t r a c t i o n i n s e x u a l activity p o i n t i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n ? T h i s u n c a n n y e n c e towards

intense sexual pleasure

ideology of our postmodern

c o n t r a s t s starkly with

indiffer­

the

official

s o c i e t y as b e n t o n i n s t a n t g r a t i f i c a t i o n

and

p l e a s u r e - s e e k i n g : t o d a y ' s s u b j e c t d e d i c a t e s h i s life t o p l e a s u r e a n d g e l s so d e e p l y involved in t h e p r e p a r a t o r y activities ( j o g g i n g , m a s s a g i n g , t a n n i n g , applying c r e a m a n d l o t i o n s . . .) t h a t t h e a t t r a c t i o n o f t h e official G o a l o f h i s e f f o r t s f a d e s away. I n t h e c o u r s e o f a b r i e f s t r o l l a l o n g

Christopher

S t r e e t o r i n C h e l s e a , o n e e n c o u n t e r s h u n d r e d s o f gays p u t t i n g e x t r a o r d i ­ nary e n e r g y i n t o body-building, obsessed with the dreadful getting

old, dedicated

prospect o f

to p l e a s u r e , yet obviously living in

permanent

anxiety and u n d e r the shadow o f their ultimate failure. W h a t is u n d e r m i n e d t o d a y , i n o u r p o s t - O e d i p a l ' p e r m i s s i v e ' s o c i e t i e s , is s e x u a l puissance

as

the

foundational

'passionate

attachment',

as

the

d e s i r e d / p r o h i b i t e d f o c a l p o i n t a r o u n d w h i c h our life r e v o l v e s . ( F r o m t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , e v e n t h e f i g u r e o f t h e p a t e r n a l ' s e x u a l h a r a s s e r ' looks l i k e a n o s t a l g i c i m a g e o f s o m e o n e w h o is still fully a b l e t o e n j o y ' i t ' . ) O n c e a g a i n t h e s u p e r e g o h a s a c c o m p l i s h e d its t a s k s u c c e s s f u l l y : t h e d i r e c t i n j u n c t i o n ' E n j o y ! ' is a m u c h m o r e e f f e c t i v e way t o h i n d e r

the subject's access to

e n j o y m e n t t h a n t h e e x p l i c i t P r o h i b i t i o n w h i c h s u s t a i n s t h e s p a c e f o r its t r a n s g r e s s i o n . T h e l e s s o n is t h a t n a r c i s s i s t i c ' c a r e o f t h e S e l f , n o t 'repressive' intense

network

sexual

o f social prohibitions,

experiences. T h e

is t h e

Utopia o f a

ultimate

new

the

enemy

of

post-psychoanalytic

s u b j e c t i v i t y e n g a g e d in t h e p u r s u i t o f n e w i d i o s y n c r a t i c b o d i l y p l e a s u r e s b e y o n d s e x u a l i t y h a s r e v e r t e d t o its o p p o s i t e : w h a t w e a r e g e t t i n g i n s t e a d is d i s i n t e r e s t e d b o r e d o m - a n d i t s e e m s t h a t t h e d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n

of

p a i n ( s a d o - m a s o c h i s t i c s e x u a l p r a c t i c e s ) is t h e o n l y r e m a i n i n g p a t h t o t h e intense experience o f pleasure. I n t h e v e r y l a s t p a g e o f Seminar

XI, L a c a n c l a i m s t h a t ' a n y s h e l t e r i n

which may b e established a viable, t e m p e r a t e relation o f o n e sex to the o t h e r n e c e s s i t a t e s t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n - t h i s is w h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s t e a c h e s us - o f t h a t m e d i u m k n o w n as t h e p a t e r n a l m e t a p h o r ' : its r e a l i z a t i o n , t h e p a t e r n a l

Law guarantees

5 2

far f r o m

hindering

its c o n d i t i o n s . N o

wonder,

then, that the retreat o f the big O t h e r , o f t h e symbolic Law, entails the m a l f u n c t i o n i n g o f ' n o r m a l ' sexuality a n d the rise o f s e x u a l i n d i f f e r e n c e . As D a r i a n L e a d e r has p o i n t e d o u t , happen

5 1

t h e f a c t t h a t , i n X Files, so many

'out there' ( w h e r e t h e t r u t h d w e l l s : a l i e n s t h r e a t e n i n g

things

us, e t c . ) is

368

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o t h e f a c t t h a t nothing

happens

'down here', b e t w e e n t h e

two h e r o e s ( G i l l i a n A n d e r s o n a n d D a v i d D u c h o v n y ) - t h a t t h e r e is n o s e x between

them.

T h e suspended

paternal

Law (which would

make

sex

b e t w e e n t h e two h e r o e s p o s s i b l e ) ' r e t u r n s i n t h e R e a l ' , i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e multitude o f ' u n d e a d ' spectral apparitions which intervene in o u r

ordi­

n a r y lives. T h i s d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y h a s two f a c e t s . O n

the

h a n d , symbolic p r o h i b i t i v e n o r m s a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y r e p l a c e d b y ideals ( o f social success, o f bodily

fitness

s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n is s u p p l e m e n t e d

one

imaginary

. . . ) ; on the other, the lack o f

by the r e - e m e r g e n c e o f ferocious

s u p e r e g o f i g u r e s . S o w e h a v e a s u b j e c t w h o is e x t r e m e l y n a r c i s s i s t i c - w h o p e r c e i v e s e v e r y t h i n g as a p o t e n t i a l

threat

to his p r e c a r i o u s

imaginary

b a l a n c e ( t a k e t h e u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n o f t h e l o g i c o f victim; every c o n t a c t with a n o t h e r h u m a n b e i n g is e x p e r i e n c e d as a p o t e n t i a l t h r e a t : i f t h e

other

p e r s o n s m o k e s , i f h e c a s t s a c o v e t o u s g l a n c e a t m e , h e is a l r e a d y h u r t i n g m e ) ; far f r o m allowing h i m to float freely in his u n d i s t u r b e d b a l a n c e , however, this narcissistic self-enclosure leaves t h e s u b j e c t to t h e ( n o t s o ) t e n d e r m e r c i e s o f the s u p e r e g o i n j u n c t i o n to enjoy. S o - c a l l e d ' p o s t m o d e r n ' s u b j e c t i v i t y t h u s i n v o l v e s a k i n d o f direct, 'superegoization'

of the imaginary

Prohibition;

Ideal, c a u s e d b y t h e l a c k o f t h e p r o p e r s y m b o l i c

paradigmatic

here

are

the

'postmodern'

hackers-

p r o g r a m m e r s , t h e s e e x t r a v a g a n t e c c e n t r i c s h i r e d by l a r g e c o r p o r a t i o n s to p u r s u e t h e i r p r o g r a m m i n g h o b b i e s in a n i n f o r m a l e n v i r o n m e n t . T h e y a r e under

the

injunction

to b e what

they are, to follow their

idiosyncrasies, a l l o w e d to i g n o r e social n o r m s

o f dress a n d

innermost behaviour

(they obey only s o m e e l e m e n t a r y rules o f polite tolerance o f e a c h other's i d i o s y n c r a s i e s ) ; t h e y t h u s s e e m t o r e a l i z e a k i n d o f p r o t o - S o c i a l i s t Utopia o f overcoming the opposition between alienated business, where you earn money, and

the private hobby-activity that you p u r s u e for pleasure

at

w e e k e n d s . I n a way, t h e i r j o b is t h e i r h o b b y , w h i c h is w h y t h e y s p e n d l o n g h o u r s at w e e k e n d s in their workplace b e h i n d t h e c o m p u t e r screen: w h e n o n e is p a i d f o r i n d u l g i n g i n o n e ' s h o b b y , t h e r e s u l t is t h a t o n e is e x p o s e d to a s u p e r e g o p r e s s u r e i n c o m p a r a b l y s t r o n g e r t h a n t h a t o f t h e g o o d o l d 'Protestant

work

postmodern

ethic'. Therein

lies t h e

unbearable

paradox

of

this

' d i s a l i e n a t i o n ' : t h e t e n s i o n is n o l o n g e r b e t w e e n m y i n n e r ­

m o s t idiosyncratic creative impulses and

the Institution

that does

not

a p p r e c i a t e t h e m o r wants to c r u s h t h e m in o r d e r to ' n o r m a l i z e ' m e : w h a t the

like

Microsoft

t a r g e t s is p r e c i s e l y t h i s c o r e o f m y i d i o s y n c r a t i c c r e a t i v i t y -

superego

injunction

o f a postmodern

corporation

I became

useless for t h e m t h e m o m e n t I start losing this ' i m p o f perversity',

the

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

369

m o m e n t I lose m y ' c o u n t e r c u l t u r a l ' subversive e d g e a n d start to b e h a v e l i k e a ' n o r m a l ' m a t u r e s u b j e c 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 u s a strange alliance b e t w e e n the r e b e l l i o u s subversive c o r e o f my personality, my 'imp o f perversity', a n d the external corporation.

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 wound

to

prosthesis,

our

body,

since

empowering

its

the

phallus

bearer

at

itself the

qua

price

signifier of

some

is s u c h

the a

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 signified

s i g n i f i e d is t h e p a r t o f puissance order

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

( 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 integrated into the paternal

symbolic

( 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 ' :

THE TICKLISH

370

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 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 .

5 4

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 turmoils o f the disintegration between

o f Yugoslavia: when

Slovenia proclaiming i n d e p e n d e n c e

and

the

the

conflict erupts

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 sacrificed

everything

that

mattered

to

him

m o s t , is t h e

corrupt

he 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 increasingly stick to sacrifice

it f o r

some

seems n o l o n g e r to b e operative, since subjects their

particular

universal

Cause

substantial (this

identity,

is w h a t

unwilling

so-called

to

'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

371

OEDIPUS?

in the body (circumcision, etc.) a n d the p o s t m o d e r n c u t :

5 6

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 distinctly m o d e r n

phenomena.

are

5 7

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 directly a n d

no

longer needs

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 nature

as t h e

medium

itself

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,

struggle; along the same lines, w h e n

not

as a s y m b o l o f

the m o d e r n

spiritual

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 you: I a m the L O R D ' ( L e v i t i c u s 19: 2 8 ) .

5 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

THE

372

TICKLISH

the difference between the p r e m o d e r n

SUBJECT

p l e t h o r a o f ways t o s h a p e

one's

body (tattooing, piercing, mutilation o f organs . . .) a n d t h e fourth stage, the p o s t m o d e r n 'neo-tribal' cut in the body? T o p u t it i n s o m e w h a t s i m p l i f i e d t e r m s : t h e t r a d i t i o n a l c u t r a n i n t h e d i r e c t i o n from the Real to the Symbolic, w h i l e t h e p o s t m o d e r n c u t r u n s i n t h e o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n , from the Symbolic to the Real. T h e a i m o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l c u t was t o i n s c r i b e t h e s y m b o l i c f o r m o n t o r a w f l e s h , t o ' g e n t r i f y '

raw

f l e s h , t o m a r k its i n c l u s i o n i n t o t h e b i g O t h e r , its s u b j e c t i o n t o it; t h e a i m of postmodern

s a d o - m a s o p r a c t i c e s o f b o d i l y m u t i l a t i o n is, r a t h e r ,

the

o p p o s i t e o n e - to g u a r a n t e e , to give a c c e s s to, t h e ' p a i n o f e x i s t e n c e ' , t h e minimum

o f the bodily Real in the universe o f symbolic simulacra. In

o t h e r words, the function o f today's ' p o s t m o d e r n ' s e r v e n o t as t h e m a r k

c u t i n t h e b o d y is t o

o f symbolic castration but,

opposite: to designate

rather,

as its e x a c t

the body's resistance against submission

to

the

s o c i o - s y m b o l i c L a w . W h e n a g i r l h a s h e r e a r s , c h e e k s a n d v a g i n a l lips p i e r c e d w i t h r i n g s , t h e m e s s a g e is n o t o n e o f s u b m i s s i o n b u t o n e o f t h e 'defiance o f the mode

flesh':

o f submission

s h e c h a n g e s w h a t , i n a t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i e t y , was t h e to the

symbolic big O t h e r

o f Tradition

into

its

o p p o s i t e , into the idiosyncratic display o f h e r individuality. O n l y i n t h i s way is r e f l e x i v i z a t i o n t h o r o u g h l y g l o b a l : w h e n - t o p u t i t i n H e g e l e s e - it ' r e m a i n s b y i t s e l f i n its o t h e r n e s s ' , t h a t is, w h e n p r e v i o u s l y ) its v e r y o p p o s i t e s t a r t s t o f u n c t i o n postmodern

( w h a t was

as its e x p r e s s i o n - as i n

a r c h i t e c t u r e , in w h i c h a faked r e t u r n

to traditional

d i s p l a y s t h e f a n c i e s o f r e f l e x i v e i n d i v i d u a l i t y . T h e o l d m o t t o plus ca

styles change,

plus c'est la merne chose s h o u l d b e s u p p l e m e n t e d b y its o p p o s i t e , plus c'est la mime chose, plus (a change:

t h e s i g n o f t h i s r a d i c a l h i s t o r i c a l c h a n g e is t h e

fact that t h e very f e a t u r e s that o n c e d e f i n e d p a t r i a r c h a l s e x u a l e c o n o m y a r e a l l o w e d t o stay, s i n c e t h e y n o w f u n c t i o n i n a n e w way. S i m p l y r e c a l l the p h e n o m e n o n

o f ' R u l e Girls':™ we a r e a p p a r e n d y d e a l i n g with

an

a t t e m p t to re-establish the old rules o f s e d u c t i o n ( w o m e n are c h a s e d a n d h a v e t o m a k e t h e m s e l v e s i n a c c e s s i b l e , t h a t is, t o r e t a i n t h e s t a t u s o f t h e elusive o b j e c t a n d n e v e r display an active i n t e r e s t in the m a n

they are

a t t r a c t e d t o , e t c . ) ; h o w e v e r , a l t h o u g h t h e content of t h e s e ' r u l e s ' is, f o r all practical

purposes,

'patriarchal'

the

same

as t h a t

o f the

old

rules

p r o c e s s o f s e d u c t i o n , t h e s u b j e c t i v e position

differs r a d i c a l l y : w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h t h o r o u g h l y

regulating of

the

enunciation

'postmodern'

emanci­

p a t e d subjects w h o , in o r d e r to e n h a n c e t h e i r p l e a s u r e , reflexively a d o p t a

set

o f rules.

So here

'transubstantiated'

and

again

the

s e r v e s as t h e

adoption means

opposite, o f 'postmodern' reflexive freedom.''"

of a

past

procedure

o f expression

o f its

is very

WHITHER OEDIPUS?

373

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 reverts

to its o p p o s i t e , l e a d i n g

individualization

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, with

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

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

idiosyncratic hobbies

o r ways o f d r e s s i n g ,

meant

more

and

more

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)

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

tends

to overlap

with

its o p p o s i t e , w i t h

the

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 themselves are externalized.

T h e ultimate paradox o f individuation,

feelings

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. figure o f surplus-enjoyment:

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 an object o n which I am

hooked,

which

THE TICKLISH

374

SUBJECT

t h r e a t e n s t o s w a l l o w m e u p i n t h e e x c e s s i v e jouissance

that suspends

the

b i g O t h e r , t h a t is, all s y m b o l i c l i n k s ? I s n o t t h e d r u g u s e r ' s r e l a d o n s h i p t o the drug therefore the ultimate exemplification o f Lacan's formula s-a? T h i s a n t i n o m y c a n also b e f o r m u l a t e d simulacruvi

( o f the

masks I wear, o f the

i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s ) a n d t h e Real

as t h e a n t i n o m y b e t w e e n r o l e s I play i n t h e

game

the of

( o f traumatic bodily violence

a n d c u t s ) . T h e k e y p o i n t h e r e is a g a i n t o a s s e r t t h e H e g e l i a n ' s p e c u l a t i v e i d e n t i t y ' b e t w e e n t h e s e two o p p o s i t e s : t h e p r i c e o f t h e g l o b a l r e i g n o f simulacra

is e x t r e m e

v i o l e n c e to

the

bodily Real.

(Long ago,

Lacan

p r o v i d e d the f o r m u l a f o r this p a r a d o x i c a l c o i n c i d e n c e o f o p p o s i t e s : w h e n s y m b o l i c e f f i c i e n c y is s u s p e n d e d ,

t h e I m a g i n a r y falls i n t o t h e R e a l . ) S o

h o w are we to b r e a k o u t o f this vicious cycle? Any a t t e m p t t o r e t u r n to O e d i p a l s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y is c l e a r l y s e l f - d e f e a t i n g , a n d c a n l e a d o n l y t o r i d i c u l o u s s p e c t a c l e s l i k e t h o s e o f t h e P r o m i s e - K e e p e r s . W h a t is n e e d e d is the assertion o f a Real which, instead o f b e i n g caught in the vicious cycle with

its i m a g i n a r y

counterpart,

(re)introduces

the

dimension

of

the

i m p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t s h a t t e r s t h e I m a g i n a r y ; i n s h o r t , w h a t is n e e d e d is a n act as o p p o s e d t o m e r e activity - t h e a u t h e n t i c a c t t h a t i n v o l v e s

disturbing

('traversing') t h e fantasy. W h e n e v e r a s u b j e c t is ' a c t i v e ' ( e s p e c i a l l y w h e n h e is d r i v e n i n t o f r e n e t i c h y p e r a c t i v i t y ) , t h e q u e s t i o n t o b e a s k e d is: w h a t is t h e u n d e r l y i n g f a n t a s y s u s t a i n i n g t h i s activity? T h e a c t - as o p p o s e d t o activity - o c c u r s o n l y w h e n t h i s p h a n t a s m i c b a c k g r o u n d i t s e l f is d i s t u r b e d . I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e , a c t f o r L a c a n is o n t h e s i d e o f t h e o b j e c t qua r e a l as o p p o s e d t o s i g n i f i e r ( t o ' s p e e c h a c t ' ) : we can p e r f o r m accepted

the

fundamental

s p e e c h a c t s o n l y in s o f a r as we, h a v e

alienation

in

the

symbolic order

and

the

p h a n t a s m i c s u p p o r t necessary for the f u n c t i o n i n g of this o r d e r , while t h e a c t as r e a l is a n e v e n t w h i c h o c c u r s ex nihilo,

without any

phantasmic

s u p p o r t . A s s u c h , t h e a c t as o b j e c t is a l s o t o b e o p p o s e d t o t h e s u b j e c t , a t least in the standard L a c a n i a n sense o f the 'alienated' divided subject: the c o r r e l a t e t o t h e a c t is a d i v i d e d s u b j e c t , b u t n o t i n t h e s e n s e t h a t , b e c a u s e o f this d i v i s i o n , t h e a c t is always f a i l e d , d i s p l a c e d , a n d s o o n - o n

the

c o n t r a r y , t h e a c t i n its t r a u m a t i c tuche is t h a t w h i c h d i v i d e s t h e s u b j e c t w h o c a n n e v e r s u b j c c t i v i z c it, a s s u m e it as ' h i s o w n ' , p o s i t h i m s e l f as its a u t h o r - a g e n t - t h e a u t h e n t i c a c t t h a t I a c c o m p l i s h is always b y d e f i n i t i o n a foreign body, an intruder which simultaneously attracts/fascinates and r e p e l s m e , s o t h a t i f a n d w h e n I c o m e t o o c l o s e t o it, t h i s l e a d s t o m y apkanisis,

s e l f - e r a s u r e . I f t h e r e is a s u b j e c t t o t h e a c t , it is n o t t h e s u b j e c t

o f subjectivization, o f integrating the act into the universe o f symbolic i n t e g r a t i o n a n d r e c o g n i t i o n , o f a s s u m i n g t h e a c t as ' m y o w n ' , b u t , r a t h e r ,

WHITHER

375

OEDIPUS?

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 'decentrement'

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 . F o r that reason, Kant's description o f how a direct insight into

the

T h i n g i n i t s e l f ( t h e n o u m e n a l G o d ) w o u l d d e p r i v e us o f o u r f r e e d o m a n d t u r n us i n t o l i f e l e s s p u p p e t s i f w e s u b t r a c t f r o m it t h e s c e n i c i m a g e r y ( f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h t h e D i v i n e M a j e s t y ) a n d r e d u c e it t o t h e e s s e n t i a l ( a n e n t i t y p e r f o r m i n g what it d o e s ' a u t o m a t i c a l l y ' , w i t h o u t a n y i n n e r t u r m o i l and

s t r u g g l e ) , p a r a d o x i c a l l y fits

the

description

o f the

(ethical)

act

p e r f e c t l y - this a c t is p r e c i s e l y s o m e t h i n g w h i c h u n e x p e c t e d l y j u s t o c c u r s ' , it is a n o c c u r r e n c e w h i c h a l s o ( a n d e v e n m o s t ) s u r p r i s e s its a g e n t i t s e l f ( a f t e r a n a u t h e n t i c a c t , m y r e a c t i o n is always ' E v e n I d o n ' t k n o w h o w I was a b l e t o d o t h a t , it j u s t h a p p e n e d ! ' ) . T h e p a r a d o x is t h u s t h a t , i n a n a u t h e n t i c act, the highest f r e e d o m

c o i n c i d e s with t h e u t m o s t passivity,

w i t h a r e d u c t i o n t o a l i f e l e s s a u t o m a t o n w h o b l i n d l y p e r f o n n s its g e s t u r e s . T h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f t h e a c t t h u s c o m p e l s us t o a c c e p t t h e r a d i c a l s h i f t o f perspective involved in the m o d e r n n o t i o n o f to

a c c e p t is n o t

the

fact that

the

true

finitude:

w h a t is s o d i f f i c u l t

a c t in w h i c h

noumenal

and

p h e n o m e n a l d i m e n s i o n s c o i n c i d e is f o r e v e r o u t o f o u r r e a c h ; t h e

true

t r a u m a l i e s in t h e o p p o s i t e a w a r e n e s s t h a t there are acts, t h a t t h e y do

occur,

a n d that we have to c o m e to t e r m s with t h e m . 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 every

time

an

ad infinitum

authentic

act

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

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

this

catastrophes

condition o f

is m a n ' s

finitude,

presumption

that

he

can

overcome

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 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

that

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

377

OEDIPUS?

0 3

to these

the

fourth,

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 ; three

strategies

o f disavowal

o f the

act, o n e

should

add

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 u n i v e r s e ) , let us t h e n

catastrophic

directly provoke

(for the existing discursive

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

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

the

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

'spontaneously' ossification

o f the

R e v o l u t i o n , with

everywhere,

against

the

workers'

councils popping

Thermidor,

that

is, t h e

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 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

up

later need

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

THE TICKLISH

378

SUBJECT

g r o u n d for t h e Stalinist o r M a o i s t t e r r o r t h r o u g h his otherwise s i n c e r e a n d b e n e v o l e n t proposals, h e s h o u l d learn to avoid the liberal trap o f a c c e p t i n g t h i s a c c u s a t i o n at f a c e v a l u e a n d t h e n t r y i n g t o d e f e n d h i m s e l f by pleading

S o c i a l i s m will b e d e m o c r a d c ,

respecting

h u m a n r i g h t s , d i g n i t y , h a p p i n e s s ; t h e r e will b e n o u n i v e r s a l

n o t guilty ( ' O u r

obligatory

Party L i n e . . . ' ) :

n o , L i b e r a l D e m o c r a c y is n o t

our

ultimate

horizon;

u n e a s y as it m a y s o u n d , t h e h o r r i b l e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S t a l i n i s t p o l i t i c a l t e r r o r s h o u l d not l e a d us i n t o a b a n d o n i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e o f t e r r o r i t s e l f o n e should search even m o r e stringently for the

' g o o d t e r r o r ' . Is t h e

s t r u c t u r e o f a t r u e political a c t o f l i b e r a t i o n n o t , by d e f i n i t i o n , t h a t o f a forced

choice and,

as s u c h ,

'terroristic'? W h e n ,

in

1940, the

French

R e s i s t a n c e c a l l e d o n i n d i v i d u a l s t o j o i n its r a n k s a n d a c t i v e l y o p p o s e

the

G e r m a n o c c u p a t i o n o f F r a n c e , t h e i m p l i c i t s t r u c t u r e o f its a p p e a l was n o t ' Y o u a r e f r e e to c h o o s e b e t w e e n us a n d

the Germans', but

'You

must

c h o o s e us! I f y o u c h o o s e c o l l a b o r a t i o n , y o u r e n o u n c e y o u r v e r y f r e e d o m ! ' I n a n a u t h e n t i c c h o i c e o f f r e e d o m , I c h o o s e w h a t I k n o w I have to d o . I t was B e r t o l t B r e c h t w h o , in h i s ' l e a r n i n g '

p l a y The Measure

Taken

( 1 9 3 0 ) , fully d e p l o y e d t h i s ' t e r r o r i s t i c ' p o t e n t i a l o f t h e a c t , d e f i n i n g

the

a c t as t h e r e a d i n e s s t o a c c e p t o n e ' s t h o r o u g h s e l f - o b l i t e r a t i o n ( ' s e c o n d d e a t h ' ) : the youth who j o i n s the revolutionaries, then endangers

them

t h r o u g h his h u m a n i s t c o m p a s s i o n for t h e suffering workers, a g r e e s to b e t h r o w n i n t o a p i t w h e r e h i s b o d y will d i s i n t e g r a t e , w i t h n o t r a c e o f h i m left b e h i n d .

( A

H e r e , t h e r e v o l u t i o n is e n d a n g e r e d

by t h e r e m a i n d e r o f

n a i v e h u m a n i t y - t h a t is, b y p e r c e i v i n g o t h e r p e o p l e n o t o n l y as t h e class struggle b u t also, a n d

p r i m a r i l y , as s u f f e r i n g

figures

human

in

beings.

A g a i n s t this r e l i a n c e o n o n e ' s d i r e c t s e n t i m e n t s o f c o m p a s s i o n , B r e c h t offers t h e ' e x c r e m e n t a l ' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the r e v o l u t i o n a r y s u b j e c t with t h e t e r r o r n e e d e d t o e r a s e t h e l a s t t r a c e s o f t e r r o r itself, t h u s a c c e p t i n g t h e n e e d f o r its o w n u l t i m a t e s e l f - o b l i t e r a t i o n : ' W h o a r e y o u ? S t i n k i n g , b e g o n e f r o m the r o o m that has b e e n c l e a n e d ! W o u l d that y o u w e r e t h e last o f t h e filth w h i c h y o u h a d t o r e m o v e ! ' * ' I n h i s f a m o u s s h o r t p l a y Mauser

5

0

(1970 ''), H e i n e r Midler

t o write a d i a l e c t i c a l r e b u t t a l o f B r e c h t , c o n f r o n t i n g this

endeavoured figure

o f the

betrayal o f the revolution o n a c c o u n t o f h u m a n i s t c o m p a s s i o n ('I c a n n o t kill

the

enemies o f revolution,

because

I also see

in

them

ignorant

suffering h u m a n beings, helpless victims c a u g h t in the historical p r o c e s s ' ) with t h e o p p o s i n g

figure

o f the revolutionary e x e c u t i o n e r w h o identifies

e x c e s s i v e l y w i t h h i s b r u t a l w o r k ( i n s t e a d o f e x e c u t i n g e n e m i e s with

the

n e c e s s a r y i m p a s s i v i t y , a w a r e t h a t h i s m u r d e r o u s w o r k is t h e p a i n f u l

but

n e c e s s a r y m e a s u r e d e s t i n e d t o b r i n g a b o u t a s t a t e i n w h i c h k i l l i n g will n o

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

379

l o n g e r b e necessary, h e elevates the destruction o f the e n e m i e s o f the revolution into an end-in-itself, finding fulfilment in t h e destructive orgy as s u c h ) . A t t h e e n d o f t h e p l a y , it is t h u s t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y e x e c u t i o n e r t u r n e d i n t o a k i l l i n g m a c h i n e , n o t t h e c o m p a s s i o n a t e h u m a n i s t , w h o is p r o c l a i m e d t h e e n e m y o f t h e revolution a n d c o n d e m n e d to e x e c u t i o n bv t h e P a r t y C h o r u s . F a r f r o m s i m p l y u n d e r m i n i n g The Measure

Taken w i t h its

dialectical counter-example, however, the e x e c u t i o n o f the

revolutionary

e x e c u t i o n e r h i m s e l f i n Mauser

offers a p e r f e c t e x a m p l e o f t h e 'last o f t h e

filth w h i c h h a d t o b e r e m o v e d ' . A r e v o l u t i o n is a c h i e v e d (not

betrayed)

w h e n it ' e a t s its o w n c h i l d r e n ' , t h e e x c e s s t h a t w a s n e c e s s a r y t o s e t it i n m o t i o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e u l t i m a t e r e v o l u t i o n a r y e t h i c a l s t a n c e is n o t that o f simple devotion a n d willingly a c c e p t i n g t h e

role

fidelity

to the Revolution but, rather, that o f

o f 'vanishing

mediator',

o f the

excessive

e x e c u t i o n e r to b e e x e c u t e d ( a s t h e ' t r a i t o r ' ) s o t h a t t h e R e v o l u t i o n c a n a c h i e v e its u l t i m a t e g o a l . More

precisely, in

Mauser

the

e x e c u t i o n e r h i m s e l f is n o t

executed

s i m p l y f o r e n j o y i n g h i s k i l l i n g o n b e h a l f o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n as a n

end-in-

itself; h e is n o t c a u g h t i n s o m e k i n d o f p s e u d o - B a t a i l l e a n o r g y o f (self-) d e s t r u c t i o n ; t h e p o i n t i s , r a t h e r , t h a t h e w a n t s t o 'kill t h e d e a d t h e m s e l v e s again', to obliterate t h e d e a d totally f r o m historical m e m o r y , to disperse t h e i r very b o d i e s , to m a k e t h e m d i s a p p e a r c o m p l e t e l y , so that t h e n e w a g e will s t a r t f r o m t h e z e r o - p o i n t , w i t h a c l e a n s l a t e - in s h o r t , t o b r i n g a b o u t what

L a c a n , following

Sade, called the

'second death'.

Paradoxically,

h o w e v e r , it is p r e c i s e l y t h i s t h a t t h e t h r e e r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s i n B r e c h t ' s The Measure

Taken

a i m at: t h e i r y o u n g c o m r a d e m u s t n o t o n l y b e k i l l e d , h i s

very d i s a p p e a r a n c e

must

annihilation must be 1

totally'. '

7

disappear,

no

trace

o f it m u s t

total — t h e y o u n g c o m r a d e

be

left,

'must disappear,

S o w h e n t h e t h r e e r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s ask t h e i r y o u n g c o m r a d e to

say ' Y e s ! ' t o h i s f a t e , t h e y w a n t

him

freely to e n d o r s e

this t o t a l

o b l i t e r a t i o n , t h a t is, h i s s e c o n d d e a t h i t s e l f . T h i s is t h e a s p e c t o f Measure

his and

Taken t h a t is n o t c o v e r e d i n M i d l e r ' s Mauser,

self

1

The

the problem Brecht

is s t r u g g l i n g w i t h is n o t t h e t o t a l a n n i h i l a t i o n , t h e ' s e c o n d d e a t h ' , o f t h e enemies o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n , b u t t h e h o r r i b l e t a s k o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y

himself.

t o a c c e p t a n d e n d o r s e his own 'second death', t o ' e r a s e h i m s e l f t o t a l l y f r o m t h e p i c t u r e ' . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , a l s o , o n e c a n n o l o n g e r o p p o s e (as M u l l e r does)

the destructive

total o b l i t e r a t i o n o f the victim to the

respectful

t a k i n g c a r e o f t h e d e a d , t o fully a s s u m i n g t h e b u r d e n o f t h e k i l l i n g , o n c e t h e v i c t i m is k i l l e d o n b e h a l f o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n : w h e n , at t h e e n d o f The Measure

Taken,

i n a s c e n e r e m i n i s c e n t o f a pietd, t h e t h r e e c o m r a d e s g e n t l y

t a k e t h e i r y o u n g f r i e n d in t h e i r a r m s , t h e y a r e e a r n i n g h i m t o w a r d s

the

380

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 selfinstrumentalization 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 in o r d e r t o c o n c e a l t h e jouissance

fiction

o f the big O t h e r

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

fundamentalist,

figure

o f Evil i n t h e

G o o d itself in

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

its

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 t h e s a m e e v e n t as ' e v i l ' -

condemn

recall the case o f Mary Kay L e t o u r n e a u ,

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

the

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 affair)

(as a n o b s c e n e i l l e g i t i m a t e

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 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

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

around, opposed 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 ,

THE TICKLISH

382

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 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

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 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 , 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

from and

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

erection depends entirely o n m e , o n my m i n d

o f erection:

(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

authentic

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

spontaneity, something

through rational-instrumental

that c a n n o t b e thoroughly

of

mastered

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 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 )

and/

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

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

as a s i g n 'phallus'

that 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 with

his p e n i s -

what

happens,

however,

when

his h e a d

takes

but 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

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

o f erection into

a

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 protopsychotic

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

necessary

inner

obverse

evolution

and

o f New Age

growth. . . . H e r e spiritualist

we

elevation:

encounter the

end

the

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 (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 p o i n t h e r e is t h a t , the subject is completely

unaware

figure

knowledge

in p r i s o n ) ; t h e key

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 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

the

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

New Age wisdom, between Viagra and

The Celestine Prophecy?

That

and 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

THE TICKLISH

386 of

SUBJECT

reaction e m e r g e d : o n e e i t h e r simply c o n d e m n e d

her

as evil, fully

r e s p o n s i b l e f o r f o r g e t t i n g t h e e l e m e n t a r y s e n s e o f d u t y a n d d e c e n c y in letting h e r s e l f g o a n d e n g a g i n g in a n affair with a sixth-grade s c h o o l b o y ; o r - like h e r d e f e n c e lawyer -

o n e took refuge

in p s y c h i a t r i c

mumbo

j u m b o , m e d i c a l i z i n g h e r c a s e , t r e a t i n g h e r as a n ill p e r s o n , d e s c r i b i n g h e r as s u f f e r i n g f r o m a ' b i p o l a r d i s o r d e r '

(a new term for manic-depressive

s t a t e s ) . W h e n s h e is i n o n e o f h e r m a n i c fits, s h e is s i m p l y n o t a w a r e o f t h e d a n g e r s h e is g e t t i n g i n t o - o r - as h e r l a w y e r p u t it, r e p e a t i n g

the

worst anti-feminist c l i c h e - ' T h e only p e r s o n to w h o m Mary Kay poses any t h r e a t is h e r s e l f - s h e is t h e g r e a t e s t d a n g e r t o h e r s e l f add

h e r e : with

d e f e n c e lawyers l i k e t h a t , w h o

( o n e is t e m p t e d to

needs a prosecution?).

A l o n g these lines, D r J u l i e M o o r e , the psychiatrist who 'evaluated' Mary K a y , i n s i s t e d e m p h a t i c a l l y t h a t M a r y K a y ' s p r o b l e m 'is n o t p s y c h o l o g i c a l , b u t m e d i c a l ' , t o b e t r e a t e d b y d r u g s t h a t will s t a b i l i z e h e r b e h a v i o u r : ' F o r M a r y K a y , m o r a l i t y b e g i n s w i t h a p i l l . ' I t was r a t h e r u n c o m f o r t a b l e

to

listen to this d o c t o r w h o brutally m e d i c a l i z e d M a r y Kay's p a s s i o n , depriv­ ing h e r o f the dignity o f an a u t h e n t i c subjective stance: she c l a i m e d that w h e n M a r y Kay talks a b o u t h e r love f o r t h e b o y s h e simply s h o u l d n o t b e t a k e n s e r i o u s l y - s h e is t r a n s p o r t e d i n t o s o m e h e a v e n , d i s c o n n e c t e d f r o m the demands and obligations o f h e r social surroundings. . . . T h e notion o f 'bipolar disorder'

popularized

b y two O p r a h

Winfrey-

s h o w s is i n t e r e s t i n g : its b a s i c c l a i m is t h a t a p e r s o n s u f f e r i n g f r o m

this

d i s o r d e r still k n o w s t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n r i g h t a n d w r o n g , still k n o w s w h a t is r i g h t a n d g o o d f o r h e r ( p a t i e n t s a r e , as a r u l e , w o m e n ) , b u t w h e n s h e is i n a m a n i c s t a t e s h e g o e s a h e a d a n d m a k e s i m p u l s i v e d e c i s i o n s , suspending

h e r c a p a c i t y o f r a t i o n a l j u d g e m e n t w h i c h t e l l s h e r w h a t is^

r i g h t a n d g o o d for h e r . Is n o t s u c h a s u s p e n s i o n , h o w e v e r , o n e o f t h e constituents o f the notion o f the authentic

act o f b e i n g t r u l y i n l o v e ?

C r u c i a l h e r e was M a r y Kay's u n c o n d i t i o n a l

compulsion to accomplish

s o m e t h i n g s h e k n e w v e r y well was a g a i n s t h e r o w n G o o d : h e r p a s s i o n was s i m p l y t o o s t r o n g ; s h e was fully a w a r e t h a t , b e y o n d all s o c i a l o b l i g a t i o n s , t h e v e r y c o r e o f h e r b e i n g was a t s t a k e i n it. . . . T h i s p r e d i c a m e n t a l l o w s us t o s p e c i f y t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a c t a n d k n o w l e d g e . O e d i p u s d i d n ' t k n o w w h a t h e was d o i n g ( k i l l i n g h i s o w n f a t h e r ) , y e t h e d i d it; H a m l e t k n e w w h a t h e h a d t o d o , w h i c h is why h e p r o c r a s t i n a t e d a n d was u n a b l e to a c c o m p l i s h the act. T h e r e is, h o w e v e r , a t h i r d

position, that o f -

C l a u d e l ' s Sygne de C o u f o n t a i n e f r o m his d r a m a o f je sais bien, mais quand

among others 69

The Hostage,

Paul

a version

rneme - S y g n e fully k n e w , was fully a w a r e o f , t h e

h o r r i b l e r e a l i t y o f w h a t s h e was a b o u t t o d o ( b r i n g i n g r u i n t o h e r e t e r n a l

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

387

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 Sygne's act stands

the

for

the

formula

o f cynicism should

radical opposite

n o t d e c e i v e us:

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

know a b o u t the dangers o f smoking, the m o r e you should

you

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 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 Scherbsky

Institute

in

to t h e

to

diagnose

(the practice centred on the

infamous

Moscow)? No

old Soviet attempts wonder,

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

then, therapy

that

part

of

( t h e lawyer

the 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

THE

5S»

TICKLISH

days i m m e d i a t e l y p r e c e d i n g

SUBJECT

t h i s e n c o u n t e r s h e was n o t g i v e n h e r

pre­

scribed medication regularly). O p r a h Winfrey herself, w h o d e d i c a t e d o n e o f h e r shows to Mary Kay, was

at

her

worst

here:

she

was

right

to

reject

the

talk

of

'bipolar

p e r s o n a l i t y ' as l e g a l p r a t t l e , y e t s h e r e j e c t e d it f o r t h e w r o n g r e a s o n - as a simple

e x c u s e allowing

Mary Kay to

avoid

her

fundamental

guilt

of

behaving irresponsibly. A l t h o u g h O p r a h p r e t e n d e d to b e neutral a n d n o t t o t a k e s i d e s , s h e r e f e r r e d t o M a t y K a y ' s l o v e all t h e t i m e i n a m o c k i n g l y d i s t a n t i a t e d way ( ' w h a t s h e thought was l o v e ' , e t c . ) , a n d f i n a l l y p a s s i o n a t e l y v o i c e d the surprised q u e s t i o n o f h e r peers, o f h e r h u s b a n d , o f the soc a l l e d d e c e n t c o m m o n p e o p l e : ' H o w c o u l d s h e h a v e d o n e it, n o t t h i n k i n g about the catastrophic c o n s e q u e n c e s o f h e r act? H o w c o u l d she not only p u t at risk, b u t effectively a b a n d o n a n d r e n o u n c e , e v e r y t h i n g t h a t f o r m e d t h e very s u b s t a n c e

of her

life -

h e r family, with

three

children,

her

p r o f e s s i o n a l c a r e e r ? ' Is n o t s u c h a s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e ' p r i n c i p l e o f s u f f i c i e n t r e a s o n ( s ) ' , h o w e v e r , t h e v e r y d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e act} U n d o u b t e d l y t h e m o s t d e p r e s s i v e m o m e n t was w h e n , a t t h e

trial, u n d e r t h e p r e s s u r e

of her

s u r r o u n d i n g s , M a r y K a y c o n c e d e d , in t e a r s , t h a t s h e k n e w s h e w a s d o i n g something

that was legally a n d

morally wrong -

a moment

of

ethical

betrayal i n t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e o f ' c o m p r o m i s i n g o n e ' s d e s i r e ' i f e v e r t h e r e was o n e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , h e r guilt a t t h a t p o i n t lay p r e c i s e l y i n r e n o u n c i n g h e r p a s s i o n . W h e n s h e l a t e r r e a s s e r t e d h e r u n c o n d i t i o n a l fidelity t o h e r love (stating with dignity that s h e h a d l e a r n e d to r e m a i n t r u e a n d

faithful

to h e r s e l f ) , we have a c l e a r c a s e o f s o m e o n e w h o , after a l m o s t s u c c u m b i n g to the pressure o f h e r s u r r o u n d i n g s , o v e r c o m e s h e r guilt a n d regains h e r e t h i c a l c o m p o s u r e b y d e c i d i n g not to compromise her desire. T h e u l t i m a t e false a r g u m e n t against M a r y Kay e v o k e d by a p s y c h o l o g i s t on

the Oprah

opposite

s h o w was t h a t o f g e n d e r s y m m e t r y : l e t u s i m a g i n e

' L o l i t a ' c a s e o f a thirty-four-year-old

male

teacher who

the gets

i n v o l v e d w i t h a t h i r t e e n - y e a r - o l d g i r l , h i s p u p i l - is it n o t t r u e t h a t i n t h i s case we w o u l d insist m u c h m o r e u n a m b i g u o u s l y o n his guilt a n d r e s p o n s i ­ bility? T h i s a r g u m e n t is m i s l e a d i n g a n d w r o n g - n o t o n l y f o r t h e reason that the a r g u m e n t a t i o n

o f those w h o o p p o s e affirmative

same action

( h e l p i n g u n d e r p r i v i l e g e d m i n o r i t i e s ) o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t i t is a c a s e o f inverted

r a c i s m is w r o n g

( t h e f a c t is t h a t m e n

rape women,

n o t vice

versa . . . ) . ~ " O n a m o r e radical level, o n e s h o u l d insist o n t h e u n i q u e n e s s , the absolute idiosyncrasy, o f the ethical act p r o p e r - such an a c t involves its o w n i n h e r e n t n o r m a t i v i t y w h i c h ' m a k e s it r i g h t ' ; t h e r e is n o

neutral

e x t e r n a l s t a n d a r d t h a t w o u l d e n a b l e us t o d e c i d e i n a d v a n c e , b y a s i m p l e a p p l i c a t i o n t o a s i n g l e c a s e , o n its e t h i c a l s t a t u s .

WHITHER

So our

OEDIPUS?

u l t i m a t e l e s s o n is t h a t w e s h o u l d

389

supplement

the

Lacanian

n o t i o n o f ' b e t w e e n two d e a t h s ' with ' b e t w e e n t h e t w o d e a t h d r i v e s ' : t h e u l t i m a t e c h o i c e is d i r e c t l y t h e o n e b e t w e e n t w o d e a t h d r i v e s . T h e first aspect

o f the

death

drive

is t h e

indestructible

stupidity

of

superego

e n j o y m e n t . A s u p r e m e e x a m p l e o f this i d i o t i c s u p e r e g o c o m p u l s i o n p r o v i d e d b y C h a r l e s R u s s e l l ' s f i l m The Mask,

is

with J i m C a r e y ( 1 9 9 4 ) , t h e

story o f a w e a k o r d i n a r y b a n k teller, h u m i l i a t e d a g a i n a n d a g a i n by his p e e r s a n d by w o m e n , w h o a c q u i r e s e x t r a o r d i n a r y p o w e r s w h e n h e puts o n a mysterious old mask found

on

a city b e a c h . A s e r i e s o f details

are

e s s e n t i a l t o t h e s t o r y ' s b a c k g r o u n d . W h e n t h e m a s k is t h r o w n o n t o t h e s e a s h o r e , it s t i c k s t o t h e s l i m y d e c a y i n g r e m a i n s o f a c o r p s e ,

bearing

witness to what r e m a i n s o f t h e ' p e r s o n b e h i n d t h e m a s k ' after h e totally identifies with t h e mask: a formless s l i m e l i k e t h a t o f M r V a l d e m a r f r o m P o e ' s s t o r y w h e n h e is r e s u s c i t a t e d f r o m d e a t h , t h i s ' i n d i v i s i b l e r e m a i n d e r ' o f t h e R e a l . A n o t h e r c r u c i a l f e a t u r e is t h a t t h e h e r o , b e f o r e a c q u i r i n g t h e m a s k , is p r e s e n t e d as a c o m p u l s i v e T V c a r t o o n - w a t c h e r : w h e n h e p u t s o n t h e g r e e n w o o d e n m a s k , a n d it t a k e s p o s s e s s i o n o f h i m , h e is a b l e

to

b e h a v e , i n ' r e a l l i f e ' , as a c a r t o o n h e r o ( d o d g i n g t h e b u l l e t s , d a n c i n g a n d l a u g h i n g madly, sticking his eyes a n d t o n g u e far o u t o f his h e a d w h e n h e is e x c i t e d ) - i n s h o r t , h e b e c o m e s ' u n d e a d ' , e n t e r i n g t h e s p e c t r a l p h a n t a s ­ m i c d o m a i n o f u n c o n s t r a i n e d p e r v e r s i o n , o f ' e t e r n a l life' in w h i c h t h e r e is n o d e a t h ( o r s e x ) , i n w h i c h t h e p l a s t i c i t y o f t h e b o d i l y s u r f a c e is n o l o n g e r c o n s t r a i n e d b y a n y p h y s i c a l laws ( f a c e s c a n b e s t r e t c h e d

indefi­

nitely; 1 c a n spit o u t f r o m m y b o d y bullets w h i c h w e r e s h o t into m e ; after I fall f r o m

a high building,

spread-eagled

on

the pavement,

I simply

r e a s s e m b l e m y s e l f a n d walk away . . . ) . T h i s u n i v e r s e is i n h e r e n t l y compulsive:

e v e n t h o s e w h o o b s e r v e it c a n n o t

r e s i s t its s p e l l . S u f f i c e it t o r e c a l l p e r h a p s t h e s u p r e m e s c e n e o f t h e film i n w h i c h t h e h e r o , w e a r i n g h i s g r e e n m a s k , is c o r n e r e d b y a l a r g e p o l i c e f o r c e ( d o z e n s o f c a r s , h e l i c o p t e r s ) : to g e t o u t o f this i m p a s s e h e treats the l i g h t f o c u s e d o n h i m as s p o t l i g h t s o n a s t a g e , a n d s t a r t s t o s i n g a n d d a n c e a crazy Hollywood

musical version

o f a seductive

Latino song -

the

p o l i c e m e n a r e u n a b l e t o r e s i s t its s p e l l ; t h e y a l s o s t a r t t o m o v e a n d s i n g as if they are p a r t o f a m u s i c a l - n u m b e r c h o r e o g r a p h y (a y o u n g p o l i c e w o m a n is s h e d d i n g t e a r s , visibly

fighting

b a c k the power o f the mask, but

she

n o n e t h e l e s s s u c c u m b s t o its s p e l l a n d j o i n s t h e h e r o i n a p o p u l a r s o n g and-dance

number...).

Crucial

here

is t h e

inherent

stupidity

o f this

c o m p u l s i o n : it s t a n d s f o r t h e w a y e a c h o f u s is c a u g h t i n t h e i n e x p l i c a b l e s p e l l o f i d i o t i c puissance,

as w h e n w e a r e u n a b l e t o r e s i s t w h i s t l i n g s o m e

v u l g a r p o p u l a r s o n g w h o s e m e l o d y is h a u n t i n g u s . T h i s c o m p u l s i o n is

390

THE

properly

ex-timate: imposed

TICKLISH

from

the

SUBJECT

outside, yet d o i n g

nothing

but

r e a l i z i n g o u r i n n e r m o s t w h i m s - as t h e h e r o h i m s e l f p u t s i t i n a d e s p e r a t e m o m e n t : ' W h e n I put the mask on, I lose control - I can do anything I want.' 'Having c o n t r o l over o n e s e l f

t h u s i n n o way s i m p l y r e l i e s o n

the

a b s e n c e o f obstacles to the realization o f o u r intentions: I a m able to e x e r t c o n t r o l o v e r m y s e l f o n l y i n s o f a r as s o m e f u n d a m e n t a l o b s t a c l e m a k e s it i m p o s s i b l e f o r m e t o ' d o a n y t h i n g I w a n t ' - t h e m o m e n t t h i s o b s t a c l e falls away, I a m c a u g h t i n a d e m o n i a c c o m p u l s i o n , a t t h e w h i m o f ' s o m e t h i n g in m e m o r e t h a n m y s e l f . W h e n t h e m a s k - t h e d e a d o b j e c t - c o m e s alive b y t a k i n g p o s s e s s i o n o f u s , its h o l d o n us is e f f e c t i v e l y t h a t o f a ' l i v i n g d e a d ' , o f a m o n s t r o u s automaton

i m p o s i n g i t s e l f o n u s - is n o t t h e l e s s o n

to b e drawn f r o m this that o u r f u n d a m e n t a l

fantasy, the k e r n e l o f o u r

b e i n g , is i t s e l f s u c h a m o n s t r o u s T h i n g , a m a c h i n e o f

71

jouissance?

O n the o t h e r h a n d , against this stupid s u p e r e g o i n j u n c t i o n to e n j o y which increasingly dominates and regulates the perverse universe o f our late capitalist e x p e r i e n c e , t h e d e a t h

drive designates the very o p p o s i t e

gesture, the desperate e n d e a v o u r to e s c a p e the clutches o f the

'undead'

e t e r n a l life, t h e h o r r i b l e fate o f b e i n g c a u g h t in t h e e n d l e s s

repetitive

c y c l e o f jouissance.

T h e d e a t h drive d o e s n o t r e l a t e to t h e finitude o f o u r

c o n t i n g e n t t e m p o r a l e x i s t e n c e , but designates the e n d e a v o u r to e s c a p e t h e d i m e n s i o n t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l m e t a p h y s i c s d e s c r i b e d as t h a t o f

immortality,

t h e i n d e s t r u c t i b l e l i f e t h a t p e r s i s t s b e y o n d d e a t h . I t is o f t e n a t h i n , a l m o s t imperceptible line which separates

two m o d a l i t i e s o f t h e

death

drive: which s e p a r a t e s o u r yielding to t h e b l i n d c o m p u l s i o n to

repeat

more

and

more

intense

pleasures,

these

as e x e m p l i f i e d b y

the

adolescent

transfixed by t h e v i d e o g a m e o n t h e s c r e e n , f r o m t h e t h o r o u g h l y d i f f e r e n t e x p e r i e n c e o f traversing the fantasy. S o w e n o t o n l y d w e l l b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h s , as L a c a n p u t it, b u t o u r u l t i m a t e c h o i c e is d i r e c t l y t h e o n e b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h d r i v e s : t h e o n l y way t o g e t r i d o f d i e s t u p i d s u p e r e g o e m b r a c e the death

death

d r i v e i n its d i s r u p t i v e

d r i v e o f e n j o y m e n t is t o

dimension

o f traversing

the

fantasy. O n e c a n b e a t t h e d e a t h drive o n l y by t h e d e a t h drive itself - so, a g a i n , t h e u l t i m a t e c h o i c e is b e t w e e n b a d a n d w o r s e . A n d t h e s a m e g o e s for the properly Freudian ethical stance. T h e superego injunction 'Enjoy!' is u l t i m a t e l y s u p p o r t e d

by s o m e

figure

darfst! / Y o u m a y ! ' , t h e

logo on

a brand

Germany, provides

o f the 'totalitarian' o f fat-free

Master.

meat products

the most succinct formula o f how the

'Du in

'totalitarian'

M a s t e r o p e r a t e s . T h a t is t o say: o n e s h o u l d r e j e c t t h e s t a n d a r d e x p l a n a t i o n of

today's

new

fundamentalisms

as a

reaction

against

the

anxiety o f

excessive f r e e d o m in o u r late capitalist 'permissive' l i b e r a l society, o f f e r i n g

WHITHER

us a

firm

a n c h o r by providing

OEDIPUS?

391

strong prohibitions -

this c l i c h e a b o u t

individuals 'escaping from f r e e d o m ' into the totalitarian haven o f c l o s e d o r d e r is p r o f o u n d l y m i s l e a d i n g . O n e s h o u l d also r e j e c t t h e s t a n d a r d F r e u d o - M a r x i s t thesis a c c o r d i n g to which the libidinal foundation so-called 'authoritarian satisfaction

in

o f t h e t o t a l i t a r i a n ( F a s c i s t ) s u b j e c t is t h e

personality' structure:

the individual w h o

compulsively obeying authority,

repressing

finds

spontaneous

s e x u a l u r g e s , f e a r i n g i n s e c u r i t y a n d irresponsibility, a n d so o n . T h e shift f r o m t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a u t h o r i t a r i a n t o t h e t o t a l i t a r i a n M a s t e r is c r u c i a l h e r e : although,

on

the

surface, the

totalitarian

M a s t e r also i m p o s e s

severe

o r d e r s , c o m p e l l i n g us t o r e n o u n c e o u r p l e a s u r e s a n d to sacrifice ourselves for s o m e h i g h e r Duty, his actual injunction, discernible b e t w e e n the lines o f h i s e x p l i c i t w o r d s , is e x a c t l y t h e o p p o s i t e - t h e c a l l t o u n c o n s t r a i n e d and unrestrained

transgression.

Far from

imposing on

us a

firm

set o f

standards to be obeyed unconditionally, the

totalitarian

a g e n c y that suspends

t h a t is t o say, h i s s e c r e t

(moral) punishment

-

M a s t e r is

the

i n j u n c t i o n is: Yon may!: t h e p r o h i b i t i o n s t h a t s e e m t o r e g u l a t e s o c i a l l i f e and

guarantee

a minimum

o f d e c e n c y are ultimately worthless, j u s t a

d e v i c e t o k e e p t h e c o m m o n p e o p l e at b a y , w h i l e y o u a r e a l l o w e d t o kill, rape a n d p l u n d e r the E n e m y , let yourself go a n d excessively enjoy, violate o r d i n a r y m o r a l p r o h i b i t i o n s . . . in so far as y o u f o l l o w M e . O b e d i e n c e t o t h e M a s t e r is t h u s t h e o p e r a t o r t h a t a l l o w s y o u t o r e j e c t o r

transgress

e v e r y d a y m o r a l r u l e s : all t h e o b s c e n e d i r t y t h i n g s y o u w e r e d r e a m i n g of, all t h a t y o u h a d

to r e n o u n c e

when you

subordinated

yourself to

the

traditional patriarchal symbolic Law - you are now allowed to indulge in them without punishment,

e x a c t l y like t h e fat-free G e r m a n m e a t w h i c h

y o u m a y e a t w i t h o u t a n y risk t o y o u r h e a l t h . . . . I t is h e r e , h o w e v e r , t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r t h e last, f a t a l t r a p t o b e a v o i d e d . W h a t psychoanalytic e t h i c s o p p o s e s to this totalitarian s o m e b a s i c You mustn't!,

unconditionally respected neighbour!

Do

not

You may! is n o t

s o m e f u n d a m e n t a l p r o h i b i t i o n o r l i m i t a t i o n to b e (Respect the autonomy

e n c r o a c h violently u p o n

and

his/her

dignity o f your intimate

fantasy

s p a c e ! ) . T h e e t h i c a l s t a n c e o f ( s e l f - ) l i m i t a t i o n , o f ' N o trespassing!' in all its v e r s i o n s , i n c l u s i v e o f its r e c e n t e c o l o g i c o - h u m a n i s t twist ( D o n o t e n g a g e in b i o g e n e t i c e n g i n e e r i n g a n d c l o n i n g ! D o n o t t a m p e r t o o m u c h

with

n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s ! D o n o t try t o v i o l a t e t h e s a c r e d d e m o c r a t i c r u l e s a n d risk a v i o l e n t s o c i a l u p h e a v a l ! R e s p e c t t h e c u s t o m s a n d

mores o f o t h e r

e t h n i c c o m m u n i t i e s ! ) is u l t i m a t e l y i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . O n e s h o u l d reject t h e usual l i b e r a l - c o n s e r v a t i v e g a m e o f ism'

with

a

reference

to s o m e

firm

fighting

set o f e t h n i c a l

'totalitarian­

standards

whose

THE

392 abandonment

is s u p p o s e d

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

to lead to catastrophe: n o , the H o l o c a u s t

and

the G u l a g did n o t o c c u r b e c a u s e p e o p l e forgot a b o u t the basic rules o f human decency and give r e i n So -

to the

'set free t h e b e a s t in t h e m s e l v e s ' , l e t t i n g

unconstrained

realization

o n c e m o r e , a n d for the last time -

themselves

o f their murderous

impulses.

t h e c h o i c e is b e t w e e n

bad

and

w o r s e ; w h a t F r e u d i a n e t h i c s o p p o s e s t o t h e ' b a d ' s u p e r e g o v e r s i o n o f You 1

may.

is a n o t h e r ,

to . . .' -

even m o r e

radical

1

You may. , a Scilicet

('You are

allowed

t h e title o f t h e y e a r b o o k e d i t e d by L a c a n in t h e early 1 9 7 0 s )

l o n g e r v o u c h e d for by any figure o f the Master. L a c a n ' s m a x i m

'Do

no not

c o m p r o m i s e y o u r d e s i r e ! ' fully e n d o r s e s t h e p r a g m a t i c p a r a d o x o f o r d e r ­ i n g y o u t o b e f r e e : it e x h o r t s y o u to d a r e .

Notes 1. J a c q u e s L a c a n , lss complexes famihaux dans la formation de I'individu ( 1 9 3 8 ) , Paris: Navariii 1 9 8 4 . 2. S e e E r i c S a n t n e r , My (htm Private Germany, P r i n c e t o n , NJ: P r i n c e t o n University Press 1996. 3. Is it not, however, that after this d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e crisis o f t h e empirical-social form o f t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x , L a c a n later (in t h e 1 9 5 0 s ) r e f o r m u l a t e d O e d i p u s as a kind o f f o r m a l - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r a m e i n d e p e n d e n t o f c o n c r e t e historical c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d inscribed into t h e very structure o f l a n g u a g e ( t h e O e d i p a l p a t e r n a l prohibition merely exemplifies t h e loss, t h e prohibition o f jouissance, i n h e r e n t t o t h e symbolic o r d e r as such . . .)? In a strictly h o m o l o g o u s gesture, Louis Althusser resolves t h e ' e m p i r i c a l ' crisis o f M a r x i s m as t h e tool for c o n c r e t e social analysis by t r a n s f o r m i n g it into a formal-structural t h e o r e t i c a l edifice with n o d i r e c t link t o d e t e r m i n a t e historical c o n t e n t . W h a t this criticism ( o f resolving a n 'empirical' crisis by r e c o u r s e t o t h e a priori symbolic formal o r d e r ) fails to take into a c c o u n t is that, in the late L a c a n o f t h e 1970s, historicity r e t u r n s with a v e n g e a n c e . 4. T i m Pat C o o g a n , De VaUna, L o n d o n : A r r o w B o o k s 1 9 9 5 , p. 2 4 9 . 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid., p. 2 7 8 . 7. T h e usual c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e c o u p l e D e V a l e r a - C o l l i n s with t h e c o u p l e R o b e s p i e r r e D a n t o n ( R o b e s p i e r r e leaving D a n t o n t o win t h e battles, t h e n having him sacrificed) is t h e r e f o r e deeply misleading: it was, r a t h e r , Collins himself w h o was a kind o f c o m b i n e d D a n t o n / R o b e s p i e r r e , while D e V a l e r a was c l o s e r to a N a p o l e o n i c figure. T w o q u o t e s t h r o w a c l e a r light o n their relationship in t h e c r u c i a l p h a s e o f negotiating with t h e British g o v e r n m e n t a n d t h e n signing t h e T r e a t y in 1 9 2 1 . T h e first, f r o m D e V a l e r a ' s official biography, a p p r o v e d by himself, describes his reasons for n o t g o i n g t o L o n d o n himself t o c o n c l u d e t h e negotiations, b u t insisting o n a t e a m h e a d e d by Collins: D e V a l e r a 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 ) Collins's m a i n a r g u m e n t for n o t g o i n g to L o n d o n to n e g o t i a t e was completely different f r o m this self-appointed position o f the 'living symbol o f the R e p u b l i c ' - his point was:

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

393

in E n g l a n d as in Ireland, t h e Michael Collins l e g e n d existed. It p i c t u r e d m e as a mysterious, active m e n a c e , elusive, unknown, u n a c c o u n t a b l e . . . . B r i n g m e into t h e spotlight o f a L o n d o n c o n f e r e n c e a n d quickly will be discovered t h e c o m m o n clay o f which I a m m a d e . T h e g l a m o u r o f t h e legendary figure will be g o n e , ( q u o t e d f r o m ibid., p. 2 4 8 ) D e Valera a n d Collins a r e referring n o t to any factual reasons c o n c e r n i n g their respective abilities, o r the d a n g e r s and intricacies o f the n e g o t i a t i n g p r o c e s s , but, r a t h e r , to t h e d a m a g e t h e fact o f participating in t h e negotiations m i g h t d o to their p r o p e r l y mythical symbolic status: De V a l e r a fears the loss o f his status as t h e symbol o f the R e p u b l i c , which m u s t n o t be tarnished by any m u n d a n e business o f dirty negotiations involving necessary c o m p r o m i s e s ; while Collins fears t h e loss o f his status as t h e invisible Agent, w h o s e spectral o m n i p o t e n c e dwindles o n c e h e is b r o u g h t into daylight a n d shown to be just a n o t h e r o r d i n a r y guy. W h a t we e n c o u n t e r h e r e , o f c o u r s e , is - in L a c a n e s e - t h e opposition between S, a n d objel pelit a, between the symbolic Master sustained by the c h a r i s m a o f his public insignia a n d its spectral d o u b l e , the mysterious object which, o n the c o n t r a r y , e x e r t s its p o w e r only as half-seen, never fully present in daylight. 8. F o r a c o n c i s e description o f these shifts, see Michel L a p e y r e , Au-deUi du complexe d'CEdipe, Paris: A n t h r o p o s - E c o n o m i c a 1 9 9 7 . 9. T h e title o f C h a p t e r 9 o f J a c q u e s L a c a n , Le Seminaire, lime XVII: Leavers de la psychoanalyse, Paris: Editions du Seuil 1 9 9 1 . 10. F o r a m o r e detailed a c c o u n t o f this distinction, see C h a p t e r 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder, L o n d o n : V e r s o 1 9 9 6 . 11. F o r this reason, the way the obsessional hysteric a n d t h e pervert relate to rules is exactly o p p o s e d : the obsessional follows his rules in o r d e r to pacify t h e t r a u m a t i c i m p a c t o f the symbolic L a w / P r o h i b i t i o n , its u n b e a r a b l e u n c o n d i t i o n a l injunction - that is, for him, rules a r e t h e r e to normalize t h e t r a u m a t i c e x c e s s o f the Law (if you follow the c l e a r a n d explicit rules, you d o not have to worry about t h e a m b i g u o u s pressure o f y o u r c o n s c i e n c e the Catholic C h u r c h has always b e e n skilful in m a n i p u l a t i n g rules in this way: if you a r e b o t h e r e d by t h e sense of sin, t h e priest prescribes you a set o f p r o c e d u r e s - so many prayers, so m a n y g o o d deeds, and so on - which, o n c e you have a c c o m p l i s h e d t h e m , deliver you o f the guilt feeling); while the pervert establishes ( a n d follows) rules irr o r d e r to c o n c e a l the fact that t h e r e is n o underlying Law in his psychic universe, that is, his rules serve as a kind o f mate-law. 12. See J a c q u e s L a c a n , Le Seminaire, livre VIII: Le transferl, Paris: E d i t i o n s du Seuil 1 9 9 1 . 13. See J a c q u e s Derrida, Donner la mart, Paris: Galilee 1 9 9 5 . 14. A sign o f how even the C h u r c h is rrot resistant to this shift in t h e f u n d a m e n t a l attitude a r e t h e r e c e n t grass-roots pressures on the P o p e to elevate Mary to t h e status of c o r e d e m p t r i x : o n e e x p e c t s the P o p e to m a k e t h e Catholic C h u r c h viable for the post-paternal third m i l l e n n i u m by p r o c l a i m i n g a d o g m a which asserts that t h e only way for us, sinful mortals, to gain divine m e r c y is via o u r plea to Mary - Mary serves as o u r m e d i a t o r ; if we c o n v i n c e h e r , she will speak in o u r favour to Christ, h e r son. 15. H e g e l , o f c o u r s e , b r o u g h t this meta-physical s e a r c h to the point o f self-reference: for him, 'the suprasensible is appearance as appearance., that is, t h e O t h e r W o r l d b e n e a t h a p p e a r a n c e is precisely s o m e t h i n g which appears, it is the appearance that t h e r e is A n o t h e r W o r l d b e y o n d t h e p h e n o m e n a l sensible world. 16. See P a u l - L a u r e n t Assoun, La Voix el k Regard, vol. I, Paris: A n t h r o p o s - E c o n o m i c a 1 9 9 5 , pp. 6 4 ft. 17. T h a t is also t h e m e a s u r e o f t r u e love: even when I c a t c h m y p a r t n e r r e d - h a n d e d , in bed with a n o t h e r m a n ( o r w o m a n ) , I give p r e f e r e n c e to his ( o r h e r ) words - t h e verbal protestations o f i n n o c e n c e - over t h e h a r d , stupid fact perceived by my eyes. . . • 18. R i c h a r d Andrews a n d Paul S c h e l l e n b e r g e r , The Tomb of Cod, L o n d o n : W a r n e r Books 1 9 9 7 , p. 4 3 3 .

394

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

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 Continuum 1995.

Critical

Theory, New

York:

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 ? 2 8 . In La fin de {'interpretation

(available o n t h e I n t e r n e t ) , Jacques-Alain Miller tried t o

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

395

resolve this d e a d l o c k by situating t h e analyst at t h e level o f pre-symbolic jouis-sense, m e a n i n g ­ less gibber, s o m e t h i n g like t h e r h i z o m a t i c flow o f J o y c e ' s Finnegans Wake. T h i s r e f e r e n c e to J o y c e is significant in so far as J o y c e is t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f t h e reflexive artist: his works, specifically Finnegans Wake, a r e n o t simply e x t e r n a l t o their i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b u t take t h e i r possible interpretations into a c c o u n t in a d v a n c e , a n d e n t e r into d i a l o g u e with t h e m . Since t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r theoretical e x p l a n a t i o n o f a work o f art e n d e a v o u r s to ' f r a m e ' its object, o n e can say that this J o y c e i a n dialectics provides a n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f how the f r a m e is always included in - is a part o f - t h e f r a m e d c o n t e n t : the t h e o r y a b o u t t h e work is c o m p r i s e d in t h e work; t h e w o r k is a kind of pre-emptive strike at possible t h e o r i e s a b o u t itself. So, instead o f the S o f interpretation ( t h e c h a i n o f K n o w l e d g e ) adding itself to t h e S, o f the i n t e r p r e t e d signifier, elucidating its m e a n i n g , we have in Finnegans Wake a gigantic, p o l y m o r p h o u s S, which n o t only resists being s u b o r d i n a t e d to the interpretive S , but in a way swallows it (its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ) in a d v a n c e into its own m a d d a n c e o f jouis-sense. . . . Is this really, however, t h e only way out? D o e s not this solution m e r e l y g o f r o m bad to worse, r e p l a c i n g t h e delirium o f interpretation with t h e i m m e r s i o n in t h e n i g h t m a r e o f t h e pre-symbolic/pre-discursive Thing? 2

2

2 9 . H e r e 1 draw on extensive discussions with R e n a t a Salerl, to w h o m I also owe a lot o f t h e ideas e x p r e s s e d in this c h a p t e r ; see R e n a t a Salecl, (Per)Versions of Love and Hale, L o n d o n : Verso 1 9 9 8 . 3 0 . In t h e 1 9 6 0 s and 1 9 7 0 s , it was possible to buy soft-porn p o s t c a r d s with a girl clad in a bikini o r wearing a p r o p e r dress; w h e n o n e m o v e d the p o s t c a r d a little bit o r l o o k e d at it from a slightly different perspective, however, the dress magically d i s a p p e a r e d , a n d o n e was able to see the girl's naked body - is t h e r e n o t s o m e t h i n g similar a b o u t the i m a g e o f Bill Gates, whose benevolent features, viewed from a slightly different perspective, magirallv a c q u i r e a sinister a n d t h r e a t e n i n g d i m e n s i o n ? 3 1 . This t e n d e n c y was already discernible in Bryan Singer's e x c e l l e n t film The Usual Suspects ( 1 9 9 5 ) , in which t h e invisible-omnipotent Master-Criminal turns o u t to be n o n e o t h e r than the clumsy, frightened Kevin S p a c e y c h a r a c t e r . 3 2 . See Slavoj Zizek, "T H e a r Y o u with My Eyes"; o r , T h e Invisible Master', in daze and Voice as Love Objects, D u r h a m , NC: Duke University Press 1 9 9 6 . 3 3 . Aclorno pointed o u t how t h e very e m e r g e n c e o f psychology as 'science', with the individual's psyche as its 'object', is strictly correlative t o t h e p r e d o m i n a n c e o f i m p e r s o n a l relations in e c o n o m i c a n d political life. 3 4 . A m o n g the advocates o f risk society politics, it is p o p u l a r to point out, as a sign that we a r e moving into a new e r a 'beyond Left a n d Right', how n o n e o t h e r than G e o r g e Soros, the very e m b o d i m e n t o f financial speculation, c a m e to the insight that t h e u n r e s t r a i n e d rule o f t h e m a r k e t presents a d a n g e r g r e a t e r t h a n C o m m u n i s t totalitarianism, a n d thus has t o be c o n s t r a i n e d t h r o u g h s o m e sociopolitical m e a s u r e s - however, is this insight really e n o u g h ? Should we not r a t h e r , instead o f c e l e b r a t i n g this fact, ask ourselves if this d o e s n o t prove the contrary: namely, that the new politics 'beyond Left a n d Right' does n o t really pose a t h r e a t to t h e reign o f Capital? 3 5 . T h e answer to the question 'Why d o we privilege t h e e c o n o m i c level o f the logic o f Capital o v e r other s p h e r e s o f socio-symbolic life (political processes, cultural p r o d u c t i o n , e t h n i c tensions . . .)? Is this privileging n o t essentialist in that it neglects the radical pluralitv o f social life, the fact that its multiple levels c a n n o t be c o n c e i v e d as d e p e n d i n g o n t h e crucial role o f o n e o f the agencies?' is t h e r e f o r e c l e a r : o f c o u r s e we a r e dealing today with the proliferation o f multiple f o r m s o f politicization ( n o t only the s t a n d a r d fight for d e m o c r a c y a n d social justice, birt also all the new f o r m s o f feminist, h o m o s e x u a l , e c o l o g i c a l , ethrric minority, etc., political a g e n t s ) ; however, the very s p a c e for this proliferation o f multiplicity is sustained by t h e r e c e n t stage in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f capitalism, that is, by its post-nationstate globalization and reflexive colonization o f t h e last vestiges o f 'privacy' a n d substantial i m m e d i a c y . C o n t e m p o r a r y feminism, for e x a m p l e , is strictly correlative to t h e fact that, in

396

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

r e c e n t decades, family a n d sexual life itself has b e c o m e 'colonized' by m a r k e t logic, a n d is thus e x p e r i e n c e d as s o m e t h i n g t h a t b e l o n g s t o t h e s p h e r e o f free c h o i c e s . 3 6 . Retroactively, o n e thus becomes aware of how deeply t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f so-called 'dissidence' was e m b e d d e d in t h e socialist ideological framework; of t h e e x t e n t t o which 'dissidence', in its very Utopian 'moralism' ( p r e a c h i n g social solidarity, ethical responsibility, e t c . ) , provided t h e disavowed ethical c o r e o f socialism: p e r h a p s o n e day historians will n o t e t h a t - in t h e s a m e sense in which H e g e l c l a i m e d t h a t t h e t r u e spiritual result o f t h e P e l o p o n n e s i a n W a r , its spiritual E n d , is T h u c y d i d e s ' b o o k a b o u t it - 'dissidence' was t h e t r u e spiritual result o f actually existing S o c i a l i s m . . . . 3 7 . S e e Slavoj Zrzek, ' I n t r o d u c t i o n ' , in Mapping Ideology, L o n d o n : Verso 1 9 9 5 . 3 8 . Karl M a r x , ' P r e f a c e t o A Critique, of Political Economy , in Selected Writings, O x f o r d : O x f o r d University Press 1 9 7 7 , p. 3 8 9 . 3 9 . A m o n g today's Marxists, it is F r e d r i c J a m e s o n w h o has m o s t consistently e m p h a s i z e d this aspect. 4 0 . A t least c o n c e r n i n g cultural studies, I speak h e r e n o t f r o m a c o n d e s c e n d i n g position o f a critic assuming t h e safe position o f a n e x t e r n a l observer, b u t as s o m e o n e who h a s p a r t i c i p a t e d in cultural studies - I, as it were, 'include myself o u t ' . . . . 4 1 . A c c o r d i n g to J e a n - C l a u d e Milner ( s e e Le, salaire, de Videal, Paris: Seuil 1 9 9 7 ) , t h e s a m e reflexivity d e t e r m i n e s t h e status o f today's new ruling class, t h e 'salaried bourgeoisie': t h e c r i t e r i o n o f t h e ruling class is n o l o n g e r primarily p r o p e r t y , b u t m o r e a n d m o r e t h e fact o f b e l o n g i n g to t h e circle o f those w h o a r e a c k n o w l e d g e d as 'experts' ( m a n a g e r s , state administrators, lawyers, a c a d e m i c s , journalists, d o c t o r s , artists . . .) a n d a r e for this r e a s o n paid m o r e than average wage-earners. Milner's point is that, c o n t r a r y t o misleading a p p e a r ­ a n c e s (sustained by t h e vast network o f university diplomas, e t c . ) , this b e l o n g i n g t o t h e circle o f e x p e r t s is ultimately n o t g r o u n d e d in a n y actual' qualifications, but is t h e result o f t h e sociopolitical struggle in t h e c o u r s e o f which s o m e professional strata gain entry into t h e privileged salaried bourgeoisie': we a r e dealing h e r e with t h e closed circle o f self-reference, that is, you a r e paid m o r e if y o u g e n e r a t e t h e impression that you should be paid m o r e ( a T V news p r e s e n t e r is paid m u c h m o r e than a t o p scientist whose inventions c a n c h a n g e t h e whole industrial l a n d s c a p e ) . In short, what M a r x e v o k e d as a p a r a d o x i c a l e x c e p t i o n ( t h e s t r a n g e case in which p r i c e itself d e t e r m i n e s value instead o f merely expressing it, like t h e o p e r a singer who is n o t paid s o highly b e c a u s e his singing has such a g r e a t value, b u t is p e r c e i v e d as m o r e valuable b e c a u s e h e is s o highly p a i d ) is t h e rule today. 4 2 . It is interesting t o n o t e how h e r e theorists o f t h e s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y follow H a b e r m a s , w h o also tends t o dismiss p h e n o m e n a like Fascism o r e c o n o m i c alienation n o t as results o f t h e i n h e r e n t trends o f E n l i g h t e n m e n t , b u t as proofs t h a t E n l i g h t e n m e n t is still an 'unfinished p r o j e c t ' - a strategy s o m e w h a t similar t o that o f d e f u n c t Socialist regimes, which put all t h e b l a m e for t h e p r e s e n t woes o n t h 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 o r feudal) p a s t ' . . . . 4 3 . T o put it a n o t h e r way: t h e t h e o r y o f s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y obliterates t h e d o u b l e impossibility a n d / o r a n t a g o n i s t i c split: o n t h e o n e h a n d , t h e antagonistic complicity between progressive reflexivization a n d violent r e t u r n s o f substantial identity that c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e body politic; o n t h e o t h e r , t h e a n t a g o n i s t i c complicity between reflexive f r e e d o m a n d t h e 'irrational' n e e d f o r subjection that c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e ' p o s t m o d e r n ' subject. 4 4 . See R o b e r t H u g h e s , Culture of Complaint, O x f o r d : O x f o r d University Press 1 9 9 3 . 4 5 . T h e shift from traditional Left t o ' p o s t m o d e r n ' Left is as a rule d e s c r i b e d by the m o t t o 'from redistribution to r e c o g n i t i o n ' : t h e traditional S o c i a l - D e m o c r a t i c Left a i m e d at t h e redistribution o f wealth a n d social p o w e r o n b e h a l f o f t h e exploited-powerlessunderprivileged; while today's ' p o s t m o d e r n ' Left puts in t h e f o r e g r o u n d t h e multiculturalist fight for t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r ( e t h n i c , lifestyle, sexual o r i e n t a t i o n , religious . . . ) g r o u p identity. W h a t , however, if they b o t h p a r t i c i p a t e in t h e s a m e logic o f ressentiment, i n d i c a t e d / c o n c e a l e d by t h e c o m m o n prefix 're-'? W h a t if they b o t h victimize t h e underprivi­ l e g e d / e x c l u d e d , e n d e a v o u r i n g t o culpabilize t h e r u l i n g / w e a l t h y a n d d e m a n d i n g restitution from t h e m ? Consequently, what if a c e r t a i n d o s e o f old-fashioned Marxist criticism is

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

397

a p p r o p r i a t e h e r e : what if o u r focus should c h a n g e f r o m redistribution t o t h e very m o d e o f p r o d u c t i o n which causes 'inequitable' distribution a n d r e c o g n i t i o n ? 4 6 . T h e m a s o c h i s t i c self-inflicted w o u n d thus serves a different p u r p o s e in hysteria a n d in perversion: in hysteria t h e aim is to disavow castration (I w o u n d myself in o r d e r to c o n c e a l t h e fact that t h e w o u n d o f castration is already there); while in p e r v e r s i o n I wound myself in o r d e r t o disavow the. failure/lack of castration (i.e. I d o it t o i m p o s e t h e s e m b l a n c e o f a L a w ) . 4 7 . E x e m p l a r y h e r e is Oliver S t o n e ' s JFK. S t o n e is t h e f o r e m o s t meta-nalionalist in Hollywood today; I use the t e r m 'meta-nationalism' in parallel with Balibar's ' m e t a - r a c i s m ' ( t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y p a r a d o x o f racism f o r m u l a t e d in t e r m s o f its very opposite, o f t h e fear o f racist outbursts: ' o n e should keep e t h n i c g r o u p s a p a r t in o r d e r to prevent racist vio­ l e n c e . . . ' ) : S t o n e s e e m s t o u n d e r m i n e g r e a t A m e r i c a n ideologico-political myths, but h e d o e s it in a 'patriotic' way, so t h a t on a d e e p e r level his very subversion reasserts A m e r i c a n patriotism as an ideological attitude. 4 8 . T h e o u t s t a n d i n g e x a m p l e o f a left-liberal c o n s p i r a c y m o v i e is Barracuda ( 1 9 7 8 ) , with its i n g e n i o u s additional 'turn o f t h e screw' on t h e s t a n d a r d n a t u r a l disaster formula: why d o sharks a n d o t h e r fish suddenly start to a t t a c k swimmers in an idyllic A m e r i c a n town resort? It turns out t h a t the w h o l e city was an illegal e x p e r i m e n t a l site f o r a mysterious g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c y injecting t h e water supply with an u n t e s t e d d r u g that raises t h e aggression level ( t h e goal o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t is t o develop m e a n s o f raising t h e c o m b a t i v e n e s s o f the A m e r i c a n p o p u l a t i o n after t h e demoralizing influence o f t h e flower-power 1 9 6 0 s ) , a n d t h e fishes' aggressivity was c a u s e d by t h e water d u m p e d in t h e sea. X Files goes even a step f u r t h e r in this d i r e c t i o n by inverting t h e s t a n d a r d ideological o p e r a t i o n o f e x c h a n g i n g all o u r social a n d psychic fears ( o f f o r e i g n e r s , o f big business, o f o t h e r r a c e s , o f t h e f o r c e o f raw n a t u r e . . .) for t h e attacking animal (shark, ants, birds . . .) o r for t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l m o n s t e r who c o m e s t o e m b o d y all o f t h e m : in X Files, it is t h e State C o n s p i r a c y - the d a r k O t h e r P o w e r b e h i n d t h e public p o w e r - which is p r e s e n t e d as a kind o f g e n e r a l equivalent hidden b e h i n d t h e multitude o f ' s u p e r n a t u r a l ' threats (werewolves, extraterrestrials . . . ) , that is, t h e series o f s u p e r n a t u r a l h o r r o r s is e x c h a n g e d for the alienated Social T h i n g . 4 9 . F o r that r e a s o n , anxiety is clinically n o t a s y m p t o m , bvit a r e a c t i o n that o c c u r s w h e n t h e subject's symptom - the f o r m a t i o n that allowed him o r h e r to maintain a p r o p e r distance towards the t r a u m a t i c object-Thing - dissolves, ceases to function: at that m o m e n t , w h e n the subject is deprived o f the buffer-role o f his s y m p t o m a n d is thus directly e x p o s e d to the T h i n g , anxiety e m e r g e s to signal this o v e r p r o x i m i t y o f t h e T h i n g . 5 0 . Gilles Deleuze, Coldness and Cruelty, New York: Z o n e 1 9 9 1 , p p . 8 2 - 3 . 5 1 . A c c o r d i n g to t h e s t a n d a r d narrative o f m o d e r n i t y , w h a t distinguishes it from even t h e most universal versions o f p r e m o d e r n Law (Christianity, J u d a i s m , e t c . ) is that the individual is supposed to e n t e r t a i n a reflected relationship towards ethical n o r m s . N o r m s a r e not t h e r e simply to be a c c e p t e d ; the subject has t o m e a s u r e n o t only his acts against t h e m , but also t h e a d e q u a c y o f these n o r m s themselves, that is, h o w they fit t h e h i g h e r m e t a r u l e that legitimizes their use: a r e t h e n o r m s themselves truly universal? D o they treat all m e n - a n d w o m e n equally a n d with dignity? D o they allow free e x p r e s s i o n o f their i n n e r m o s t aspirations.', a n d so forth. T h i s s t a n d a r d narrative gives us a subject w h o is able to e n t e r t a i n a free reflexive relationship towards every n o r m he d e c i d e s to follow - every n o r m has to pass the j u d g e m e n t o f his a u t o n o m o u s reason. W h a t H a b e n n a s passes o v e r in silence, however, is the obverse o f this reflexive distance towards ethical n o r m s e x p r e s s e d by the above q u o t e f r o m Deleuze: since, a p r o p o s o f any n o r m I follow, I c a n n e v e r be s u r e that it is actually t h e right n o r m to follow, the subject is c a u g h t in a difficult situation o f knowing that t h e r e a r e n o r m s to follow, without any e x t e r n a l g u a r a n t e e as to what these n o r m s a r e . . . . T h e r e is n o m o d e r n reflexive f r e e d o m from the i m m e d i a t e submission t o universal n o r m s without this situation o f a p r i o n guilt. 5 2 . J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Four Fundamental 1 9 7 7 , p. 2 7 6 .

Concepts of Psycho-Analysis,

New York: N o r t o n

398

THE

TICKLISH

SUBJECT

5 3 . See Darian L e a d e r , Promises Lovers Make When It Gets Late, L o n d o n : F a b e r & F a b e r 1997. 5 4 . Was it n o t St Paul who e m p h a s i z e d this difference in R o m a n s 2: 2 6 - 9 ? . . . if those who a r e u n c i r c u m c i s e d keep t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e law, will n o t t h e i r u n c i r c u m c i s i o n be r e g a r d e d as c i r c u m c i s i o n ? . . . F o r a person is n o t a J e w who is o n e outwardly, n o r is true c i r c u m c i s i o n s o m e t h i n g e x t e r n a l a n d physical. R a t h e r , a p e r s o n is a J e w who is o n e inwardly, a n d real c i r c u m c i s i o n is a m a t t e r o f t h e h e a r t - it is spiritual a n d not literal. 5 5 . F o r a m o r e detailed d e s c r i p t i o n o f this d o u b l e m o v e m e n t o f t h e 'sacrifice o f a sacrifice', see C h a p t e r 2 o f Slavoj Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder. 5 6 . H e r e I draw again on R e n a t a Salecl; see Salecl, (Per)Versions of Love and Hate. 5 7 . H e r e o n e should e m p h a s i z e t h e difference between the s a d o - m a s o p r a c t i c e s o f selfmutilation a n d t h e p r a c t i c e s o f t a t t o o i n g a n d o t h e r versions o f inscription o n t h e bodily surface: tattooing involves the relationship between the naked skin a n d its c o v e r i n g u p by clothes - that is to say, the p r o b l e m o f tattooing is how to transform t h e n a k e d skin itself into clothing, how to close t h e g a p between t h e two; so t h a t even while we a r e naked we a r e in a way already dressed; on the o t h e r h a n d , the sado-maso p r a c t i c e o f self-mutilation cuts into the surface o f the skin, revealing t h e raw flesh b e n e a t h . W h a t is t h r e a t e n e d in b o t h cases is t h e notion o f the n a k e d body, o f t h e b a r e surface o f t h e skin: e i t h e r by d i r e c t symbolic inscriptions which c o v e r it up, o r by o p e n i n g u p access t o t h e 'raw flesh' b e n e a t h ; in short, what we get if we put the two p r a c t i c e s t o g e t h e r is a body which, when it is actually undressed, is no l o n g e r a naked body but a mass o f raw flesh. 5 8 . Against this b a c k g r o u n d , o n e c a n well u n d e r s t a n d why, in his ( u n p u b l i s h e d ) S e m i n a r o n Anxiety ( 1 9 6 2 / 6 3 ) , L a c a n emphasizes that the Jewish p r a c t i c e o f c i r c u m c i s i o n is definitely not a version of castration (as a vulgar a n d naive line o f association s e e m s to imply) but, r a t h e r , its e x a c t opposite: the effect o f c i r c u m c i s i o n is not that o f a t r a u m a t i c cut, but that o f pacification, t h a t is, c i r c u m c i s i o n enables t h e subject to find its a l l o c a t e d place in t h e symbolic o r d e r . 5 9 . Analysed by R e n a t a Salecl in (PerjVrrsums of Love and Hate. 6 0 . T h e triad o f p r e m o d e r n cut, t h e m o d e r n a b s e n c e o f cut, a n d t h e p o s t m o d e r n r e t u r n to the cut thus effectively forms a kind o f H e g e l i a n triad o f the ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' - n o t in t h e sense that in posnnoderniry we r e t u r n to t h e cut at an allegedly h i g h e r level, b u t in a m u c h m o r e precise sense: in p r e m o d e r n society t h e cut in the body p e r f o r m s t h e subject's inscription into t h e symbolic o r d e r ( t h e big O t h e r ) ; in m o d e r n society we have the big Other that is operative without the tut — that is, t h e subject inscribes itself into t h e big O t h e r without the m e d i a t i o n o f t h e bodily cut (as was already t h e case in Christianity, t h e c u t is internalizedspiritualized into an i n n e r g e s t u r e o f r e n u n c i a t i o n ) ; in p o s t m o d e r n society, on the c o n t r a r y , we have the rut, but without the big Other. It is thus only in p o s t m o d e r n society that the loss o f the big O t h e r ( t h e substantial symbolic o r d e r ) is fully c o n s u m m a t e d : in it, we r e t u r n to t h e feature that c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e first p h a s e ( t h e r e is again a c u t in t h e b o d y ) , but this c u t now stands for the e x a c t opposite o f t h e first p h a s e - that is to say, it signals n o t the inscription into t h e big O t h e r , but its radical n o n e x i s t e n c e . 6 1 . See Alenka Z u p a n c i c , ' T h e Subject o f t h e Law', in SIC, 2, ed. Slavoj Zizek, D u r h a m , NC: Duke University Press 1 9 9 8 . 6 2 . F o r this r e a s o n , L a c a n is to be strictly o p p o s e d to the recently fashionable 'postsecular' t r e n d o f giving theology a d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t spin, reasserting t h e Divine as t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e u n f a t h o m a b l e O t h e r n e s s , as the ' u n d e c o n s t r u c t i b l e c o n d i t i o n o f deconstruction'. 6 3 . See the e n d o f C h a p t e r 3 above. 6 4 . For a detailed r e a d i n g o f B r e c h t ' s The Measure Taken, see C h a p t e r 5 o f Slavoj Zizek, Enjoy Your Symptom!, New York: R o u t l e d g e 1 9 9 3 .

WHITHER

OEDIPUS?

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 York: Grove Press 1 9 6 5 , p. 9 7 .

399 Wife and Other Short Plays, New

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

Absolute Power (h\m) 3 2 8 Adorno, Theodor break with H a b e r m a s 347 Dialectic of Enlightenment (with H o r k h e i m e r ) 10, 4 6 , 3 5 9 Negative Dialectics 8 9 Philosophy of the New Music 2 5 0 sphere o f Kulturindustrie 3 5 8 violin versus piano 1 0 1 - 2 Althusser, Louis 3, 1 5 8 - 9 ideological interpellation 1 4 1 , 145, 258, 260 i n f l u e n c e on others 1 2 7 - 8 , 2 3 2 overdetermination 102 Antigone ( S o p h o c l e s ) 2 6 3 - 4 Arendt, H a n n a h 191 Aristotle DeAnima 2 4 phronesis 3 3 3 Assoun, Paul-Laurent 3 2 4 S t Augustine 3 8 3

B a d i n t e r , R o b e r t 134 B a d i o u , Alain A m e r i c a a n d R o m a n E m p i r e 211 anti-communitarian c o m m u n i t a r i a n 172 Being and Truth-Event 1 2 8 - 3 5 , 237-8 beyond the G o o d 161 Christianity a n d psychoanalysis 145-51

differences with L a c a n 3, 1 5 9 - 6 4 fidelity to the Truth-Event 164, 166-7 ideology a n d the T r u t h - E v e n t 1 4 1 - 5 i n f l u e n c e o f Althusser 1 2 8 is the gap the subject? 1 5 8 - 9 Master/Hysteric/University 1 6 4 - 5 return to the S u b s t a n c e 2 0 9 St Paul and psychoanalysis 1 5 3 - 4 subjectivity 1 8 2 - 4 transformation o f Truth-Event into universal 1 5 7 - 8 undecidability o f the Event 135-41 Balibar, E t i e n n e 3, 2 0 1 a n d Althusser 127 anti-Habermasian H a b e r m a s i a n 172-3 civility 173 egaliberte 1 8 8 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 3 , 2 3 2 - 3 excessive v i o l e n c e 2 0 2 t h r e e levels o f universality 2 1 3 B a r t o k , B e l a 102 B e c k , Ulrich 4, 3 3 7 , 3 3 8 B e e t h o v e n , Ludwig van 1 0 2 being and Time ( H e i d e g g e r ) 10, 21 closure/openness 2 2 - 4 dualities 1 5 - 1 8 H u s s e d ' s criticism 6 3 - 4 B e n j a m i n , Walter revolution as repetition 2 0 revolutionary gaze 8 9

402

INDEX

B e n j a m i n , Walter (cont.) ' T h e s e s on the Philosophy o f History' 137 Blair, T o n y 198 B l i x e n , Karen 2 8 7 Blood Simple (film) 111 Blue Velvet (film) 2 9 9 B o s c h , H i e r o n y m u s 3 5 , 4 9 - 5 0 , 52 Bossuet, J a c q u e s B e n i g n e 118 B o u r d i e u , Pierre 3 5 5 B r a h a m s , J o h a n n e s 102 Brassed Off ( h i m ) 3 0 2 , 3 5 1 - 2 Brazil (film) 155 B r e c h t , Bertolt 2 3 6 The Measure Taken 3 7 8 - 8 0 Brown, Wendy States of Injurs 7 1 - 2 Bruno, Giordano 3 7 6 B u c h a n a n , Patrick 2 1 0 , 2 1 5 , 2 2 1 , 3 5 5 , 381 Butler, J u d i t h 3 on decision 19 H e g e l and Foucault 2 5 3 m e l a n c h o l y m e c h a n i s m and homosexuality 2 6 9 - 7 3 , 2 7 9 passionate a t t a c h m e n t s 2 6 5 - 9 , 2 8 2 , 288-9 q u e e r struggle 2 2 5 resistance 2 6 0 - 6 4 sexual difference 2 7 4 - 5 subjectivity and sexuality 2 5 7 - 9

Cabaret (film) 139 Capital ( M a r x ) negation o f negation 7 2 - 3 Carpenter, J o h n They Live 5 3 - 4 Cassirer, Ernst 27 Castoriadis, Cornelius Kant, H e i d e g g e r a n d the abyss o f imagination 2 3 - 4 The Celestine Prophecy (Redfield) 3 8 4 - 5 Class Struggles in France ( M a r x ) 2 1 7

Claudel, Paul 3 2 0 The Hostage 3 8 6 - 7 Clinton, Bill 1 9 9 , 3 2 9 as Satan 3 8 0 - 8 1 C o e n brothers Blood Simple 111 Coldness and Cruelty ( D e l e u z e ) 3 6 4 - 5 Collins, Michael 3 1 6 - 1 7 Critique of Judgement ( K a n t ) 4 0 schematizes R e a s o n 6 1 - 2 Critique of Practical Reason ( K a n t ) 2 5 Critique of Pure Reason ( K a n t ) 31 anti-metaphysical potential 4 6 - 5 0 The Crying Game (film) 2 7 1

Daly, Glyn 'Ideology and its P a r a d o x e s ' 3 6 4 DeAnima (Aristotle) 2 4 D e Gaulle, Charles 2 2 6 de M a n , Paul Kant's materialism 6 4 de V a l c r a , E a m o n 3 1 6 - 1 7 D e l e u z e , Gilles 7 3 , 2 5 0 Coldness and Cruelty 3 6 4 - 5 deterritorialization 2 0 9 masochism 2 8 0 D e n g X i a o p i n g 199 Derrida, J a c q u e s 1 5 8 - 9 A b r a h a m ' s sacrifice 3 2 1 - 2 Descartes's withdrawal-into-self 3 4 on H e i d e g g e r 9 - 1 0 ontology versus heauntology 2 3 8 p u r e notion o f gift 5 6 On the Spirit 9 Descartes, R e n e Reply to Six Objections 116 the spectre o f the Cartesian subject 1-2 universality o f cogito 100 voluntarism 3 1 9 withdrawal-into-self 3 4 Dialectic of Enlightenment ( A d o r n o and H o r k h e i m e r ) 10, 4 6 , 3 5 9

INDEX

Diana, Princess o f Wales 3 2 8 D i o g e n e s the Cynic 3 2 4 Discipline and Punish ( F o u c a u l t ) 2 5 2 Dostoevsky, Fyodor 1 5 0 Doyle, A r t h u r C o n a n 5 6 Dune (film) 5 6 , 7 7 - 8 , 2 9 9 Duns Scotus, J o h a n n e s 3 1 8

Eastwood, Clint 2 6 6 The Ego and the Id ( F r e u d ) 2 8 9 Eighteenth Brumaire ( M a r x ) creation o f history 8 8 Eisenstein, Sergei 3 3 The Elephant Man (film) 5 7 Eraserhead (film) 5 3

F i c h t e , J o h a n n Gottlieb subjectivity/zlnitos 4 4 - 5 Fields, W.C. 7 4 The Forbidden Planet (film) 3 0 1 Fosse, B o b Cabaret 139 Foucault, M i c h e l disciplinary p r o c e d u r e 371 Discipline and Punish 2 5 2 The History of Madness 2 5 7 The History of Sexuality 2 5 2 - 4 point o f r e f e r e n c e 1 7 4 potential o f perversions 2 4 7 resistance to power 2 6 2 sexuality and power 2 5 1 - 4 strategies without subject 3 4 0 use o f pleasures 3 6 6 Frank, A n n e 3 2 3 Freud, Sigmund analysis o f Sr.hreber 3 5 death drive 3 6 , 6 5 - 6 , 1 6 3 , 2 9 4 Destiny/drive 3 0 3 dream-thoughts and u n c o n s c i o u s desires 185 The Ego and the Id 2 8 9 first and s e c o n d nature 82 helplessness o f the infant 2 8 8

403 hysteria 2 4 9

monstrous otherness 5 2 - 3 Moses and Monotheism 1 6 2 , 3 1 7 - 1 8 m o u r n i n g and m e l a n c h o l y 2 6 9 , 2 7 0 m u r d e r o f the primordial father 3 6 3 Oedipus complex 3 1 3 - 1 8 pleasure principle 3 6 6 psychic reality 2 7 4 sexualization 2 8 2 - 3 ' t h r e e wishes' fairy tales 3 0 2 Totem and Taboo 162, 3 1 5 - 1 7 Unconscious 2 4 7 - 8 From Atlantis to the Sphinx (Wilson) 70-71 The Full Monty (film) 3 5 1 - 2 Gates, Bill 3 5 6 Little B r o t h e r / E v i l Genius icon 347-50 Giddens, A n t h o n y 3 - 4 , 3 3 8 Gilliam, T e r r y Brazil 155 Goebbels, Joseph 207 Goldwyn, S a m u e l 110 G o r b a c h e v , Mikhail 3 2 9 Gray, J o h n Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus 2 7 2 Greene, Graham The Potting Shed 1 4 2 - 3 Gulag Archipelago (Solzhenitsyn) 2 2 9 Gymnasialreden ( H e g e l ) 104

H a b e r m a s , J u r g e n 8 1 , 1 7 1 , 172 break with A d o r n o and H o r k h e i m e r 347 H e i d e g g e r ' s subjectivity 10 H a m m e t t , Dashiell The Maltese Falcon 2 0 5 - 6 Havel, Vaclav 2 0 5 H e g e l , G e o r g W. F. abstract universality 118 accepts Kant's acosmos 6 0 - 6 1

404

INDEX

H e g e l , G e o r g W . F. (cont.) c o n c r e t e universality 9 8 - 1 0 3 , 2 0 1 - 2 criticism o f Kant's B e y o n d 8 4 - 6 curtain over the i n n e r world 3 0 2 d e t e r m i n a t e negation 177 eight planets 3 2 4 epistemology versus ontology 5 5 - 6 evil 150 family 3 4 3 f r e e d o m as c o n c e i v e d necessity 4 3 - 4 Gymnasialreden 1 0 4 including the form in the c o n t e n t 113 Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion 106 Lectures on the Philosophy of the World 37 Logic 9 6 lord and b o n d s m a n 2 5 7 - 8 negation o f negation 7 2 - 7 night o f the world 2, 2 9 - 3 0 , 3 3 - 5 , 55 phallic m e t a p h o r 9 2 Phenomenology of Spirit 3 0 - 3 1 , 7 6 , 8 4 - 6 , 96 politics 2 3 3 - 4 , 2 3 8 - 9 power a n d resistance 2 5 5 q u a d r u p l e logic 7 9 - 8 2 r e c o m m e n d e d by L e n i n 149 relationships between logic a n d metaphysics 8 2 - 6 secondary identification 9 0 secrets o f the Egyptians 2 8 4 - 5 S e l f as S u b s t a n c e 2 3 1 sexuality 8 3 - 4 , 2 5 3 stubborn a t t a c h m e n t 1 0 3 - 8 subjectivity 7 8 , 1 0 3 substance a n d subject 7 6 , 7 9 , 8 6 - 9 0 Suprasensible's face 196 symbolic expression 371 System der Sittlichkeit 9 4 - 5 totalitarianism 192 universality-in-becoming 9 0 - 9 8

Hegemony and Socialist Strategy ( L a c l a u a n d Mouffe) 1 2 8 H e i d e g g e r , Martin 1 4 3 analysis o f s c h e m a t i s m 6 1 - 2 analytic o f Dasein 5 2 Being and Time 10, 1 5 - 1 8 being-towards-death 163 c l o s u r e / o p e n n e s s o f Being and Time 22-4 c o n t i n g e n c y o f o f world-experience 65-6 decision a n d c h o i c e 16, 1 8 - 2 0 e n g a g e m e n t with Fascism 1 1 - 2 1 An Introduction to Metaphysics 13, 4 8 Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics 2 2 - 8 , 29, 31, 46 the M o n s t r o u s 4 6 - 5 0 relation to p o s t m o d e r n t h o u g h t 9-11 subjectivity 1, 2 - 3 , 6 2 totalitarianism and subjectivity 10 H e l l m a n , Lillian 2 2 2 H e n r i c h , D i e t e r 10 History and Class Consciousness ( L u k a c s ) 137 The History of Madness ( F o u c a u l t ) 257 The History of Sexuality ( F o u c a u l t ) 252-4 H i t c h c o c k , Alfred Vertigo 2 8 6 , 3 0 0 Hitler, A d o l f 3 8 1 - 2 Hobbes, Thomas 114 Hoffman, Eva 3 4 0 Hoffmann, E.T.A. 51 H o r k h e i m e r , Max b r e a k with H a b e r m a s 3 4 7 c o n s e q u e n c e s o f family structure 3 4 4 Dialectic of Enlightenment (with A d o r n o ) 10, 4 6 , 3 5 9 s p h e r e o f Kulturindustrie 3 5 8 Hosle, Vittorio 8 2 , 8 6 - 7 The Hostage ( C l a u d e l ) 3 8 6 - 7

INDEX

Husserl, E d m u n d criticism o f Being and Time 6 3 - 4 I Love Lucy (television) 7 7 - 8 'Ideology a n d its P a r a d o x e s ' (Daly) 3 6 4 The Immortal Story (film) 2 8 7 An Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger) 13, 49 J a m e s o n , F r e d r i c 1 7 1 , 185 true Leftists 1 9 - 2 0 J e s u s Christ 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 modern reinterpretations 3 3 1 - 2 Truth-Event 1 3 0 , 142, 146 J o r d a n , Neil The Crying Game 2 7 1 J u n g , Carl G. 2 7 0 , 2 7 1 Kafka, Franz ' S i l e n c e o f the S i r e n s ' 3 0 5 The Trial 7 8 Kaganovich, L a z a r Moiseyevich 1 9 4 Kant, I m m a n u e l abstract universality 9 1 anti-cosmos 4 6 - 5 0 , 1 5 8 and B a d i o u 1 6 5 - 7 Critique of Judgement 4 0 Critique of Practical Reason 2 5 Critique of Pure Reason 31 evil 2 the F r e n c h Revolution 1 3 9 - 4 0 fundamental fantasy 5 9 - 6 1 H e g e l ' s criticism o f a B e y o n d 8 4 - 6 H e i d e g g e r a n d abyss o f imagination 22-8

405 n a t u r e a n d culture 3 6 - 7 non-traditional metaphysics 1 6 3 notion o f imagination 2 8 - 3 3 n o u m e n a l and p h e n o m e n a l 1 9 8 political Ideals to c o m e 2 3 8 - 9 the Real 2 7 6 - 7 schematizes R e a s o n 6 1 - 2 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 subjectivity 4 4 - 6

transcendental principle o f publicity 235 transcendental schematism 175 violence o f imagination 4 1 - 3 Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics (Heidegger) 2 2 - 8 , 29, 31, 46 Kennedy, J o h n F. 2 2 9 Kierkegaard, S 0 r e n 1 1 5 , 1 4 1 - 2 Christianity on side o f modernity 211-12 ' sickness unto death 2 9 2 - 3 two facets o f duty 321 K i n g j r , Martin L u t h e r 2 0 3 Kipling, Rudyard 2 3 6 Kris, Ernst 1 0 8 - 9

Lacan, Jacques aims and goals o f drives 8 2 alienation a n d identity 3 7 3 - 5 a n a m o r p h i c distortion and reality 78-9 authentic acts 3 7 5 - 6 the big O t h e r 87, 2 8 8 , 3 1 4 - 1 5 , 3 3 0 butterfly dreams 3 3 0

including the form in the c o n t e n t 113

death drive 1 6 0 - 6 1 , 2 9 1 , 2 9 3 - 4 , 3 9 0 desire and fantasy 2 9 5 - 9

materialism a n d idealism 3 7 - 8 metaphysical notion o f the world 64-6

differences with B a d i o u 3, 1 5 9 - 6 4 drives 1 6 0 - 6 1 , 2 8 3 - 4 , 2 8 7 - 8 , 2 9 1 , 2 9 3 - 4 , 304, 390 Evil 3 8 2

moral Law 4 0 - 4 1 , 4 4 , 4 6 , 2 7 9 - 8 0 , 364-6

fantasy and reality 51

406

INDEX

L a c a n , J a c q u e s (cont.) forms o f sexual practice 2 4 9 the four discourses 3 7 6 - 7 fundamental fantasy and symbolic identification 2 6 5 - 9 and H e g e l 7 6 Interpellation/subjectivization 258-9 ' L a derision de la s p h e r e ' 3 0 1 - 2 lamella 1 5 4 - 5 , 1 6 3 logic o f the signifier 81 masochism 2 8 1 - 2 Master-Signifier 114, 1 5 4 , 159 matrix o f the four discourses 191 monstrous o t h e r n e s s 5 2 - 3 nearness o f object-cause o f desire 363-4 negative m a g n i t u d e 1 0 7 - 8 no sexual relationship 2 8 5 - 6 normality o f a m o d e 35 Oedipus complex 2 8 9 - 9 0 , 3 1 3 - 1 4 paternal Law 3 6 7 perversion versus hysteria 2 4 7 - 8 the phallus 3 6 9 - 7 0 , 3 8 3 the Real 1 6 6 - 7 , 2 7 6 - 7 rebels against philosophy 2 5 0 - 5 1 rebirth 2 1 2 resistance and Butler's criticism 261-4 sexual difference 2 7 3 - 9 space between two deaths 146, 1 5 2 - 5 St Paul 149, 1 5 2 - 4 subject and subjectivization 1 5 9 - 6 0 subject's life-world 6 2 surplus-enjoyment 105, 106 symbolic castration 3 2 2 Truth-Event 162 use o f H e i d e g g e r 1 0 - 1 1 the voice 3 1 9 Laclau, E r n e s t o 1 0 0 - 1 0 1 , 1 5 8 , 1 7 2 - 3 gap between Universal and Particular 1 7 9 - 8 0 Hegelian d e t e r m i n a t e negation 177

Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (with Mouffe) 1 2 8 i n f l u e n c e o f Althusser 128 logic o f equivalence 178 Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory 128 radical d e m o c r a c y 1 7 4 readability 179 sexual difference 2 7 2 subjectivity 1 8 2 - 4 Lafargue, Paul Right to Laziness 2 5 2 Lang, Fritz Metropolis 3 4 8 L a p l a n c h e , Jean 2 8 2 , 2 8 4 , 2 8 7 Lasch, C h r i s t o p h e r 221 L e Pen, J e a n - M a r i e 2 1 0 , 2 1 5 , 3 5 5 , 381 L e a d e r , Darian 109, 2 1 7 , 3 6 7 - 8 Lectures on the Philosophy of the World ( H e g e l ) 37 Lefort, Claude 192 L e n i n , Vladimir Ilych a c c e p t i n g the c o n s e q u e n c e s 2 3 6 materialism and idealism 3 7 - 8 r e c o m m e n d s H e g e l 149 L e t o u r n e a u , Mary Kay 3 8 1 , 3 8 2 , 385-8 Levinson, Barry Sphere 301 Lewinsky, M o n i c a 3 2 9 Lincoln, Abraham 5 6 Llosa, Mario Vargas hooligans 2 0 5 Logic ( H e g e l ) 9 6 q u a d r u p l e logic. 7 9 - 8 2 Lost Highway (film) 2 9 9 - 3 0 0 Luini, B e r n a r d i n o Salome is brought the head of John the Baptist 3 0 5 Lukacs, G e o r g History and Class Consciousness 137 L u t h e r , Martin 157

407

INDEX

Lynch, David 5 5

The Mask (film) 3 8 9 - 9 0

Dune 5 6 , 7 7 - 8

Mauser ( M u l l e r ) 3 7 8 - 8 0

The Elephant Man 57 Eraser head 5 3 Lost Highway 2 9 9 - 3 0 0 pre-ontological p h e n o m e n a a n d reality 5 6 Twin Peaks 5 6 Lyotard, J e a n - F r a n c o i s 1 7 1 , 172

M a l e b r a n c h e , Nicolas 100, 3 2 5 Grace 1 1 6 - 1 9 Malinowski, Bronislaw 72, 2 5 2 The Maltese Falcon ( H a m n i e t t ) 2 0 5 - 6 Mao Zedong 219 Marx, Groucho 323 M a r x , Karl Capital as vampire 3 5 8 Class Struggles in France 2 1 7 dismissed by Russell 142 Eighteenth Brumaire and creation o f history 8 8 equivalence 231 the e x c e p t i o n is the rule 1 0 3 exploitation and h u m a n rights 179-82 Fascism as an o u t c o m e o f capitalism 12 fetishization 3 4 9 H e g e l as essential r e a d i n g 1 4 9 ideological abstraction 2 7 6 living contradiction o f t h e proletariat 225 masculine abstract universality 1 0 0 meta-politics 190, 1 9 1 - 2 negation o f negation 7 2 - 3 proletariat and working class 137 religious narrative 4 7 and the sociologists 2 7 7 - 8 superseding the market 3 3 9 from theory to revolution 174 universalism 2 2 6 workers as commodity 157

McCarthy, J o s e p h 3 2 3 M e a d , Margaret 7 2 , 2 5 2 The Measure Taken ( B r e c h t ) 3 7 8 - 8 0 Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus (Gray) 2 7 2 Metropolis (film) 3 4 8 Miller, Jacques-Alain sexual difference 2 9 4 - 5 Milosevic, S l o b o d a n 3 3 9 , 3 7 0 Molotov, Vyacheslav Mikhailovich 1 9 4 Moore, Dr Julie 386 Morrell, Lady O t t o l i n e 5 4 Moses and Monotheism ( F r e u d ) 1 6 2 , 317-18 Mouffe, Charual Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (with L a c l a u ) 128 Mozart, Wolfgang A m a d e u s 1 0 1 - 2 Muller, H e i n e r Mauser 3 7 8 - 8 0 Negative Dialectics ( A d o r n o ) 8 9 The Net (film) 3 6 4 Nietzsche, Friedrich criticism o f W a g n e r 10 On the Genealogy of Morals 107, 108 a n d St Paul 1 5 0 traditional, m o d e r n and p o s t m o d e r n readings 171 Will 109 " On the Genealogy of Morals ( N i e t z s c h e ) 107, 108 On the Spirit ( D e r r i d a ) 9 St Paul 3 3 1 Christianity and psychoanalysis 145-51 link between Law a n d desire 1 5 2 - 4 Truth-Event 1 4 2 , 1 4 3 universalism 2 2 6

408 Pharaoh (film) 2 6 7 Phenomenology of Spirit ( H e g e l ) 3 0 - 3 1 , 76, 8 4 - 6 phallic m e t a p h o r 9 2 - 3 stubborn attachment 103 totalitarianism 1 9 2 understanding 9 6 Philosophical Notebooks ( L e n i n ) 1 4 9 Philosophy of the New Music ( A d o r n o ) 250 P i c c o n e , Paul 2 2 1 Pippin, R o b e r t 2 9 0 Plato e t e r n a l Ideas 2 7 , 1 3 3 Supreme Good 48 Timaeus 5 4 P o e , E d g a r Allan 155 Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory (Laclau) 128 P o p p e r , Karl 9 9 IlPostino (film) 3 2 7 The Postman (film) 3 2 7 The Potting Shed ( G r e e n e ) 1 4 2 - 3

R a n c i e r e , J a c q u e s 3, 1 5 8 a n d Althusser 1 2 7 - 8 anti-Lyotardian Lyotardian 1 7 2 gap between d e m o c r a c y a n d economic exploitation 195 mesentente 2 3 4 police structure 2 3 0 , 2 3 2 - 3 , 2 3 5 , 237-8 politics 1 8 7 - 8 , 2 0 7 post-politics 2 0 1 , 2 4 8 rebellion o f proletarian masses 1 7 3 totalitarianism 192 universality 2 2 8 Rather, Dan 207 R a w l s . J o h n 171 Redfield, J a m e s The Celestine Prophecy 3 8 4 - 5 Regnault, F r a n c o i s 2 5 0 Reply to Six Objections ( D e s c a r t e s ) 1 1 6

INDEX

Reve, Karel van h e t 9 9 Rhinegold ( W a g n e r ) 3 4 8 Right to Laziness (Lafargue) 2 5 2 The River with No Bridge ( S u m i i ) 1 8 9 Rogozinski, J a c o b 3 7 , 4 0 , 4 3 , 4 8 b e y o n d the abyss 6 1 Russell, B e r t r a n d 1 4 2 declaration to Lady O t t o l i n e 5 4 Russell, Charles The Mask 3 8 9 - 9 0

Sade, Marquis de 3 5 9 S c h e l l i n g , F r i e d r i c h W.J. von 2 1 - 2 , 9 7 , 127 Divine E x i s t e n c e a n d G r o u n d 8 7 - 8 Ground o f Existence 55 night o f t h e S e l f 3 4 p u r e Willing 3 1 8 - 1 9 S c h m i t t , Carl 1 1 3 - 1 6 Schoenberg, Arnold 250 S c h r e b e r , Daniel Paul 1 1 6 S c h u m a n n , R o b e r t 102 Carnival 51 Schurmann, Reiner 9 ' S i l e n c e o f t h e S i r e n s ' (Kafka) 3 0 5 S k i n n e r , Q u e n t i n 181 Sleeping with the Enemy (film) 1 1 1 - 1 2 Solaris (film) 3 0 1 Solzhenitsyn, A l e x a n d e r Gulag trilogy 2 2 9 Sophocles Antigone 2 6 3 - 4 Sphere (film) 3 0 1 - 2 Stalin, J o s e p h 1 3 2 repression 2 2 7 show trials 3 2 0 - 2 1 terrors 3 7 8 totalitarianism 1 9 3 - 4 States of Injury ( B r o w n ) 7 1 - 2 Stravinksy, I g o r 2 5 0 Sumii, S u e The River with No Bridge 189 System der Sittlichkeit ( H e g e l ) 9 4 - 5

INDEX

Tarkovsky, Andrei

Vertigo (film) 2 8 6 - 7 , 3 0 0

Solaris 3 0 1 Taylor, Charles 8 7 - 8 , 171 Teresa, Mother 328 ' T h e s e s on the Philosophy o f History' ( B e n j a m i n ) 137 They Live (dim)

53-4

Timaeus (Plato) 5 4 Totem and Taboo ( F r e u d ) 162

W a g n e r , R i c h a r d 10, 2 9 1 - 2 Rhinegold 3 4 8 Watch on the Rhine (film) 2 2 2 - 3 Welles, O r s o n The Immortal Story 2 8 7 Wilcox, Fred

Twin Peaks (television) 5 6

The Forbidden Planet 3 0 1 Wilson, Colin From Atlantis to the Sphinx 7 0 - 7 1 Winfrey, O p r a h 3 8 6 , 3 8 8

Under Fire (film) 2 2 2

Yanez (film) 3 7 0

Oedipus complex 3 1 5 - 1 7 The Trial (Kafka) 7 8

409

A spectre is haunting W e s t e r n a c a d e m i a , t h e spectre of t h e Cartesian subject. The Ticklish Subject confronts Deconstructionists a n d Habermasians, cognitive scientists a n d Heideggerians, feminists and N e w A g e obscurantists by unearthing a subversive core t o this elusive s p e c t r e , and by finding in this core t h e indispensable philosophical point of reference for any genuinely emancipatory politics. 'Discussing Hegel and Lacan is like breathing for Slavoj.' J U D I T H BUTLER, U C BERKELEY 'His most focused a n d political book t o date.' ROBERT S . B O Y N T O N , UNQUA FRANCA 'Slavoj 2 i i e k ' s argument is subtle, witty and impassioned, and this book his f o u r t e e n t h in nine years - confirms his status a s one of t h e most innovative a n d exciting contemporary thinkers of t h e left.' TIMES LITERARY SUPPLEMENT '2i£ek is a one-person culture mulcher . . . a fast-forward philosopher of culture for t h e post-Cold War period.' VILLAGE VOICE LITERARY SUPPLEMENT

SLAVOJ JXJ.EK is Senior Researcher a t t h e Institute for Social Studies, Ljubljana, Slovenia. His other books f o r Verso include The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why the Christian Legacy is Worth Fighting For, The Sublime Object of Ideology, The Plague of Fantasies, The Indivisible Remainder, For They Know Not What They Do and M e t a s t a s e s of Enjoyment. H e is t h e editor of Mapping Ideology a n d Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lacan But Were Afraid to Ask Hitchcock.

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 Cover by Alan Hill Design

Photography by Richard Svtvarnes