(Wo Es War) Slavoj Zizek-The Ticklish Subject - The Absent Centre of Political Ontology-Verso (2000) PDF

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 of
L a c a n i a n psychoanalysis a n d Marxist tradition detonates a d y n a m i c free
d o m that e n a b l e s us to q u e s t i o n t h e very p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s o f t h e c i r c u i t o f
Capital.
In the same series:

S l a v o j Z i z e k , The Metastases of Enjoyment: Six Essays on Woman and Causality
J e r e m y B e n t h a m , The Panopticon Writings. 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
Matters
A l a i n G r o s r i c h a r d , The Sultan's Court: European Fantasies of the East. Trans
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 of Fantasies
R e n a t a S a l e c l , (Per)Versions of Love and. Hate
Forthcoming:
A l e n k a Z u p a n c i c , Ethics of the Real: Kant, Lacan
Alain Badiou, Ethics
Contents
I n t r o d u c t i o n : A S p e c t r e Is H a u n t i n g W e s t e r n A c a d e m i a . . . 1
Part I T h e 'Night o f the World' 7
1 The Deadlock of Transcendental Imagination, or, Martin Heidegger
as a Reader of Kant 9
H e i d e g g e r i a n P o l i t i c a l ( D i s ) E n g a g e m e n t - W h y D i d Being and
Time R e m a i n U n f i n i s h e d ? - T h e T r o u b l e w i t h T r a n s c e n d e n t a l
Imagination - T h e Passage through Madness - T h e Violence
o f I m a g i n a t i o n - T h e M o n s t r o u s - K a n t with David L y n c h -
Kant's Acosmism
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 T h e Split Universality 125
3 The Politics of Truth, or, Alain Badiou as a Reader of St Paul 127
T h e T r u t h - E v e n t . . . . . . . a n d Its U n d e c i d a b i l i t y - T r u t h and
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 F r o m S u b j e c t i o n to Subjective Destitution 245
5 Passionate (Dis)Attachments, or, Judith Butler as a Reader 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 in the Risk
S o c i e t y - I t ' s t h e PoliticalEconomy, 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 deconstructionist (for w h o m the Carte
s i a n s u b j e c t is a d i s c u r s i v e fiction, 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 o f the t h o u g h t o f B e i n g ( w h o stresses the
need to 'traverse' the horizon of modern subjectivity c u l m i n a t i n g in
current ravaging nihilism); the cognitive scientist (who endeavours to
prove empirically that there is n o unique scene o f the Self, j u s t a
pandemonium 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) and the feminist (who emphasizes that the
a l l e g e d l y s e x l e s s cogito 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 the Cartesian heritage? A n d which has not
hurled back the branding reproach 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 subject, whose

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 parties 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 self-
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 obverse,
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, 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 tradition
of German Idealism; post-Althusserian political philosophy; the 'decon-
structionist' shift f r o m S u b j e c t to the p r o b l e m a t i c o f multiple subject-
1
positions and subjectivizations. 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 chapter then deals with the vicissitudes o f the
fundamental 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 with Heidegger's endeavour to
traverse the horizon of modern Cartesian subjectivity. Again and again, the
inherent logic o f their philosophical 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' ( t h e d i a b o l i c a l Evil i n K a n t , t h e night o f the world' in
Hegel, etc.). And the problem with Heidegger 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 of
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 name
for the abyss o f f r e e d o m ; this failure also casts n e w light o n the old
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 confrontation,
the second chapter endeavours 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
I i \ l K U J L » U < - I H J . N 3
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 egaliberte,
R a n c i e r e ' s t h e o r y o f mesentente, 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 ' political
thought which, against the spectre of the (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. So the first
^ 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 with 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 embodied in the paternal
Law) 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,
4 THE TICKLISH 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 multi-
c u l t u r a l i s m . O n e o f the p h o t o s o f 1 9 9 7 w a s u n d o u b t e d l y t h a t o f m e m b e r s
o f s o m e i n d i g e n o u s tribe from B o r n e o carrying water in plastic bags to
p u t o u t g i g a n t i c fires w h i c h w e r e d e s t r o y i n g t h e i r h a b i t a t , t h e r i d i c u l o u s
i n a d e q u a c y o f their m o d e s t effort m a t c h e d by the h o r r o r o f s e e i n g their
e n t i r e life-world disappear. A c c o r d i n g to n e w s p a p e r r e p o r t s , t h e g i g a n t i c
cloud o f s m o k e covering the entire a r e a o f n o r t h e r n I n d o n e s i a , Malaysia
and the southern Philippines derailed nature i t s e l f , its n o r m a l cycle
( b e c a u s e o f the c o n t i n u o u s darkness, b e e s were u n a b l e to a c c o m p l i s h
their part in the biological r e p r o d u c t i o n o f p l a n t s ) . H e r e we have an
e x a m p l e o f the u n c o n d i t i o n a l R e a l o f global Capital p e r t u r b i n g t h e very
r e a l i t y o f n a t u r e - t h e r e f e r e n c e t o g l o b a l C a p i t a l is n e c e s s a r y h e r e , s i n c e
t h e fires w e r e n o t s i m p l y t h e r e s u l t o f t h e ' g r e e d ' o f l o c a l w o o d m e r c h a n t s
and farmers ( a n d o f c o r r u p t I n d o n e s i a n state officials allowing i t ) , b u t
also o f the fact that b e c a u s e o f the El N i n o effect, the extraordinary
d r o u g h t did n o t e n d in t h e rains w h i c h regularily q u e n c h s u c h fires, a n d
t h e E l N i n o e f f e c t is global.
T h i s c a t a s t r o p h e t h u s gives b o d y to t h e R e a l o f o u r t i m e : t h e t h r u s t o f
Capital which ruthlessly disregards and destroys particular life-worlds,
t h r e a t e n i n g t h e v e r y survival o f h u m a n i t y . W h a t , h o w e v e r , a r e t h e i m p l i
cations o f this c a t a s t r o p h e ? A r e we d e a l i n g m e r e l y with the logic of
Capital, or is t h i s l o g i c j u s t the predominant thrust o f the modern
productivist attitude o f technological d o m i n a t i o n over a n d exploitation o f
nature? O r furthermore, is t h i s v e r y t e c h n o l o g i c a l e x p l o i t a t i o n t h e u l t i
mate expression, the realization o f the deepest potential of modern
C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y itself? T h e a u t h o r ' s a n s w e r t o t h i s d i l e m m a is t h e
e m p h a t i c p l e a o f ' N o t guilty!' f o r t h e C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t .
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 5
of the argumentation, false a t t r i b u t i o n s a n d r e f e r e n c e s that display my

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 the awkwardness o f style
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 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 to
Heidegger's philosophy. H e i d e g g e r is t r e a t e d with due respect, 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 the
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 to gain a
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 (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 attempt at a politically 'progressive'
appropriation of Heidegger (like R e i n e r S c h u m a n n ' s 'anarchic' read
2 3
ing ) or propose a thorough r e j e c t i o n o f his t h o u g h t (like A d o r n o or
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 a simplified
image of Heidegger that does not live u p to his own 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
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 ontolog-

ical 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 Enlightenment.
Heideggerians, o f course, would retort that o n e c a n n o t simply oppose
d e m o c r a t i c s u b j e c t i v i t y to its ' t o t a l i t a r i a n ' e x c e s s , s i n c e t h e l a t t e r is t h e
' t r u t h ' o f t h e f o r m e r - t h a t is t o say, s i n c e p h e n o m e n a l i k e ' t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m '
a r e e f f e c t i v e l y g r o u n d e d i n m o d e r n s u b j e c t i v i t y . ( T h i s is h o w - to p u t it in
a s o m e w h a t s i m p l i f i e d way - H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f e x p l a i n s h i s b r i e f Nazi
e n g a g e m e n t : b y t h e Tact t h a t t h e p r o j e c t o f Being and Time was n o t y e t
wholly freed o f the t r a n s c e n d e n t a l approach.)
The same ambiguity also seems to determine Lacan's own (often
i n c o n s i s t e n t ) r e f e r e n c e to H e i d e g g e r , o s c i l l a t i n g b e t w e e n appropriation
o f s o m e k e y H e i d e g g e r t e r m s as p r o v i d i n g t h e s o u g h t - a f t e r f o u n d a t i o n for
psychoanalysis, a n d a series o f dismissive passing r e m a r k s in his last years
(like the o n e qualifying his e a r l i e r r e f e r e n c e s to H e i d e g g e r as purely
external and didactic). Against the b a c k g r o u n d o f this i m b r o g l i o , our
t h e s i s will b e t h a t L a c a n s u c c e e d s w h e r e H a b e r m a s a n d o t h e r 'defenders
o f t h e s u b j e c t ' , i n c l u d i n g D i e t e r H e n r i c h , fail: t h e L a c a n i a n (re)reading
o f t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f s u b j e c t i v i t y i n G e r m a n I d e a l i s m e n a b l e s us n o t o n l y
t o d e l i n e a t e c o n t o u r s o f a n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y t h a t d o e s n o t fit t h e f r a m e
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 11
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 'totalitarian'
excess o f subjectivity). Nietzsche possessed an unerring 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 the threat o f
modern 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 on
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 and global
in its control of natural processes and, human resources. . . . 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
t h e s t a t e o f o u r n a t u r a l s u r r o u n d i n g s is t h u s d e v a l u e d as r e l y i n g o n the
very s o u r c e o f t h e t r o u b l e .
F o r H e i d e g g e r , t h e t r u e p r o b l e m is n o t e c o l o g i c a l c r i s i s i n its o n t i c
dimension, including a possible global catastrophe ( h o l e in the ozone
layer, m e l t i n g o f t h e ice c a p s , e t c . ) , b u t t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l m o d e o f r e l a t i n g
t o e n t i t i e s a r o u n d u s - t h i s t r u e c r i s i s will c o n f r o n t u s e v e n m o r e r a d i c a l l y
i f t h e e x p e c t e d c a t a s t r o p h e d o e s not o c c u r ; t h a t is, i f h u m a n k i n d does
s u c c e e d in technologically ' m a s t e r i n g ' the critical situation. . . . F o r that
reason, H e i d e g g e r also d e n i e s p h i l o s o p h i c a l relevance to the standard
liberal problematic o f the tension between ' o p e n ' a n d 'closed' societies,
b e t w e e n t h e ' n o r m a l ' f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e d e m o c r a t i c capitalist system, with
its r e s p e c t f o r h u m a n r i g h t s a n d f r e e d o m s , a n d its ( F a s c i s t o r C o m m u n i s t )
totalitarian 'excesses'. Implicitly, at least, H e i d e g g e r devalues t h e effort to
c o n s t r a i n t h e s y s t e m - t o m a i n t a i n its ' h u m a n f a c e ' , t o c o m p e l it t o r e s p e c t
t h e basic rules o f d e m o c r a c y a n d f r e e d o m , to provide f o r h u m a n solidar
ity, t o p r e v e n t its s l i d i n g i n t o t o t a l i t a r i a n e x c e s s — as a n e s c a p e f r o m the
i n n e r t r u t h o f t h e s y s t e m t h a t b e c o m e s p e r c e p t i b l e in s u c h e x c e s s e s ; s u c h
half-hearted e f f o r t s t o k e e p t h e s y s t e m i n c h e c k a r e t h e w o r s t way t o
r e m a i n w i t h i n its h o r i z o n . O n e s h o u l d r e c a l l h e r e t h e k e y s t r a t e g i c r o l e o f
the signifier 'hysteria' in the m o d e r n 'radical' political discourse, up to
t h e B o l s h e v i k s , w h o d i s m i s s e d as ' h y s t e r i c s ' t h e i r o p p o n e n t s w h o g r o a n e d
a b o u t the n e e d for d e m o c r a t i c values, the totalitarian threat to humanity,
and so on. A l o n g the same lines, H e i d e g g e r also d e n o u n c e s liberal-
h u m a n i t a r i a n d e m a n d s f o r ' c a p i t a l i s m w i t h a h u m a n f a c e ' as t h e u n w i l l
i n g n e s s t o c o n f r o n t t h e e p o c h a l t r u t h i n all its u n b e a r a b l e r a d i c a l i t y . T h e
p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e B o l s h e v i k s is a b s o l u t e l y p e r t i n e n t : w h a t H e i d e g g e r s h a r e s
w i t h r e v o l u t i o n a r y M a r x i s t s is t h e n o t i o n t h a t t h e s y s t e m ' s t r u t h e m e r g e s
i n its e x c e s s - t h a t is t o say, f o r H e i d e g g e r , as w e l l as f o r M a r x i s t s , F a s c i s m
is n o t a s i m p l e a b e r r a t i o n o f t h e ' n o r m a l ' d e v e l o p m e n t o f c a p i t a l i s m b u t
t h e n e c e s s a r y o u t c o m e o f its i n n e r d y n a m i c s .
Here, however, complications arise: on closer inspection, it soon
b e c o m e s c l e a r t h a t H e i d e g g e r ' s a r g u m e n t a t i v e s t r a t e g y is t w o f o l d . O n t h e
o n e h a n d , h e r e j e c t s every c o n c e r n f o r d e m o c r a c y a n d h u m a n r i g h t s as a
purely o n t i c affair u n w o r t h y o f p r o p e r p h i l o s o p h i c a l o n t o l o g i c a l q u e s t i o n
i n g - d e m o c r a c y , F a s c i s m , C o m m u n i s m , t h e y all a m o u n t t o t h e s a m e w i t h
regard to the epochal Destiny o f the West; on the other hand, his
i n s i s t e n c e t h a t h e is n o t c o n v i n c e d t h a t d e m o c r a c y is t h e p o l i t i c a l f o r m
0
w h i c h b e s t suits t h e e s s e n c e o f t e c h n o l o g y n o n e t h e less suggests that
t h e r e is another p o l i t i c a l f o r m w h i c h suits t h i s ecological e s s e n c e better -
f o r s o m e t i m e , H e i d e g g e r t h o u g h t h e h a d f o u n d it i n t h e F a s c i s t ' t o t a l
mobilization' (but, significantly, never in Communism, 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 self-
m 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 their
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 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
r e p r o a c h o f h i s N a z i p a s t c o n s i s t s o f two p o i n t s : n o t o n l y w a s h i s N a z i
e n g a g e m e n t a s i m p l e p e r s o n a l e r r o r ( a ' s t u p i d i t y [Dummheit]', as H e i d e g
ger himself put i t ) i n n o way i n h e r e n t l y r e l a t e d to his philosophical
p r o j e c t ; t h e m a i n c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t is t h a t it is H e i d e g g e r ' s o w n p h i l o s
ophy that enables us to discern the true epochal roots of modern
totalitariarnsm. However, what remains unthought here is t h e hidden
complicity between the ontological indifference towards c o n c r e t e social
s y s t e m s ( c a p i t a l i s m , F a s c i s m , C o m m u n i s m ) , i n s o f a r as t h e y a l l b e l o n g to
the same horizon o f m o d e r n technology, and the secret privileging o f a
c o n c r e t e s o c i o p o l i t i c a l m o d e l (Nazism with H e i d e g g e r , C o m m u n i s m with
s o m e ' H e i d e g g e r i a n M a r x i s t s ' ) as c l o s e r t o t h e o n t o l o g i c a l t r u t h o f o u r
epoch.
Here one should avoid the trap that c a u g h t H e i d e g g e r ' s defenders,
w h o d i s m i s s e d H e i d e g g e r ' s N a z i e n g a g e m e n t as a s i m p l e a n o m a l y , a fall
i n t o t h e o n t i c level, in b l a t a n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n to his t h o u g h t , w h i c h t e a c h e s
us n o t t o c o n f u s e o n t o l o g i c a l h o r i z o n w i t h o n t i c c h o i c e s ( a s w e have
a l r e a d y s e e n , H e i d e g g e r is a t h i s s t r o n g e s t w h e n h e d e m o n s t r a t e s h o w , o n
a d e e p e r structural level, e c o l o g i c a l , conservative, a n d so o n , o p p o s i t i o n s
to the modern universe o f t e c h n o l o g y are already embedded in the
horizon o f what they purport to reject: the ecological critique o f the
technological exploitation o f n a t u r e ultimately leads to a m o r e 'environ
m e n t a l l y s o u n d ' t e c h n o l o g y , e t c . ) . H e i d e g g e r d i d n o t e n g a g e in t h e N a z i
political p r o j e c t 'in spite o f his o n t o l o g i c a l p h i l o s o p h i c a l a p p r o a c h , but
because of it; t h i s e n g a g e m e n t was n o t ' b e n e a t h ' h i s p h i l o s o p h i c a l l e v e l -
o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i f o n e is t o u n d e r s t a n d H e i d e g g e r , t h e k e y p o i n t is t o
grasp the complicity (in H e g e l e s e : 'speculative identity') between the
elevation above o n t i c c o n c e r n s a n d the passionate ' o n t i c ' Nazi political
engagement.
O n e can now see the ideological trap that caught H e i d e g g e r : w h e n he
criticizes Nazi racism o n b e h a l f o f the true ' i n n e r greatness' o f the Nazi
movement, he repeats the elementary ideological gesture o f maintaining
a n i n n e r d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s t h e i d e o l o g i c a l t e x t - o f c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e r e is
s o m e t h i n g m o r e b e n e a t h it, a n o n - i d e o l o g i c a l k e r n e l : i d e o l o g y e x e r t s its
h o l d o v e r us b y m e a n s o f t h i s v e r y i n s i s t e n c e t h a t t h e C a u s e w e a d h e r e to
is n o t ' m e r e l y ' i d e o l o g i c a l . S o w h e r e is t h e t r a p ? W h e n t h e disappointed
H e i d e g g e r t u r n s away f r o m a c t i v e e n g a g e m e n t i n t h e N a z i m o v e m e n t , h e
d o e s so b e c a u s e the Nazi m o v e m e n t did n o t m a i n t a i n t h e l e v e l o f its
' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' , b u t l e g i t i m i z e d itself with i n a d e q u a t e ( r a c i a l ) i d e o l o g y .
In o t h e r words, what h e e x p e c t e d from it was t h a t it s h o u l d l e g i t i m i z e
i t s e l f t h r o u g h d i r e c t a w a r e n e s s o f its ' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' . A n d t h e p r o b l e m
• lies i n t h i s v e r y e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t a p o l i t i c a l m o v e m e n t t h a t will d i r e c t l y
r e f e r t o its h i s t o r i c o - o n t o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n is p o s s i b l e . T h i s e x p e c t a t i o n ,
| l i b w e v e r , is i n itself p r o f o u n d l y metaphysical, in so far as i t fails to
| recognize that the gap separating the direct ideological legitimization o f
a m o v e m e n t f r o m its ' i n n e r g r e a t n e s s ' (its h i s t o r i c o - o n t o l o g i c a l e s s e n c e )
is constitutive, a p o s i t i v e c o n d i t i o n o f its ' f u n c t i o n i n g ' . T o u s e t h e t e r m s o f
, the later H e i d e g g e r , ontological insight necessarily entails ontic blindness
a n d e r r o r , a n d v i c e v e r s a - t h a t is t o say, i n o r d e r t o b e ' e f f e c t i v e ' a t t h e
o n t i c l e v e l , o n e m u s t d i s r e g a r d t h e o n t o l o g i c a l h o r i z o n o f o n e ' s activity.
( I n this sense, H e i d e g g e r e m p h a s i z e s that 'science doesn't think' and
that, far f r o m b e i n g its l i m i t a t i o n , t h i s i n a b i l i t y is t h e v e r y m o t o r of
scientific progress.) In o t h e r words, what H e i d e g g e r seems u n a b l e to
e n d o r s e is a c o n c r e t e p o l i t i c a l e n g a g e m e n t t h a t w o u l d accept its n e c e s s a r y ,
constitutive blindness - as i f t h e moment we acknowledge the gap
separating the awareness o f the ontological horizon from ontic engage
m e n t , a n y o n t i c e n g a g e m e n t is d e p r e c i a t e d , l o s e s its a u t h e n t i c d i g n i t y .
A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f t h e s a m e p r o b l e m is t h e p a s s a g e f r o m ready-at-hand
t o p r e s e n t - a t - h a n d i n Being and Time. H e i d e g g e r t a k e s as t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t
t h e a c t i v e i m m e r s i o n i n its s u r r o u n d i n g s o f a f i n i t e e n g a g e d a g e n t w h o
r e l a t e s t o o b j e c t s a r o u n d it as t o s o m e t h i n g r e a d y - a t - h a n d ; the impassive
p e r c e p t i o n o f o b j e c t s as p r e s e n t - a t - h a n d a r i s e s g r a d u a l l y f r o m t h i s e n g a g e
ment when things 'malfunction' i n d i f f e r e n t ways, a n d is t h e r e f o r e a
derivative m o d e o f p r e s e n c e . H e i d e g g e r ' s p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t the
p r o p e r o n t o l o g i c a l d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e way Dasein is i n t h e w o r l d h a s t o
a b a n d o n t h e m o d e r n C a r t e s i a n duality o f values a n d facts: t h e n o t i o n t h a t
the subject encounters present-at-hand objects on to which he then
p r o j e c t s h i s a i m s , a n d e x p l o i t s t h e m a c c o r d i n g l y , falsifies t h e p r o p e r s t a t e
o f t h i n g s : t h e f a c t t h a t e n g a g e d i m m e r s i o n i n t h e w o r l d is p r i m o r d i a l , a n d
t h a t all o t h e r m o d e s o f t h e p r e s e n c e o f o b j e c t s a r e d e r i v e d f r o m it.
On closer examination, however, the picture becomes somewhat
b l u r r e d a n d m o r e c o m p l e x . T h e p r o b l e m w i t h Being and Time is h o w t o
c o - o r d i n a t e the series o f pairs o f oppositions: a u t h e n t i c e x i s t e n c e versus
das Man; a n x i e t y v e r s u s i m m e r s i o n i n w o r l d l y activity; t r u e p h i l o s o p h i c a l
t h o u g h t versus traditional ontology; dispersed m o d e r n society versus the
P e o p l e a s s u m i n g its h i s t o r i c D e s t i n y . . . . T h e p a i r s i n t h i s s e r i e s d o not
simply overlap: when a p r e m o d e r n a r t i s a n o r f a r m e r , f o l l o w i n g h i s tra
d i t i o n a l way o f l i f e , is i m m e r s e d i n h i s d a i l y i n v o l v e m e n t w i t h ready-at-
h a n d o b j e c t s t h a t a r e i n c l u d e d i n h i s w o r l d , t h i s i m m e r s i o n is d e f i n i t e l y
n o t t h e s a m e as t h e das Man o f t h e m o d e r n c i t y - d w e l l e r . ( T h i s is why, i n
his n o t o r i o u s ' W h y s h o u l d we r e m a i n in t h e p r o v i n c e ? ' , H e i d e g g e r h i m s e l f
r e p o r t s t h a t w h e n h e was u n c e r t a i n w h e t h e r t o a c c e p t t h e i n v i t a t i o n t o g o
to t e a c h in B e r l i n , h e a s k e d his f r i e n d , a h a r d - w o r k i n g l o c a l f a r m e r , w h o
j u s t s i l e n t l y s h o o k h i s h e a d - H e i d e g g e r i m m e d i a t e l y a c c e p t e d t h i s as t h e
a u t h e n t i c a n s w e r t o h i s p r e d i c a m e n t . ) Is it n o t , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t , i n c o n t r a s t
to t h e s e two o p p o s e d m o d e s o f i m m e r s i o n - t h e a u t h e n t i c involvement
with t h e ready-at-hand a n d t h e m o d e r n l e t t i n g o n e s e l f g o with t h e flow o f
das Man - t h e r e a r e a l s o two o p p o s e d m o d e s o f a c q u i r i n g a d i s t a n c e : t h e
s h a t t e r i n g e x i s t e n t i a l e x p e r i e n c e o f a n x i e t y , w h i c h e x t r a n e a t e s us from
t h e t r a d i t i o n a l i m m e r s i o n i n o u r way o f l i f e , a n d t h e t h e o r e t i c a l d i s t a n c e
o f t h e n e u t r a l o b s e r v e r w h o , as i f f r o m o u t s i d e , p e r c e i v e s t h e w o r l d in
'representations'? It seems as i f t h i s 'authentic' tension between the
i m m e r s i o n o f ' b e i n g - i n - t h e - w o r l d ' a n d its s u s p e n s i o n i n a n x i e t y is r e d o u
b l e d by t h e 'inauthentic' p a i r o f das Man and traditional metaphysical
o n t o l o g y . S o we have four positions: the tension in e v e r y d a y life be
t w e e n a u t h e n t i c ' b e i n g - i n - t h e - w o r l d ' a n d das Man, as w e l l as t h e tension
b e t w e e n t h e two m o d e s o f e x t r a c t i n g o u r s e l v e s f r o m the everyday run
of things, authentic existential resoluteness and the traditional meta
p h y s i c a l o n t o l o g y - d o e s n o t t h i s give us a k i n d o f H e i d e g g c r i a n s e m i o t i c
square?
H e i d e g g e r is n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e ( H e g e l i a n ) p r o b l e m o f l e g i t i m i z i n g
n o r m s t h a t r e g u l a t e o u r i m m e r s i o n in t h e everyday life-world: h e o s c i l l a t e s
b e t w e e n d i r e c t ( p r e - r e f l e x i v e ) i m m e r s i o n i n d a i l y life a n d t h e a b y s s o f t h e
disintegration o f this f r a m e w o r k (his version o f e n c o u n t e r i n g 'absolute
9
n e g a t i v i t y ' ) . H e is a c u t e l y a w a r e o f h o w o u r e v e r y d a y life is g r o u n d e d on
s o m e fragile d e c i s i o n - how, a l t h o u g h we a r e i r r e d u c i b l y t h r o w n i n t o a
c o n t i n g e n t situation, this d o e s n o t m e a n that we are simply determined
b y it, c a u g h t i n it l i k e a n a n i m a l : t h e o r i g i n a l h u m a n c o n d i t i o n is t h a t o f
b e i n g o u t o f j o i n t , o f abyss a n d e x c e s s , a n d a n y i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e d a i l y
life h a b i t a t r e l i e s o n a n a c t o f r e s o l u t e a c c e p t a n c e o f it. D a i l y h a b i t a t a n d
e x c e s s a r e n o t s i m p l y o p p o s e d : , t h e h a b i t a t i t s e l f is ' c h o s e n ' i n a n 'exces
s i v e ' g e s t u r e o f g r o u n d l e s s d e c i s i o n . T h i s a c t o f v i o l e n t i m p o s i t i o n is t h e
'third term' that u n d e r m i n e s t h e a l t e r n a t i v e o f fully f i t t i n g i n t o a life-
w o r l d c o n t e x t a n d o f a b s t r a c t d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d R e a s o n : it c o n s i s t s i n t h e
v i o l e n t g e s t u r e o f b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e f i n i t e c o n t e x t , t h e g e s t u r e w h i c h is
n o t yet 'stabilized' in t h e p o s i t i o n o f n e u t r a l universality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f
the observing Reason, but remains a kind o f 'universality-in-becoming', to
put it i n Kierkegaardese. T h e 'specifically human' dimension is thus
n e i t h e r that o f the e n g a g e d agent c a u g h t in the finite life-world c o n t e x t ,
n o r that o f universal R e a s o n e x e m p t e d f r o m t h e life-world, but t h e very
d i s c o r d , t h e ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' , b e t w e e n t h e two.
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 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 co-ordinates o f - the situation into which he is thrown
1 0
[geworfen], in w h i c h h e finds himself, disorientated and lost. W h a t is
problematic here is t h a t Heidegger uses the notion of 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 from
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 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 - the
p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t Dasein 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
1 1
anticipatory resoluteness.' 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 on,
""winch is not yet t h e ' i m p e r s o n a l ' das Man, b u t a l s o no longer the premodern
immersion in a traditional 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 anonymous
d i s p e r s e d s o c i e t y o f das Man, 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 between the decadent modern 'Americanized'
civilization o f frenetic false activity a n d the 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
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, the
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 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 and Grace: a true
decision/choice (not a choice between 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, or,
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: 'Ne choisit
1 2
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 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 an
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 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
1 1
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'.
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
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' a way t o e x p l a i n this
paradox? Does n o t the primordial 'exclusion' which grounds decision
( i . e . c h o i c e ) i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e c h o i c e is, a t a c e r t a i n r a d i c a l l y fundamental
level, f o r c e d - that I have a (free) c h o i c e only o n c o n d i t i o n that I m a k e
t h e p r o p e r c h o i c e - s o t h a t , at t h i s l e v e l , o n e e n c o u n t e r s a p a r a d o x i c a l
c h o i c e w h i c h o v e r l a p s w i t h its m e t a - c h o i c e : I a m t o l d w h a t I m u s t c h o o s e
freely. . . . F a r f r o m b e i n g a sign o f ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ( o r politically "totalitar
i a n " ) d i s t o r t i o n ' , t h i s l e v e l o f ' f o r c e d c h o i c e ' is p r e c i s e l y w h a t t h e p s y c h o t i c
p o s i t i o n lacks: t h e p s y c h o t i c s u b j e c t a c t s as i f h e h a s a t r u l y f r e e c h o i c e ' a l l
t h e way a l o n g ' .
S o , b e f o r e we dismiss H e i d e g g e r ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f a n t i c i p a t o r y d e c i s i o n
as f r e e l y a s s u m i n g o n e ' s d e s t i n y as a c o d e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f a c o n s e r v a t i v e
^rjserudo-revolution, we should stop for a moment and recall Fredric
J a m e s o n ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t a t r u e L e f t i s t is in a way m u c h c l o s e r t o t o d a y ' s
n e o - c o n s e r v a t i v e c o m m u n i t a r i a n t h a n h e is t o a l i b e r a l d e m o c r a t : h e fully
e n d o r s e s t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e c r i t i c i s m o f liberal d e m o c r a c y a n d a g r e e s with
the conservative o n 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
1 4
on the Philosophy o f History', 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 title of
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 to b r e a k t h r o u g h tra
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 ' 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 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
decision not grounded 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,
c o m p l e t e l y m i s s e s t h e p o i n t : w h a t t h i s c r i t i c i s m r e j e c t s as p r o t o - F a s c i s t
( J e c i s i o n i s m is s i m p l y t h e b a s i c c o n d i t i o n o f t h e political. In a perverted
^y, H e i d e g g e r ' s N a z i e n g a g e m e n t was t h e r e f o r e a 'step in the right
*• f j j r e c t i o n ' , a s t e p t o w a r d s o p e n l y a d m i t t i n g a n d fully a s s u m i n g t h e c o n s e
quences o f the lack o f ontological guarantee, o f the abyss o f human
1 5
freedom: as A l a i n B a d i o u p u t it, i n H e i d e g g e r ' s e y e s t h e N a z i ' r e v o l u t i o n '
vns formally indistinguishable from the authentic politico-historical
' e v e n t ' . O r - t o p u t it i n a n o t h e r way - H e i d e g g e r ' s p o l i t i c a l e n g a g e m e n t
was a k i n d o f passage a Facte i n t h e R e a l t h a t b e a r s w i t n e s s t o t h e f a c t t h a t
h e refused to g o to t h e e n d in t h e S y m b o l i c - to t h i n k o u t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l
C o n s e q u e n c e s o f h i s b r e a k t h r o u g h i n Being and Time.
T h e s t a n d a r d s t o r y a b o u t H e i d e g g e r is t h a t h e a c c o m p l i s h e d h i s Kehre
( t u r n ) a f t e r b e c o m i n g a w a r e o f h o w t h e o r i g i n a l p r o j e c t o f Being and, Time
leads back to transcendental subjectivism: owing to the unreflected
r e m a i n d e r o f subjectivTsm"Xdecisionism, e t c . ) , H e i d e g g e r let h i m s e l f be
s e d u c e d i n t o his Nazi e n g a g e m e n t ; w h e n , however, h e b e c a m e aware
o f h o w h e h a d ' b u r n t h i s f i n g e r s ' w i t h it, h e c l e a r e d u p t h e r e m a i n d e r s o f
Subjectivism a n d d e v e l o p e d the i d e a o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l - e p o c h a l c h a r a c t e r
o f B e i n g i t s e l f . . . . O n e is t e m p t e d t o i n v e r t t h i s s t a n d a r d s t o r y : t h e r e is a
kind o f 'vanishing mediator' between H e i d e g g e r I a n d H e i d e g g e r II, a
p o s i t i o n o f r a d i c a l i z e d s u b j e c t i v i t y c o i n c i d i n g w i t h its o p p o s i t e - t h a t is,
reduced to an empty gesture, the impossible intersection between the
' d e c i s i o n i s m ' o f H e i d e g g e r I a n d his late 'fatalism' ( t h e e v e n t o f B e i n g
' t a k e s p l a c e ' i n m a n , w h o s e r v e s as its s h e p h e r d . . . ) . F a r f r o m b e i n g t h e
' p r a c t i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e ' o f this r a d i c a l i z e d s u b j e c t i v i t y , H e i d e g g e r ' s N a z i
e n g a g e m e n t w a s a d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t t o avoid it. . . . I n o t h e r w o r d s , w h a t
H e i d e g g e r l a t e r d i s m i s s e d as t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e s u b j e c t i v i s t t r a n s c e n -
" dental approach i n Being and Time, is w h a t h e should have stuck to.
H e i d e g g e r ' s u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e is n o t t h a t h e r e m a i n e d s t u c k i n t h e h o r i z o n
"|)&f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s u b j e c t i v i t y , b u t t h a t h e a b a n d o n e d t h i s h o r i z o n all t o o
Q u i c k l y , b e f o r e t h i n k i n g o u t all its i n h e r e n t p o s s i b i l i t i e s . N a z i s m was n o t a
^l^olitical expression o f the 'nihilist, d e m o n i a c potential o f m o d e r n subjec-
;,*Jvity' b u t , r a t h e r , its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : a d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t t o a v o i d this
jpotential.
T h i s l o g i c o f t h e ' m i s s i n g l i n k ' is o f t e n p r e s e n t i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h o u g h t ,
from S c h e l l i n g to t h e F r a n k f u r t S c h o o l . I n the case o f S c h e l l i n g , we have
t h e a l m o s t u n b e a r a b l e t e n s i o n o f h i s Weltalter drafts, t h e i r u l t i m a t e failure;
S c h e l l i n g ' s l a t e p h i l o s o p h y , w h i c h f o l l o w s t h e Weltalter, effectively resolves
this u n b e a r a b l e t e n s i o n , b u t in t h e w r o n g way - by l o s i n g t h e very d i m e n
s i o n t h a t was m o s t p r o d u c t i v e i n it. W e e n c o u n t e r t h e s a m e p r o c e d u r e o f
'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 Heidegger's late 'thought o f Being' 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 and
1
Time? '
W h y D i d Being and Time R e m a i n Unfinished?
7
W h y is H e i d e g g e r ' s Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics' crucial here? L e t
us r e c a l l t h e s i m p l e f a c t t h a t Being and Time, as w c k n o w it, is a f r a g m e n t :
w h a t H e i d e g g e r p u b l i s h e d as t h e b o o k c o n s i s t s o f t h e first two s e c t i o n s o f
t h e first p a r t ; t h e p r o j e c t p r o v e d i m p o s s i b l e t o r e a l i z e , a n d w h a t c a m e o u t
o f t h i s f a i l u r e , w h a t ( t o u s e g o o d o l d s t r u c t u r a l i s t j a r g o n ) filled i n t h e l a c k
of the missing final part o f Being and Time, was t h e a b u n d a n c e of
H e i d e g g e r ' s w r i t i n g s a f t e r t h e f a m o u s Kehre. O u r p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is n o t
simply to imagine t h e finished v e r s i o n o f Being and. Time, the impediment
t h a t s t o p p e d H e i d e g g e r was i n h e r e n t . O n c l o s e r e x a m i n a t i o n , t h e situ
a t i o n is m o r e c o m p l e x . O n t h e o n e h a n d - a t l e a s t a t m a n u s c r i p t l e v e l -
t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t o f Being and Time was a c c o m p l i s h e d : n o t o n l y d o w e
have Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, which encompasses t h e first
s e c t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t e d P a r t I I , b u t H e i d e g g e r ' s l e c t u r e s a t M a r b u r g in
1 9 2 7 ( p u b l i s h e d l a t e r as The Basic Problems of Phenomenology) d o loosely
cover precisely the remaining s e c t i o n s o f t h e o r i g i n a l Being and Time
p r o j e c t ( t i m e as t h e h o r i z o n o f t h e q u e s t i o n o f b e i n g ; t h e C a r t e s i a n cogito
a n d t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n c o n c e p t i o n o f t i m e as t h e p l a n n e d s e c t i o n s t w o a n d
t h r e e o f t h e s e c o n d p a r t ) , s o that, i f we p u t t h e s e t h r e e p u b l i s h e d v o l u m e s
t o g e t h e r , w e d o g e t a r o u g h r e a l i z e d v e r s i o n o f t h e e n t i r e Being and Time
project. Furthermore, perhaps even more enigmatic is t h e f a c t that
a l t h o u g h t h e p u b l i s h e d v e r s i o n o f Being and Time d o e s n o t c o v e r e v e n t h e
c o m p l e t e first p a r t o f t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t , b u t o n l y its first t w o s e c t i o n s
( s e c t i o n t h r e e , t h e e x p o s i t i o n o f t i m e as t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l horizon for
t h e q u e s t i o n o f b e i n g , is m i s s i n g ) , it s o m e h o w s t r i k e s u s as ' c o m p l e t e ' , a s
a n o r g a n i c W h o l e , as i f n o t h i n g is r e a l l y m i s s i n g . W h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g
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 ' that

conceals or 'sutures' the persisting openness ( i n c o n c l u s i v e n e s s ) : with
Being and Time, 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
1 8
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 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 the
approach o f Being and Time was still t o o 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 a m o n g all e n t i t i e s . B u t w h a t if
there was another deadlock, another 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 (that Heidegger
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 and Time was still c a u g h t in t h e
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 'conditions
o f possibility' o f t h e s e n s e o f B e i n g via t h e a n a l y s i s o f Dasein): what
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 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
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 a
u n i q u e p a s s a g e o f De Anima (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
1 9
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 ) . 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'. Castor-
iadis o p p o s e s this notion o f imagination to the standard one which
o t h e r w i s e p r e v a i l s b o t h in De Anima 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
physical tradition: 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
2
unsettles for every ontology ( a n d for e v e r y 'thinking o f B e i n g ' ) . ' "
C a s t o r i a d i s a l s o d r a w s p o l i t i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e s f r o m t h i s : it is H e i d e g g e r ' s
r e c o i l i n g f r o m t h e abyss o f i m a g i n a t i o n t h a t j u s t i f i e s h i s a c c e p t a n c e o f
^totalitarian' p o l i t i c a l c l o s u r e , w h i l e t h e abyss o f i m a g i n a t i o n p r o v i d e s t h e
philosophical foundation for the democratic opening - the notion of
s o c i e t y as g r o u n d e d i n a c o l l e c t i v e a c t o f h i s t o r i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n : ' A full
r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e r a d i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n is p o s s i b l e o n l y i f it g o e s h a n d in
h a n d with t h e discovery o f t h e o t h e r d i m e n s i o n o f t h e radical i m a g i n a r y ,
t h e s o c i a l - h i s t o r i c a l i m a g i n a r y , i n s t i t u t i n g s o c i e t y as s o u r c e o f o n t o l o g i c a l
21
c r e a t i o n d e p l o y i n g i t s e l f as h i s t o r y . " However, Castoriadis's notion o f
i m a g i n a t i o n r e m a i n s w i t h i n t h e e x i s t e n t i a l i s t h o r i z o n o f m a n as t h e b e i n g
who p r o j e c t s his ' e s s e n c e ' in the act o f imagination transcending all
p o s i t i v e B e i n g . S o , b e f o r e w e p a s s t h e f i n a l j u d g e m e n t o n it, it w o u l d b e
appropriate to take a c l o s e r l o o k at t h e c o n t o u r s o f i m a g i n a t i o n in K a n t
himself.
T h e m y s t e r y o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n qua s p o n t a n e i t y l i e s i n t h e
fact that it c a n n o t b e p r o p e r l y l o c a t e d with regard to the couple of
phenomenal and Noumenal. K a n t h i m s e l f is c a u g h t h e r e i n a deadly
jjnpasse a n d / o r a m b i g u i t y . O n t h e o n e h a n d , h e c o n c e i v e s o f t r a n s c e n
dental freedom ( ' s p o n t a n e i t y ' ) as noumenal: as p h e n o m e n a l e n t i t i e s , w e
;
,!i$re c a u g h t i n t h e w e b o f c a u s a l c o n n e c t i o n s , w h i l e o u r f r e e d o m ( t h e f a c t
that, as m o r a l s u b j e c t s , we a r e f r e e , s e l f - o r i g i n a d n g a g e n t s ) i n d i c a t e s t h e
l i o u m c n a l d i m e n s i o n . In t h i s way, K a n t s o l v e s t h e d y n a m i c a n t i n o m i e s o f
r e a s o n : b o t h p r o p o s i t i o n s c a n b e t r u e - t h a t is t o say, s i n c e all p h e n o m e n a
%re c a u s a l l y l i n k e d , m a n , as a phenomenal entity, is n o t free; as a
''Kioumenal e n t i t y , h o w e v e r , m a n c a n a c t m o r a l l y as a f r e e a g e n t . . . . W h a t
blurs t h i s c l e a r p i c t u r e is K a n t ' s o w n i n s i g h t i n t o t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n s e
quences o f o u r direct access to t h e n o u m e n a l s p h e r e : i f this w e r e to
>$jappen, m e n would lose their moral freedom and/or transcendental
Spontaneity; they would t u r n i n t o l i f e l e s s p u p p e t s . T h a t is t o say: i n a
s u b c h a p t e r o f h i s Critique of Practical Reason mysteriously entitied ' O f the
Wise A d a p t a t i o n o f M a n ' s C o g n i t i v e F a c u l t i e s t o H i s P r a c t i c a l V o c a t i o n ' ,
tic a n s w e r s t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h a t w o u l d h a p p e n t o us i f w e w e r e t o g a i n
access t o t h e n o u m e n a l d o m a i n , t o T h i n g s i n t h e m s e l v e s :
. . . instead o f the conflict which now the moral disposition has to wage with
inclinations and in which, after s o m e defeats, moral strength o f m i n d may b e
gradually won, G o d and eternity in their awful majesty would stand unceasingly
before o u r eyes. . . . T h u s most actions c o n f o r m i n g to the law would b e d o n e
from fear, few would be d o n e from h o p e , n o n e from duty. T h e moral worth o f
actions, on which a l o n e the worth o f t h e person a n d even o f the world d e p e n d s
in t h e eyes o f s u p r e m e wisdom, would n o t exist at all. T h e c o n d u c t o f m a n , so
l o n g as his nature r e m a i n e d as it is now, would b e c h a n g e d into m e r e
m e c h a n i s m , where, as in a p u p p e t show, everything would gesticulate well but
2 2
n o life would b e found in the figures.' '
transcendental freedom and/or spontaneity i t s e l f is t h u s i n a sense

ftohenomenal: i t o c c u r s o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e noumenal sphere is not
ijgtccessible to the subject. T h i s in-betweerj - neither phenomenal 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
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 explains
2 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 apperception as t h e p r o o f that the
subject has a n o u m e n a l side which is n o t s u b j e c t t o t h e causal 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 unreliable and
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 (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 to the subject a n d its ' i m p o s s i b l e ' I n -
i t s e l f sans phrase, tout court, 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 , the
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 highest Good, o f
course, designates a n o u m e n a l entity ( o n e c a n n o t c o n c e i v e o f it in a
c o n s i s t e n t way as a n object of our 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 finite rational entity (man) has to represent to itself the
noumenal supreme Being; or, to put it in phenomenological terms,
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 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
'phenomenon' i n a m o r e r a d i c a l s e n s e o f s o m e t h i n g t h a t is m e a n i n g f u l
o n l y as a n e n t i t y w h i c h appears t o a finite b e i n g e n d o w e d with c o n s c i o u s
ness a n d / o r t h e c a p a c i t y f o r f r e e d o m . P e r h a p s , i f w e a p p r o a c h t h e d i v i n i t y
too closely, this s u b l i m e quality of s u p r e m e Goodness turns into an
excruciating Monstrosity.
H e r e , H e i d e g g e r is fully j u s t i f i e d i n h i s f e r o c i o u s a v e r s i o n t o C a s s i r e r ' s
2 4
reading o f Kant during their famous Davos debate in 1 9 2 9 . Cassirer
simply c o n t r a s t s t h e t e m p o r a l f i n i t u d e o f the human condition ( a t this
level, h u m a n beings are empirical entities whose behaviour can be
e x p l a i n e d b y d i f f e r e n t sets o f c a u s a l l i n k s ) w i t h t h e f r e e d o m o f m a n qua
e t h i c a l a g e n t : i n its s y m b o l i c activity, h u m a n i t y g r a d u a l l y c o n s t r u c t s t h e
universe o f values a n d m e a n i n g s that c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to ( o r e x p l a i n e d
via a r e f e r e n c e t o ) t h e d o m a i n o f facts a n d t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s - this
u n i v e r s e o f V a l u e s a n d M e a n i n g s p o s i t e d b y m a n ' s s y m b o l i c a c t i v i t y is t h e
m o d e r n v e r s i o n o f P l a t o ' s r e a l m o f e t e r n a l I d e a s : t h a t is t o say, i n it, a
d i m e n s i o n d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f t h e d y n a m i c c i r c u i t o f life, o f g e n e r a t i o n
and corruption, breaks through a n d comes into existence - a dimension
w h i c h , a l t h o u g h it d o c s n o t e x i s t o u t s i d e t h e a c t u a l h u m a n l i f e - w o r l d , is
i n i t s e l f ' i m m o r t a l ' a n d ' e t e r n a l ' . I n h i s c a p a c i t y as ' s y m b o l i c a n i m a l ' , m a n
transcends the confines of finitudc a n d temporality. . . . Against this
distinction, H e i d e g g e r demonstrates h o w t h e 'immortality' a n d 'eternity'
of t h e s y m b o l i c s y s t e m o f V a l u e s a n d M e a n i n g s , i r r e d u c i b l e t o t h e l e v e l o f
. . e m p i r i c a l l y g i v e n p o s i t i v e f a c t s , c a n e m e r g e o n l y as part, o f t h e e x i s t e n c e
of a f i n i t e a n d m o r t a l b e i n g w h o is a b l e t o r e l a t e t o h i s f i n i t u d e as s u c h :
.'i: ' i m m o r t a l ' b e i n g s d o n o t e n g a g e i n s y m b o l i c a c t i v i t y , s i n c e , f o r t h e m , t h e
; gap b e t w e e n fact a n d V a l u e disappears. T h e key question, u n a n s w e r e d by
|i C a s s i r e r , is t h e r e f o r e : w h a t is t h e s p e c i f i c s t r u c t u r e o f t h e temporality of
Inhuman e x i s t e n c e , s o t h a t it a l l o w s f o r t h e e m e r g e n c e o f meaning - t h a t is
I to say, s o t h a t a human b e i n g is a b l e t o e x p e r i e n c e h i s e x i s t e n c e as
pj e m b e d d e d i n a m e a n i n g f u l W h o l e ?
|; O n e c a n see clearly, now, why H e i d e g g e r focuses o n transcendental
^.imagination: the unique character o f imagination lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t it
! undermines the opposition between receptivity/finitude ( o f m a n as a n
Si e m p i r i c a l b e i n g c a u g h t i n t h e p h e n o m e n a l c a u s a l n e t w o r k ) a n d s p o n t a n -
!
A eity ( i . e . t h e s e l f - o r i g i n a t i n g a c t i v i t y o f m a n a s a f r e e a g e n t , b e a r e r o f
n o u m e n a l f r e e d o m ) : i m a g i n a t i o n is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e c e p t i v e a n d p o s i t i n g ,
' p a s s i v e ' ( i n it, w e a r e a f f e c t e d b y s e n s i b l e i m a g e s ) a n d ' a c t i v e ' ( t h e s u b j e c t
h i m s e l f f r e e l y gives b i r t h t o t h e s e i m a g e s , s o t h a t t h i s a f f e c t i o n is s e l l -
a f f e c t i o n ) . A n d H e i d e g g e r ' s e m p h a s i s is o n h o w s p o n t a n e i t y i t s e l f c a n b e
c o n c e i v e d o n l y t h r o u g h t h i s u n i t y w i t h a n i r r e d u c i b l e e l e m e n t o f passive
receptivity that characterizes h u m a n finitude: if the subject were to

s u c c e e d in getting rid o f receptivity a n d gaining direct access to the
noumenal in itself, h e w o u l d 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 (or
false identification) o f the spontaneity o f transcendental 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 understanding [synthesis intellectualis] and the
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. In
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 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, o r Cat
egories'), which, after defining synthesis as 'the process of joining
different representations to e a c h other, and of comprehending their
2 i
diversity in o n e c o g n i t i o n ' , 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
26
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 .
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 D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L IMAGINATION 29
l
Jjowever, m s o r a r a s p U r e s y n t h e s i s , r e p r e s e n t e d g e n e r a l l y , g i v e s us t h e
pure conception o f the understanding', 2 8
t h e a m b i g u i t y is c l e a r l y d i s c e r n -
; I b l e : is ' s y n t h e s i s , g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g . . . t h e m e r e o p e r a t i o n o f i m a g i n
2 9
ation', with U n d e r s t a n d i n g as a s e c o n d a r y c a p a c i t y i n t e r v e n i n g after
i imagination has already done its w o r k , or is i t t h a t 'pure synthesis,
i r e p r e s e n t e d g e n e r a l l y , gives u s t h e p u r e c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e understand
s o t r i
ing'. a t t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n is m e r e l y t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f
i the synthetic power o f understanding on a lower, m o r e primitive, pre-
c o g n i t i v e l e v e l ? O r , t o p u t it i n t h e t e r m s o f g e n u s a n d s p e c i e s : is t h e f o r c e
v'of i m a g i n a t i o n d i e i m p e n e t r a b l e u l t i m a t e m y s t e r y o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s p o n
taneity, t h e r o o t o f subjectivity, t h e e n c o m p a s s i n g g e n u s o u t o f w h i c h
grows u n d e r s t a n d i n g as its d i s c u r s i v e c o g n i t i v e s p e c i f i c a t i o n , o r is t h e
encompassing genus understanding i t s e l f , w i t h i m a g i n a t i o n as a k i n d o f
. shadow c a s t r e t r o a c t i v e l y by u n d e r s t a n d i n g on to the lower level o f
i n t u i t i o n - o r , t o p u t it i n H e g e l e s e , is t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n the
underdeveloped 'In-itself of a force posited as s u c h ' , 'for i t s e l f , in
•Understanding? T h e point o f Heidegger's reading is t h a t o n e should
d e t e r m i n e t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e f u n d a m e n t a l d i m e n s i o n at
v the r o o t o f discursive understanding, which should thus be analysed
independently o f the categories o f Understanding - Kant recoiled from
- this r a d i c a l s t e p , a n d reduced imagination to a m e r e m e d i a t i n g force
vbetween the pure sensuous manifold o f intuition and the cognitive
^ s y n t h e t i c activity o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g .
I n c o n t r a s t t o this a p p r o a c h , we a r e t e m p t e d t o e m p h a s i z e a d i f f e r e n t
l| a s p e c t : t h e f a c t t h a t K a n t ' s n o t i o n o f i m a g i n a t i o n s i l e n t l y p a s s e s o v e r a
^Crucial 'negative' feature o f imagination: o b s e s s e d as h e is w i t h the
{.endeavour to synthesize, to b r i n g t o g e t h e r the dispersed m a n i f o l d given
' in intuition, K a n t passes over in silence the opposite p o w e r o f i m a g i n a t i o n
" emphasized l a t e r by H e g e l - namely, imagination qua the 'activity o f
/ / . d i s s o l u t i o n ' , w h i c h t r e a t s as a s e p a r a t e e n t i t y w h a t h a s e f f e c t i v e e x i s t e n c e
. only as a p a r t o f s o m e o r g a n i c W h o l e . T h i s n e g a t i v e p o w e r a l s o c o m p r i s e s
'.! U n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d I m a g i n a t i o n , as is c l e a r i f w e r e a d two c r u c i a l p a s s a g e s
from Hegel together. T h e first, less k n o w n , is f r o m his m a n u s c r i p t s o f
Jenaer Realphilosophie, a b o u t the 'night o f the world':
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
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 ghastly
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 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 arbitrary
freedom - to tear u p the images and to r e c o n n e c t t h e m without any
3 1
constraint.' 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 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
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 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

J Understanding 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 pass-
3 3
i ages 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', the
^ power o f disrupting the unity o f the R e a l , violently installing the domain
o l membra disjecta, o f phenomena in the m o s t radical sense o f the term. T h e
1
'night' o f the 'pure self, in which dismembered and disconnected
'phantasmagorical representations' appear a n d v a n i s h , is t h e m o s t ele
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 'an
^ 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 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 of Pure Reason, elabo-
s 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 -
* omable root o f all s u b j e c t i v e activity, as a 'spontaneous' capacity to

r 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 passages,
' 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 o f the synthetic
* J j n a g i n a t i o n , an even m o r e primordial power o f 'pre-synthetic imagin-
\ a t i o n ' , o f tearing apart sensible elements out o f their context, o f dismember
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
r e f u s a l t o b r i n g t o l i g h t I m a g i n a t i o n i n its n e g a t i v e / d i s r u p t i v e a s p e c t , as
t h e f o r c e o f t e a r i n g t h e c o n t i n u o u s f a b r i c o f i n t u i t i o n a p a r t . K a n t is t o o
q u i c k i n a u t o m a t i c a l l y a s s u m i n g t h a t t h e m u l t i t u d e o f i n t u i t i o n is d i r e c t l y
g i v e n , s o t h a t t h e b u l k o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s a c t i v i t y is t h e n constrained to
b r i n g i n g t h i s m u l t i t u d e t o g e t h e r , t o o r g a n i z i n g it i n t o a n i n t e r c o n n e c t e d
Whole, from the m o s t primitive synthesis o f i m a g i n a t i o n , t h r o u g h the
s y n t h e t i c activity o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , u p t o t h e r e g u l a t i v e
I d e a o f R e a s o n , the i m p o s s i b l e task o f u n i t i n g o u r e n t i r e e x p e r i e n c e o f
t h e u n i v e r s e i n t o a r a t i o n a l o r g a n i c s t r u c t u r e . W h a t K a n t n e g l e c t s is t h e
f a c t t h a t t h e p r i m o r d i a l f o r m o f i m a g i n a t i o n is t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e o f t h i s
s y n t h e t i c activity: i m a g i n a t i o n e n a b l e s us to tear the t e x t u r e o f reality
a p a r t , t o t r e a t as e f f e c t i v e l y e x i s t i n g s o m e t h i n g t h a t is m e r e l y a c o m p o n e n t
o f a living W h o l e .
How, then, does the opposition between imagination a n d understand
ing relate to that b e t w e e n synthesis a n d analysis (in t h e s e n s e o f disrupt
ing, d e c o m p o s i n g , the primordial immediate unity o f intuition)? This
relation can be c o n c e i v e d as w o r k i n g both ways: o n e can determine
i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e s p o n t a n e o u s s y n t h e s i s o f t h e s e n s u o u s m a n i f o l d i n t o a
perception o f unified objects a n d processes, which are then torn apart,
d e c o m p o s e d , a n a l y s e d by d i s c u r s i v e u n d e r s t a n d i n g ; o r o n e c a n d e t e r m i n e
i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e p r i m o r d i a l p o w e r o f d e c o m p o s i t i o n , o f t e a r i n g - a p a r t ,
while the role o f understanding is t h e n t o b r i n g t o g e t h e r t h e s e membra
disjecta, into a new rational W h o l e . In b o t h cases, the continuity b e t w e e n
imagination and understanding is d i s r u p t e d : t h e r e is a n i n h e r e n t antag
o n i s m b e t w e e n t h e two - it is e i t h e r U n d e r s t a n d i n g that heals the wound
i n f l i c t e d b y i m a g i n a t i o n , s y n t h e s i z i n g its membra disjecta, or Understanding
m o r t i f i e s , tears the s p o n t a n e o u s s y n t h e t i c unity o f i m a g i n a t i o n i n t o bits
and pieces.
A t t h i s p o i n t , a n a i v e q u e s t i o n is q u i t e a p p r o p r i a t e : w h i c h o f t h e two
a x e s , o f t h e two r e l a t i o n s , is m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l ? T h e u n d e r l y i n g structure
h e r e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t o f a v i c i o u s c y c l e o r m u t u a l implication: 'the
w o u n d c a n b e h e a l e d o n l y b y t h e s p e a r t h a t i n f l i c t e d it' - t h a t is to say,
the multitude that the synthesis o f imagination endeavours to bring
t o g e t h e r is a l r e a d y t h e r e s u l t o f i m a g i n a t i o n itself, o f its d i s r u p t i v e power.
T h i s m u t u a l i m p l i c a t i o n n o n e t h e less g i v e s p r e c e d e n c e t o t h e ' n e g a t i v e ' ,
disruptive aspect o f i m a g i n a t i o n - n o t only for the obvious c o m m o n - s e n s e
r e a s o n t h a t e l e m e n t s m u s t first b e d i s m e m b e r e d i n o r d e r t o o p e n u p the
space for the endeavour to bring t h e m t o g e t h e r again, but for a m o r e
radical reason: because of the subject's irreducible finitude, the very
e n d e a v o u r o f ' s y n t h e s i s ' is always m i n i m a l l y ' v i o l e n t ' a n d d i s r u p t i v e . That
j s 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 to i m p o s e o n the 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 the
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 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 can
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 longer
accepts s o m e pre-synthetic zero-ground elements worked u p o n by our
mind - there is n o neutral elementary stuff (like e l e m e n t a r y sensory
' i d e a s ' in L o c k e ) w h i c h is t h e n composed by o u r mind - that is, t h e
s y n t h e t i c activity o f o u r m i n d is ahuays-already at xuorh, e v e n i n o u r most
3 4
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 ' . 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 imagination, is, stricto setisu, impossible, a level that must be
.retroactively p r e s u p p o s e d , but can never actually be encounteied. 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 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
j the i m a g i n a t i o n ' s disruptive activity. I n s h o r t , the mythic, inaccessible
| Stero-level o f p u r e m u l t i t u d e 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
l", n o t h i n g b u t pure imagination 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
«<activity o f d i s r u p t i n g t h e c o n t i n u i t y o f t h e i n e r t i a o f t h e pie-symbolic
| 'natural' Real. This pre-synthetic 'multitude' is w h a t H e g e l d e s c r i b e s as
|;the 'night o f the world', as t h e 'unrulincss' of the subject's abyssal
1 freedom which violently e x p l o d e s reality into a dispersed floating of
'l membra disjecta. I t is t h u s c r u c i a l t o ' c l o s e t h e c i r c l e ' : w e n e v e r e x i t the
J c i r c l e o f i m a g i n a t i o n , s i n c e t h e very zero-level m y t h i c p r e s u p p o s i t i o n of
s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n , t h e ' s t u f f o n w h i c h it w o r k s , is i m a g i n a t i o n i t s e l f at
3
• its p u r e s t a n d m o s t v i o l e n t , 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 a s p e c t . ' '
T h e Passage through Madness
H e g e l e x p l i c i t l y p o s i t s t h i s ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' as p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l : the

s y m b o l i c o r d e r , t h e u n i v e r s e o f t h e W o r d , logos, emerges only when this
inwardness o f the p u r e self 'must e n t e r also into e x i s t e n c e , b e c o m e an
o b j e c t , o p p o s e i t s e l f to t h i s i n n e r n e s s t o b e e x t e r n a l ; r e t u r n t o b e i n g . T h i s
is l a n g u a g e as n a m e - g i v i n g p o w e r . . . . T h r o u g h t h e n a m e t h e o b j e c t as
3 6
i n d i v i d u a l e n t i t y is b o r n o u t o f t h e I . ' Consequently, what o n e should
b e a r i n m i n d is t h a t , f o r t h e o b j e c t t o b e ' b o r n o u t o f t h e I ' , it is n e c e s s a r y ,
as it w e r e , t o s t a r t w i t h a c l e a n s l a t e - t o e r a s e t h e e n t i r e t y o f r e a l i t y i n s o
f a r as it is not yet ' b o r n o u t o f t h e I ' by p a s s i n g t h r o u g h t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e
world'. This, finally, b r i n g s us to madness as a philosophical notion
i n h e r e n t to t h e very c o n c e p t o f subjectivity. S c h e l l i n g ' s basic i n s i g h t -
w h e r e b y , p r i o r t o its a s s e r t i o n as t h e m e d i u m o f r a t i o n a l W o r d , t h e s u b j e c t
is t h e p u r e ' n i g h t o f t h e S e l f , t h e ' i n f i n i t e l a c k o f b e i n g ' , t h e v i o l e n t
gesture o f c o n t r a c t i o n that n e g a t e s every b e i n g outside itself - also f o r m s
the core o f Hegel's notion o f madness: when Hegel determines madness
as w i t h d r a w a l f r o m t h e a c t u a l w o r l d , t h e c l o s i n g o f t h e s o u l i n t o i t s e l f , its
' c o n t r a c t i o n ' , t h e c u t t i n g - o f f o f its l i n k s w i t h e x t e r n a l r e a l i t y , h e all t o o
q u i c k l y c o n c e i v e s o f t h i s w i t h d r a w a l as a ' r e g r e s s i o n ' t o t h e l e v e l o f t h e
' a n i m a l s o u l ' still e m b e d d e d i n its n a t u r a l s u r r o u n d i n g s a n d determined
by the r h y t h m o f n a t u r e ( n i g h t a n d day, e t c . ) . D o e s n o t t h i s w i t h d r a w a l ,
o n t h e c o n t r a r y , d e s i g n a t e t h e s e v e r i n g o f t h e l i n k s w i t h t h e Umwelt, the
e n d o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s i m m e r s i o n i n its i m m e d i a t e n a t u r a l surroundings;
a n d is it n o t , as s u c h , t h e f o u n d i n g g e s t u r e o f ' h u m a n i z a t i o n ' ? W a s n o t
this w i t h d r a w a l - i n t o - s e l f a c c o m p l i s h e d b y D e s c a r t e s i n h i s u n i v e r s a l doubt
a n d r e d u c t i o n t o cogito, w h i c h , as D e r r i d a p o i n t e d o u t i n h i s ' C o g i t o a n d
3 7
the History o f M a d n e s s ' , also involves a passage t h r o u g h the m o m e n t o f
radical madness?
H e r e we m u s t b e c a r e f u l n o t t o m i s s t h e way H e g e l ' s b r e a k w i t h the

E n l i g h t e n m e n t tradition c a n b e d i s c e r n e d in the reversal o f the very
m e t a p h o r o f t h e s u b j e c t : t h e s u b j e c t is n o l o n g e r t h e L i g h t o f R e a s o n
opposed to the non-transparent, impenetrable Stuff (of Nature, Tra
dition . . . ) ; his very c o r e , the gesture that o p e n s u p the space for the
L i g h t o f Logos, is a b s o l u t e n e g a t i v i t y , t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' , t h e p o i n t o f
utter m a d n e s s in which p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l apparitions o f 'partial objects'
wander aimlessly. C o n s e q u e n t l y , there is n o subjectivity without this
g e s t u r e o f w i t h d r a w a l ; t h a t is w h y H e g e l is fully j u s t i f i e d i n i n v e r t i n g the
s t a n d a r d q u e s t i o n o f h o w t h e f a l l - r e g r e s s i o n i n t o m a d n e s s is p o s s i b l e : t h e
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 35
real q u e s t i o n is, r a t h e r , h o w t h e s u b j e c t is a b l e t o c l i m b o u t o f m a d n e s s
a n d reach ' n o r m a l i t y ' . T h a t is t o say: t h e w i t h d r a w a l - i n t o - s e l f , t h e c u t t i n g -
off o f the links to t h e e n v i r o n s , is f o l l o w e d b y t h e construction of a
s j r n b o l i c universe w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t p r o j e c t s o n t o r e a l i t y as a k i n d o f
tfSgteuTe^rjro^tion, d e s t i n e d t o r e c o m p e n s e us f o r t h e l o s s o f t h e i m m e
diate, p r e - s y m b o l i c R e a l . H o w e v e r , as F r e u d h i m s e l f a s s e r t e d in h i s a n a l y s i s
ofTJaniel P a u l S c h r e b e r , is n o t t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g o f a substitute-formation,
which r e c o m p e n s e s t h e s u b j e c t f o r t h e loss o f r e a l i t y , t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t
definition o f p a r a n o i a c construction as t h e subject's attempt to cure
himself of t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f h i s u n i v e r s e ?
I n s h o r t , t h e o n t o l o g i c a l n e c e s s i t y o f ' m a d n e s s ' l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t it is
not p o s s i b l e t o p a s s d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e p u r e l y ' a n i m a l s o u l ' i m m e r s e d i n its
natural l i f e - w o r l d t o ' n o r m a l ' s u b j e c t i v i t y d w e l l i n g in its s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e .
The ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' b e t w e e n t h e two is t h e ' m a d ' g e s t u r e o f r a d i c a l
withdrawal from reality which opens up the space for its symbolic
(re)constitution. Hegel already e m p h a s i z e d the radical ambiguity o f the
statement ' W h a t I t h i n k , t h e p r o d u c t o f m y t h o u g h t , is o b j e c t i v e l y t r u e . '
T h i s s t a t e m e n t is a s p e c u l a t i v e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t e x p r e s s e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
the ' l o w e s t ' , t h e e r r a t i c a t t i t u d e o f t h e m a d m a n c a u g h t i n h i s s e l f - e n c l o s e d
universe, unable to relate to reality, and the 'highest', the truth of
s p e c u l a t i v e i d e a l i s m , t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h o u g h t a n d b e i n g . If, t h e r e f o r e , i n
this p r e c i s e s e n s e - as L a c a n put it - normality i t s e l f is a m o d e , a
s u b s p e c i e s o f p s y c h o s i s - t h a t is, i f t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n ' n o r m a l i t y ' and
madness is i n h e r e n t to m a d n e s s - o f what, then, d o e s this difference
between t h e 'mad' (paranoiac) construction and the 'normal' (social)
construction o f r e a l i t y c o n s i s t ? Is ' n o r m a l i t y ' ultimately merely a more
' m e d i a t e d ' f o r m o f m a d n e s s ? O r , as S c h e l l i n g p u t it, is n o r m a l Reason
merely ' r e g u l a t e d m a d n e s s ' ?
Does not Hegel's brief description - 'here shoots a bloody head, there
a n o t h e r white ghastly apparition' - c h i m e perfectly with L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f
the ' d i s m e m b e r e d b o d y ' [k corps morcele]? W h a t H e g e l calls t h e ' n i g h t o f
the w o r l d ' (the p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l , pre-symbolic d o m a i n o f partial drives)
is an u n d e n i a b l e c o m p o n e n t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s m o s t r a d i c a l s e l f - e x p e r i e n c e ,
exemplified, a m o n g others, by H i e r o n y m u s B o s c h ' s c e l e b r a t e d paintings.
I n a way, t h e e n t i r e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c e x p e r i e n c e f o c u s e s o n t h e t r a c e s o f t h e
t r a u m a t i c passage f r o m this ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' i n t o o u r 'daily' universe
of logos. T h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e n a r r a t i v e f o r m a n d t h e ' d e a t h d r i v e ' , as
the w i t h d r a w a l - i n t o - s e l f c o n s t i t u t i v e o f t h e s u b j e c t , is t h u s t h e m i s s i n g l i n k
t h a t h a s to b e p r e s u p p o s e d if we are to a c c o u n t for the passage from
n a t u r a l ' to ' s y m b o l i c ' s u r r o u n d i n g s .
The k e y p o i n t is t h u s t h a t t h e p a s s a g e f r o m ' n a t u r e ' t o ' c u l t u r e ' is n o t

d i r e c t , t h a t o n e c a n n o t a c c o u n t f o r it w i t h i n a c o n t i n u o u s evolutionary
n a r r a t i v e : s o m e t h i n g h a s t o i n t e r v e n e b e t w e e n t h e two, a k i n d o f ' v a n i s h
i n g m e d i a t o r ' , w h i c h is n e i t h e r N a t u r e n o r C u l t u r e - t h i s I n - b e t w e e n is
silently p r e s u p p o s e d i n all e v o l u t i o n a r y n a r r a t i v e s . W e a r e n o t i d e a l i s t s :
t h i s I n - b e t w e e n is n o t t h e s p a r k o f logos magically conferred on Homo
sapiens, enabling him to f o r m his s u p p l e m e n t a r y v i r t u a l s y m b o l i c sur
roundings, but precisely s o m e t h i n g that, a l t h o u g h it is a l s o n o longer
n a t u r e , is n o t y e t logos, a n d h a s t o b e ' r e p r e s s e d ' b y logos - t h e F r e u d i a n
n a m e f o r t h i s I n - b e t w e e n , o f c o u r s e , is t h e d e a t h d r i v e . S p e a k i n g o f t h i s
I n - b e t w e e n , it is i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e h o w p h i l o s o p h i c a l n a r r a t i v e s o f t h e
' b i r t h o f m a n ' a r e always c o m p e l l e d t o p r e s u p p o s e such a m o m e n t in
h u m a n (pre)history when ( w h a t will b e c o m e ) m a n is n o l o n g e r a m e r e
animal and simultaneously n o t yet a 'being o f language', bound by
symbolic Law; a moment of thoroughly 'perverted', 'denaturalized',
'derailed' n a t u r e w h i c h is n o t yet c u l t u r e . I n h i s p e d a g o g i c a l writings,
K a n t emphasized that the h u m a n animal n e e d s disciplinary pressure in
order to t a m e an uncanny 'unruliness' that s e e m s to b e i n h e r e n t in
h u m a n n a t u r e - a wild, u n c o n s t r a i n e d p r o p e n s i t y t o i n s i s t s t u b b o r n l y o n
o n e ' s o w n will, c o s t w h a t it m a y . B e c a u s e o f t h i s ' u n r u l i n e s s ' t h e human
a n i m a l n e e d s a M a s t e r to discipline h i m : discipline targets this 'unruli
n e s s ' , n o t the a n i m a l n a t u r e in m a n :
It is discipline which prevents man from being t u r n e d aside by his animal

impulses from humanity, his a p p o i n t e d end. Discipline, for instance, must
restrain him from venturing wildly a n d rashly into danger. Discipline, thus, is
merely negative, its action b e i n g to c o u n t e r a c t man's natural unrulincss. T h e
positive part o f education is instruction.
Unruliness consists in i n d e p e n d e n c e o f law. By discipline m e n are p l a c e d in
subjection to the laws o f m a n k i n d , and b r o u g h t to feel their constraint. This,
however, must be a c c o m p l i s h e d early. Children, for instance, are first sent to
school, not so m u c h with the object o f their learning s o m e t h i n g , but rather that
they may b e c o m e used to sitting still a n d doing exactly as they are told. . . .
T h e love o f freedom is naturally so strong in man that when o n c e h e has
grown a c c u s t o m e d to freedom, he will sacrifice everything for its sake. . . . Owing
to his natural love o f freedom it is necessary that m a n should have his natural
roughness s m o o t h e d down; with animals, their instinct renders this
38
unnecessary.
E v e r y t h i n g is i n this marvellous text: from the Foucauldian motif of

d i s c i p l i n a r y m i c r o - p r a c t i c e as p r e c e d i n g a n y p o s i t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n , t o the
Althusserian e q u a t i o n o f the free s u b j e c t with his s u b j e c t i o n to the Law.
H o w e v e r , its f u n d a m e n t a l a m b i g u i t y is n o l e s s d i s c e r n i b l e : o n the one

h a n d , K a n t s e e m s t o c o n c e i v e d i s c i p l i n e as t h e p r o c e d u r e t h a t m a k e s t h e
h u m a n a n i m a l f r e e , d e l i v e r i n g it f r o m t h e h o l d o f n a t u r a l i n s t i n c t s ; o n
t h e o t h e r , i t is c l e a r t h a t w h a t d i s c i p l i n e t a r g e t s is n o t d i r e c t l y man's
animal n a t u r e b u t his excessive love o f f r e e d o m , his natural 'unruliness',
which g o e s far b e y o n d o b e y i n g a n i m a l instincts - in this 'unruliness',
another, properly n o u m c n a l d i m e n s i o n violently e m e r g e s , a dimension
t h a t s u s p e n d s m a n ' s e n c h a i n m e n t in t h e p h e n o m e n a l n e t w o r k o f n a t u r a l
c a u s a l i t y . T h e s t o r y o f m o r a l i t y is t h u s n o t t h e s t a n d a r d s t o r y o f n a t u r e
versus c u l t u r e , o f t h e m o r a l L a w c o n s t r a i n i n g o u r n a t u r a l 'pathological'
p l e a s u r e - s e e k i n g p r o p e n s i t i e s - o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e s t r u g g l e is b e t w e e n
t h e m o r a l L a w a n d unnatural v i o l e n t ' u n r u l i n e s s ' , a n d , in t h i s s t r u g g l e ,
m a n ' s natural p r o p e n s i t i e s are, rather, o n the side o f m o r a l Law against
the excess o f 'unruliness' that t h r e a t e n s his well-being ( s i n c e m a n 'has
g r o w n a c c u s t o m e d t o f r e e d o m , h e will s a c r i f i c e e v e r y t h i n g f o r its s a k e ' ,
i n c l u d i n g h i s w e l l - b e i n g ! ) . I n H e g e l ' s Lectures on the Philosophy of World
History, a s i m i l a r r o l e is p l a y e d b y t h e r e f e r e n c e t o ' n e g r o e s ' : s i g n i f i c a n t l y ,
H e g e l d e a l s with ' n e g r o e s ' b e f o r e history p r o p e r ( w h i c h starts with a n c i e n t
C h i n a ) , in the section entitled ' T h e Natural C o n t e x t or the G e o g r a p h i c a l
B a s i s o f W o r l d H i s t o r y ' : ' n e g r o e s ' s t a n d f o r t h e h u m a n s p i r i t i n its ' s t a t e
o f n a t u r e ' ; t h e y a r e d e s c r i b e d as p e r v e r t e d , m o n s t r o u s children, simul
taneously naive a n d e x t r e m e l y c o r r u p t e d - t h a t is t o say, l i v i n g in the
prelapsarian s t a t e o f i n n o c e n c e a n d , p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , t h e m o s t cruel
barbarians; p a r t o f n a t u r e a n d yet t h o r o u g h l y denaturalized; ruthlessly
m a n i p u l a t i n g n a t u r e t h r o u g h p r i m i t i v e s o r c e r y , yet s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t e r r i
: w
fied by r a g i n g n a t u r a l f o r c e s ; m i n d l e s s l y brave cowards. . . .
In a closer reading, o n e should link the p r o b l e m of imagination as
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 to its p o i n t o f f a i l u r e a n n o u n c e d i n t h e two
f o r m s o f t h e S u b l i m e : t h e s e two f o r m s a r e p r e c i s e l y t h e two m o d e s o f
i m a g i n a t i o n ' s f a i l u r e t o a c c o m p l i s h its s y n t h e t i c activity. J a c o b R o g o z i n s k i
d r e w a t t e n t i o n t o t h e way a k i n d o f e l e m e n t a r y v i o l e n c e is a l r e a d y a t w o r k
in p u r e reason, in the m o s t e l e m e n t a r y synthesis o f i m a g i n a t i o n ( m e m o r y ,
r e t e n t i o n , t e m p o r a l i t y ) . T h a t is t o say: w h a t K a n t fails t o a p p r e c i a t e is t h e
e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h i s s y n t h e s i s c o n s t i t u t i v e o f ' n o r m a l ' r e a l i t y is — in an
unheard-of and simultaneously most fundamental sense - a l r e a d y 'vio
l e n t ' , i n s o f a r as it c o n s i s t s i n a n o r d e r i m p o s e d b y t h e s u b j e c t ' s s y n t h e t i c
4
activity o n t h e h e t e r o g e n e o u s d i s a r r a y o f i m p r e s s i o n s . * ' L e t us a d d that
t h i s v i o l e n c e o f s y n t h e s i s is p e r h a p s already an answer to the more
fundamental violence o f d i s m e m b e r m e n t , o f tearing the natural continu
ity o f e x p e r i e n c e a p a r t . I f 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 w e r e t o s u c c e e d
w i t h o u t a g a p , we w o u l d o b t a i n p e r f e c t s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t a n d s e l f - e n c l o s e d
a u t o - a f f e c t i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e s y n t h e s i s o f i m a g i n a t i o n n e c e s s a r i l y fails; it
g e t s c a u g h t i n a n i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n t w o d i f f e r e n t ways:
• first, in a n i n h e r e n t way, t h r o u g h t h e i m b a l a n c e b e t w e e n apprehension

a n d c o m p r e h e n s i o n , w h i c h g e n e r a t e s t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l s u b l i m e : syn
t h e t i c c o m p r e h e n s i o n is n o t a b l e t o ' c a t c h u p ' w i t h t h e m a g n i t u d e o f
the a p p r e h e n d e d p e r c e p t i o n s w i t h w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t is bombarded,
a n d it is t h i s v e r y f a i l u r e o f s y n t h e s i s t h a t r e v e a l s its v i o l e n t n a t u r e ;
• t h e n , i n a n e x t e r n a l way, t h r o u g h t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e ( m o r a l ) L a w
that a n n o u n c e s a n o t h e r dimension, that o f the n o u m e n a l : the (moral)
Law is n e c e s s a r i l y e x p e r i e n c e d b y t h e s u b j e c t a s a v i o l e n t intrusion
disturbing the s m o o t h self-sufficient run o f t h e auto-affection o f his
imagination.
I n t h e s e two c a s e s o f t h e v i o l e n c e t h a t e m e r g e s a s a k i n d o f a n s w e r t o t h e
preceding violence o f the transcendental imagination itself, wc thus
e n c o u n t e r t h e m a t r i x o f m a t h e m a t i c a l a n d d y n a m i c a n t i n o m i e s . T h i s is
t h e e x a c t l o c u s at w h i c h t h e a n t a g o n i s m b e t w e e n ( p h i l o s o p h i c a l ) m a t e r i
a l i s m a n d i d e a l i s m is d i s c e r n i b l e i n K a n t ' s p h i l o s o p h y : i t c o n c e r n s the
question o f primacy in the relationship between the two antinomies.
I d e a l i s m gives p r i o r i t y t o t h e d y n a m i c a n t i n o m y , t o t h e way t h e suprasen-
sible Law transcends a n d / o r suspends f r o m t h e outside the phenomenal
c a u s a l c h a i n : f r o m this p e r s p e c t i v e , p h e n o m e n a l i n c o n s i s t e n c y is m e r e l y
t h e way i n w h i c h t h e n o u m e n a l B e y o n d i n s c r i b e s i t s e l f i n t o t h e phenom
enal domain. M a t e r i a l i s m , in contrast, gives priority to mathematical
a n t i n o m y , to t h e i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f t h e p h e n o m e n a l d o m a i n : the
u l t i m a t e o u t c o m e o f m a t h e m a t i c a l a n t i n o m y is t h e d o m a i n o f a n ' i n c o n
sistent All', o f a multitude that lacks the ontological consistency o f
'reality'. F r o m this p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e d y n a m i c a n t i n o m y itself a p p e a r s as a n
a t t e m p t t o r e s o l v e t h e i n h e r e n t d e a d l o c k o f m a t h e m a t i c a l a n t i n o m y by-
t r a n s p o s i n g it i n t o t h e c o e x i s t e n c e o f two distinct o r d e r s , t h e p h e n o m e n a l
and the noumenal. In other words, mathematical antinomy (i.e. the
i n h e r e n t failure or collapse o f i m a g i n a t i o n ) 'dissolves' p h e n o m e n a l reality
in the direction o f the m o n s t r o u s Real, while dynamic a n t i n o m y tran
s c e n d s p h e n o m e n a l reality in t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e s y m b o l i c L a w - it 'saves
phenomena' by p r o v i d i n g a k i n d o f e x t e r n a l g u a r a n t e e o f t h e phenom
4 1
enal domain.
As L e n i n h a d a l r e a d y e m p h a s i z e d , t h e h i s t o r y o f p h i l o s o p h y c o n s i s t s o f
an incessant, repetitive tracing o f the difference between materialism and
T H E D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L IMAGINATION 39
i d e a l i s m ; w h a t o n e h a s t o a d d is t h a t , as a r u l e , t h i s l i n e o f d e m a r c a t i o n
d o e s n o t r u n w h e r e o n e w o u l d o b v i o u s l y e x p e c t it t o r u n - often, the
materialist choice hinges o n how we d e c i d e between seemingly secondary
a l t e r n a t i v e s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r e d o m i n a n t p h i l o s o p h i c a l c l i c h e , t h e last
v e s t i g e o f K a n t ' s m a t e r i a l i s m is t o b e s o u g h t in his i n s i s t e n c e o n the
Thing-in-itself, t h e e x t e r n a l O t h e r t h a t f o r e v e r resists b e i n g dissolved in
t h e s u b j e c t ' s activity o f r e f l e x i v e ( s e l f - ) p o s i t i n g . T h u s F i c h t e , i n h i s r e j e c
t i o n o f t h e K a n t i a n T h i n g - i n - i t s e l f - t h a t is t o say, i n h i s n o t i o n o f t h e
absolute act o f the subject's self-positing - e l i m i n a t e s t h e last trace o f
m a t e r i a l i s m f r o m K a n t ' s e d i f i c e , o p e n i n g u p t h e way f o r H e g e l ' s ' p a n l o g i -
cist' r e d u c t i o n o f all reality to a n e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f the a b s o l u t e s u b j e c t ' s
notional self-mediation . . . C o n t r a r y to this p r e d o m i n a n t cliche, incor
r e c t l y s u s t a i n e d by L e n i n h i m s e l f , K a n t ' s ' m a t e r i a l i s m ' c o n s i s t s , r a t h e r , i n
asserting the primacy of mathematical antinomy, a n d in c o n c e i v i n g d y n a m i c
a n t i n o m y as s e c o n d a r y , as a n a t t e m p t t o 'save p h e n o m e n a ' through the
h o u m e n a l L a w as t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n .
I n o t h e r w o r d s , it is o n l y t o o e a s y t o l o c a t e t h e g r e a t e s t e f f o r t a n d s c o p e
o f i m a g i n a t i o n - a n d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , its u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e - in its i n a b i l i t y
to m a k e the n o u m e n a l d i m e n s i o n p r e s e n t ( t h e r e i n lies the lesson o f the
Sublime: the attempt to r e p r e s e n t the n o u m e n a l - i . e . t o fill t h e gap
between the n o u m e n a l and the imagined p h e n o m e n a l - fails, s o that
i m a g i n a t i o n c a n r e v e a l t h e n o u m e n a l d i m e n s i o n o n l y i n a n e g a t i v e way,
via its f a i l u r e , as t h a t w h i c h e l u d e s e v e n t h e g r e a t e s t e f f o r t o f i m a g i n a t i o n ) .
P r i o r to this e x p e r i e n c e o f gap a n d failure, 'imagination' is a l r e a d y a
n a m e for the violent gesture that opens up and sustains t h e very gap
between the n o u m e n a l and the p h e n o m e n a l . T h e true problem is n o t
h o w t o b r i d g e t h e g a p s e p a r a t i n g t h e two b u t , r a t h e r , h o w t h i s g a p c a m e
t o e m e r g e i n t h e first p l a c e .
T h u s H e i d e g g e r was r i g h t , in a way, i n h i s e m p h a s i s o n transcendental
i m a g i n a t i o n as p r e c e d i n g a n d g r o u n d i n g t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e c o n s t i t u
tive c a t e g o r i e s o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d this s a m e priority h o l d s e v e n for
t h e S u b l i m e as t h e i m p o s s i b l e s c h e m e o f t h e I d e a s o f R e a s o n . T h e g e s t u r e
t o b e a c c o m p l i s h e d h e r e is s i m p l y t o i n v e r t a n d / o r d i s p l a c e t h e s t a n d a r d
n o t i o n , a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h s u b l i m e p h e n o m e n a , by t h e i r very failure,
b e a r w i t n e s s i n a n e g a t i v e way t o a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n , t h a t o f t h e n o u m c n a l
d i m e n s i o n o f R e a s o n . R a t h e r , i t is t h e o t h e r way r o u n d : t h e S u b l i m e , i n
its e x t r e m e , i n its a p p r o a c h i n g t h e M o n s t r o u s , i n d i c a t e s a n a b y s s w h i c h is
a l r e a d y c o n c e a l e d , ' g e n t r i f i e d ' , b y t h e I d e a s o f R e a s o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , it
is n o t t h a t , i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e , i m a g i n a t i o n fails p r o p e r l y t o
s c h e m a t i z e / t e m p o r a l i z e t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e d i m e n s i o n o f R e a s o n ; r a t h e r , it
is that the regulative Ideas of Reason are ultimately nothing but a

s e c o n d a r y e n d e a v o u r t o c o v e r u p , t o s u s t a i n t h e abyss o f t h e Monstrous
a n n o u n c e d in the failure o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l imagination.
T o c l a r i f y this p o i n t f u r t h e r , o n e s h o u l d i n t r o d u c e h e r e t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
b e t w e e n s c h e m e a n d symbol: s c h e m e offers a direct, sensible p r e s e n t a t i o n
o f a n o t i o n o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g ; while a symbol retains a distance, m e r e l y
indicating something beyond it. T h e persistence in time is t h u s an
adequate scheme o f the category o f substance; while Beauty, a beautiful
o b j e c t , is - as K a n t p u t s it - t h e ' s y m b o l o f t h e G o o d ' , t h a t is, n o t a
s c h e m e , b u t a s y m b o l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e G o o d as a n I d e a o f R e a s o n ,
not a category o f Understanding. A n d things b e c o m e complicated here
w i t h t h e S u b l i m e : t h e S u b l i m e is n o t a s y m b o l o f t h e G o o d ; s o , i n a way, it
is c l o s e r t o t h e s c h e m e , i t s t a n d s f o r a n e f f o r t o f i m a g i n a t i o n t o ' s c h e m a
tize' the Idea o f Reason. However, it is a strange case o f a failed
s c h e m a t i s m , o f a s c h e m e t h a t s u c c e e d s t h r o u g h its v e r y f a i l u r e . B e c a u s e
of this success-in-failure, the Sublime involves a strange mixture of
p l e a s u r e a n d p a i n : it is a p l e a s u r e p r o v i d e d by t h e v e r y e x p e r i e n c e o f
pain, o f the painful failure o f i m a g i n a t i o n , o f the painful gap between
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 . D o we n o t e n c o u n t e r h e r e a g a i n the
F r e u d i a n / L a c a n i a n p a r a d o x o f jouissance 'beyond the pleasure principle',
as p l e a s u r e - i n - p a i n - o f das Ding which c a n b e e x p e r i e n c e d only in a
n e g a t i v e way - w h o s e c o n t o u r s c a n b e d i s c e r n e d o n l y n e g a t i v e l y , as t h e
c o n t o u r s o f a n i n v i s i b l e v o i d ? S i m i l a r l y , is n o t t h e ( m o r a l ) Law itself a
sublime Thing, in so far as it also elicits the painful sentiment of
humiliation, o f self-debasement, m i x e d with a p r o f o u n d satisfaction that
t h e s u b j e c t has d o n e his duty?
W h a t w e a p p r o a c h i n t h e first, n e g a t i v e , p a i n f u l t i m e o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e
of the S u b l i m e is w h a t Kant refers to as t h e 'chaotic aggregate', as
' s t e p m o t h e r l y n a t u r e ' , n a t u r e as a c r u e l m o t h e r n o t s u b j e c t t o a n y L a w .
A s R o g o z i n s k i h a s d e m o n s t r a t e d , t h i s n o t i o n o f ' c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e ' as das
Ungeheure ( t h e M o n s t r o u s ) p l a y s t h e s a m e r o l e as ' d i a b o l i c a l E v i l ' i n the
Kantian ethics: a hypothesis necessarily evoked b u t then instantly revoked,
' d o m e s t i c a t e d ' . T h i s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e f e m i n i n e is b y n o m e a n s a c c i d e n t a l
and n e u t r a l . A s is w e l l k n o w n , in his Analytics o f the S u b l i m e in the
Critique of Judgement K a n t e v o k e s as t h e m o s t s u b l i m e o f a l l s t a t e m e n t s t h e
i n s c r i p t i o n o n t h e t e m p l e o f Isis ( t h e d i v i n e M o t h e r N a t u r e ) : T a m all
t h a t is, t h a t was a n d t h a t will b e , a n d n o m o r t a l will e v e r r a i s e m y v e i l . ' As
t h e t e m p o r a l d e s c r i p t i o n clearly i n d i c a t e s , we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with N a t u r e
in its i m p o s s i b l e t o t a l i t y , w i t h N a t u r e as t h e t o t a l i t y o f p h e n o m e n a which
c a n never b e accessible to o u r finite e x p e r i e n c e . A c o u p l e o f years later,
however, in ' Y o u r G r e a t M a s t e r ' , his p o l e m i c s against t h o s e w h o w a n t o r

p r e t e n d t o r e v e a l t h e s e c r e t b e n e a t h t h e v e i l , K a n t g i v e s a m a s c u l i n e twist
to t h e s e c r e t b e h i n d t h e veil: ' T h e h i d d e n G o d d e s s in f r o n t o f w h o m . . .
4 2
w e fall o n o u r k n e e s , is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e m o r a l L a w i n o u r s e l v e s . '
H e r e , l i t e r a l l y , w o m a n ( t h e p r i m o r d i a l M o t h e r N a t u r e ) a p p e a r s as ' o n e o f
t h e N a m e s - o f - t h e - F a t h e r ' ( L a c a n ) : h e r t r u e s e c r e t is t h e p a t e r n a l moral
Law. W e a r e d e a l i n g h e r e n o t with t h e totality o f p h e n o m e n a but with
w h a t is b e y o n d p h e n o m e n a , the noumenal Law. O f c o u r s e , t h e s e two
v e r s i o n s o f w h a t is b e h i n d t h e veil r e f e r t o t h e two m o d e s o f t h e S u b l i m e
( m a t h e m a t i c a l / d y n a m i c ) , a n d to t h e two c o r r e s p o n d i n g types o f a n t i n o
m i e s o f r e a s o n . T h e r e a r e t h u s two c o n c l u s i o n s to b e d r a w n :
1. K a n t h i m s e l f , a l b e i t i m p l i c i t l y , d i d a l r e a d y s e x u a l i z e t h e two a n t i n o m i e s ,
i n s o f a r as h e l i n k e d t h e t o t a l i t y o f p h e n o m e n a g e n e r a t i n g t h e first
( m a t h e m a t i c a l ) type o f a n t i n o m i e s to t h e ' f e m i n i n e ' p r i n c i p l e o f t h e
m o n s t r o u s p u r e c h a o t i c m u l t i t u d e , a n d t h e s e c o n d ( d y n a m i c ) type o f
a n t i n o m i e s to the ' m a s c u l i n e ' principle o f the moral Law.
2 . T h e s h i f t o f p a i n i n t o p l e a s u r e i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e is a l s o
i m p l i c i t l y s e x u a l i z e d ; it o c c u r s w h e n w e b e c o m e a w a r e o f h o w , b e n e a t h
t h e h o r r o r o f t h e c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e o f p h e n o m e n a , t h e r e is t h e m o r a l
L a w - t h a t is, it i n v o l v e s t h e ' m a g i c ' shift f r o m t h e f e m i n i n e m o n s t r o s i t y
to t h e m a s c u l i n e Law.
A g a i n , e v e r y t h i n g h i n g e s h e r e o n w h e r e w e p u t t h e a c c e n t : is - i n the
idealist o p t i o n - the monstrosity o f t h e c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e o f p h e n o m e n a
j u s t t h e e x t r e m e o f o u r i m a g i n a t i o n , w h i c h still fails t o c o n v e y t h e proper
n o u m e n a l d i m e n s i o n o f t h e m o r a l L a w ? O r - t h e m a t e r i a l i s t o p t i o n - is i t
t h e o t h e r way r o u n d , a n d is t h e m o r a l L a w i t s e l f , i n its v e r y sublime
quality, 'the last veil c o v e r i n g the Monstrous', the (already minimally
' g e n t r i f i e d ' , d o m e s t i c a t e d ) way w e , f i n i t e s u b j e c t s , a r e a b l e t o p e r c e i v e
(and endure) the unimaginable Thing?
T h e Violence o f Imagination
So when Kant endeavours to m o v e b e y o n d t h e c l o m a i n o f i m a g i n a t i o n

a n d t o a r t i c u l a t e s u p r a s e n s i b l e R a t i o n a l I d e a s as w h a t a c c o u n t s f o r h u m a n
d i g n i t y , H e i d e g g e r i n t e r p r e t s t h i s m o v e as a ' r e t r e a t ' f r o m t h e abyss o f
imagination. Heidegger is r i g h t in so far as K a n t is i n effect trying
to g r o u n d imagination in a system o f Rational Ideas whose status is
n o u m e n a l . B u t is t h i s t h e o n l y way t o b r e a k o u t o f t h e c l o s u r e o f self-
affection t h a t c o n s t i t u t e s s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n ? W h a t i f it is t h e very
i n s i s t e n c e o n s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n as t h e u n s u r p a s s a b l e h o r i z o n o f t h e
a p p e a r a n c e / d i s c l o s u r e o f b e i n g w h i c h , by r e t a i n i n g us within t h e c l o s u r e
o f t e m p o r a l a u t o - a f f e c t i o n , s c r e e n s t h e abyss o f t h e u n i m a g i n a b l e w h i c h is
not eo ipso t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f n o u m e n a ? T h a t is t o say: w h e n
Kant claims that, without the m i n i m a l synthesis o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l imagin
ation, t h e r e w o u l d b e n o ' p h e n o m e n a ' in t h e p r o p e r s e n s e o f t h e t e r m ,
o n l y ' a b l i n d p l a y o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , t h a t is t o say, less t h a n a dream',
d o e s h e n o t t h e r e b y e v o k e t h e m o n s t r o u s ' c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e ' , t h e 'not-yet-
world', the p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l chora, which forms the background of the
experience o f the Sublime?
T h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e r e a c h e s t h e very b o r d e r o f this ' c h a o t i c
a g g r e g a t e ' o f t h e s e n s e s i n o r d e r t o r e t r e a t f r o m it i n t o t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e
d i m e n s i o n o f t h e n o u m e n a l L a w . I s n o t t h e M o n s t r o u s w h i c h is explicitly-
r e n d e r e d t h e m a t i c i n t h e d i a l e c t i c s o f t h e S u b l i m e in t h e t h i r d Critique
t h u s a l r e a d y a t w o r k a t t h e v e r y h e a r t o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a e s t h e t i c s in
the first Critique} Is n o t t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n ( i n its s y n t h e t i c
function) already a d e f e n c e against this c h a o t i c a g g r e g a t e ? A r e n o t the
spectral a p p e a r a n c e s o f partial objects m e n t i o n e d by H e g e l in the q u o t e d
passage a b o u t the 'night o f the world' precisely such a pre-synthetic, pre-
o n t o l o g i c a l ' b l i n d p l a y o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s ' , w h i c h is ' l e s s t h a n a d r e a m ' ?
T h e w a g e r o f t h e K a n t i a n S u b l i m e is t h a t a n o t h e r s y n t h e s i s , n o t that
o f t h e o n t o l o g i c a l synthesis a c c o m p l i s h e d by t h e t e m p o r a l self-affection o f
transcendental i m a g i n a t i o n , c a n save us f r o m t h i s abyss o f t h e failure
of imagination.
T h e v i o l e n c e o f i m a g i n a t i o n i n t h e S u b l i m e is t w o f o l d : i t is t h e v i o l e n c e
of i m a g i n a t i o n i t s e l f ( o u r s e n s e s a r e s t r e t c h e d t o t h e i r u t m o s t a n d bom
b a r d e d w i t h i m a g e s o f e x t r e m e c h a o s ) , as w e l l as t h e v i o l e n c e done to
i m a g i n a t i o n by R e a s o n ( w h i c h c o m p e l s o u r faculty o f i m a g i n a t i o n to e x e r t
all its p o w e r s a n d t h e n t o fail m i s e r a b l y , s i n c e it is u n a b l e t o c o m p r e h e n d
R e a s o n ) . E v e r y i m a g i n a t i o n is a l r e a d y v i o l e n t i n i t s e l f , i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e
tension between apprehension [Auffassung] and comprehension [Zusam-
menfassung]: t h e s e c o n d c a n n e v e r fully c a t c h u p w i t h t h e first. Conse
quently, temporality itself, 'as such', involves a gap between the
apprehension o f the dispersed multitude and the synthetic act o f the
c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f the unity o f this m u l t i t u d e . O u r faculty o f i m a g i n a t i o n
fails t o a c h i e v e t h i s u n i t y w h e n t h e o b j e c t is t o o l a r g e - t h a t is, in t h e c a s e
o f t h e ' m a t h e m a t i c a l s u b l i m e ' : ' t h e r e is n o t e n o u g h t i m e ' , t h e r e a r e t o o
m a n y u n i t s f o r us t o a c c o m p l i s h t h e i r s y n t h e s i s . T h i s ' n o t - e n o u g h - t i m e ' is
n o t a s e c o n d a r y d e f i c i e n c y , it a p p e r t a i n s t o t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f t i m e - t h a t
j s , ' t h e r e is t i m e ' o n l y i n s o f a r as ' t h e r e is n o t e n o u g h t i m e ' , t e m p o r a l i t y
as such is s u s t a i n e d b y t h e g a p b e t w e e n a p p r e h e n s i o n a n d c o m p r e h e n s i o n :
a b e i n g a b l e t o c l o s e t h i s g a p a n d fully t o c o m p r e h e n d t h e apprehended
m u l t i t u d e w o u l d b e a n o u m e n a l archetypus intellectus no longer constrained
by the limitations o f temporality. T h i s v i o l e n c e o f the synthesis o f c o m p r e
h e n s i o n is t h e n f o l l o w e d by t h e v i o l e n c e o f t h e s y n t h e s i s o f r e t e n t i o n
which endeavours to c o u n t e r a c t t h e flow o f t i m e , to r e t a i n w h a t runs
away, t o r e s i s t t h e t e m p o r a l d r a i n a g e .
Rogozinski's c o n c l u s i o n r e g a r d i n g this twofold gap a n d / o r v i o l e n c e ( o f
c o m p r e h e n s i o n o v e r a p p r e h e n s i o n , o f r e t e n t i o n o v e r t h e f l o w o f t i m e ) is
t h a t t i m e i t s e l f a n d t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n i n its s y n t h e t i c a c t i v i t y
o f auto-affection are n o t directly the same, since the s e c o n d already exerts
a violence o n the p u r e t e m p o r a l dispersal - w i t h o u t this v i o l e n c e , reality
i t s e l f w o u l d n o t r e t a i n its m i n i m a l o n t o l o g i c a l c o n s i s t e n c y . T r a n s c e n d e n t a l
s c h e m a t i s m thus d e s i g n a t e s t h e p r o c e d u r e by w h i c h , already at t h e level
of pre-discursive, purely intuitive temporal e x p e r i e n c e , the pure pre-
synthetic temporal d i s p e r s a l is v i o l e n t l y s u b o r d i n a t e d to the synthetic
activity o f t h e s u b j e c t , w h o s e d e f i n i t i v e f o r m is t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e
discursive categories o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g to intuition. S c h e m a t i s m forges
o u r t e m p o r a l e x p e r i e n c e into a h o m o g e n e o u s linear succession in which
past a n d future are s u b o r d i n a t e d to t h e p r e s e n t (which retains the past
a n d a n n o u n c e s t h e f u t u r e ) : w h a t t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s c h e m a t i s m p r e v e n t s us
f r o m t h i n k i n g is p r e c i s e l y t h e p a r a d o x o f creatio ex nihilo.
I n s c h e m a t i z e d t i m e , n o t h i n g r e a l l y new c a n e m e r g e - e v e r y t h i n g is
4 3
always-already t h e r e , a n d merely deploys its i n h e r e n t potential. The
Sublime, o n the contrary, marks the m o m e n t at which s o m e t h i n g e m e r g e s
out o f Nothing - something new that cannot be accounted f o r by-
r e f e r e n c e to the pre-existing n e t w o r k o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s . W e are dealing
h e r e with a n o t h e r t e m p o r a l i t y , t h e t e m p o r a l i t y o f f r e e d o m , o f a radical
r u p t u r e in t h e c h a i n o f ( n a t u r a l a n d / o r s o c i a l ) c a u s a l i t y . . . . W h e n , f o r
e x a m p l e , d o e s t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e S u b l i m e o c c u r in politics? W h e n ,
'against their better j u d g e m e n t ' , people disregard the balance sheet o f
profits a n d losses a n d 'risk f r e e d o m ' ; at that m o m e n t , s o m e t h i n g that,
l i t e r a l l y , c a n n o t b e ' a c c o u n t e d f o r ' in t h e t e r m s o f ' c i r c u m s t a n c e s ' m i r a c
4 4
ulously ' b e c o m e s possible'. . . . T h e f e e l i n g o f t h e S u b l i m e is a r o u s e d b y
an E v e n t that m o m e n t a r i l y suspends t h e n e t w o r k o f symbolic causality.
I n s o f a r as f r e e d o m is t h e p r o p e r n a m e f o r t h i s s u s p e n s i o n o f c a u s a l i t y ,
o n e is a b l e h e r e to t h r o w a new light o n the Hegelian definition of
freedom as ' c o n c e i v e d n e c e s s i t y ' : t h e consequent notion o f subjective
i d e a l i s m c o m p e l s us t o i n v e r t t h i s t h e s i s a n d t o c o n c e i v e o f necessity as
(ultimately nothing but) conceived freedom. T h e central tenet o f Kant's tran
s c e n d e n t a l i d e a l i s m is t h a t i t is t h e s u b j e c t ' s ' s p o n t a n e o u s ' (i.e. radically
free) act o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a p p e r c e p t i o n that c h a n g e s t h e c o n f u s e d flow o f
s e n s a t i o n s i n t o ' r e a l i t y ' , w h i c h o b e y s n e c e s s a r y laws. T h i s p o i n t is e v e n
c l e a r e r i n m o r a l p h i l o s o p h y : w h e n K a n t c l a i m s t h a t m o r a l L a w is t h e ratio
cognoscendi o f o u r t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r e e d o m , is h e n o t l i t e r a l l y s a y i n g that
n e c e s s i t y is c o n c e i v e d f r e e d o m ? T h a t is t o say: t h e o n l y way f o r us t o g e t
t o k n o w ( t o c o n c e i v e o f ) o u r f r e e d o m is via t h e f a c t o f t h e unbearable
p r e s s u r e o f t h e m o r a l L a w , o f its necessity, which enjoins us to act against
t h e c o m p u l s i o n o f o u r p a t h o l o g i c a l impulses. At t h e m o s t g e n e r a l level,
o n e s h o u l d posit that 'necessity' ( t h e symbolic necessity that regulates o u r
lives) relies on t h e abyssal free act o f the subject, o n his contingent
d e c i s i o n , o n t h e point de capiton that magically turns confusion into a new
O r d e r . I s n o t t h i s f r e e d o m , w h i c h is n o t y e t c a u g h t i n t h e c o b w e b o f
n e c e s s i t y , t h e abyss o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' ?
F o r t h i s r e a s o n , F i c h t e ' s r a d i c a l i z a t i o n o f K a n t is c o n s i s t e n t , n o t j u s t a
s u b j e c t i v i s t e c c e n t r i c i t y . F i c h t e was t h e first p h i l o s o p h e r t o f o c u s o n the
u n c a n n y c o n t i n g e n c y at t h e very h e a r t o f subjectivity: t h e F i c h t e a n s u b j e c t
is n o t t h e o v e r b l o w n E g o = E g o as t h e a b s o l u t e O r i g i n o f a l l r e a l i t y , b u t a
finite subject thrown, caught, in a c o n t i n g e n t social situation forever
4 5
eluding mastery. T h e Anstoss, t h e p r i m o r d i a l i m p u l s e t h a t sets in m o t i o n
the gradual self-limitation a n d self-determination o f the initially void
s u b j e c t , is n o t m e r e l y a m e c h a n i c a l e x t e r n a l i m p u l s e ; i t a l s o indicates
a n o t h e r s u b j e c t w h o , i n t h e abyss o f its f r e e d o m , f u n c t i o n s as t h e c h a l
l e n g e [Aufford-erung] c o m p e l l i n g m e t o l i m i t / s p e c i f y m y f r e e d o m , t h a t is,
to a c c o m p l i s h the passage from abstract egotist freedom to concrete
f r e e d o m within the rational e t h i c a l universe - p e r h a p s this i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e
Aufforderung is n o t m e r e l y t h e s e c o n d a r y s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f t h e Anstoss, but
its e x e m p l a r y o r i g i n a l c a s e .
I t is i m p o r t a n t t o b e a r i n m i n d t h e two p r i m a r y m e a n i n g s o f Anstoss in
G e r m a n : c h e c k , o b s t a c l e , h i n d r a n c e , s o m e t h i n g t h a t resists the boundless
expansion o f o u r s t r i v i n g ; and an impetus, a stimulus, s o m e t h i n g that
i n c i t e s o u r activity. Anstoss is n o t s i m p l y t h e o b s t a c l e t h e a b s o l u t e I p o s i t s
t o i t s e l f i n o r d e r t o s t i m u l a t e its a c t i v i t y - s o t h a t , b y o v e r c o m i n g t h e self-
p o s i t e d o b s t a c l e , i t a s s e r t s its c r e a t i v e p o w e r , l i k e t h e g a m e s t h e p r o v e r b i a l
p e r v e r t e d a s c e t i c s a i n t plays w i t h h i m s e l f b y i n v e n t i n g e v e r n e w tempta
t i o n s a n d t h e n , i n s u c c e s s f u l l y r e s i s t i n g t h e m , c o n f i r m i n g his s t r e n g t h . I f
t h e K a n t i a n Ding an sich c o r r e s p o n d s to the F r e u d i a n - L a c a n i a n Thing,
Anstoss is c l o s e r t o objet petit a, t o t h e p r i m o r d i a l f o r e i g n b o d y t h a t ' s t i c k s
in the t h r o a t ' o f t h e s u b j e c t , t o t h e o b j e c t - c a u s e o f d e s i r e t h a t splits it up:

Fichte h i m s e l f d e f i n e s Anstoss as t h e n o n - a s s i m i l a b l e f o r e i g n b o d y that
causes t h e s u b j e c t t o d i v i d e i n t o t h e e m p t y a b s o l u t e s u b j e c t a n d t h e f i n i t e
determinate subject, limited by the n o n - I . Anstoss thus designates the
m o m e n t o f t h e ' r u n - i n ' , t h e h a z a r d o u s k n o c k , t h e encounter o f t h e R e a l in
the m i d s t o f t h e i d e a l i t y o f t h e a b s o l u t e I: t h e r e is n o s u b j e c t without
Anstoss, without the collision with a n e l e m e n t o f i r r e d u c i b l e facticity a n d
c o n t i n g e n c y — ' t h e I is s u p p o s e d t o e n c o u n t e r s o m e t h i n g f o r e i g n within
itself. T h e p o i n t is t h u s t o a c k n o w l e d g e ' t h e p r e s e n c e , w i t h i n t h e I itself,
of a r e a l m o f i r r e d u c i b l e o t h e r n e s s , o f a b s o l u t e c o n t i n g e n c y a n d i n c o m
prehensibility. . . . Ultimately, not j u s t Angelus Silesius's rose, but every
46
Anstoss w h a t s o e v e r isl ohne Warum.'
I n c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o t h e K a n t i a n n o u m e n a l Ding that affects o u r senses,
Anstoss does not c o m e from o u t s i d e , it is stricto sensu ex-timate. a non
a s s i m i l a b l e f o r e i g n b o d y a t t h e v e r y c o r e o f t h e s u b j e c t - as F i c h t e h i m s e l f
e m p h a s i z e s , t h e p a r a d o x o f Anstoss l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t it is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
' p u r e l y s u b j e c t i v e ' and n o t p r o d u c e d b y t h e activity o f t h e I . I f Anstoss were
not ' p u r e l y s u b j e c t i v e ' , i f it w e r e a l r e a d y t h e n o n - I , p a r t o f o b j e c t i v i t y , w e
w o u l d fall b a c k i n t o ' d o g m a t i s m ' - t h a t is t o say, Anstoss would effectively
a m o u n t t o n o m o r e t h a n a s h a d o w ) ' r e m a i n d e r o f t h e K a n t i a n Ding an
sich, a n d w o u l d t h u s b e a r w i t n e s s t o F i c h t e ' s i n c o n s e q u e n t i a l i t y ( t h e u s u a l
c r i t i c i s m o f F i c h t e ) ; i f Anstoss w e r e s i m p l y s u b j e c t i v e , it w o u l d p r e s e n t a
case o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s h o l l o w p l a y i n g w i t h itself, a n d w e w o u l d n e v e r r e a c h
the l e v e l o f o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y - t h a t is, F i c h t e w o u l d e f f e c t i v e l y b e a s o l i p s i s t
( a n o t h e r c o m m o n c r i t i c i s m o f h i s p h i l o s o p h y ) . T h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is t h a t
•Anstoss sets i n m o t i o n t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f ' r e a l i t y ' : a t t h e b e g i n n i n g is t h e
pure I w i t h t h e n o n - a s s i m i l a b l e f o r e i g n b o d y a t its h e a r t ; the subject
c o n s t i t u t e s reality by a s s u m i n g a d i s t a n c e towards t h e R e a l o f t h e f o r m l e s s
4 7
Anstoss, a n d c o n f e r r i n g o n it t h e s t r u c t u r e o f o b j e c t i v i t y .
I f K a n t ' s Ding an sich is n o t F i c h t e ' s Anstoss, w h a t is t h e difference
b e t w e e n t h e m ? O r - t o p u t i t i n a n o t h e r way - w h e r e do w e find i n K a n t
something that announces F i c h t e ' s Anstoss? One should not confuse
K a n t ' s Ding an sich w i t h t h e ' t r a n s c e n d e n t a l object', which (contrary to
s o m e c o n f u s e d a n d m i s l e a d i n g f o r m u l a t i o n s f o u n d i n K a n t h i m s e l f ) is n o t
noumenal but the 'nothingness', the void o f horizon o f objectivity, o f
that w h i c h stands against the (finite) subject, the minimal form of
r e s i s t a n c e w h i c h is n o t y e t 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 t h a t t h e s u b j e c t
encounters in t h e w o r l d - Kant uses the G e r m a n expression Daiuider,
w h a t is ' o u t t h e r e o p p o s i n g i t s e l f t o u s , s t a n d i n g a g a i n s t u s ' . T h i s Dawider
is not t h e abyss o f t h e T h i n g , it d o e s n o t p o i n t t o t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e
u n i m a g i n a b l e ; it is, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e v e r y h o r i z o n o f o p e n n e s s towards
objectivity within which particular o b j e c t s a p p e a r to a finite subject.
The Monstrous
F i c h t e was a p h i l o s o p h e r o f the primacy o f practical over theoretical

R e a s o n ; s o we a r e n o w a l s o i n a p o s i t i o n t o s h o w h o w o u r r e a d i n g o f K a n t
affects t h e K a n t i a n a p p r o a c h t o t h e e t h i c a l p r o b l e m a t i c . I n h i s Kant, and
the Problem of Metaphysics, H e i d e g g e r e n d e a v o u r s to think the m o r a l Law
i t s e l f - t h a t is, t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f p r a c t i c a l R e a s o n - a c c o r d i n g t o the
s a m e m o d e l o f 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 p u r e a u t o - a f f e c t i o n , as t h e
u n i t y o f activity ( s p o n t a n e i t y ) and passivity ( r e c e p t i v i t y ) : in h i s moral
e x p e r i e n c e , t h e s u b j e c t s u b m i t s h i m s e l f t o a L a w t h a t is n o t e x t e r n a l b u t
p o s i t e d b y h i m s e l f , s o t h a t b e i n g a f f e c t e d b y t h e C a l l o f m o r a l L a w is t h e
u l t i m a t e f o r m o f s e l f - a f f e c t i o n - in it, as w e l l as in t h e L a w t h a t c h a r a c t e r
izes a u t o n o m o u s s u b j e c t i v i t y , a u t o n o m y a n d r e c e p t i v i t y c o i n c i d e . T h i s is
t h e o r i g i n o f all t h e p a r a d o x e s o f H e i d e g g e r ' s r e a d i n g : H e i d e g g e r first
r e d u c e s temporality a n d Law to p u r e self-affection o f the subject, then
rejects them for this very reason - because they remain within the
constraints o f subjectivity. In short, Heidegger himself generates the
'subjectivist' r e a d i n g o f K a n t t o w h i c h h e t h e n refers in r e j e c t i n g h i m . . . .
H e i d e g g e r ' s d e v a l u a t i o n o f K a n t ' s p r a c t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y i n his Kant and

the Problem of Metaphysics b e l o n g s in t h e l o n g l i n e o f critics, f r o m H e i n r i c h
H e i n e a n d F e u e r b a c h t o A d o r n o a n d H o r k h e i m e r in Dialectic of Enlighten
ment, w h o d i s m i s s t h e Critique of Practical Reason as K a n t ' s b e t r a y a l o f t h e
s u b v e r s i v e a n t i - m e t a p h y s i c a l p o t e n t i a l o f h i s Critique of Pure Reason: in his
e t h i c a l t h o u g h t , K a n t a s s e r t s f r e e d o m a n d m o r a l L a w as t h a t o n a c c o u n t
of which the finite subject (man) is n o t constrained to phenomenal
e x p e r i e n c e - t h a t is, as a w i n d o w o n t h e p u r e l y r a t i o n a l n o u m e n a l domain,
beyond o r outside time: literally the d o m a i n o f meta-physics. T h e p r i c e
K a n t pays f o r t h i s is t h a t h e h a s t o l i m i t t h e s c o p e , t h e g r o u n d i n g r o l e , o f
transcendental imagination and its m o v e m e n t o f temporalization: the
experience of freedom and m o r a l L a w is not r o o t e d in t e m p o r a l self-
affection. A c c o r d i n g to H e i d e g g e r , t h e u l t i m a t e c a u s e o f this ' r e g r e s s i o n '
into the metaphysical opposition between temporal a n d e t e r n a l lies in
K a n t ' s m e t a p h y s i c a l n o t i o n o f t i m e as t h e l i n e a r s u c c e s s i o n o f m o m e n t s
u n d e r t h e d o m i n a t i o n o f t h e p r e s e n t : s o , a l t h o u g h K a n t is c o m p e l l e d t o
invoke temporal determinations i n h i s n o t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t qua moral
a g e n t ( m o r a l i t y i n v o l v e s t h e i n f i n i t e t e m p o r a l p r o g r e s s ; o n l y a finite b e i n g
d w e l l i n g i n t i m e c a n b e a f f e c t e d b y t h e C a l l o f D u t y , e t c . ) , h e is u l t i m a t e l y
>able t o c o n c e i v e t h e f a c t o f f r e e d o m o n l y as s o m e t h i n g p o i n t i n g to a
d o m a i n o u t s i d e t i m e ( t o n o u m e n a l e t e r n i t y ) , n o t as t h e e x t a s i s o f a n o t h e r ,
ignore o r i g i n a l , n o n - l i n e a r m o d e o f t e m p o r a l i t y .
j Is t h e r e n o a c t u a l l i n k b e t w e e n K a n t ' s e t h i c a l d u t y a n d H e i d e g g e r ' s C a l l
o f C o n s c i e n c e ? H e i d e g g e r ' s n o t i o n o f t h e C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e is u s u a l l y
c r i t i c i z e d f o r its f o r m a l d e c i s i o n i s m : t h i s V o i c e is p u r e l y f o r m a l , it t e l l s
Dasein to make an authentic choice without providing any concrete
criteria e n a b l i n g t h e s u b j e c t to identify a u t h e n t i c c h o i c e . ( T h e l o c a t i o n o f
t h i s C a l l is e x - t i m a t e i n t h e L a c a n i a n s e n s e : as H e i d e g g e r e m p h a s i z e s , t h i s
tCall is n o t p r o n o u n c e d / u t t e r e d b y another Dasein o r d i v i n e A g e n t ; it c o m e s
from outside, but is simultaneously something that emerges from
N o w h e r e , s i n c e it is t h e v o i c e o f t h e v e r y h e a r t o f Dasein, r e m i n d i n g it o f
its o w n u n i q u e p o t e n t i a l i t y . ) H e i d e g g e r l i n k s t h i s C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e t o
t h e m o t i f o f g u i l t , c o n c e i v e d as a n a p r i o r i ( e x i s t e n t i a l ) f o r m a l f e a t u r e o f
Dasein as s u c h : i t is n o t a c o n c r e t e g u i l t a b o u t s o m e d e t e r m i n a t e act or
non-act but the expression o f the formal act that in the case o f Dasein,
o w i n g t o its f i n i t u d e a n d t h r o w n n e s s , a n d at t h e s a m e t i m e its a n t i c i p a l o r y -
projecting opening towards the future, p o t e n t i a l i t y always a n d a priori
outstrips t h e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f Dasein s determinate existence. T h e usual
p o i n t h e r e is t h a t H e i d e g g e r ' s e c u l a r i z e s t h e P r o t e s t a n t n o t i o n o f S i n as
c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h h u m a n e x i s t e n c e as s u c h ' , d e p r i v i n g i t o f its p o s i t i v e
t h e o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n by r e d e f i n i n g it i n a p u r e l y f o r m a l way.
H e i d e g g e r s h o u l d n o n e t h e less b e d e f e n d e d h e r e : t h i s c r i t i c i s m is n o
better g r o u n d e d than the standard criticism that the Marxist narrative o f
t h e C o m m u n i s t r e v o l u t i o n l e a d i n g t o t h e c l a s s l e s s s o c i e t y is a s e c u l a r i z e d
v e r s i o n o f t h e r e l i g i o u s n a r r a t i v e o f F a l l a n d S a l v a t i o n ; in b o t h c a s e s , t h e
a n s w e r s h o u l d b e : why s h o u l d n ' t we t u r n t h e criticism a r o u n d a n d claim
that the latter, allegedly 'secularized' version provides the true version o f
w h i c h t h e r e l i g i o u s n a r r a t i v e is m e r e l y a m y s t i f i e d a n d n a i v e a n t i c i p a t i o n ?
Furthermore, do n o t these Heideggerian notions o f Guilt and Call o f
C o n s c i e n c e rely o n the paradigmatically m o d e r n tradition that stretches
f r o m K a n t i a n e t h i c s t o t h e s t r i c t F r e u d i a n n o t i o n o f s u p e r e g o ? T h a t is t o
say: t h e first t h i n g t o n o t e is t h a t t h e f o r m a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e C a l l o f
C o n s c i e n c e a n d u n i v e r s a l i z e d G u i l t a r e s t r i c t l y i d e n t i c a l , two s i d e s o f t h e
same c o i n : it is p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e Dasein never receives any positive
injunction from the Call o f C o n s c i e n c e that it c a n never b e sure of
a c c o m p l i s h i n g its p r o p e r d u t y - t h a t G u i l t is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l with it. W h a t
w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e is a r e f o r m u l a t i o n o f K a n t ' s c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a
tive, w h i c h is a l s o t a u t o l o g i c a l l y e m p t y : i t says t h a t t h e s u b j e c t s h o u l d do
h i s d u t y w i t h o u t s p e c i f y i n g w h a t t h i s d u t y is, a n d t h u s shifts t h e b u r d e n o f
d e t e r m i n i n g the c o n t e n t o f duty wholly o n to the subject.
H e i d e g g e r was t h u s fully j u s t i f i e d w h e n , a c o u p l e o f y e a r s l a t e r ( i n h i s
1 9 3 0 c o u r s e o n the e s s e n c e o f h u m a n f r e e d o m ) , h e i n d u l g e d in a b r i e f
attempt to save K a n t ' s Critique of Practical Reason by i n t e r p r e t i n g the
K a n t i a n m o r a l i m p e r a t i v e i n t h e t e r m s o f Being and Time, as t h e C a l l o f
C o n s c i e n c e t h a t s h a t t e r s a n d t r a n s p o r t s us f r o m o u r i m m e r s i o n i n t o das
Man, i n t o t h e i n a u t h e n t i c o n t i c m o r a l i t y o f ' t h i s is h o w it is done, h o w one
does it': K a n t i a n practical reason provides a glimpse i n t o t h e abyss o f
freedom beyond (or, rather, b e n e a t h ) the constraints o f traditional meta
physical ontology. T h i s r e f e r e n c e to the Critique of Practical Reason is
founded on an accurate insight into Kant's radical ethical revolution,
w h i c h b r e a k s w i t h t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l e t h i c s o f S u p r e m e G o o d - a n d j u s t as
Heidegger retreated from the abyss o f t h e unimaginable Monstrosity
lurking in the Kantian p r o b l e m a t i c o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l imagination, so h e
also retreated from the Monstrosity discernible in the K a n t i a n 'ethical
f o r m a l i s m ' w h e n , a f t e r h i s Kehre, he no longer reserved an exceptional
r o l e f o r K a n t . F r o m t h e m i d - 1 9 3 0 s o n w a r d s , it is t h e E v e n t o f t h e T r u t h o f
B e i n g , its ( d i s ) c l o s u r e , w h i c h p r o v i d e s t h e h i s t o r i a l / e p o c h a l law/measure
o f w h a t , in o u r e v e r y d a y e x p e r i e n c e , c a n c o u n t as e t h i c a l i n j u n c t i o n . K a n t
is t h e r e b y r e d u c e d t o a figure in t h e l i n e s t r e t c h i n g f r o m P l a t o ' s I d e a o f
S u p r e m e G o o d ( w h i c h a l r e a d y s u b o r d i n a t e s B e i n g t o S u p r e m e G o o d ) to
t h e m o d e r n n i h i l i s t i c b a b b l e a b o u t ' v a l u e s ' ; h e e v e n lays t h e g r o u n d for
the modern t u r n f r o m t h e n o t i o n o f G o o d as i n h e r e n t i n t h e o r d e r o f
B e i n g itself to t h e subjectivist n o t i o n o f 'values' that h u m a n b e i n g s i m p o s e
o n ' o b j e c t i v e ' reality, so that his e t h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n provides a key l i n k in
t h e l i n e f r o m P l a t o n i s m to m o d e r n n i h i l i s m towards values. K a n t was t h e
first t o a s s e r t t h e W i l l as t h e W i l l t o W i l l : i n all its g o a l s , t h e W i l l b a s i c a l l y
wills itself, a n d t h e r e i n lie the roots o f nihilism. T h e a u t o n o m y o f t h e
m o r a l L a w m e a n s t h a t d i i s L a w is self-posited:, w h e n m y will f o l l o w s its C a l l ,
48
it u l t i m a t e l y wills itself.
Heidegger thus d e n i e s any truly subversive p o t e n t i a l o f the Kantian
e t h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n , o f h i s a s s e r t i o n o f L a w as b a r r e d / e m p t y , not deter
m i n e d b y a n y p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t (it is u p o n t h i s f e a t u r e t h a t L a c a n g r o u n d s
his thesis o n Kant's practical philosophy as t h e s t a r t i n g point in the
l i n e a g e c u l m i n a t i n g i n F r e u d ' s i n v e n t i o n o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s ) . As R o g o z i n s k i
demonstrated, w h a t is c r u c i a l h e r e is t h e fate o f the triad Beautiful/
S u b l i m e / M o n s t r o u s : Heidegger ignores the Sublime - t h a t is, h e links
B e a u t y d i r e c t i y to t h e M o n s t r o u s ( m o s t e v i d e n d y i n h i s r e a d i n g o f A n t i
49
g o n e i n An Introduction to Metaphysics ): B e a u t y is t h e m o d e o f a p p a r i t i o n
o f t h e M o n s t r o u s ; it d e s i g n a t e s o n e o f t h e m o d a l i t i e s o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t
i that shatters o u r a l l e g i a n c e to t h e everyday r u n o f things - t h a t is, i t
d e r a i l s o u r i m m e r s i o n i n das Man ( t h e way ' i t is d o n e ' ) . T h i s p a s s i n g o v e r
t h e S u b l i m e is d i r e c t l y l i n k e d t o t h e i n s e r t i o n o f K a n t i n t h e P l a t o n i c
lineage o f the S u p r e m e G o o d - to H e i d e g g e r ' s dismissal o f the Kantian
e t h i c a l r e v o l u t i o n : i f t h e B e a u t i f u l is, as K a n t p u t it, t h e s y m b o l o f t h e
Good, t h e n t h e S u b l i m e is p r e c i s e l y t h e f a i l e d s c h e m e o f t h e e t h i c a l Law.
T h e stakes in H e i d e g g e r ' s direct linking o f the Beautiful to the M o n s t r o u s
are thus h i g h e r than they m a y seem: the disappearance o f the S u b l i m e
i n H e i d e g g e r ' s r e a d i n g o f K a n t is t h e o b v e r s e o f h i s i g n o r a n c e o f t h e
K a n t i a n m o t i f o f t h e pure form o f Law; the fact that the Kantian moral
L a w is ' e m p t y ' , a p u r e f o r m , r a d i c a l l y a f f e c t s t h e s t a t u s o f t h e M o n s t r o u s .
How?
Heidegger, of course, thematizes the Monstrous (or rather, the
U n c a n n y , das Unheimliche, as h e t r a n s l a t e s t h e ' d a e m o n i c ' f r o m Antigone %
first g r e a t c h o r u s ) : i n h i s d e t a i l e d r e a d i n g o f t h i s c h o r u s i n An Introduction
to Metaphysics, he deploys the contours o f the overpowering violence o f
nature, o f earth, as w e l l as t h e v i o l e n c e o f m a n who, by dwelling in
l a n g u a g e , t h r o w s t h e n a t u r a l c o u r s e o f e v e n t s ' o f f t h e r a i l s ' a n d e x p l o i t s it
f o r his o w n p u r p o s e s . H e insists r e p e a t e d l y o n t h e ' o u t - o f j o i n t ' c h a r a c t e r
o f m a n : n o t o n l y is h i s fight a g a i n s t / w i t h t h e p o w e r s o f n a t u r e ' d e r a i l i n g ' ;
t h e v e r y i n s t i t u t i o n o f polis, o f a c o m m u n a l o r d e r , is c h a r a c t e r i z e d as a n
a c t o f v i o l e n t i m p o s i t i o n , as g r o u n d e d i n a n a b y s s a l d e c i s i o n . S o H e i d e g
g e r is well a w a r e t h a t e v e r y d w e l l i n g i n t h e f a m i l i a r e v e r y d a y u n i v e r s e is
grounded in a v i o l e n t / m o n s t r o u s act o f resolutely deciding/assuming
o n e ' s f a t e : t h a t s i n c e m a n is p r i m o r d i a l l y ' o u t o f j o i n t ' , t h e v e r y i m p o s i t i o n
of a 'home [heim]', o f a c o m m u n a l s i t e o f d w e l l i n g , polis, is unheimlkh,
r e p o s e s o n a n e x c e s s i v e / v i o l e n t d e e d . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h i s d o m a i n o f
UnheimlicJies r e m a i n s for h i m t h e very d o m a i n o f t h e disclosure o f histori
cal s h a p e o f b e i n g , o f a world, g r o u n d e d in i m p e n e t r a b l e e a r t h , in w h i c h
m a n historically dwells, o f t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n e a r t h (natural surround
ings) and t h e s h a p e o f m a n ' s c o m m u n a l b e i n g . A n d , i n s o f a r as the
p a r t i c u l a r s h a p e o f h i s t o r i c a l b e i n g is ' b e a u t y ' , o n e c a n s e e t h e p r e c i s e
sense in which, for Heidegger, Beauty and the Monstrous are co-
dependent.
T h e K a n t i a n / L a c a n i a n M o n s t r o u s , however, involves a n o t h e r dimen
sion: a d i m e n s i o n not-yet-worldly, o n t o l o g i c a l , the d i s c l o s u r e o f a historical
shape o f c o m m u n a l destiny o f being, but a pre-ontological universe o f the
' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' in w h i c h partial o b j e c t s w a n d e r in a state p r e c e d i n g
a n y s y n t h e s i s , l i k e t h a t in H i e r o n y m u s B o s c h ' s p a i n t i n g s ( w h i c h a r e s t r i c t l y
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 of Pure Reason
provides the foundation o f a new ontology o f finitude and 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 finitude 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 w h o l e o f the universe, as a m e a n i n g f u l hermeneutic totality o f
s u r r o u n d i n g s , as a life-iuorld 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 problematic o f the Sublime which
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 o f Kant: the Kantian 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 - in
F r e u d i a n terms: o f d e a t h drive.
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 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
Carnival 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, and
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 '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 ' even
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 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
51
reality.
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 objects'
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, the undead
5 2
object-libido. O r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - t h e d e a t h d r i v e is not
t h e p r e - s u b j e c t i v e n o u m e n a l R e a l itself, b u t t h e i m p o s s i b l e m o m e n t o f t h e
'birth o f subjectivity', o f the negative gesture o f c o n t r a c t i o n / w i t h d r a w a l
t h a t r e p l a c e s r e a l i t y w i t h membra disjecta, w i t h a s e r i e s o f o r g a n s as s t a n d -
ins f o r t h e ' i m m o r t a l ' l i b i d o . T h e m o n s t r o u s R e a l c o n c e a l e d by t h e I d e a s
o f R e a s o n is n o t t h e n o u m e n a l , b u t t h i s p r i m o r d i a l s p a c e o f 'wild' pre-
synthetic imagination, the impossible domain o f transcendental freedom/
s p o n t a n e i t y a t its p u r e s t , p r i o r t o its s u b o r d i n a t i o n to any self-imposed
Law, the d o m a i n g l i m p s e d m o m e n t a r i l y in various ' e x t r e m e ' points o f
post-Renaissance art, f r o m Hieronymus Bosch to t h e Surrealists. This
d o m a i n is i m a g i n a r y , b u t n o t y e t t h e I m a g i n a r y qua s p e c u l a r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n
o f t h e s u b j e c t w i t h a fixed i m a g e , t h a t is, p r i o r t o t h e i m a g i n a r y i d e n t i f i
c a t i o n as f o r m a t i v e o f t h e e g o . S o t h e g r e a t i m p l i c i t a c h i e v e m e n t o f K a n t
is t h e assertion not o f the gap between transcendentally constituted
p h e n o m e n a l reality a n d the t r a n s c e n d e n t n o u m e n a l d o m a i n , but o f the
' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' b e t w e e n t h e two: i f o n e b r i n g s h i s l i n e o f t h o u g h t t o
its c o n c l u s i o n , o n e has to presuppose, between direct animality and
h u m a n f r e e d o m s u b o r d i n a t e d to Law, the monstrosity o f a pre-synthetic
imagination 'run a m o k ' , g e n e r a t i n g spectral apparitions o f partial objects.
I t is o n l y a t this l e v e l t h a t , in t h e g u i s e o f t h e p a r t i a l l i b i d o - o b j e c t s , w e
encounter the impossible object correlative to the pure void o f the
subject's absolute spontaneity: these partial objects ('here a b l o o d y h e a d
- t h e r e a n o t h e r white ghastly a p p a r i t i o n ' ) are the impossible forms in the
guise o f which t h e s u b j e c t qua absolute spontaneity 'encounters itself
among objects'.
A s f o r L a c a n , it is o f t e n n o t e d t h a t his classic a c c o u n t o f i m a g i n a r y
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a l r e a d y p r e s u p p o s e s t h e g a p to b e f i l l e d b y it, t h e h o r r i f y i n g
e x p e r i e n c e o f d i s p e r s e d ' o r g a n s w i t h o u t a b o d y ' , o f le corps morcele, o f its
membra disjecta f r e e l y f l o a t i n g a r o u n d - it is a t this l e v e l t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r
t h e d e a t h d r i v e a t its m o s t r a d i c a l . A n d , a g a i n , it is this d i m e n s i o n o f p r e -
phantasmic and pre-synthetic imagination from which Heidegger
r e t r e a t e d w h e n h e a b a n d o n e d t h e i d e a o f m a i n t a i n i n g K a n t as t h e c e n t r a l
p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e i n h i s d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e a n a l y t i c o f Dasein. Further
m o r e , the s a m e m o v e m e n t s h o u l d b e r e p e a t e d at the level o f i n t e r s u b j e c -
tivity: t h e H e i d e g g e r i a n Mit-Sein, t h e f a c t t h a t Dasein s being-in-the-world
a l w a y s - a l r e a d y r e l a t e s t o o t h e r Daseins, is n o t t h e p r i m a r y phenomenon.
P r i o r t o it, t h e r e is a r e l a t i o n s h i p to a n o t h e r subject who is n o t yet
properly 'subjectivized', a p a r t n e r in a discursive situation, b u t o n e w h o
r e m a i n s t h e ' n e i g h b o u r ' as t h e e x - t i m a t e f o r e i g n b o d y a b s o l u t e l y c l o s e t o
5 3
us. F o r F r e u d a n d L a c a n , ' n e i g h b o u r ' is d e f i n i t e l y o n e o f t h e n a m e s o f
das Ungeheure, o f the Monstrous: what is a t s t a k e in the process of

'Oedipalization', the establishment o f the rule o f the paternal 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 Eraserhead,
his first f i l m , a s t r a n g e rumour began 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
1
the point o f h e a r i n g inaudible n o i s e s / '
The 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,
invisible level, so that, with special glasses o n , we can literally 'see

5 ! i
ideology'. . . .
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 o f proto-speech from the
explicit act o f symbolic assumption: ' 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
5 0
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 . ' 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 will
have 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 pre-
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 than
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, 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 too
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]. 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 pre-
ontological 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
a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h G e r m a n I d e a l i s t s p l e a d e d t h e ' p a n - l o g i c i s t ' r e d u c t i o n
o f a l l r e a l i t y t o t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e N o t i o n ' s s e l f - m e d i a t i o n ) . K a n t was t h e
first t o d e t e c t t h i s c r a c k i n t h e o n t o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e o f r e a l i t y , i f ( w h a t w e
' e x p e r i e n c e a s ) ' o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y ' is n o t s i m p l y g i v e n ' o u t t h e r e ' , w a i t i n g t o
be perceived by the subject, but an artificial composite constituted
; t h r o u g h the subject's active participation - t h a t is, t h r o u g h t h e a c t o f
transcendental synthesis - t h e n the question crops up s o o n e r o r later:
w h a t is t h e s t a t u s o f t h e u n c a n n y X t h a t precedes the transcendentally
c o n s t i t u t e d reality? F.W.J. S c h e l l i n g gave t h e m o s t d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t o f this
X in his n o t i o n o f t h e G r o u n d o f E x i s t e n c e - o f that which 'in God
H i m s e l f is n o t y e t G o d ' : t h e ' d i v i n e m a d n e s s ' , t h e o b s c u r e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l
d o m a i n o f 'drives', t h e pre-logical R e a l that forever r e m a i n s t h e elusive
G r o u n d o f R e a s o n t h a t c a n n e v e r b e g r a s p e d 'as s u c h ' , m e r e l y g l i m p s e d
i n t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f its w i t h d r a w a l . . . A l t h o u g h tliis d i m e n s i o n may
a p p e a r t o b e u t t e r l y f o r e i g n t o H e g e l ' s ' a b s o l u t e i d e a l i s m ' , it was n e v e r t h e
less H e g e l h i m s e l f w h o p r o v i d e d its m o s t p o i g n a n t d e s c r i p t i o n i n the
q u o t e d p a s s a g e f r o m t h e Jenaer RealphUosophie: is n o t t h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l
s p a c e o f ' t h e n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' , in w h i c h ' h e r e s h o o t s a b l o o d y h e a d -
t h e r e a n o t h e r w h i t e g h a s t l y a p p a r i t i o n , s u d d e n l y h e r e b e f o r e it, a n d j u s t
so disappears', t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t d e s c r i p t i o n o f L y n c h ' s universe?
T h i s p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l d i m e n s i o n is b e s t d i s c e r n e d t h r o u g h t h e c r u c i a l
Hegelian gesture o f transposing epistemological limitation into ontologi
c a l f a u l t . T h a t is t o say: all H e g e l d o e s is, i n a way, t o s u p p l e m e n t K a n t ' s
well-known motto o f the transcendental constitution o f reality ('the
conditions o f possibility o f o u r knowledge are at the same time the
c o n d i t i o n s o f p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e o b j e c t o f o u r k n o w l e d g e ' ) b y its n e g a t i v e -
t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f o u r k n o w l e d g e (its f a i l u r e t o g r a s p t h e W h o l e o f B e i n g ,
t h e way o u r k n o w l e d g e g e t s i n e x o r a b l y e n t a n g l e d i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a n d
i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s ) is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e v e r y o b j e c t o f o u r
k n o w l e d g e , t h a t is, t h e g a p s a n d v o i d s i n o u r k n o w l e d g e o f r e a l i t y a r e
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e g a p s a n d v o i d s in t h e ' r e a l ' o n t o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e i t s e l f . I t
m a y s e e m t h a t h e r e H e g e l is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f K a n t : d o e s h e n o t , i n
c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o K a n t ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t it is i m p o s s i b l e t o c o n c e i v e o f t h e
u n i v e r s e as a W h o l e , d e p l o y t h e l a s t a n d m o s t a m b i t i o u s g l o b a l o n t o l o g i c a l
e d i f i c e o f t h e t o t a l i t y o f B e i n g ? T h i s i m p r e s s i o n , h o w e v e r , is m i s l e a d i n g :
w h a t i t fails t o t a k e n o t e o f is t h e w a y t h e i n n e r m o s t 'motor' o f the
d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s is t h e i n t e r p l a y b e t w e e n e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l o b s t a c l e a n d
ontological deadlock. In the course o f a dialectical reflexive turn, the
s u b j e c t is c o m p e l l e d t o a s s u m e t h a t t h e i n s u f f i c i e n c y o f h i s knowledge
with r e g a r d to reality signals the m o r e radical insufficiency o f reality itself
(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 really-
mean?' 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 (here: the
same line) 'sutures' the fundamental ambiguity and 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?
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 non-localizable
I sounds. T h e nightmare s e q u e n c e o f The Elephant Man, f o r e x a m p l e , is
accompanied by a strange vibrating noise that 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 English,
rendered 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 logos.
This brings us to t h e f u n d a m e n t a l feature 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
shudders or stiffens - like the father who, upon learning that his
unmarried innocent daughter is p r e g n a n t , first c a l m l y r e m a r k s 'OK,
what's the big deal?', a n d only later, after a c o u p l e o f s e c o n d s , turns pale
a n d starts t o s h o u t . . . ) . W h a t we a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e is - i n H e g e l e s e -
t h e m i n i m a l g a p b e t w e e n I n - i t s e l f a n d F o r - i t s e l f ; D e r r i d a d e s c r i b e d this
g a p a p r o p o s o f t h e n o t i o n o f gift: as l o n g as a gift is n o t r e c o g n i z e d , it ' i s '
n o t fully a gift; t h e m o m e n t it is r e c o g n i z e d , i t is n o l o n g e r a p u r e gift,
s i n c e it is a l r e a d y c a u g h t i n t h e c y c l e o f e x c h a n g e . A n o t h e r e x e m p l a r y
case w o u l d b e t h e t e n s i o n in a n e m e r g i n g love r e l a t i o n s h i p : we all know
the charm o f the situation j u s t before t h e m a g i c s i l e n c e is b r o k e n -
t h e two p a r t n e r s are already assured o f their mutual attraction, erotic
t e n s i o n h a n g s in t h e a i r , t h e s i t u a t i o n i t s e l f s e e m s t o b e ' p r e g n a n t ' with
m e a n i n g , to p r e c i p i t a t e itself towards t h e W o r d , to wait for t h e W o r d , to
b e i n s e a r c h o f t h e W o r d w h i c h will n a m e it - y e t o n c e t h e W o r d is
pronounced, it n e v e r fully fits, it n e c e s s a r i l y b r i n g s a b o u t t h e e f f e c t o f
disappointment, the charm is lost, every birth of meaning is an
abortion. . . .
T h i s p a r a d o x points towards the key feature o f dialectical materialism
w h i c h is m o s t c l e a r l y p e r c e p t i b l e i n c h a o s t h e o r y a n d q u a n t u m p h y s i c s
( a n d w h i c h , p e r h a p s , d e f i n e s w h a t we call ' p o s t m o d e r n i s m ' ) : a c u r s o r y
approach ignorant o f details reveals (or even generates) the features
w h i c h r e m a i n o u t o f r e a c h to a d e t a i l e d , e x c e e d i n g l y close a p p r o a c h . As
is w e l l k n o w n , c h a o s t h e o r y was b o r n out o f the imperfection o f the
m e a s u r i n g apparatus: w h e n t h e s a m e data, repetitively p r o c e s s e d by the
same computer program, led to radically different results, scientists
b e c a m e aware that a difference in data t o o small to b e n o t e d can p r o d u c e
a gargantuan d i f f e r e n c e in t h e final o u t c o m e . . . . T h e s a m e p a r a d o x is
o p e r a t i v e in t h e very f o u n d a t i o n o f q u a n t u m physics: t h e d i s t a n c e towards
the 'thing itself ( t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e i m p r e c i s i o n o f o u r m e a s u r i n g , t h a t is,
the b a r r i e r o f ' c o m p l e m e n t a r i t y ' w h i c h prevents us from simultaneously
a c c o m p l i s h i n g d i f f e r e n t m e a s u r i n g s ) is part of the 'thing itself, not merely
o u r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l d e f e c t : t h a t is, i n o r d e r f o r ( w h a t we p e r c e i v e a s )
' r e a l i t y ' t o a p p e a r , s o m e o f its f e a t u r e s have to remain 'unspecified'.
Is n o t t h e g a p b e t w e e n the level o f q u a n t u m p o t e n t i a l i t i e s a n d the
m o m e n t o f ' r e g i s t r a t i o n ' w h i c h c o n f e r s a c t u a l i t y o n it h o m o l o g o u s i n a
way t o t h e l o g i c o f ' d o u b l e t a k e ' - to the g a p b e t w e e n the e v e n t itself
(a f a t h e r being informed o f his d a u g h t e r ' s pregnancy) and its sym
b o l i c r e g i s t r a t i o n - t h e m o m e n t w h e n t h e p r o c e s s ' a p p e a r s t o i t s e l f , is
registered? O f crucial i m p o r t a n c e here is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n this
dialectical-materialist n o t i o n o f 'symbolic registration' which, 'after the
THE D E A D L O C K OF T R A N S C E N D E N T A L I M A G I N A T I O N 59
: f a c t ' , c o n f e r s a c t u a l i t y o n t h e f a c t in q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e i d e a l i s t e q u a t i o n
!. esse = percipi: t h e a c t o f ( s y m b o l i c ) r e g i s t r a t i o n , t h e ' s e c o n d t a k e ' , always
: c o m e s after a m i n i m a l delay a n d r e m a i n s forever i n c o m p l e t e , cursorv, a
g a p s e p a r a t i n g it f r o m t h e I n - i t s e l f o f t h e r e g i s t e r e d p r o c e s s - y e t p r e c i s e l y
as s u c h , it is p a r t o f t h e ' t h i n g i t s e l f , as i f t h e ' t h i n g ' i n q u e s t i o n c a n fully
r e a l i z e its o n t o l o g i c a l s t a t u s o n l y b y m e a n s o f a m i n i m a l d e l a y w i t h r e g a r d
to itself.
T h e p a r a d o x t h u s lies in t h e f a c t t h a t 'false' appearance is comprised within
the 'thing itself. And, i n c i d e n t a l l y , therein lies t h e dialectical 'unity of
e s s e n c e a n d a p p e a r a n c e ' c o m p l e t e l y m i s s e d by t h e t e x t b o o k p l a t i t u d e s o n
h o w ' e s s e n c e m u s t a p p e a r ' , a n d so o n : t h e a p p r o x i m a t e 'view f r o m afar'
w h i c h i g n o r e s all t h e d e t a i l s a n d l i m i t s i t s e l f t o t h e ' m e r e a p p e a r a n c e ' , is
nearer the 'essence' than a close gaze; the 'essence' o f a thing thus
paradoxically constitutes itself t h r o u g h t h e very r e m o v a l o f t h e 'false'
r , K
appearance from t h e R e a l i n its i m m e d i a c y . W e thus have three ele
m e n t s , n o t o n l y e s s e n c e a n d its a p p e a r i n g : first, t h e r e is r e a l i t y ; w i t h i n it,
there is t h e 'interface'-screen o f appearances; finally, o n this screen,
'essence' appears. The c a t c h is t h u s that appearance is l i t e r a l l y the
appearing/emerging o f the essence - that is, t h e o n l y p l a c e f o r the
e s s e n c e t o d w e l l . T h e s t a n d a r d I d e a l i s t r e d u c t i o n o f r e a l i t y as s u c h , in its
e n t i r e t y , t o t h e m e r e a p p e a r a n c e o f s o m e h i d d e n E s s e n c e falls s h o r t h e r e :
w i t h i n t h e d o m a i n o f ' r e a l i t y ' itself, a l i n e m u s t b e d r a w n w h i c h s e p a r a t e s
'raw' reality f r o m t h e s c r e e n t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e h i d d e n E s s e n c e o f reality
a p p e a r s , s o t h a t i f w e t a k e away t h i s m e d i u m o f a p p e a r a n c e , we l o s e t h e
v e r y ' e s s e n c e ' w h i c h a p p e a r s in it. . . .
Kant's A c o s m i s m
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 Being-in-itself provokes such an unease among the
commentators on Kant ( 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 .
Its l e s s o n , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e r e is n o a c t i v e f r e e a g e n t w i t h o u t this
phantasmic support, without this O t h e r Scene in which he is totally
manipulated by the O t h e r . In short, the K a n t i a n p r o h i b i t i o n o f direct
access to the n o u m e n a l domain should be reformulated: what should
r e m a i n i n a c c e s s i b l e t o us is n o t t h e n o u m e n a l R e a l , b u t o u r fundamental
fantasy itself - t h e m o m e n t t h e s u b j e c t c o m e s t o o c l o s e to this p h a n t a s m i c
c o r e , h e l o s e s t h e c o n s i s t e n c y o f his e x i s t e n c e .
S o , f o r K a n t , d i r e c t a c c e s s t o t h e n o u m e n a l d o m a i n w o u l d d e p r i v e us o f
t h e v e r y ' s p o n t a n e i t y ' t h a t f o r m s t h e c o r e o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r e e d o m : it
w o u l d t u r n us i n t o l i f e l e s s a u t o m a t a o r , t o p u t i t i n t o d a y ' s t e r m s , into
c o m p u t e r s , i n t o ' t h i n k i n g m a c h i n e s ' . B u t is t h i s c o n c l u s i o n r e a l l y u n a v o i d
a b l e ? Is t h e s t a t u s o f c o n s c i o u s n e s s b a s i c a l l y t h a t o f f r e e d o m i n a s y s t e m
o f r a d i c a l d e t e r m i n i s m ? A r e w e f r e e o n l y i n s o f a r as w e fail t o r e c o g n i z e
t h e c a u s e s d e t e r m i n i n g u s ? T o save u s f r o m t h i s p r e d i c a m e n t , w e s h o u l d
again displace the o n t o l o g i c a l o b s t a c l e into a positive o n t o l o g i c a l c o n
d i t i o n . T h a t is t o say: t h e m i s t a k e o f t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f ( s e l f - ) c o n s c i o u s
n e s s with m i s r e c o g n i t i o n , with an e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l o b s t a c l e , is t h a t it
stealthily ( r e ) i n t r o d u c e s the standard, p r e m o d e r n , 'cosmological' notion
o f r e a l i t y as a p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f b e i n g : in s u c h a fully c o n s t i t u t e d p o s i t i v e
'chain of being' there is, o f c o u r s e , n o place for the subject, so the
d i m e n s i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y c a n b e c o n c e i v e d o f o n l y as s o m e t h i n g s t r i c t l y
c o - d e p e n d e n t with the e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l m i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e true positiv-
ity o f b e i n g . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e o n l y way t o a c c o u n t e f f e c t i v e l y f o r the
status o f ( s e l f - ) c o n s c i o u s n e s s is t o a s s e r t the ontological incompleteness of
'reality' itself, t h e r e is ' r e a l i t y ' o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e r e is a n o n t o l o g i c a l g a p , a
c r a c k , at its v e r y h e a r t - t h a t is, a t r a u m a t i c e x c e s s , a f o r e i g n b o d y that
cannot be integrated i n t o it. T h i s b r i n g s us b a c k to t h e n o t i o n o f t h e
' n i g h t o f the w o r l d ' : in this m o m e n t a r y s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e positive order
o f r e a l i t y , we c o n f r o n t t h e o n t o l o g i c a l g a p b e c a u s e o f w h i c h ' r e a l i t y ' is
n e v e r a c o m p l e t e , s e l f - e n c l o s e d , p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f b e i n g . I t is o n l y t h i s
e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e p s y c h o t i c w i t h d r a w a l f r o m r e a l i t y , o f t h e a b s o l u t e self-
contraction, which a c c o u n t s for the mysterious 'fact' o f transcendental
f r e e d o m - f o r a ( s e l f - ) c o n s c i o u s n e s s t h a t is a c t u a l l y ' s p o n t a n e o u s ' , whose
s p o n t a n e i t y is n o t a n e f f e c t o f m i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f s o m e ' o b j e c t i v e ' p r o c e s s .
Only at this level are we able to appreciate Hegel's breathtaking

achievement: far from regressing from K a n t ' s c r i t i c i s m to 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
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 Posthu-
mum). F r o m o u r p e r s p e c t i v e , h o w e v e r , this S e c r e t H a r m o n y is p r e c i s e l y
t h e t e m p t a t i o n t o b e r e s i s t e d : t h e p r o b l e m f o r u s is h o w w e a r e t o c o n c e i v e
o f t h e f o u n d i n g gesture o f subjectivity, t h e 'passive v i o l e n c e ' , t h e negative
a c t o f ( n o t yet i m a g i n a t i o n , b u t ) a b s t r a c t i o n , self-withdrawal into t h e
'night o f the world'. This 'abstraction' is the a b y s s c o n c e a l e d b y t h e
o n t o l o g i c a l synthesis: by t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i m a g i n a t i o n c o n s t i t u t i v e o f
r e a l i t y - as s u c h , i t is t h e p o i n t o f t h e m y s t e r i o u s e m e r g e n c e o f t r a n s c e n
dental 'spontaneity'.
T h e p r o b l e m w i t h H e i d e g g e r , t h e r e f o r e , is t h a t h e limits t h e a n a l y s i s o f
s c h e m a t i s m to t r a n s c e n d e n t a l analytics ( t o U n d e r s t a n d i n g , to t h e categor
ies constitutive o f reality), n e g l e c t i n g to c o n s i d e r h o w t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f
s c h e m a t i s m r e - e m e r g e s i n t h e Critique of Judgement, where Kant conceives
o f t h e S u b l i m e p r e c i s e l y as a n attempt t o schematize the Ideas o f Reason
t h e m s e l v e s : t h e S u b l i m e c o n f r o n t s us with t h e failure o f i m a g i n a t i o n , with
t h a t w h i c h r e m a i n s forever a n d a p r i o r i u n - i m a g i n a b l e — a n d it is h e r e
t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r t h e s u b j e c t qua t h e v o i d o f n e g a t i v i t y . I n short, i t is
precisely b e c a u s e o f t h e limitation o f H e i d e g g e r ' s analysis o f s c h e m a t i s m
to t r a n s c e n d e n t a l analytics that h e is u n a b l e t o address the excessive
d i m e n s i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y , its i n h e r e n t m a d n e s s .
F r o m o u r p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e p r o b l e m w i t h H e i d e g g e r is t h u s , i n t h e last
analysis, t h e following o n e : t h e L a c a n i a n r e a d i n g e n a b l e s us to u n e a r t h in
C a r t e s i a n s u b j e c t i v i t y its i n h e r e n t t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e m o m e n t o f e x c e s s
( ' d i a b o l i c a l Evil' in K a n t , the ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' in H e g e l . . .) a n d the
s u b s e q u e n t a t t e m p t to gentrify-domesticate-normalize this e x c e s s . A g a i n
a n d again, post-Cartesian p h i l o s o p h e r s are c o m p e l l e d , by the inherent
logic of their philosophical project, to articulate a certain excessive
m o m e n t o f 'madness' i n h e r e n t t o cogito, w h i c h t h e y t h e n immediately
e n d e a v o u r t o ' r e n o r m a l i z e ' . A n d t h e p r o b l e m w i t h H e i d e g g e r is t h a t h i s
n o t i o n o f m o d e r n subjectivity d o e s n o t s e e m to a c c o u n t for this i n h e r e n t
e x c e s s . I n s h o r t , t h i s n o t i o n s i m p l y d o e s n o t ' c o v e r ' t h a t a s p e c t o f cogito
t h a t l e a d s L a c a n t o c l a i m t h a t cogito is t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e u n c o n s c i o u s .
Or - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - the paradoxical achievement o f
L a c a n , w h i c h u s u a l l y p a s s e s u n n o t i c e d e v e n a m o n g h i s a d v o c a t e s , is t h a t ,
on t h e very b e h a l f o f psychoanalysis, h e returns to the Modern Age,
' d c c o n t e x t u a l i z e d ' r a t i o n a l i s t n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t . T h a t is t o say: o n e o f t h e
c l i c h e s o f t o d a y ' s A m e r i c a n a p p r o p r i a t i o n o f H e i d e g g e r is t o e m p h a s i z e
h o w h e , a l o n g with W i t t g e n s t e i n , M e r l e a u - P o n t y , a n d o t h e r s , e l a b o r a t e d
the conceptual framework that e n a b l e s us to get rid o f t h e rationalist
n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t as a n a u t o n o m o u s a g e n t w h o , e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e w o r l d ,
p r o c e s s e s d a t a p r o v i d e d b y t h e s e n s e s in a c o m p u t e r - l i k e way. H e i d e g g e r ' s
notion o f 'being-in-the-world' indicates o u r irreducible a n d unsurpassable
' e m b e d d e d n e s s ' in a c o n c r e t e a n d u l t i m a t e l y c o n t i n g e n t life-world: we are
a l w a y s - a l r e a d y in t h e w o r l d , e n g a g e d i n a n e x i s t e n t i a l p r o j e c t a g a i n s t a
background that eludes our grasp and forever remains the opaque
h o r i z o n i n t o w h i c h w e a r c ' t h r o w n ' as f i n i t e b e i n g s . A n d i t is c u s t o m a r y t o
interpret the opposition between consciousness and the Unconscious
along the same lines: the d i s e m b o d i e d E g o stands for rational conscious
ness, whereas the ' U n c o n s c i o u s ' is s y n o n y m o u s w i t h t h e o p a q u e back
g r o u n d t h a t w e c a n n e v e r fully m a s t e r , s i n c e w e a r e a l w a y s - a l r e a d y p a r t o f
it, c a u g h t i n it.
Lacan, however, in an unprecedented gesture, claims the exact
o p p o s i t e : t h e F r e u d i a n ' U n c o n s c i o u s ' has n o t h i n g w h a t s o e v e r to d o with
the structurally necessary a n d irreducible o p a q u e n e s s o f the b a c k g r o u n d ,
o f the l i f e - c o n t e x t in which we, the always-already e n g a g e d a g e n t s , a r e
embedded; the 'Unconscious' is, rather, the disembodied rational
m a c h i n e t h a t f o l l o w s its p a t h i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s
l i f e - w o r l d ; it s t a n d s f o r t h e r a t i o n a l s u b j e c t i n s o f a r as i t is o r i g i n a l l y ' o u t
o f j o i n t ' , in d i s c o r d with its c o n t e x t u a l i z e d s i t u a t i o n : t h e ' U n c o n s c i o u s ' is
the crack that makes the subject's primordial stance s o m e t h i n g o t h e r than
' b e i n g-i n-tb e-wo r i d ' .
I n t h i s way, o n e c a n a l s o p r o v i d e a n e w , u n e x p e c t e d s o l u t i o n t o t h e o l d
p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m o f h o w the subject can disengage itself from
its c o n c r e t e l i f e - w o r l d a n d ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e i t s e l f as a d i s e m b o d i e d rational
a g e n t : t h i s d i s e n g a g e m e n t c a n o c c u r o n l y b e c a u s e t h e r e is f r o m t h e v e r y
o u t s e t s o m e t h i n g i n t h e s u b j e c t t h a t r e s i s t s its full i n c l u s i o n i n t o its l i f e -
w o r l d c o n t e x t , a n d t h i s ' s o m e t h i n g ' , o f c o u r s e , is t h e u n c o n s c i o u s as t h e
psychic m a c h i n e which disregards the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f the 'reality prin
c i p l e ' . T h i s shows how, in t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n o u r i m m e r s i o n in the
w o r l d as e n g a g e d a g e n t s a n d t h e m o m e n t a r y c o l l a p s e o f t h i s i m m e r s i o n
i n a n x i e t y , t h e r e is n o p l a c e f o r t h e U n c o n s c i o u s . T h e p a r a d o x is t h a t
o n c e we t h r o w o u t t h e C a r t e s i a n r a t i o n a l s u b j e c t o f s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s , we
lose the U n c o n s c i o u s .
P e r h a p s t h i s is a l s o t h e m o m e n t o f t r u t h i n H u s s e r l ' s r e s i s t a n c e a g a i n s t
e m b r a c i n g Being and Time - i n h i s i n s i s t e n c e t h a t H e i d e g g e r m i s s e s t h e
p r o p e r t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s t a n c e o f p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l epohe a n d ultimately
a g a i n c o n c e i v e s Dasein as a w o r l d l y e n t i t y : a l t h o u g h t h i s r e p r o a c h slricto
sensu m i s s e s its m a r k , it d o e s express the apprehension o f how, in
Heidegger's notion o f being-in-the-world, the point o f 'madness' that
c h a r a c t e r i z e s the C a r t e s i a n subjectivity, t h e self-withdrawal o f the cogito
i n t o itself, t h e e c l i p s e o f t h e w o r l d , d i s a p p e a r s . . . . I t is w e l l k n o w n how-
H e i d e g g e r turned a r o u n d the famous Kantian statement that the great
s c a n d a l o f p h i l o s o p h y is t h a t t h e p a s s a g e f r o m our representations of
o b j e c t s t o o b j e c t s t h e m s e l v e s was n o t p r o p e r l y p r o v e n . F o r H e i d e g g e r , t h e
t r u e s c a n d a l is t h a t t h i s p a s s a g e is p e r c e i v e d as a p r o b l e m a t a l l , s i n c e t h e
fundamental situation o f Dasein as b e i n g - m - t h e - w o r l d , as always-already
e n g a g e d with o b j e c t s , r e n d e r s t h e v e r y f o r m u l a t i o n o f s u c h a 'problem'
meaningless. F r o m o u r perspective, however, the 'passage' (i.e. the sub
j e c t ' s e n t r y i n t o t h e w o r l d , h i s o r h e r c o n s t i t u t i o n as a n a g e n t engaged
i n r e a l i t y , i n t o w h i c h s h e / h e is t h r o w n ) is n o t o n l y a l e g i t i m a t e p r o b l e m ,
5 9
but even the p r o b l e m o f psychoanalysis. In short, I intend to read
F r e u d ' s s t a t e m e n t t h a t ' t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is o u t s i d e t i m e ' a g a i n s t t h e b a c k
g r o u n d o f H e i d e g g e r ' s t h e s i s o n t e m p o r a l i t y as t h e o n t o l o g i c a l h o r i z o n o f
t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f B e i n g : p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as it is ' o u t s i d e t i m e ' , the
s t a t u s o f d i e U n c o n s c i o u s ( d r i v e ) is (as L a c a n p u t it in Seminar XT] ' p r e -
o n t o l o g i c a l ' . T h e p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l is t h e d o m a i n o f t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d '
i n w h i c h t h e v o i d o f s u b j e c t i v i t y is c o n f r o n t e d b y t h e s p e c t r a l p r o t o - r c a l i t y
o f ' p a r t i a l o b j e c t s ' , b o m b a r d e d w i t h t h e s e a p p a r i t i o n s o f le corps morcele.
W h a t we e n c o u n t e r h e r e is t h e d o m a i n o f p u r e , r a d i c a l f a n t a s y as p r e -
t e m p o r a l spatiality.
Husserl's distinction between eidetic and phenomenologico-transcenderital
reduction is crucial here: nothing 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 - instead
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 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 reduction 'derealizes' them, accepting them as the
pure non-substantial p h e n o m e n a l f l o w ( a s h i f t t h a t is p e r h a p s 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 the
other hand, although Husseii's phenomenologico-transcendental reduc
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 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
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. (So

when we e n c o u n t e r an object from the distant historical past - 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 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,
undermined 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 towards
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 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 (reasserted
today in various 'holistic' approaches) also differs 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 the
w o r l d . O f c o u r s e , H e i d e g g e r ' s n a m e f o r t h e way t h e e n g a g e d agent's
i m m e r s i o n i n h i s w o r l d c a n b e s h a t t e r e d is ' a n x i e t y ' : o n e o f t h e c e n t r a l
m o t i f s o f Being and Time is t h a t a n y c o n c r e t e w o r l d - e x p e r i e n c e is u l t i m a t e l y
c o n t i n g e n t a n d , as s u c h , always u n d e r t h r e a t ; i n c o n t r a s t t o a n animal,
Damn n e v e r fully fits its s u r r o u n d i n g s ; its i m m e r s i o n i n its d e t e r m i n a t e
Life-World is always p r e c a r i o u s , a n d can be undermined by a sudden
e x p e r i e n c e o f its fragility a n d c o n t i n g e n c y . T h e k e y q u e s t i o n , therefore,
is: how does this shattering experience o f anxiety, which extraneates

Dasein to its immersion in its contingent way of life, 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, as the founding gesture o f subjectivity?
How does the Heideggerian being-towards-death relate to the Freudian
death drive? In contrast to some attempts to identify them (found in
Lacan's work of the early 1950s), one should insist on their radical
incompatibility: 'death drive' designates the ' u n d e a d ' lamella, the 'immor
tal' 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 pseudo-
event, 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.
3 4 . O n this crucial point, see Z d r a v k o K o b e , Automaton transcendentale I, Ljubljana:

Analecta 1995.
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 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\(Psycho-
Analysis, 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, Hiisserl-
iaira, 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 the
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 ' 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 , i t will l e a d to a n e w level o f collective
c o n s c i o u s n e s s , o f shared 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
3
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 - 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 modern
European consciousness arose - in short, the Fall 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 of the Fall (the forgetting of the
ancient wisdom) coincides with its exact opposite, with the longed-for next step in
evolution. 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 the a n c i e n t holistic W i s d o m , but that it did not break with it
thoroughly enough: 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.
4
In Stales of Injury, Wendy Brown refers to t h e s a m e logic o f the
dialectical process when she emphasizes 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
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 tvithout whites; w o r k e r s a world
without capitalists. . . . 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 , an
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 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 historical
c o n t e x t . I n t h i s way, it is n o t 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 to
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 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 'negation'
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 xuithin its symbolic confines, so
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 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 term
' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' in Capital, 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, which
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 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
themselves expropriated, s i n c e t h e very f o r m o f private ownership is

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 , 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 a limit to the very forces of
5
' 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 ) .
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 reflect on its
limitations, without endeavouring t o s u p p l a n t it. A g a i n , o f c o u r s e , 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 with power's criticism: 'Yes, we do w a n t power, and why
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 ? '
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
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
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) - the
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 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 ' , giving b o d y to the
d i s c o n t e n t in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p - p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , h o w e v e r , s h e / h e is
n e c e s s a r y i f t h i s d i s c o n t e n t is t o b e c o m e ' f o r i t s e l f , i f i t is t o a c t u a l i z e
itself. T h e p a s s a g e f r o m I n - i t s e l f to F o r - i t s e l f t h u s i n v o l v e s t h e l o g i c o f
r e p e t i t i o n : w h e n a t h i n g b e c o m e s ' f o r i t s e l f , n o t h i n g actually c h a n g e s in
6
it; it j u s t r e p e a t e d l y asserts ('re-marks') what it a l r e a d y was i n i t s e l f .
' N e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' is t h u s n o t h i n g b u t r e p e t i t i o n a t its p u r e s t : i n t h e
first m o v e , a c e r t a i n g e s t u r e is a c c o m p l i s h e d a n d fails; t h e n , i n t h e s e c o n d
m o v e , this s a m e g e s t u r e is s i m p l y repeated. R e a s o n is n o t h i n g but the
repetition o f Understanding t h a t d e p r i v e s it o f t h e e x c e s s b a g g a g e o f
s u p r a s e n s i b l e i r r a t i o n a l B e y o n d , j u s t as C h r i s t is n o t o p p o s e d t o A d a m b u t
merely the second Adam.
T h e s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l i t y o f t h i s p a s s a g e is b e s t c a p t u r e d b y W . C . F i e l d s ' s
great o n e - l i n e r w h i c h provides his own version o f H e g e l ' s d i c t u m that the
s e c r e t s o f t h e E g y p t i a n s w e r e s e c r e t s a l s o f o r t h e E g y p t i a n s t h e m s e l v e s : you
can deceive only a crook; t h a t is, y o u r d e c e p t i o n will s u c c e e d o n l y i f it
mobilizes and manipulates the victim's own propensity to cheat. T h i s

paradox is c o n f i r m e d by every successful swindler: 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 'negation' - deception of the
nonexistent third victim - I effectively ' n e g a t e myself, 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 of politics
n e c e s s a r i l y e n d s u p i n its v e r y o p p o s i t e : i n t h e n o l e s s r a d i c a l politicization
of morals. T h o s e w h o d i r e c t l y t r a n s l a t e t h e p o l i t i c a l a n t a g o n i s m i n w h i c h
they participate into moral terms (the struggle o f G o o d and Evil, o f
honesty against c o r r u p t i o n ) are s o o n e r or later c o m p e l l e d to p e r f o r m the
political i n s t r u m e n t a l i z a t i o n o f t h e d o m a i n o f m o r a l s : to s u b o r d i n a t e t h e i r
m o r a l assessments to t h e actual needs o f their political struggle - T
s u p p o r t X b e c a u s e h e is m o r a l l y g o o d ' i m p e r c e p t i b l y drifts i n t o ' X m u s t
b e g o o d b e c a u s e I s u p p o r t h i m ' . A n a l o g o u s l y , t h e leftist d i r e c t p o l i t i c i z a
t i o n o f s e x u a l i t y ( ' t h e p e r s o n a l is p o l i t i c a l ' , t h a t is, t h e n o t i o n o f s e x u a l i t y
as t h e a r e n a f o r t h e p o l i t i c a l p o w e r s t r u g g l e ) u n a v o i d a b l y c h a n g e s i n t o
the sexualization o f politics (the direct g r o u n d i n g o f political oppression
in t h e fact o f sexual difference, w h i c h s o o n e r o r later ends u p in s o m e
version o f the New Age transformation o f politics into the struggle
between Feminine and Masculine Principles . .. ) .
T h e Dialectical Anamorphosis
T h e l a s t two e x a m p l e s c l e a r l y d i s p l a y h o w H e g e l ' s b e h e s t t o c o n c e i v e t h e
A b s o l u t e ' n o t o n l y as S u b s t a n c e , b u t a l s o as S u b j e c t ' d e n o t e s t h e e x a c t
o p p o s i t e o f w h a t it s e e m s t o m e a n (the absolute S u b j e c t ' s 'swallowing' -
i n t e g r a t i n g - t h e e n t i r e s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t t h r o u g h its a c t i v i t y o f m e d i a -
d o n ) : d o e s n o t H e g e l ' s Phenomenology of Spirit t e l l us a g a i n a n d a g a i n t h e
s a m e story o f the r e p e a t e d failure o f the s u b j e c t ' s e n d e a v o u r to realize his
p r o j e c t in social S u b s t a n c e , t o i m p o s e his vision o n t h e social u n i v e r s e -
t h e story o f h o w the 'big O t h e r ' , the social s u b s t a n c e , again a n d again
t h w a r t s h i s p r o j e c t a n d t u r n s it u p s i d e - d o w n ? L a c a n c a n t h u s b e a t l e a s t
partially e x c u s e d f o r his slip in c o n f o u n d i n g two s e p a r a t e 'figures o f
c o n s c i o u s n e s s ' f r o m Phenomenology (the 'Law o f the Heart' and the 'Beau
tiful S o u l ' ) ; w h a t t h e y s h a r e is t h e s a m e m a t r i x w h i c h , p e r h a p s e v e n m o r e
than the 'Unhappy Consciousness', condenses the basic operation of
Phenomenology: in b o t h cases, the subject endeavours to assert his particular
r i g h t e o u s a t t i t u d e , b u t t h e a c t u a l s o c i a l p e r c e p t i o n o f h i s a t t i t u d e is t h e
exact opposite o f his self-perception - for the social Substance, the
subject's righteousness equals crime.
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 very r e v e n g e o f the decentred Other against the
subject's presumption: 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
against the 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 '
is t h e subject's repression into the unconscious 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 ' presupposes
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 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 self-
relating 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 on the action which, in addition, does not speak from an
i m a g i n e d future p l a c e (the h e r o r e m e m b e r i n g past events in a f l a s h b a c k ) ,
b u t is c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s w i t h t h e e v e n t o n w h i c h it c o m m e n t s , e x p r e s s i n g
the s u b j e c t ' s doubts, a n x i e t i e s , a n d so on. T h e h e r o ' s voice-over d o e s n o t
e n c o m p a s s t h e d e p i c t e d s i t u a t i o n , b u t is i t s e l f e m b e d d e d in it, is a p a r t o f
it, e x p r e s s e s t h e s u b j e c t ' s e n g a g e m e n t in it.
No wonder, then, that this procedure strikes today's spectator as
r i d i c u l o u s - it is u n c a n n i l y c l o s e t o a n o t h e r s t a p l e H o l l y w o o d gesture:
when a person o n screen hears or sees something which takes h i m a b a c k
(as s t u p i d , u n b e l i e v a b l e , e t c . ) , h i s g a z e u s u a l l y s t i f f e n s , h e i n c l i n e s h i s
h e a d s l i g h t l y a n d l o o k s d i r e c t l y i n t o t h e c a m e r a , a c c o m p a n y i n g it w i t h
'What?' o r s o m e similar r e m a r k - i f the s c e n e o c c u r s in a television series,
this g e s t u r e is as a r u l e a c c o m p a n i e d b y c a n n e d l a u g h t e r , as w a s r e g u l a r l y
t h e c a s e in / Love Lucy. T h i s idiotic gesture signals the reflexive m o m e n t
o f r e g i s t r a t i o n : t h e a c t o r s ' d i r e c t i m m e r s i o n i n t h e i r n a r r a t i v e r e a l i t y is
momentarily perturbed; t h e a c t o r , as it w e r e , e x t r a c t s h i m s e l f f r o m the
narrative c o n t e x t and a s s u m e s t h e p o s i t i o n o f a n o b s e r v e r o f his own
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, this a p p a r e n t l y

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 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 between
naive objectivism a n d transcendental 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, in a n u n p r e c e d e n t e d way, the analogically constitutive
character of the subject's activity with the subject's irreducible pathological bias:
w h e n t h e s e two f e a t u r e s a r e t h o u g h t t o g e t h e r , c o n c e i v e d as c o - d e p e n d e n t ,
we o b t a i n t h e n o t i o n o f a pathological bias constitutive of 'reality' itself.
T h e L a c a n i a n n a m e f o r t h i s p a t h o l o g i c a l b i a s c o n s t i t u t i v e o f r e a l i t y is,
o f c o u r s e , anamorphosis. W h a t d o e s a n a m o r p h o s i s a c t u a l l y a m o u n t t o , say,
i n H o l b e i n ' s Ambassadors} A p a r t o f t h e p e r c e i v e d s c e n e is d i s t o r t e d in
s u c h a way t h a t it a c q u i r e s its p r o p e r contours only from the specific
v i e w p o i n t f r o m w h i c h t h e r e m a i n i n g r e a l i t y is b l u r r e d : w h e n w e c l e a r l y
p e r c e i v e t h e s t a i n as a s k u l l , a n d t h u s r e a c h t h e p o i n t o f ' t h e S p i r i t is a
b o n e ' , t h e r e s t o f r e a l i t y is n o l o n g e r d i s c e r n i b l e . W e t h u s b e c o m e a w a r e
t h a t r e a l i t y a l r e a d y i n v o l v e s o u r g a z e , t h a t t h i s g a z e is included in t h e s c e n e
we a r e o b s e r v i n g , that this s c e n e a l r e a d y ' r e g a r d s us' in t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e
in w h i c h , i n K a f k a ' s The Trial, t h e d o o r o f t h e L a w is t h e r e o n l y f o r t h e
' m a n f r o m t h e c o u n t r y ' . O n e c a n a g a i n d i s c e r n t h e tiny, i m p e r c e p t i b l e ,
but none the less c r u c i a l g a p that forever separates L a c a n from the
standard Idealist n o t i o n o f 'subjective constitution' (according to which
r e a l i t y as such, t h e w h o l e o f it, is ' a n a m o r p h o t i c ' i n t h e g e n e r a l s e n s e o f
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 in reality
itself in the guise of an anamorphic 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 quintuplic-
ity. H o w pertinent, then, is t h e form o f triad, that is, t h e infamous
tripartite 'rhythm' o f the Hegelian process? Although they may appear
purely formal in the worst sense o f d i e term, these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i m m e d i
ately c o n f r o n t us with t h e i n n e r m o s t t e n s i o n a n d instability o f the H e g e
l i a n s y s t e m as t h e s y s t e m o f subjectivity.
Let us t a k e as t h e starting point the well-known passage from the
c o n c l u d i n g ' m e t h o d o l o g i c a l ' r e m a r k s o f h i s g r e a t e r Logic, i n w h i c h H e g e l
h i m s e l f s p e a k s o f t r i p l i c i t y or q u a d r u p l i c i t y : the m i d d l e moment of a
process, between the starting i m m e d i a c y a n d the concluding mediated
i m m e d i a c y - t h a t is t o say, t h e m o m e n t o f negation — c a n b e c o u n t e d t w i c e ,
as i m m e d i a t e n e g a t i o n a n d / o r as s e l f - r e l a t i n g n e g a t i o n , s o t h a t t h e e n t i r e
p r o c e s s consists o f t h r e e o r f o u r m o m e n t s . In his p h i l o s o p h y o f n a t u r e ,
Hegel seems t o give a p o s i t i v e o n t o l o g i c a l g r o u n d i n g to this formal
a l t e r n a t i v e w h e n h e a s s e r t s t h a t t h e b a s i c f o r m o f t h e s p i r i t is t r i p l i c i t y a n d
t h a t o f n a t u r e is q u a d r u p l i c i t y : s i n c e n a t u r e is t h e k i n g d o m o f e x t e r n a l i t y ,
e a c h o f t h e l o g i c a l m o m e n t s h a s t o a c q u i r e s e p a r a t e d p o s i t i v e e x i s t e n c e in
it. ( I n s o f a r a s , i n H e g e l ' s s t a n d a r d m a l e - d o m i n a t e d p e r s p e c t i v e , m a n a n d
w o m a n a r e r e l a t e d as c u l t u r e a n d n a t u r e , o n e is e v e n t e m p t e d t o c l a i m
that Hegel's allocation o f quadruplicity to nature points towards the
traditional opposition o f 3 and 4 as t h e masculine' and 'feminine'
7
n u m b e r s in o r i e n t a l t h o u g h t . )
There is, h o w e v e r , another, much 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 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. Quite
distinct from 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 a s s e r t s its
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 its o r g a n i c
balance, subordinating the interest o f the W h o l e to 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 that
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 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 the
two d i v i d e d m o m e n t s , n a t u r e a n d finite spirit, are r e c o n c i l e d : t h e totality
8
o f i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e Sittlichkeil as m a n ' s ' s e c o n d n a t u r e ' . 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 different

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 correlations
between L o g i c itself a n d the Realphilosophie. In his L o g i c , 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
p h i l o s o p h y o f N a t u r e ( c h e m i s m , o r g a n i s m ) o r to the p h i l o s o p h y o f finite
s p i r i t ( e x t e r n a l t e l e o l o g y ) - H e g e l has to a c c o m p l i s h t h i s g e s t u r e o f ' e x t e r
nalizing' the subjective logic p r o p e r i n t o objectivity, so that h e c a n then
p r o p o s e as t h e t h i r d m o m e n t t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a , t h e s y n t h e s i s o f s u b j e c t i v e
logic with objectivity.
It would thus have b e e n m u c h m o r e c o n s i s t e n t to posit 'subjective l o g i c '
( n o t i o n - j u d g e m e n t - s y l l o g i s m ) as t h e second p a r t o f a n o v e r a l l t r i a d i c s t r u c
t u r e , a n d t o a d d to ' s u b j e c t i v e l o g i c ' p r o p e r ( t h e first p a r t o f t h e l o g i c o f
N o t i o n ) a third logic, a synthesis o f 'objective' logic (which describes the
categorial structure o f pre-subjective reality f r o m B e i n g t h r o u g h E s s e n c e ,
c o n c l u d i n g i n t h e n o t i o n o f A c t u a l i t y , o f S u b s t a n c e as causa sui a n d its
passage into subject) a n d o f 'subjective' logic (which describes the cate
g o r i a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e f i n i t e s u b j e c t ' s r e a s o n i n g - it is p r e c i s e l y h e r e that
we find t h e c o n t e n t o f t r a d i t i o n a l ' l o g i c ' ) . T h i s t h i r d l o g i c w o u l d d e s c r i b e
t h e c a t e g o r i a l s t r u c t u r e o f ' s e c o n d n a t u r e ' , o f s p i r i t u a l S u b s t a n c e as t h e
u n i t y o f o b j e c t i v e a n d s u b j e c t i v e m o m e n t - t h a t is, it w o u l d d e f i n e the
c a t e g o r i a l s t r u c t u r e o f m t o s u b j e c t i v i t y . A n d - o n e is t e m p t e d t o a d d , i n a n
a n a c h r o n i s t i c p r o l e p s i s - i n s o f a r as L a c a n d e f i n e s t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r as
n e i t h e r o b j e c t i v e n o r s u b j e c t i v e , b u t p r e c i s e l y as t h e o r d e r o f i n t e r s u b j e c -
tivity, is n o t t h e p e r f e c t c a n d i d a t e f o r t h i s t h i r d l o g i c o f i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y
the psychoanalytic 'logic o f the signifier' that deploys the strange structure
o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e O t h e r qua h i s s y m b o l i c S u b s t a n c e , t h e
s p a c e in w h i c h h e i n t e r a c t s with o t h e r subjects? D o we n o t already possess
f r a g m e n t s o f this l o g i c in a m u l t i t u d e o f d o m a i n s a n d guises: t h e l o g i c a l
s t r u c t u r e o f a t o m i c p h y s i c s , w h i c h i n c l u d e s i n its s t r u c t u r e s u b j e c t i v i t y ( t h e
position o f the observer, the passage from q u a n t u m virtuality to actual
existence); the 'autopoiesis' o f life, w h i c h already displays an internal
teleology; L a c a n ' s notion o f 'logical time'; up to H e g e l ' s own i n t e r s u b j e c -
tive d i a l e c t i c o f C r i m e ( a g a i n s t t h e e t h i c a l S u b s t a n c e ) a n d its P a r d o n , the
C r i m i n a l ' s r e c o n c i l i a t i o n with the e s t r a n g e d C o m m u n i t y , in w h i c h Haber-
mas discerned the m o d e l o f the intersubjective communicational process?
However, we still h a v e to face the question o f whether the social

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 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 can be destroyed at a n y m o m e n t , e i t h e r by an external
contingency (the proverbial c o m e t h i t t i n g t h e E a r t h ) o r by humanity's
self-destruction 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
f o o t i n g i n t h e first n a t u r e , c a n n e v e r f e e l fully at e a s e i n t h e s e c o n d : w h a t
F r e u d c a l l e d das Unbehagen in der Kultur, t h e d i f f e r e n t way t h e s u b j e c t ' s
passage from first to second nature can go wrong (psychosis, neur
o s i s . . . ) ? T h e r e is thv\s a c o r e t h a t r e s i s t s t h e s u b j e c t ' s f u l l r e c o n c i l i a t i o n
w i t h h i s s e c o n d n a t u r e : t h e F r e u d i a n n a m e f o r t h i s k e r n e l is d r i v e , the
H e g e l i a n n a m e f o r it is ' a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y ' ( o r , i n t h e m o r e p o e t i c t e r m s
o f the young Hegel, the ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' ) . Is t h i s n o t w h y Hegel
insists o n t h e n e c e s s i t y o f war w h i c h , f r o m t i m e to t i m e , m u s t allow t h e
s u b j e c t t o r e g a i n t h e t a s t e f o r a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y a n d s h a k e o f f his full
i m m e r s i o n i n t h e c o n c r e t e t o t a l i t y o f t h e s o c i a l S u b s t a n c e qua h i s ' s e c o n d
nature'?
B e c a u s e o f this g a p , t h e o v e r a l l s t r u c t u r e o f L o g i c s h o u l d , r a t h e r , have
b e e n quadruple: 'objective logic' (describing the categorial structures o f
prc-subjective reality) a n d 'subjective logic' (describing the structure of
the finite subject's reasoning, from n o t i o n to syllogism) should be fol
l o w e d by ' i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e l o g i c ' , a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e (since the intersubjec-
tive S u b s t a n c e still d o e s n o t fill t h e g a p b e t w e e n itself a n d objectivity,
between first and second nature), 'absolute logic'. In Lacanian terms,
i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e l o g i c is t h e l o g i c o f t h e s i g n i f i e r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e structure
o f desire, w h i l e a b s o l u t e l o g i c is t h e l o g i c o f t h e R e a l , t h e l o g i c o f drive.
A n d i n f a c t , a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f h i s L o g i c , i n his s e a r c h f o r a s y n t h e s i s
b e t w e e n t h e I d e a o f t h e T r u e a n d t h e I d e a o f t h e G o o d , H e g e l s e e m s to
d e s c r i b e t h e c e n t r a l p a r a d o x o f drive: t h e solution o f t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n
passivity ( c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e T r u e ) a n d activity ( e f f o r t t o r e a l i z e the
G o o d ) is f o r t h e s u b j e c t to g r a s p t h e f a c t t h a t , i n h i s e t h i c a l e f f o r t , h e is
n o t s t r i v i n g i n v a i n t o r e a l i z e a n i m p o s s i b l e I d e a l , b u t is r e a l i z i n g s o m e
t h i n g t h a t is a l r e a d y a c t u a l t h r o u g h h i s v e r y r e p e a t e d e f f o r t s t o r e a l i z e it.
Is t h i s n o t t h e p a r a d o x l a t e r d e f i n e d b y L a c a n i n h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between
t h e d r i v e ' s asm a n d goal ( t h e d r i v e ' s t r u e a i m is r e a l i z e d i n its v e r y r e p e a t e d
f a i l u r e t o r e a l i z e its g o a l ) ?
W i t h r e g a r d to the relationship b e t w e e n L o g i c itself a n d Realphilosophie,
H o s l e a g a i n p o i n t s o u t h o w t h e i r p a r a l l e l is n e v e r p e r f e c t a n d s t a b l e : i n
the standard f o r m o f H e g e l ' s system ( L o g i c - N a t u r e - S p i r i t ) , the triad o f
L o g i c ( B e i n g - E s s e n c e - N o t i o n ) is n o t a d e q u a t e l y r e f l e c t e d in t h e mere
d u a l i t y o f Realphilosophie ( N a t u r e - S p i r i t ) ; if, h o w e v e r , w e t r a n s f o r m Real
philosophie into the triad o f N a t u r e - finite Spirit - objective/naturalized
S p i r i t , t h e o v e r a l l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e s y s t e m is n o l o n g e r a t r i a d , b u t b e c o m e s
q u a d r u p l e . S o we have e i t h e r the overall triad, b u t without the perfect
p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n L o g i c a n d Realphilosophie, o r the perfect triadic parallel,
b u t with t h e o v e r a l l d y a d i c s p l i t b e t w e e n L o g i c a n d Realphilosophie. . .
A n d - 1 a m f u r t h e r t e m p t e d to a d d - this failure o f H e g e l to a c c o m p l i s h ,
in an additional turn o f the screw, t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n o f t h e Spirit qua
' r e t u r n t o i t s e l f o f t h e I d e a f r o m N a t u r e with N a t u r e itself, c a n also b e
d i s c e r n e d i n h i s r e d u c t i o n i s t n o t i o n o f s e x u a l i t y . T h a t is t o say, H e g e l
c o n c e i v e s t h e ' c u l t u r a l i z a t i o n ' o f s e x u a l i t y as its s i m p l e ' s u b l a t i o n ' i n t o t h e
civilized, s o c i o - s y m b o l i c f o r m o f m a r r i a g e . H e g e l treats sexuality in his
p h i l o s o p h y o f n a t u r e as a m e r e n a t u r a l f o u n d a t i o n a n d p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f
h u m a n s o c i e t y , i n w h i c h n a t u r a l c o p u l a t i o n is ' s u b l a t e d ' i n t h e spiritual
l i n k o f m a r r i a g e , b i o l o g i c a l p r o c r e a t i o n is ' s u b l a t e d ' in s y m b o l i c d e s c e n -
d a n c y m a r k e d by the family N a m e , a n d so o n . A l t h o u g h H e g e l is, o f
c o u r s e , well aware t h a t this ' s u b l a t i o n ' also affects a n d c h a n g e s the f o r m
o f satisfying n a t u r a l needs (copulation is p r e c e d e d by t h e process o f
s e d u c t i o n ; it is u s u a l l y d o n e i n t h e m i s s i o n a r y p o s i t i o n a n d n o t a tergo, as
w i t h a n i m a l s , e t c . ) , h e l e a v e s o u t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e way t h i s s y m b o l i c -
c u l t u r a l ' s u b l a t i o n ' n o t o n l y c h a n g e s the f o r m o f satisfying n a t u r a l n e e d s ,
b u t s o m e h o w affects t h e i r very s u b s t a n c e : in a s e x u a l o b s e s s i o n like courtly
l o v e , t h e u l t i m a t e a i m , s a t i s f a c t i o n i t s e l f , is d i s c o n n e c t e d f r o m its n a t u r a l
g r o u n d ; it c h a n g e s i n t o a l e t h a l p a s s i o n t h a t persists b e y o n d t h e natural
c y c l e o f n e e d a n d its s a t i s f a c t i o n .
T h e p o i n t is n o t o n l y t h a t h u m a n s h a v e s e x i n a m o r e c u l t i v a t e d way
( o r , o f c o u r s e , in a n i n c o m p a r a b l y m o r e c r u e l way) t h a n a n i m a l s , b u t that
they are able to elevate sexuality into an absolute Aim to which they
s u b o r d i n a t e t h e i r e n t i r e life - H e g a l s e e m s t o i g n o r e t h i s c h a n g e o f t h e
b i o l o g i c a l n e e d t o c o p u l a t e i n t o s e x u a l d r i v e as a p r o p e r l y ' m e t a p h y s i c a l
p a s s i o n ' . L e t us t a k e T r i s t a n a n d I s o l d e : w h e r e , i n H e g e l ' s s y s t e m , is t h e
p l a c e f o r t h i s d e a d l y p a s s i o n , f o r t h i s will t o d r o w n o n e s e l f in t h e n i g h t o f
puissance, t o leave b e h i n d t h e daily u n i v e r s e o f s y m b o l i c o b l i g a t i o n s - for
t h i s u n c o n d i t i o n a l d r i v e w h i c h is n e i t h e r C u l t u r e n o r N a t u r e ? Although
this passion strives to suspend the domain o f Culture ( o f symbolic
o b l i g a t i o n s , e t c . ) , it c l e a r l y h a s n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h a r e t u r n t o i n s t i n c t u a l
Nature - rather, it involves t h e m o s t radical perversion o f the natural
i n s t i n c t , s o t h a t , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , it is t h e v e r y r e c o u r s e t o t h e o r d e r o f
C u l t u r e t h a t e n a b l e s us t o e s c a p e t h e d e a d l y v o r t e x o f t h i s 'unnatural'
passion, a n d to r e g a i n t h e pacifying n a t u r a l b a l a n c e o f instinctual n e e d s
1
i n t h e i r s y m b o l i z e d f o r m . ' T o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way: w h a t H e g e l l e a v e s
o u t o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n is t h e f a c t t h a t 'there is n o sexual relationship':
culture n o t only confers a cultivated form o n sexuality, b u t thoroughly
d e r a i l s it, s o t h a t t h e o n l y way f o r a h u m a n b e i n g t o b e a b l e t o ' d o i t ' , t o
e n j o y it, is t o r e l y o n s o m e ' p e r v e r s e ' i d i o s y n c r a t i c p h a n t a s m i c s c e n a r i o -
t h e u l t i m a t e h u m a n p e r v e r s i o n is t h a t so-called 'natural' instinctual sexual
satisfaction needs a cultural prosthesis, some kind of symbolic crutch, in order to

remain operative. 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 actual
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: 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 Realphilo-
sophie (corresponding 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 (of subject and object, o f thought and
being, o f reason itself a n d intuition . . . ) . This distinction, of 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 between
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 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 becoming aware of how what we
( m i s ) p e r c e i v e d as a m e r e organon, introductory tools, preparatory step, to
our grasping the Absolute - that is, t o M e t a p h y s i c s p r o p e r - already
describes t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e A b s o l u t e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , w e fail t o g r a s p t h e
A b s o l u t e precisely in so far as toe continue to presuppose that, above and beyond
the domain of our finite reflected reasoning, there is an Absolute to be grasped - w e
actually o v e r c o m e the limitation o f e x t e r n a l reflection by simply b e c o m i n g
a w a r e o f h o w t h i s e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n is i n h e r e n t t o t h e A b s o l u t e i t s e l f .
This is H e g e l ' s f u n d a m e n t a l criticism o f Kant: n o t that K a n t fails to
o v e r c o m e t h e e x t e r n a l r e f l e c t i o n o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g , b u t t h a t h e still t h i n k s
t h a t t h e r e is s o m e B e y o n d w h i c h e l u d e s its g r a s p . W h a t K a n t d o e s n o t s e e
is t h a t h i s Critique of Pure Reason, as t h e c r i t i c a l ' p r o l e g o m e n a ' t o a f u t u r e
m e t a p h y s i c s , already is t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e m e t a p h y s i c s .
O v e r l a p p i n g with t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n is t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n ' L o g i c ' in
t h e ( t r a d i t i o n a l A r i s t o t e l i a n ) s e n s e o f organon, providing the conceptual
t o o l s t h a t h e l p us t o g r a s p t h e o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f r e a l i t y ( t h e r u l e s o f
our formation o f Notions and forms o f j u d g e m e n t and reasoning), and
' M e t a p h y s i c s ' ( w h i c h d i r e c t l y d e s c r i b e s t h e o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e ) : t h e first
triad o f Phenomenology remains at the level o f ' L o g i c ' , providing the
p h e n o m e n a l s e q u e n c e o f the different m o d e s w h e r e b y the finite, isolated
subject can grasp society; while the s e c o n d triad direcUy describes the
p h e n o m e n a l s e q u e n c e o f the actual historical shapes/figurations o f the
A b s o l u t e i t s e l f . ( T h e ' l o g i c ' o f t h e e a r l y H e g e l t h u s l o o s e l y fits t h e first
p a r t o f t h e m a t u r e H e g e l ' s 'subjective l o g i c ' , w h i c h follows t h e ' o b j e c t i v e '
logic d e p l o y i n g the o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f pre-subjective reality.) In this
precise sense, o n e c a n argue with justification that H e g e l ' s Phenomenology
is a w o r k o f p a s s a g e - t h a t its s t r u c t u r e still b e t r a y s t r a c e s o f t h e early-
H e g e l , e s p e c i a l l y i n its f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h t h e ' m a d d a n c e ' o f r e f l e x i v i t y , o f
d i a l e c t i c r e v e r s a l s , as t h e ( s t i l l ) i n t r o d u c t o r y p r e l u d e t o t h e S y s t e m p r o p e r ,
with its s a t i s f i e d s p e c u l a t i v e s e l f - d e p l o y m e n t . I n o t h e r w o r d s , Phenomenology
is n o t y e t ' t r u l y H e g e l i a n ' p r e c i s e l y in s o f a r as it still c o n c e i v e s o f its r o l e
as that o f the 'introduction' to the System proper (although simul
t a n e o u s l y as its first p a r t - t h a t is t h e s o u r c e o f its u l t i m a t e unresolved
ambiguity).
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 Under
standing to R e a s o n , o n e does n o t have to add anything, but, o n the
c o n t r a r y , t o subtract 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 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 this a l i e n a
tion 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 outside or beyond Understanding. F i r s t , we c h o o s e
Understanding; 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'
c a p a c i t y is c a l l e d R e a s o n ) - and 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 the
' 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 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 theory-
p 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 be:
t r u e , b u t K a n t is n o t a b l e t o acknowledge, t o state openly, t h e s e paradoxes
that provide 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
adding 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 critique simply openly states and assumes
the paradoxes constitutive of Kant's position. I t is e n o u g h 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 reality-
is 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 o b s e r v e r s all a r o u n d Europe, noumenal Freedom
appeared 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 but a
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 dimen
11
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 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 need

for the second Reconciliation between Nature and Spirit (qua 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
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 Er-

Innerung, 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 exter-
n 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 Hegelian
m o v e in which 'abstract' internalization (withdrawal 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 the
s u b j e c t w i t h d r a w s f r o m t h e Sittlichkeit 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
f r e e d o m a n d , for that very reason, 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, the
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 ' : 'objective
1 2
spirit', the spirit's r e n e w e d naturalization a n d / o r externalization.
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.
1 3
A c c o r d i n g to T a y l o r , 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 external
conditions o f existence holds also for the Absolute Subject, for God
H i m s e l f - G o d H i m s e l f is e m b e d d e d i n a s e t o f c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h f o r e v e r
r e m a i n a n i m p e n e t r a b l e O t h e r . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , S c h e l l i n g is t h e e n i g m a t i c
'vanishing m e d i a t o r ' between absolute Idealism a n d post-Hegelian histor-
i c i s m . T h i s p a s s a g e f r o m I d e a l i s m t o h i s t o r i c i s m is p e r h a p s b e s t e x p r e s s e d
b y t h e f a m o u s s t a t e m e n t f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g o f M a r x ' s Eighteenth Brumaire
a b o u t h o w m e n c r e a t e history, b u t n o t o u t o f n o t h i n g o r in t h e c o n d i t i o n s
t h e y h a v e c h o s e n t h e m s e l v e s - t h e y c r e a t e h i s t o r y in t h e c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h
w e r e f o u n d a n d i m p o s e d o n t h e m . H e r e t h e r e is a c l e a r c o n t r a s t w i t h ( a
c e r t a i n i m a g e o f ) H e g e l i a n I d e a l i s m , i n w h i c h t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a a c t s as
t h e S u b j e c t t h a t p o s i t s its e n t i r e c o n t e n t a n d t h u s a c t u a l i z e s i t s e l f o n l y o u t
o f itself, r e l y i n g o n n o e x t e r n a l c o n t i n g e n t p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s - t h a t is, i t is
n o t b o u n d by t h e c o n f i n e s o f t e m p o r a l i t y - c o n t i n g e n c y - f i n i t u d e . H o w e v e r ,
w h a t c o m e s i n b e t w e e n a b s o l u t e I d e a l i s m a n d p o s t - I d e a l i s t h i s t o r i c i s m is
t h e u n i q u e p o s i t i o n o f S c h e l l i n g as t h e ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' : S c h e l l i n g
r e t a i n s t h e A b s o l u t e as S u b j e c t ( i . e . h e s p e a k s o f G o d , n o t o f m a n ) , b u t
he none the l e s s applies to Him the fundamental postulate of temporality-
contingency-fnitude, s o t h a t w h a t h e u l t i m a t e l y a s s e r t s is t h a t G o d c r e a t e d
t h e u n i v e r s e , b u t n o t o u t o f n o t h i n g - H e c r e a t e d it in t h e conditions
which were found and imposed on H i m (these 'conditions', o f course, are
t h e u n f a t h o m a b l e Real o f the G r o u n d o f G o d , that which in G o d H i m s e l f
is n o t y e t G o d ) . "
T a y l o r ' s m i s t a k e h e r e is t h a t h e r e d o u b l e s t h e n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t i n t o
h u m a n subjectivity (finite, c a u g h t in t h e g a p b e t w e e n p r e s u p p o s i t i o n and
expression) and a spectral m o n s t e r called 'Absolute Subject', the Spirit
[Geist], G o d - o r , as T a y l o r c a l l s it (in a t h o r o u g h l y u n - H e g e l i a n f a s h i o n )
' c o s m i c spirit', w h o s e m e r e ' v e h i c l e ' is t h e (self-)consciousness o f the
finite h u m a n subject. W e thus finish w i t h a s p l i t b e t w e e n two s u b j e c t s ,
the infinite absolute Subject a n d the finite h u m a n subject, instead o f the
properly dialectical speculative identity between the infinite Substance
a n d t h e S u b j e c t as t h e a g e n t o f f i n i t u d e / a p p e a r a n c e / s p l i t - ' S u b s t a n c e is
Subject' m e a n s that t h e split w h i c h s e p a r a t e s S u b j e c t f r o m Substance,
f r o m t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e I n - i t s e l f b e y o n d p h e n o m e n a l r e a l i t y , is i n h e r e n t t o
t h e S u b s t a n c e itself. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e k e y p o i n t is t o r e a d Hegel's
p r o p o s i t i o n ' S u b s t a n c e is S u b j e c t ' n o t as a d i r e c t a s s e r t i o n o f i d e n t i t y , b u t
as a n e x a m p l e ( p e r h a p s the e x a m p l e ) o f ' i n f i n i t e j u d g e m e n t ' , l i k e 'the
S p i r i t is a b o n e ' . T h e p o i n t is n o t that the Substance (the ultimate
foundation o f all e n t i t i e s , t h e A b s o l u t e ) is n o t a p r e - s u b j e c t i v e Ground
b u t a S u b j e c t , a n a g e n t o f s e l f - d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , w h i c h p o s i t s its o t h e r n e s s
and then reappropriates it, a n d so o n : 'Subject' stands for the non-
substantial agency o f phenomenalization, appearance, 'illusion', split,
f i n i t u d e , U n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d s o o n , a n d t o c o n c e i v e S u b s t a n c e as S u b j e c t
m e a n s p r e c i s e l y t h a t split, p h e n o m e n a l i z a t i o n , a n d s o f o r t h , a r e i n h e r e n t
t o t h e life o f t h e A b s o l u t e i t s e l f . T h e r e is n o ' a b s o l u t e S u b j e c t ' - s u b j e c t
' a s s u c h ' is r e l a t i v e , c a u g h t i n s e l f - d i v i s i o n , a n d it is as such t h a t t h e S u b j e c t
is i n h e r e n t t o t h e S u b s t a n c e .
I n c o n t r a s t t o this speculative identity o f S u b s t a n c e and Subject, the
notion o f their direct i d e n t i t y t h u s i n v o l v e s t h e r e d o u b l i n g of subjects,
w h i c h again r e d u c e s subjectivity p r o p e r to a n a c c i d e n t ( ' v e h i c l e ' ) o f the
substantial Absolute, o f an O t h e r who speaks 'through' finite human
subjects. T h i s also o p e n s up the false, pseudo-Hegelian notion of a
d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s i n w h i c h its S u b j e c t ( ' c o s m i c s p i r i t ' ) p o s i t s its e x t e r n a l
ity, a l i e n a t e s i t s e l f f r o m i t s e l f , i n o r d e r t o r e g a i n its i n t e g r i t y o n a h i g h e r
level: t h e m i s l e a d i n g p r e s u p p o s i t i o n at w o r k h e r e is t h a t t h e S u b j e c t o f
t h e p r o c e s s is s o m e h o w g i v e n f r o m t h e o u t s e t , n o t e n g e n d e r e d b y t h e v e r y
process o f the S u b s t a n c e ' s splitting.
A n o t h e r way t o m a k e t h e s a m e p o i n t is w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e two d i f f e r e n t
ways o f r e a d i n g t h e s i t u a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e unfath
o m a b l e excess of a T h i n g w h i c h eludes his reflexive symbolic grasp. T h e
' s u b s t a n t i a l i s t ' way t o r e a d it is s i m p l y t o c l a i m t h a t o u r ( f i n i t e s u b j e c t ' s )
capacity to grasp the O b j e c t we are confronting always a n d a priori
s u r p a s s e s u s : t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g i n t h e o b j e c t t h a t f o r e v e r r e s i s t s b e i n g
translated into our conceptual network (the point about the 'preponder
a n c e o f t h e o b j e c t i v e ' m a d e r e g u l a r l y b y A d o r n o i n h i s Negative Dialectics).
O f what, h o w e v e r , d o e s this e x c e s s c o n s i s t ? W h a t i f w h a t e l u d e s o u r grasp,
w h a t is ' i n t h e o b j e c t m o r e t h a n t h e o b j e c t i t s e l f , a r e t h e t r a c e s o f w h a t ,
i n p a s t h i s t o r y , t h i s ' o b j e c t ' (say, a h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n t h e s u b j e c t e n d e a v
ours to analyse) might have b e c o m e , b u t failed to d o so? T o grasp a
h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n ' i n its b e c o m i n g ' ( a s K i e r k e g a a r d w o u l d h a v e p u t i t ) is
n o t t o p e r c e i v e it as a p o s i t i v e s e t o f f e a t u r e s ( ' t h e way t h i n g s a c t u a l l y
a r e ' ) , b u t t o d i s c e r n i n it t h e t r a c e s o f f a i l e d ' e m a n c i p a t o r y ' a t t e m p t s a t
liberation. ( H e r e I am, o f c o u r s e , alluding to W a l t e r B e n j a m i n ' s n o t i o n o f
t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y g a z e w h i c h p e r c e i v e s t h e a c t u a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y ' a c t as t h e
redemptive repetition o f past failed e m a n c i p a t o r y attempts.) I n this case,
however, the 'preponderance o f the objective', that which eludes our
g r a s p i n t h e T h i n g , is n o l o n g e r t h e e x c e s s o f its p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t o v e r o u r
c o g n i t i v e c a p a c i t i e s b u t , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , its lack, t h a t is, t h e t r a c e s o f
failures, t h e absences i n s c r i b e d i n its p o s i t i v e e x i s t e n c e : t o g r a s p t h e O c t o b e r
R e v o l u t i o n ' i n its b e c o m i n g ' m e a n s t o d i s c e r n t h e t r e m e n d o u s emancipa
t o r y p o t e n t i a l t h a t was s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a r o u s e d a n d c r u s h e d b y its h i s t o r i c a l
a c t u a l i t y . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h i s e x c e s s / l a c k is n o t t h e p a r t o f t h e ' o b j e c t i v e
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 being in
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 , simultaneously
'artificial'; no longer 'spontaneous' but 'mediated,' sustained by the
activity o f i n d e p e n d e n t free subjects (nation versus local 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' relationship between an apprentice and his
master-artisan; the academic community o f knowledge versus the tra
ditional wisdom passed from generation to g e n e r a t i o n ; etc., up 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 as
the form o f a p p e a r a n c e o f the universal secondary identification (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 'abstract' and ' c o n c r e t e ' universality: t h e universal
secondary identification remains '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 it r e i n t e g r a t e s primary identifications, trans
forming them into the modes of appearance of the secondary
identification.
This tension between 'abstract' and ' 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:
o n t h e o n e h a n d , t h e r e was t h e z e a l o t r y o f t h e r a d i c a l g r o u p s w h i c h saw
n o way o f c o m b i n i n g t h e t r u e C h r i s t i a n a t t i t u d e w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g s p a c e o f
p r e d o m i n a n t social r e l a t i o n s , a n d thus p o s e d a s e r i o u s t h r e a t to the social
order; o n the o t h e r h a n d , there were the attempts to r e c o n c i l e Christianity
with the existing structure o f d o m i n a t i o n , so t h a t y o u c o u l d participate in
s o c i a l life, o c c u p y y o u r d e t e r m i n a t e p l a c e i n it ( a s a s e r v a n t , peasant,
artisan, feudal l o r d . . .) a n d r e m a i n a g o o d C h r i s t i a n - accomplishing
y o u r d e t e r m i n a t e s o c i a l r o l e was n o t o n l y s e e n as c o m p a t i b l e w i t h b e i n g a
C h r i s t i a n , it was e v e n p e r c e i v e d as a s p e c i f i c w a y o f f u l f i l l i n g t h e u n i v e r s a l
duty o f b e i n g a Christian.
On a first approach, things thus seem clear and unambiguous: the
p h i l o s o p h e r o f a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l i t y is K a n t ( a n d , i n K a n t ' s s t e p s , F i c h t e ) :
in Kant's philosophy, the Universal (the moral Law) functions as the
a b s t r a c t Sollen, t h a t w h i c h ' o u g h t t o b e ' a n d w h i c h , as s u c h , p o s s e s s e s a
terrorist/subversive potential - the Universal stands for an impossible/
u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d , w h o s e p o w e r o f n e g a t i v i t y is d e s t i n e d t o u n d e r
mine a n y c o n c r e t e totality; a g a i n s t this tradition of abstract/negative
u n i v e r s a l i t y o p p o s e d t o its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t , H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s h o w t r u e
u n i v e r s a l i t y is a c t u a l i z e d i n t h e s e r i e s o f c o n c r e t e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s per
c e i v e d b y t h e a b s t r a c t p o i n t o f view o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g as t h e o b s t a c l e t o
the full r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e U n i v e r s a l (say, t h e universal moral D u t y is
actualized, b e c o m e s effective, t h r o u g h the c o n c r e t e wealth o f particular
human passions and strivings devalued by Kant as 'pathological'
obstacles).
However, are things really so simple? In o r d e r not to m i s r e a d the
properly H e g e l i a n flavour o f the o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n abstract a n d con
c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y , o n e s h o u l d ' c r o s s b r e e d ' it w i t h a n o t h e r o p p o s i t i o n , t h a t
b e t w e e n p o s i t i v e U n i v e r s a l i t y as a m e r e i m p a s s i v e / n e u t r a l m e d i u m o f t h e
c o e x i s t e n c e o f its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t ( t h e ' m u t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' o f a s p e c i e s
defined by w h a t all m e m b e r s o f the species have in common), and
U n i v e r s a l i t y i n its a c t u a l e x i s t e n c e , w h i c h is individuality, the assertion o f
t h e s u b j e c t as u n i q u e a n d i r r e d u c i b l e t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n c r e t e t o t a l i t y
i n t o w h i c h h e is i n s e r t e d . I n K i e r k e g a a r d e s e , t h i s d i f f e r e n c e is t h e one
b e t w e e n the positive B e i n g o f the Universal a n d universality-in-becoming:
t h e o b v e r s e o f t h e U n i v e r s a l as t h e p a c i f y i n g n e u t r a l medium/container
o f its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t is t h e U n i v e r s a l as t h e p o w e r o f n e g a t i v i t y t h a t
undermines t h e fixity o f e v e r y p a r t i c u l a r c o n s t e l l a t i o n , a n d t h i s power
c o m e s i n t o e x i s t e n c e in t h e guise o f the individual's a b s o l u t e egotist sell-
c o n t r a c t i o n , h i s n e g a t i o n o f all d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t . T h e d i m e n s i o n oi
U n i v e r s a l i t y b e c o m e s a c t u a l ( o r , in H e g e l e s e , ' f o r i t s e l f ) o n l y b y ' e n t e r i n g
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, by e n t e r i n g into a '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 to
include itself among its particular subspecies. W h a t this m e a n s is t h a t , p a r a d o x
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 recall
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 'Observing
R e a s o n ' i n his Phenomenology: 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 'the S p i r i t is a b o n e ' (the vulgar-materialist 'reductionist'
reading - t h e s h a p e o f o u r skull actually a n d 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 to
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 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-
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
15
remains at the level o f picture-thinking behaves as u r i n a t i o n .
A c l o s e r e a d i n g o f t h i s p a s s a g e m a k e s it c l e a r t h a t H e g e l ' s p o i n t is not
that, in c o n t r a s t t o t h e vulgar e m p i r i c i s t m i n d w h i c h sees o n l y u r i n a t i o n ,
the p r o p e r speculative attitude has to c h o o s e i n s e m i n a t i o n . T h e p a r a d o x
is t h a t the direct choice of insemination is the infallible way to miss it it is n o t
p o s s i b l e to c h o o s e t h e t r u e m e a n i n g ' d i r e c t l y - t h a t is t o sav, o n e has t o
b e g i n by m a k i n g t h e ' w r o n g ' c h o i c e ( o f u r i n a t i o n ) : t h e t r u e s p e c u l a t i v e
m e a n i n g e m e r g e s o n l y t h r o u g h r e p e a l e d r e a d i n g , as t h e a f t e r - e f f e c t ( o r
b y - p r o d u c t ) o f t h e first, ' w r o n g ' reading."'
T h e s a m e g o e s f o r social life, in w h i c h t h e d i r e c t c h o i c e o f t h e ' c o n c r e t e
universality' o f a p a r t i c u l a r e t h i c a l life-world c a n e n d only in a r e g r e s s i o n
to p r e m o d e r n o r g a n i c society w h i c h d e n i e s the infinite right o f subjectivity
as t h e f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f modernity. S i n c e the subject-citizen o f a
modern state can n o l o n g e r a c c e p t his i m m e r s i o n in s o m e particular
social role that confers o n h i m a d e t e r m i n a t e place within the organic
s o c i a l W h o l e , t h e o n l y way t o t h e r a t i o n a l t o t a l i t y o f t h e m o d e r n state
leads through the h o r r o r o f revolutionary T e r r o r : o n e should ruthlessly
tear up the constraints o f p r e m o d e r n o r g a n i c ' c o n c r e t e universality', a n d
fullv a s s e r t t h e i n f i n i t e r i g h t o f s u b j e c t i v i t y i n its a b s t r a c t n e g a t i v i t y . I n
o t h e r words, the point o f Hegel's deservedly famous analysis o f the
r e v o l u t i o n a r y T e r r o r in h i s Phenomenology is n o t t h e r a t h e r o b v i o u s i n s i g h t
into how the revolutionary p r o j e c t involved the unilateral direct assertion
o f a b s t r a c t U n i v e r s a l R e a s o n , a n d was as s u c h d o o m e d t o p e r i s h in self-
d e s t r u c t i v e fury, s i n c e it was u n a b l e t o o r g a n i z e t h e t r a n s p o s i t i o n o f its
revolutionary e n e r g y into a c o n c r e t e stable a n d differentiated social order;
H e g e l ' s p o i n t , r a t h e r , is t h e e n i g m a o f why, d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t r e v o l
u t i o n a r y T e r r o r was a h i s t o r i c a l d e a d l o c k , w e h a v e t o p a s s t h r o u g h it in
o r d e r to attain t h e m o d e r n r a t i o n a l state. . . . W e c a n n o w see h e r e how
wrong were the late-nineteenth-century conservative British Hegelians
(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 radical
c h o i c e between the organic W h o l e a n d the 'madness' o f the 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
1 7
rational order o f the m o d e r n State. T h e same holds for the couple
Siltlichkeit/Moralitat 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
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 'abstractly nega
tive' skandalon 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 bour
g e o i s class, with their reflected attitude o f individual 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 fixed a t t a c h m e n t s to a
determinate 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 , but
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 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.'*
T h i s is w h y , i n t h e p a s s a g e f r o m his Introduction to Phenomenology

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 (not R e a s o n ! ) , its
infinite power 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 to dissipate
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 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 'mediated'
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, 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 itself
assumes positive 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
t h e U n i v e r s a l is t h e P o w e r t h a t e x p r e s s e s itself i n t h e i n c e s s a n t p r o d u c t i o n
o f t h e w e a l t h o f its p a r t i c u l a r m o m e n t s , r e m a i n s a ' d y n a m i z e d s u b s t a n c e ' ,
it d o e s n o t yet involve subjectivity p r o p e r . I n T a y l o r ' s t e r m s ( n o t q u i t e
a d e q u a t e ) , we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n the ' c x p r e s -
s i v i s t ' / p r o d u c t i v e a s p e c t o f t h e A b s o l u t e ( L i f e as a causa sui t h a t r e p r o
duces a n d 'expresses' itself t h r o u g h the infinite process o f the g e n e r a t i o n
a n d c o r r u p t i o n o f its m o m e n t s ) a n d its ' c o g n i t i v e ' a s p e c t ( t h e A b s o l u t e
t h a t a c t u a l i z e s itself o n l y t h r o u g h its full s e l f - k n o w l e d g e ) - h o w a r e w e t o
r e c o n c i l e t h e two?
The first p a r a d o x is t h a t a c t i v i t y is o n the side o f S u b s t a n c e (the
' e x p r e s s i v i s t ' g e n e r a t i v e P o w e r ) a n d passivity o n t h e s i d e o f S u b j e c t (the
s u b j e c t qua c o n s c i o u s n e s s ' p a s s i v e l y ' t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t w h a t t a k e s p l a c e ) :
S u b s t a n c e is praxis, a c t i v e i n t e r v e n t i o n ; w h i l e S u b j e c t is theoria, passive
i n t u i t i o n . W h a t w e h a v e h e r e is t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f Sein a n d Sollen, o f the
T r u e a n d t h e G o o d ; h o w e v e r , c o n t r a r y t o t h e s t a n d a r d way o f c o n c e p t u a l
izing diis o p p o s i t i o n (the S p i n o z a n passive i n t u i t i o n o f S u b s t a n c e versus
the F i c h t e a n active S u b j e c t w h o s p o n t a n e o u s l y a n d a u t o n o m o u s l y posits
t h e e n t i r e o b j e c t i v e c o n t e n t ) , H e g e l c o n n e c t s t h e four t e r m s in a crisscross
way: e x p r e s s i v e p r o d u c t i v i t y is o n the side o f t h e S p i n o z a n Substance
w h i c h p e r m a n e n t l y realizes t h e G o o d by actively s h a p i n g reality; while t h e
Subject's fundamental a t t i t u d e is t h a t o f K n o w i n g - t h e S u b j e c t e n d e a v
o u r s t o e s t a b l i s h w h a t is T r u e , t o d i s c e r n t h e c o n t o u r s o f o b j e c t i v i t y .
H e g e l ' s s o l u t i o n as a G e r m a n I d e a l i s t , o f c o u r s e , is a k n o w l e d g e w h i c h
is ' s p o n t a n e o u s , ' - t h a t is, i n i t s e l f a praxis g e n e r a t i v e o f its o b j e c t , b u t not
in t h e ( F i c h t e a n ) s e n s e o f ' i n t e l l e c t u a l i n t u i t i o n ' , o f a k n o w l e d g e d i r e c t l y
p r o d u c t i v e o f its o b j e c t s , a n d n o t e v e n i n t h e s o m e w h a t w e a k e r K a n t i a n
s e n s e o f k n o w l e d g e as t r a n s c e n d e n t a l l y c o n s t i t u t i v e o f its o b j e c t s . O n e is
e v e n t e m p t e d t o say t h a t H e g e l o p t s f o r p r e c i s e l y t h e o p p o s i t e s o l u t i o n : a t
t h e level o f substantial c o n t e n t , ' e v e r y t h i n g h a s already t a k e n p l a c e ' , so
t h a t k n o w l e d g e m e r e l y t a k e s it i n t o a c c o u n t - t h a t is t o say, it is a purely-
f o r m a l a c t w h i c h r e g i s t e r s t h e s t a t e o f t h i n g s ; p r e c i s e l y as s u c h , h o w e v e r -
as t h e p u r e l y f o r m a l g e s t u r e o f ' t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t ' w h a t ' i n i t s e l f is
a l r e a d y t h e r e - k n o w l e d g e is ' p e r f o r m a t i v e ' , a n d b r i n g s a b o u t t h e a c t u a l i
z a t i o n o f t h e A b s o l u t e . S o w e a r e not. d e a l i n g w i t h a n e w v e r s i o n o f t h e
m y s t i c a l U n i o n in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t ' s a c t i v i t y o v e r l a p s w i t h t h e activity o f
t h e A b s o l u t e - G o d i t s e l f - i n w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t e x p e r i e n c e s h i m s e l f as t h e
' v e h i c l e o f t h e A b s o l u t e ' ( i n h i s g r e a t e s t activity h e is p a s s i v e , s i n c e it is
t h e A b s o l u t e w h o is e f f e c t i v e l y a c t i v e t h r o u g h h i m ) ; s u c h a m y s t i c a l U n i o n
remains the summit o f Schelling's 'dynamized Spinozism'. Hegel's point
is, r a t h e r , t h e o p p o s i t e o n e : in my greatest passivity, I am already active. - t h a t
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 ' 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 between
'positing' and 'external' reflection from the beginning of Book II o f
H e g e l ' s Logic. 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 the
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 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 , the contours o f their
underlying rational structure (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: no
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 - either the
appearance is r e d u c e d to s o m e t h i n g that is ' m e r e l y s u b j e c t i v e ' ('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 'as s u c h '
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 gap
2 0
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 .
' C o n c r e t e Universality'
W e c a n n o w s e e in w h a t p r e c i s e s e n s e H e g e l ' s l o g i c r e m a i n s 'transcenden
t a l ' in t h e s t r i c t K a n t i a n s e n s e - t h a t is, in w h a t s e n s e its n o t i o n a l n e t w o r k
is n o t m e r e l y f o r m a l , b u t c o n s t i t u t i v e o f r e a l i t y itself, w h o s e categorial
structure it d e s c r i b e s . W h a t sets in m o t i o n the dialectical progress in
H e g e l ' s Logic is t h e i n h e r e n t t e n s i o n i n t h e s t a t u s o f e v e r y d e t e r m i n a t e /
l i m i t e d c a t e g o r y : e a c h c o n c e p t is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y necessary ( i . e . i n d i s p e n s
a b l e i f w e a r e t o c o n c e i v e r e a l i t y , its u n d e r l y i n g o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e ) and
impossible ( i . e . s e l f - r e f u t i n g , i n c o n s i s t e n t : t h e m o m e n t w e fully a n d c o n s e
q u e n t l y ' a p p l y ' it t o r e a l i t y , it d i s i n t e g r a t e s a n d / o r t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s i t e ) .
T h i s n o t i o n a l t e n s i o n / ' c o n t r a d i c t i o n ' is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e u l t i m a t e spiri-
tus movens o f ' r e a l i t y ' itself: f a r f r o m s i g n a l l i n g t h e f a i l u r e o f o u r thought
t o g r a s p r e a l i t y , t h e i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f o u r n o t i o n a l a p p a r a t u s is
t h e u l t i m a t e p r o o f t h a t o u r t h o u g h t is n o t m e r e l y a l o g i c a l g a m e w e p l a y ,
but is a b l e to reach r e a l i t y itself, e x p r e s s i n g its i n h e r e n t structuring
principle.
W h a t a c c o u n t s f o r this p a r a d o x i c a l o v e r l a p p i n g o f n e c e s s i t y a n d i m p o s
s i b i l i t y is, o f c o u r s e , t h e n o t i o n o f t h e s e l f - r e l a t i n g U n i v e r s a l i t y grounded
i n its c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n . W h y a r e f i v e - c e n t c o i n s l a r g e r t h a n t e n - c e n t
c o i n s ; why this e x c e p t i o n to t h e g e n e r a l rule a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h v o l u m e
follows value? K a r c l van het Reve, the famous Dutch linguist, literary
scientist a n d P o p p e r i a n criticist o f psychoanalysis a n d d e c o n s t r u c t i o n , has
formulated t h e l o g i c o f r u l e a n d its e x c e p t i o n i n t h e g u i s e o f w h a t he
2 1
ironically calls 'Reve's C o n j e c t u r e ' : in t h e d o m a i n o f symbolic rules,
P o p p e r ' s l o g i c o f f a l s i f i c a t i o n h a s t o b e inverted — t h a t is t o say, f a r from
falsifying t h e r u l e , t h e e x c e p t i o n o n e h a s t o s e a r c h f o r confirms it. B e s i d e s
enumerating examples from a multitude o f symbolic, rule-regulated,
a c t i v i t i e s ( i n c h e s s , we h a v e rocade as t h e e x c e p t i o n , a m o v e t h a t v i o l a t e s
the fundamental l o g i c o f o t h e r p o s s i b l e m o v e s ; in c a r d g a m e s , t h e r e is
often an exceptional lower c o m b i n a t i o n that can overrule the highest
o n e ; e t c . ) , R e v e focuses o n linguistics: in g r a m m a r , a p a r t i c u l a r e x c e p t i o n
is n e e d e d in o r d e r to r e v e a l (and thus to m a k e us sensitive t o ) the
u n i v e r s a l r u l e t h a t w e o t h e r w i s e f o l l o w : A r u l e c a n n o t e x i s t i f t h e r e is n o
2 2
e x c e p t i o n a g a i n s t w h i c h it c a n d i s t i n g u i s h i t s e l f . ' T h e s e exceptions are
usually dismissed as s o - c a l l e d deponentia, 'irrational' irregularities due
e i t h e r to the i n f l u e n c e o f s o m e n e i g h b o u r i n g foreign language or to
r e m a i n d e r s o f earlier linguistic forms. In Latin, for e x a m p l e , w h e n a verb
f o r m e n d s i n -or, it u s u a l l y d e s i g n a t e s a p a s s i v e f o r m : laudo is ' I p r a i s e ' ,
laudor'l a m p r a i s e d ' , a n d s o o n - h o w e v e r , s u r p r i s i n g l y , loquor is n o t ' I a m
s p o k e n ' b u t 'I s p e a k ' !
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 'ior-

themselves', 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 : such
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 for
1 U U THE TICKLISH 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 - the inconsistency o f that very
Socialist p r e s e n t ) . E x a m p l e s a b o u n d h e r e : b o u r g e o i s utilitarian society
n e e d s a n a r i s t o c r a c y as t h e e x c e p t i o n t o r e v e a l its b a s i c u t i l i t a r i a n s t a n c e ,
a n d s o o n ; u p t o erection ( o f t h e p e n i s ) , w h i c h c a n s e r v e as t h e p r o o f a n d
sign o f p o t e n c y precisely o n a c c o u n t o f t h e i m m a n e n t d a n g e r o f failure:
2 4
o f t h e p r o s p e c t t h a t it will not o c c u r .
T h e r e are three m a i n versions o f the relationship between the Universal
a n d its p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t .
1. T h e s t a n d a r d n o t i o n o f n e u t r a l u n i v e r s a l i t y , i n d i f f e r e n t t o its p a r t i c u
l a r c o n t e n t : t h e C a r t e s i a n cogito is t h e n e u t r a l t h i n k i n g s u b s t a n c e , c o m m o n
t o all h u m a n s , indifferent to gender, and as s u c h the philosophical
foundation o f t h e political e q u a l i t y o f t h e sexes. F r o m this p e r s p e c t i v e ,
t h e f a c t t h a t , i n d e s c r i p t i o n s o f cogito in m o d e r n p h i l o s o p h y , o n e a c t u a l l y
finds a p r e d o m i n a n c e o f m a l e f e a t u r e s is u l t i m a t e l y a n i n c o n s i s t e n c y d u e
t o h i s t o r i c a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s : w i t h D e s c a r t e s , K a n t , H e g e l , a n d o t h e r s , cogito
r e m a i n e d a n ' u n f i n i s h e d p r o j e c t ' ; its c o n s e q u e n c e s w e r e n o t t h o u g h t out
to the end. (When post-Cartesians like Malebranche, for example,
repeated that w o m e n c a n n o t think clearly and are m u c h m o r e susceptible
t h a n m e n to t h e i m p r e s s i o n s o f t h e i r senses, they w e r e simply following
t h e prejudices o f the social reality o f t h e i r times.)
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 ' reading,

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 predomi
n a n c e o f certain male features ('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 of universalization, of obliterating particular differ
ences - the f o r m of abstract universality as such - is not gender-neutral, but
inherently 'masculine', 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
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 (at least
measured against his high standards, and compared with 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
u l t i m a t e m u s i c a l e n d e a v o u r to e x p r e s s what G e r m a n I d e a l i s m c a l l e d t h e
i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n S u b j e c t a n d S u b s t a n c e ; Mozart's failure bears witness
to t h e fact that his universe was n o t y e t t h a t o f r a d i c a l assertion of
subjectivity, w h i c h o c c u r r e d only with B e e t h o v e n . W i t h B e e t h o v e n ' s o n e
v i o l i n c o n c e r t o , h o w e v e r , t h i n g s a g a i n b e c a m e r a t h e r p r o b l e m a t i c ; h e was
a c c u s e d , n o t unfairly, o f a c c e n t u a t i n g t h e m a i n m e l o d i c l i n e in t h e first
m o v e m e n t in a n e x c e s s i v e l y r e p e t i t i v e way t h a t b o r d e r s o n m u s i c a l kitsch -
in s h o r t , t h e b a l a n c e b e t w e e n v i o l i n a n d o r c h e s t r a , b e t w e e n S u b j e c t and
Substance, is a l r e a d y disturbed by t h e subjective excess. T h e proper
counterpoint t o t h i s e x c e s s is t h e n (again the o n e ) violin c o n c e r t o o f
B r a h m s , w h i c h was q u i t e appropriately c h a r a c t e r i z e d as t h e 'concerto
against t h e v i o l i n ' : it is t h e m a s s i v e s y m p h o n i c w e i g h t o f t h e orchestra
which ultimately engulfs the solo voice o f the violin, fighting and squash
i n g its e x p r e s s i v e t h r u s t , r e d u c i n g i t t o o n e a m o n g t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e
s y m p h o n i c t e x t u r e . P e r h a p s t h e l a s t l i n k i n t h i s d e v e l o p m e n t was B a r t o k ' s
' c o n c e r t o f o r o r c h e s t r a ' ( t h a t is, o n l y f o r o r c h e s t r a , w i t h n o s i n g l e i n s t r u
m e n t b e i n g a l l o w e d t o s t a n d o u t as t h e b e a r e r o f a s o l o v o i c e ) , a t r u e
c o u n t e r p o i n t to S c h u m a n n ' s ' c o n c e r t w i t h o u t o r c h e s t r a ' ( t h e m o s t a c c u
rate formula o f his slide into madness, i.e. i n t o psychotic seclusion
gradually bereft o f t h e s u p p o r t in t h e 'big O t h e r ' , t h e substantial s y m b o l i c
o r d e r ) . W h a t all t h e s e e x a m p l e s h a v e in c o m m o n is t h a t e a c h o f t h e m is
n o t just a p a r t i c u l a r case o f the universal c o n c e p t o f 'violin c o n c e r t o ' , b u t
a desperate attempt to h a m m e r o u t a position with r e g a r d to t h e very
u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h i s c o n c e p t : e a c h t i m e , t h i s u n i v e r s a l c o n c e p t is ' d i s t u r b e d '
i n a s p e c i f i c way - d i s a v o w e d , t u r n e d a r o u n d , t h r o w n o f f b y t h e e x c e s s i v e
e m p h a s i s o n o n e o f its p o l e s . I n s h o r t , t h e r e never has b e e n a violin
concerto that fully 'realized its c o n c e p t ' (a dialogue engendering a
productive tension a n d reconciliation between violin a n d orchestra, Sub
ject and S u b s t a n c e ) : every time s o m e invisible h i n d r a n c e prevents the
c o n c e p t ' s fulfilment. (This i n h e r e n t h i n d r a n c e preventing the i m m e d i a t e
a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e c o n c e p t is a n o t h e r n a m e f o r t h e L a c a n i a n R e a l . ) H e r e
we have an e x a m p l e o f H e g e l i a n ' c o n c r e t e universality': a p r o c e s s o r a
s e q u e n c e o f particular attempts that d o n o t simply exemplify the neutral
universal notion but struggle with it, give a s p e c i f i c twist t o i t - the
U n i v e r s a l is t h u s fully e n g a g e d in t h e p r o c e s s o f its p a r t i c u l a r e x e m p l i f i
c a t i o n ; t h a t is t o say, t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e s i n a way, d e c i d e t h e f a t e o f t h e
21
universal n o t i o n itself. '
T o t h o s e w h o still r e m e m b e r A l t h u s s e r ' s a n t i - H e g e l i a n e l a b o r a t i o n o f
t h e n o t i o n o f overdeterminatwn as t h e k e y c a t e g o r y o f t h e M a r x i s t d i a l e c t i c ,
it will c o m e as n o s u r p r i s e t h a t A l t h u s s e r ' s p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t H e g e l ' s n o t i o n
o f u n i v e r s a l i t y is m i s d i r e c t e d : t h e f e a t u r e t h a t A l d i u s s e r e m p h a s i z e d as t h e
m a i n characteristic o f o v e r d e t e r m i n a t i o n (in e a c h particular constellation,
t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y i n q u e s t i o n is ' o v e r d e t e r m i n e d ' , g i v e n a s p e c i f i c f l a v o u r o r
s p i n , by t h e u n i q u e s e t o f c o n c r e t e c o n d i t i o n s - t h a t is t o say, in the
M a r x i s t d i a l e c t i c , the exception is the ruler, w e n e v e r e n c o u n t e r t h e a p p r o p r i
a t e e m b o d i m e n t o f u n i v e r s a l i t y as s u c h ) is t h e v e r y f u n d a m e n t a l feature
of H e g e l i a n c o n c r e t e universality. S o it is n o t enough to claim that
concrete u n i v e r s a l i t y is a r t i c u l a t e d i n t o a t e x t u r e o f p a r t i c u l a r c o n s t e l
lations, o f situations in which a specific c o n t e n t h e g e m o n i z e s the universal
n o t i o n ; o n e s h o u l d a l s o b e a r i n m i n d t h a t all t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r e x e m p l i f i
c a t i o n s o f t h e universality in q u e s t i o n are b r a n d e d by t h e sign o f t h e i r
u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e : e a c h o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l f i g u r e s o f t h e v i o l i n c o n c e r t o is
a b o v e all t h e failure t o a c t u a l i z e t h e ' n o t i o n ' o f t h e v i o l i n c o n c e r t o fully
and adequately. T h e Hegelian ' c o n c r e t e universality' thus involves the
R e a l o f s o m e c e n t r a l i m p o s s i b i l i t y : u n i v e r s a l i t y is ' c o n c r e t e ' , s t r u c t u r e d as
a texture o f particular figurations, p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e it is f o r e v e r p r e v e n t e d
f r o m a c q u i r i n g a figure t h a t w o u l d b e a d e q u a t e t o its n o t i o n . T h i s is w h y
- as H e g e l p u t s it — t h e U n i v e r s a l g e n u s is always one of its own species: t h e r e
is u n i v e r s a l i t y o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e r e is a g a p , a h o l e , i n t h e m i d s t o f t h e
p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t o f t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y i n q u e s t i o n , t h a t is, i n s o f a r as.
a m o n g t h e s p e c i e s o f a g e n u s , t h e r e is always o n e s p e c i e s m i s s i n g : n a m e l y ,
t h e s p e c i e s t h a t w o u l d a d e q u a t e l y e m b o d y t h e g e n u s itself.
' R a t h e r t h a n w a n t n o t h i n g . . .'
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 throughout
H e g e l ' s Phenomenology. On 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
attachment to s o m e 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) 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 socio-
ethical 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 by his
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 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
m o r a l s t a n d a r d s , w h i c h c o u l d l e g i t i m i z e us t o p a s s j u d g e m e n t o n e v e r y
a c t i v e s u b j e c t i v i t y , is t h e u l t i m a t e f o r m o f E v i l .
As for the t e n s i o n b e t w e e n e t h n i c particularity a n d universalism, 'stub
b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' d e s c r i b e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y the s u b j e c t ' s c l i n g i n g to his
p a r t i c u l a r e t h n i c i d e n t i t y , w h i c h h e is n o t r e a d y t o a b a n d o n u n d e r any
c i r c u m s t a n c e s , a n d a d i r e c t r e f e r e n c e t o a b s t r a c t u n i v e r s a l i t y as t h a t w h i c h
r e m a i n s t h e s a m e , t h e u n c h a n g e a b l e s t a b l e f r a m e w o r k in t h e universal
c h a n g e o f all p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t . T h e properly dialectical paradox, of
c o u r s e , is t h a t i f t h e s u b j e c t is t o e x t r a c t h i m s e l f f r o m t h e substantial
c o n t e n t o f his p a r t i c u l a r e t h n i c totality, h e c a n d o so o n l y by c l i n g i n g to
s o m e radically c o n t i n g e n t idiosyncratic c o n t e n t . F o r that reason, 'stub
b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e r e s i s t a n c e t o c h a n g e - m e d i a l i o n -
u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n and t h e v e r y o p e r a t o r o f this c h a n g e : w h e n , i r r e s p e c t i v e
o f circumstances, I stubbornly attach myself to s o m e a c c i d e n t a l particular
feature to w h i c h I a m b o u n d by n o i n n e r necessity, this ' p a t h o l o g i c a l '
a t t a c h m e n t e n a b l e s m e to d i s e n g a g e m y s e l f f r o m i m m e r s i o n in m y particu
l a r l i f e - c o n t e x t . T h a t is w h a t H e g e l c a l l s t h e ' i n f i n i t e r i g h t o f s u b j e c t i v i t y ' :
t o risk e v e r y t h i n g , m y e n t i r e s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t , f o r t h e s a k e o f s o m e
trifling, idiosyncratic f e a t u r e that m a t t e r s m o r e to m e t h a n a n y t h i n g else.
T h e p a r a d o x , t h e r e f o r e , lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t I c a n a r r i v e at t h e U n i v e r s a l -
for-itself only t h r o u g h a s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t to s o m e c o n t i n g e n t particu
lar c o n t e n t , which functions as a ' n e g a t i v e magnitude', as something
wholly i n d i f f e r e n t in itself w h o s e m e a n i n g resides e n t i r e l y in t h e fact that
it gives b o d y t o t h e s u b j e c t ' s a r b i t r a i y will ( T w a n t t h i s b e c a u s e 1 w a n t i t ! ' ,
a n d t h e m o r e t r i f l i n g this c o n t e n t , t h e m o r e m y will is a s s e r t e d . . . ) . T h i s
i d i o s y n c r a t i c f e a t u r e , o f c o u r s e , is i n i t s e l f c o n t i n g e n t a n d u n i m p o r t a n t : a
m e t o n y m y o f v o i d , o f n o t h i n g n e s s - w i l l i n g t h i s X is a way o f ' w i l l i n g
Nothingness'.
The immediate opposite o f 'stubborn attachment' as t h e supreme
e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s o b s t i n a t e self-will is, o f c o u r s e , discipline. The
n o t i o n o f t h e f o r m a t i v e p o w e r o f d i s c i p l i n e ( p r e c i s e l y i n its ' t r a u m a t i c '
d i m e n s i o n o f o b e y i n g a b l i n d m e a n i n g l e s s ' m e c h a n i c a l ' r i t u a l ) was c r u c i a l
f o r t h e H e g e l i a n n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v i t y . I n h i s Gymnasialreden, d e l i v e r e d at
t h e e n d o f t h e s c h o o l y e a r w h e n h e was h e a d o f t h e N u r e m b e r g Gymna
sium, H e g e l insisted o n the n e c e s s i t y o f m e c h a n i c a l d r i l l in military
s e r v i c e , a n d o n l e a r n i n g L a t i n . T h e s t r a n g e s t a t u s o f L a t i n is o f s p e c i a l
i n t e r e s t : w h y d i d L a t i n , n o t G r e e k , b e c o m e t h e lingua franca o f the West?
G r e e k is t h e m y t h i c a l ' l a n g u a g e o f o r i g i n s ' , e n d o w e d w i t h full m e a n i n g ;
w h i l e L a t i n is ' m e c h a n i c a l ' , s e c o n d - h a n d , a l a n g u a g e o f i m i t a t i o n in w h i c h
t h e o r i g i n a l w e a l t h o f m e a n i n g was l o s t ( a s H e i d e g g e r e m p h a s i z e s a g a i n
a n d a g a i n ) - so it is all t h e m o r e s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t L a t i n , n o t G r e e k , b e c a m e
2 7
the universal m e d i u m o f W e s t e r n civilization. Why?
I t is n o t m e r e l y t h a t this m e c h a n i c a l d r i l l , t h e c a p a c i t y t o o b e y m e a n i n g
less r u l e s , p r o v i d e s t h e g r o u n d f o r l a t e r m e a n i n g f u l a u t o n o m o u s s p i r i t u a l
a c t i v i t y ( o n e m u s t first l e a r n , g e t a c c u s t o m e d t o , t h e r u l e s o f g r a m m a r
a n d s o c i a l e t i q u e t t e , in o r d e r t o b e a b l e t o i n d u l g e freely in 'higher'
c r e a t i v e a c t i v i t y ) a n d is t h u s s u b s e q u e n t l y ' s u b l a t e d [aufgehoberi]', reduced
to a m e r e invisible G r o u n d f o r a h i g h e r activity. T h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is,
r a t h e r , t h a t w i t h o u t t h i s r a d i c a l e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n , this s a c r i f i c e o f all i n n e r
substantial spiritual c o n t e n t , t h e s u b j e c t r e m a i n s e m b e d d e d in his S u b
stance, and c a n n o t e m e r g e as p u r e self-relating negativity - the true
speculative m e a n i n g o f t h e m e a n i n g l e s s e x t e r n a l drill resides in the radical
a b a n d o n m e n t o f all ' i n n e r ' s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t o f m y s p i r i t u a l life; it is
o n l y t h r o u g h s u c h a n a b a n d o n m e n t t h a t I e m e r g e as t h e p u r e s u b j e c t o f
enunciation, no longer attached to a n y positive o r d e r , r o o t e d in any
particular life-world. S o , like F o u c a u l t , H e g e l insists o n a close link
between discipline a n d subjectivization, although he gives it a s l i g h t l y
d i f f e r e n t twist: t h e s u b j e c t p r o d u c e d b y d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s is n o t the
s o u l as t h e p r i s o n o f t h e b o d y ' , b u t — i f I m a y risk t h i s f o r m u l a t i o n -
2
precisely a soulless subject, a s u b j e c t d e p r i v e d o f the d e p t h o f his 'soul'. "
H e g e l ' s p o i n t is t h u s t h e very o p p o s i t e o f w h a t is u s u a l l y a t t r i b u t e d to
h i m : t h e ' m e c h a n i c a l ' activity o f m e a n i n g l e s s drill a n d b l i n d o b e d i e n c e
c a n n e v e r b e fully s u b l a t e d i n t o t h e ' h i g h e r ' s p i r i t u a l e x e r c i s e o f S e n s e -
not because o f the irreducible r e m a i n d e r o f material inertia but, on the
c o n t r a r y , p r e c i s e l y t o g u a r a n t e e t h e a u t o n o m y o f t h e s u b j e c t with r e g a r d
to his substantial c o n t e n t : t h e c o m p l e t e ' s u b l a t i o n ' o f m e c h a n i c a l drill
i n t o Spiritual c o n t e n t (in L a c a n e s e : o f t h e s y m b o l i c m a c h i n e into M e a n
i n g ) w o u l d e q u a l t h e s u b j e c t ' s c o m p l e t e i m m e r s i o n in S u b s t a n c e . I n so
far as m e a n i n g l e s s m e c h a n i c a l drill compels the subject to distance
h i m s e l f f r o m e v e r y s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t , t h e s u b j e c t h a s f r o m t i m e to t i m e
to b e shaken out o f his s e l f - c o m p l a c e n t i m m e r s i o n in t h e substantial
totality o f M e a n i n g , a n d c o n f r o n t e d with t h e void o f p u r e negativity -
t h a t , a c c o r d i n g t o H e g e l , is t h e r o l e o f w a r , w h i c h h e c o n s i d e r s n e c e s s a r y
p r e c i s e l y in s o f a r as it i n v o l v e s a m e a n i n g l e s s s a c r i f i c e a n d destruction
that u n d e r m i n e s t h e c o m p l a c e n c y o f o u r daily r o u t i n e . A n d , again, H e g e l
has to b e s u p p l e m e n t e d h e r e with L a c a n : w h a t m a k e s the s u b j e c t e n d u r e
t h i s m e a n i n g l e s s d r i l l o f s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e is t h e s u r p l u s - e n j o y m e n t produced
b y it. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e s u p p l e m e n t o f m e a n i n g l e s s d r i l l t o t h e s p i r i t u a l
t o t a l i t y is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e s u p p l e m e n t o f objet petit a t o t h e field of
Meaning: it bears witness to the fact that Hcgcl was no 'semantic
i d e a l i s t ' , t h a t h e was w e l l a w a r e o f h o w t h e v e r y d o m a i n o f M e a n i n g c a n
never achieve closure a n d g r o u n d itself in a self-referential circle - it has
to rely o n an 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' o f puissance provided by blind
m e c h a n i c a l e x e r c i s e . T h i s is a l s o , par excellence, the case o f religion in
r e l a t i o n t o p h i l o s o p h i c a l r e a s o n i n g : is n o t p r a y e r t h e ' h i g h e s t ' e x a m p l e o f
m e c h a n i c a l - r e p e t i t i v e activity d e s t i n e d t o p r o v i d e its o w n s a t i s f a c t i o n -
t h a t is, e n j o y m e n t - as H e g e l h i m s e l f e m p h a s i z e s i n h i s Lectures on the
Philosophy of Religion?
T h e advantage o f H e g e l ' s a c c o u n t o f disciplinary practices over Fou-
c a u l t ' s is t h a t H e g e l , as i t w e r e , p r o v i d e s t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l g e n e s i s o f
d i s c i p l i n e b y a n s w e r i n g t h e q u e s t i o n : h o w a n d w h y d o e s ( t h a t w h i c h will
b e c o m e ) t h e s u b j e c t ( t h e A l t h u s s e r i a n ' i n d i v i d u a l ' ) willingly s u b j e c t itself
t o t h e f o r m a t i v e d i s c i p l i n e o f P o w e r ? H o w a n d w h y d o e s it l e t i t s e l f b e
c a u g h t i n it? H e g e l ' s a n s w e r , o f c o u r s e , is t h e f e a r o f D e a t h , t h e a b s o l u t e
M a s t e r : s i n c e m y b o d i l y e x i s t e n c e is s u b j e c t t o n a t u r a l corruption, and
s i n c e I c a n n o t g e t r i d o f t h e b o d y a n d t h o r o u g h l y n e g a t e it, t h e o n l y t h i n g
I c a n d o is e m b o d y n e g a t i v i t y : i n s t e a d o f d i r e c t l y n e g a t i n g m y b o d y , I live
m y b o d i l y e x i s t e n c e as t h e p e r m a n e n t n e g a t i v i z a t i o n , s u b o r d i n a t i o n , m o r
t i f i c a t i o n , d i s c i p l i n i n g , o f t h e b o d y . . • • T h e life o f f o r m a t i v e d i s c i p l i n e -
w h a t H e g e l c a l l s Bildung- is t h u s a n e n d e a v o u r t o n e u t r a l i z e t h e e x c e s s i v e
l i f e - s u b s t a n c e i n m e , t o live m y a c t u a l life as i f I a m a l r e a d y d e a d , t o w a r d
off desire w h i c h ' m a k e s m e feel alive'. T h e positive figure o f the M a s t e r
who effectively oppresses me is u l t i m a t e l y a s t a n d - i n for the radical
negativity o f D e a t h , t h e a b s o l u t e M a s t e r - this e x p l a i n s the d e a d l o c k o f
t h e o b s e s s i o n a l n e u r o t i c w h o o r g a n i z e s h i s e n t i r e life as t h e e x p e c t a t i o n
o f t h e m o m e n t w h e n h i s M a s t e r will d i e , s o t h a t h e will d i e n finally be
a b l e t o b e c o m e fully a l i v e , t o ' e n j o y l i f e ' ; w h e n t h e o b s e s s i o n a l ' s M a s t e r
a c t u a l l y d i e s , t h e i m p a c t o f h i s d e a t h is, o f c o u r s e , e x a c t l y t h e o p p o s i t e :
t h e o b s e s s i o n a l is c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e v o i d o f D e a t h , t h e a b s o l u t e M a s t e r ,
w h i c h was l u r k i n g b e n e a t h t h e a c t u a l M a s t e r .
W h a t H e g e l a l r e a d y h i n t s at, a n d L a c a n e l a b o r a t e s , is h o w t h i s r e n u n c i
a t i o n o f t h e b o d y , o f b o d i l y p l e a s u r e s , p r o d u c e s a p l e a s u r e o f its o w n -
w h i c h is p r e c i s e l y w h a t L a c a n c a l l s s u r p l u s - e n j o y m e n t . T h e fundamental
' p e r v e r s i o n ' o f t h e h u m a n l i b i d i n a l e c o n o m y is t h a t w h e n s o m e p l e a s u r
a b l e activity is p r o h i b i t e d a n d ' r e p r e s s e d ' , w e d o n o t s i m p l y g e t a life o f
s t r i c t o b e d i e n c e t o t h e L a w d e p r i v e d o f all p l e a s u r e s - t h e e x e r c i s e o f t h e
L a w itself b e c o m e s libidinally c a t h e c t e d , so t h a t t h e p r o h i b i t o r y activity
i t s e l f p r o v i d e s a p l e a s u r e o f its o w n . A p r o p o s o f t h e a s c e t i c , f o r e x a m p l e ,
H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s h o w his e n d l e s s m o r t i f i c a t i o n o f his b o d y b e c o m e s a
s o u r c e o f p e r v e r s e excessive e n j o y m e n t : t h e very r e n u n c i a t i o n o f libidinal
s a t i s f a c t i o n b e c o m e s a n a u t o n o m o u s s o u r c e o f s a t i s f a c t i o n , a n d t h i s is t h e
2 9
' b r i b e ' which m a k e s the servant a c c e p t his servitude.
The key p r o b l e m is t h u s t h e uncanny possibility o f the dialectical
r e v e r s a l o f negating the body i n t o embodied negation, o f r e p r e s s i n g a l i b i d i n a l
u r g e i n t o o b t a i n i n g l i b i d i n a l satisfaction f r o m this very a c t o f r e p r e s s i o n .
T h i s m y s t e r y is t h a t o f masochism: h o w c a n t h e very v i o l e n t d e n i a l and
repudiation o f erotic satisfaction b e c o m e eroticized? H o w can libidinal
i n v e s t m e n t n o t o n l y d e t a c h i t s e l f f r o m its d i r e c t g o a l , b u t e v e n s h i f t f r o m
it to t h e very activity o p p o s i n g this g o a l ? T h e F r e u d i a n n a m e for this
o r i g i n a l ' d e t a c h a b i l i t y ' o f t h e e r o t i c i m p u l s e f r o m its ' n a t u r a l ' o b j e c t , f o r
t h i s o r i g i n a l p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e e r o t i c i m p u l s e s h i f t i n g its a t t a c h m e n t f r o m
o n e o b j e c t t o a n o t h e r , is, o f c o u r s e , n o n e o t h e r t h a n death drive. I n o r d e r
t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e n i h i l i s t i c d e n i a l o f t h e a s s e r t i v e will t o life, N i e t z s c h e ,
in On the Genealogy of Morals, introduced the well-known distinction
b e t w e e n n o t w i l l i n g at all a n d w i l l i n g N o t h i n g itself: n i h i l i s t i c h a t r e d o f
life is ' a r e v o l t a g a i n s t t h e m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s o f life; y e t it
is a n d r e m a i n s a will! . . . r a t h e r t h a n w a n t n o t h i n g , man even wants
3 0
nothingness.' H e r e o n e should recall that L a c a n (who otherwise ignores
N i e t z s c h e ) implicitly refers to t h e s a m e distinction in his definition o f
hysterical a n o r e x i a : the a n o r e x i c s u b j e c t d o e s n o t simply refuse f o o d a n d
n o t e a t ; r a t h e r , s h e eats Nothing itself. F o r L a c a n , h u m a n d e s i r e ( i n c o n t r a s t
to animal i n s t i n c t ) is always, c o n s t i t u t i v e l y , m e d i a t e d by r e f e r e n c e to
N o t h i n g n e s s : t h e t r u e o b j e c t - c a u s e o f d e s i r e (as o p p o s e d t o t h e o b j e c t s
t h a t satisfy o u r n e e d s ) is, b y d e f i n i t i o n , a ' m e t o n y m y o f l a c k ' , a s t a n d - i n
f o r N o t h i n g n e s s . ( W h i c h is w h y , f o r L a c a n , objet petit a as t h e o b j e c t - c a u s e
o f d e s i r e is t h e o r i g i n a l l y l o s t o b j e c t : it is n o t o n l y t h a t w e d e s i r e it i n s o
3 1
f a r as it is l o s t - t h i s o b j e c t is n o t h i n g b u t a l o s s p o s i t i v i z e d . )
S o w e a r e b a c k a t t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o f ' s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t ' , s i n c e it is
absolutely c r u c i a l to b e a r in m i n d the c o - d e p e n d e n c e b e t w e e n d e t a c h a b i l
ity f r o m a n y d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t a n d e x c e s s i v e a t t a c h m e n t t o a p a r t i c u l a r
o b j e c t t h a t m a k e s us i n d i f f e r e n t t o all o t h e r o b j e c t s - s u c h a n o b j e c t is
w h a t L a c a n , f o l l o w i n g K a n t , c a l l s ' n e g a t i v e m a g n i t u d e ' , t h a t is, a n o b j e c t
w h i c h , i n its v e r y p o s i t i v e p r e s e n c e , a c t s as a s t a n d - i n f o r t h e v o i d o f N o t h
i n g n e s s ( o r f o r t h e abyss o f t h e i m p o s s i b l e T h i n g ) , s o t h a t wanting litis
particular object, maintaining one's 'stubborn, attachment' to it come what may, is
the very concrete form of 'wanting Nothingness'. Excess and lack o f attachment
thus stricto sensu coincide, since excessive attachment to a particular
c o n t i n g e n t o b j e c t is t h e v e r y o p e r a t o r o f l e t h a l d i s - a t t a c h m e n t : t o t a k e a
r a t h e r p a t h e t i c e x a m p l e , T r i s t a n ' s u n c o n d i t i o n a l , excessive a t t a c h m e n t to
Isolde (and vice versa) was the very f o r m o f his dis-attachment, of
h i s c u t t i n g - o f f o f all h i s l i n k s w i t h t h e w o r l d a n d i m m e r s i o n i n t o N o t h i n g
n e s s . ( A b e a u t i f u l w o m a n a s t h e i m a g e o f d e a t h is a s t a n d a r d f e a t u r e o f
male phantasmic space.)
O n e c a n s e e h o w t h i s p a r a d o x p e r f e c t l y fits L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f s u b l i m a
t i o n as t h e e l e v a t i o n o f s o m e p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i v e o b j e c t t o ' t h e d i g n i t y o f
t h e T h i n g ' : t h e s u b j e c t b e c o m e s excessively a t t a c h e d to an o b j e c t in so far
as t h i s o b j e c t starts to f u n c t i o n as a s t a n d - i n for Nothingness. Here,
Nietzsche o n the o n e hand, and F r e u d and Lacan on the other, part
c o m p a n y : w h a t N i e t z s c h e d e n o u n c e s as t h e ' n i h i l i s t i c ' g e s t u r e t o c o u n t e r
act life-asserting instincts, F r e u d a n d L a c a n c o n c e i v e as t h e v e r y b a s i c
s t r u c t u r e o f h u m a n d r i v e as o p p o s e d t o n a t u r a l i n s t i n c t s . I n o t h e r w o r d s ,
w h a t N i e t z s c h e c a n n o t a c c e p t is t h e r a d i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f t h e d e a t h d r i v e
- the fact that the e x c e s s o f the Will o v e r a m e r e s e l f - c o n t e n d e d satisfac
tion is always m e d i a t e d b y t h e ' n i h i l i s t i c ' s t u b b o r n a t t a c h m e n t t o N o t h i n g
n e s s . T h e d e a t h d r i v e is n o t m e r e l y a d i r e c t n i h i l i s t i c o p p o s i t i o n t o a n y
life-asserting a t t a c h m e n t ; r a t h e r , it is t h e v e r y f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e of the
r e f e r e n c e t o N o t h i n g n e s s t h a t e n a b l e s us to o v e r c o m e the stupid self-
contended life-rhythm, in order to become 'passionately attached' to
some Cause - b e it l o v e , a r t , k n o w l e d g e o r p o l i t i c s - f o r w h i c h w e a r e
r e a d y t o r i s k e v e r y t h i n g . I n t h i s p r e c i s e s e n s e , it is m e a n i n g l e s s t o t a l k
a b o u t t h e s u b l i m a t i o n o f d r i v e s , s i n c e d r i v e as s u c h i n v o l v e s t h e s t r u c t u r e
o f s u b l i m a t i o n : we pass f r o m i n s t i n c t to drive w h e n , i n s t e a d o f a i m i n g
d i r e c t l y a t t h e g o a l t h a t w o u l d satisfy u s , s a t i s f a c t i o n is b r o u g h t a b o u t b y
c i r c u l a t i n g a r o u n d t h e v o i d , by r e p e a t e d l y m i s s i n g t h e o b j e c t w h i c h is t h e
stand-in for the central void. S o , w h e n a s u b j e c t desires a series o f positive
o b j e c t s , t h e t h i n g t o d o is t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n o b j e c t s w h i c h a r e a c t u a l l y
d e s i r e d as p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t s , a n d the o b j e c t w h i c h is d e s i r e d a s t h e s t a n d -
in for Nothingness: which functions as a ' n e g a t i v e m a g n i t u d e ' in the
Kantian sense o f the term.
'Include m e out!'
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' self-accusation o f plagiarism, between 'stealing
nothing (in the simple sense o f "not stealing a n y t h i n g " ) ' a n d '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
b y t h e a n a l y s t ( K r i s ) n o t , in r e a l i t y , t o h a v e s t o l e n a n y t h i n g , t h i s d o e s n o t
y e t p r o v e t h a t h e is s i m p l y i n n o c e n t . W h a t t h e p a t i e n t is a c t u a l l y s t e a l i n g
is ' n o t h i n g ' i t s e l f , j u s t as a n a n o r e x i c is n o t s i m p l y e a t i n g n o t h i n g ( i n t h e
sense o f 'not eating anything') but, rather, eating Nothingness itself. . . .
W h a t , exactly, d o these passages, so often referred to, m e a n ? Darian
3 2
Leader linked this case to another in which a patient evokes the
a n e c d o t e o f a m a n s u s p e c t e d by h i s e m p l o y e r o f s t e a l i n g s o m e t h i n g : as h e
leaves t h e factory where h e works every evening, his w h e e l b a r r o w is
s e a r c h e d s y s t e m a t i c a l l y - n o t h i n g is f o u n d , u n t i l a t l a s t i t is u n d e r s t o o d
t h a t h e is s t e a l i n g w h e e l b a r r o w s t h e m s e l v e s . . . . A l o n g t h e s a m e l i n e s , as
Lacan emphasizes, when Kris's patient displays h i s o b s e s s i o n w i t h the
' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' f e e l i n g o f p l a g i a r i z i n g , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is n o t t o t a k e t h i s
self-accusation at face value, a n d e n d e a v o u r to prove t o t h e p a t i e n t that in
r e a l i t y h e is n o t s t e a l i n g a n y t h i n g f r o m h i s c o l l e a g u e s - w h a t t h e p a t i e n t
( a s w e l l as h i s a n a l y s t ) fails t o s e e is t h a t ' t h e r e a l p l a g i a r i s m is i n t h e f o r m
o f t h e o b j e c t itself, in t h e f a c t t h a t f o r t h i s m a n s o m e t h i n g c a n o n l y h a v e
3 3
a v a l u e i f it b e l o n g s t o s o m e o n e e l s e ' : the patient's apprehension that
everything he p o s s e s s e s is s t o l e n c o n c e a l s t h e profound satisfaction -
jouissance — h e d e r i v e s f r o m t h e v e r y f a c t o f not h a v i n g a n y t h i n g t h a t t r u l y
b e l o n g s t o h i m - t h a t is truly ' h i s ' .
On t h e l e v e l o f d e s i r e , t h i s a t t i t u d e o f s t e a l i n g m e a n s t h a t d e s i r e is
always t h e d e s i r e o f t h e O t h e r , n e v e r i m m e d i a t e l y ' m i n e ' (I desire an
o b j e c t o n l y i n s o f a r as it is d e s i r e d b y t h e O t h e r ) - s o t h e o n l y way f o r m e
a u t h e n t i c a l l y t o ' d e s i r e ' is t o r e j e c t all p o s i t i v e o b j e c t s o f d e s i r e , a n d d e s i r e
N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f ( a g a i n , i n all t h e s e n s e s o f t h i s t e r m , u p t o d e s i r i n g t h a t
s p e c i f i c f o r m o f N o t h i n g n e s s w h i c h is d e s i r e i t s e l f - f o r t h i s r e a s o n , h u m a n
d e s i r e is always d e s i r e t o d e s i r e , d e s i r e t o b e t h e o b j e c t o f t h e Other's
d e s i r e ) . A g a i n , we c a n easily s e e t h e h o m o l o g y w i t h N i e t z s c h e : a W i l l c a n
b e a ' W i l l t o W i l l ' , a w i l l i n g w h i c h w a n t s w i l l i n g itself, o n l y i n s o f a r as it is
a W i l l w h i c h a c t i v e l y wills N o t h i n g n e s s . ( A n o t h e r w e l l - k n o w n f o r m o f t h i s
r e v e r s a l is t h e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f R o m a n t i c l o v e r s as a c t u a l l y b e i n g i n l o v e
n o t with t h e b e l o v e d p e r s o n , b u t with L o v e itself.)
C r u c i a l h e r e is t h e s e l f - r e f l e x i v e t u r n b y m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e ( s y m b o l i c )
f o r m i t s e l f is c o u n t e d a m o n g its e l e m e n t s : t o W i l l t h e W i l l i t s e l f is t o W i l l
n o t h i n g , j u s t as t o s t e a l t h e w h e e l b a r r o w i t s e l f ( t h e v e r y f o r m - c o n t a i n e r
o f s t o l e n g o o d s ) is t o s t e a l N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f ( t h e v o i d w h i c h p o t e n t i a l l y
contains stolen g o o d s ) . This 'nothing' ultimately stands for the subject
i t s e l f - t h a t is, it is t h e e m p t y s i g n i f i e r w i t h o u t s i g n i f i e d , w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s
t h e s u b j e c t . T h u s t h e s u b j e c t is n o t d i r e c t l y i n c l u d e d in t h e s y m b o l i c
o r d e r : it is i n c l u d e d as t h e v e r y p o i n t a t w h i c h s i g n i f i c a t i o n b r e a k s d o w n .
no THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
S a m G o l d w y n ' s f a m o u s r e t o r t w h e n h e was c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a n u n a c c e p t
able business proposition, 'Include me out!', perfecdy expresses this
i n t e r m e d i a t e status o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e s y m b o l i c order,
between direct inclusion and direct exclusion: the signifier which 'repre
s e n t s t h e s u b j e c t f o r o t h e r s i g n i f i e r s ' is t h e e m p t y s i g n i f i e r , t h e ' s i g n i f i e r
without signified', the signifier by m e a n s o f (in the guise of) which
'nothing ( t h e s u b j e c t ) is c o u n t e d as s o m e t h i n g ' - in this signifier, the
s u b j e c t is n o t s i m p l y i n c l u d e d i n t o t h e s i g n i f i e r ' s n e t w o r k ; r a t h e r , h i s v e r y
e x c l u s i o n f r o m i t ( s i g n a l l e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e is n o s i g n i f i e d t o t h i s
s i g n i f i e r ) is ' i n c l u d e d ' i n it, m a r k e d , r e g i s t e r e d by it.
T h i s s i t u a t i o n is t h e s a m e as t h a t o f t h e w e l l - k n o w n c h i l d i s h n o n s e n s e
also often quoted by L a c a n : 'I have t h r e e brothers, Ernest, Paul and
myself - the third term, 'myself, designates the way the s u b j e c t is
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n c l u d e d in t h e s e r i e s (as ' m y s e l f ' ) , a n d e x c l u d e d f r o m it
(as t h e absent 'subject o f the enunciation' who has three brothers,
i n c l u d i n g h i m s e l f ) - t h a t is t o say, t h i s t e r m , p r e c i s e l y , ' i n c l u d e s m e o u t ' .
T h u s reflexivity sustains the gap b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e e n u n c i a t i o n
and the subject o f the s t a t e m e n t / e n u n c i a t e d : w h e n - to take the old
n o t o r i o u s F r e u d i a n e x a m p l e - t h e p a t i e n t says: ' I d o n o t k n o w w h o that
[ p e r s o n i n m y d r e a m ] was, b u t it was not m y m o t h e r ! ' , t h e e n i g m a is: why-
did h e deny s o m e t h i n g that n o b o d y suggested to h i m ? In o t h e r words,
t h e r e a l m e s s a g e o f t h e p a t i e n t ' s ' I t was not m y m o t h e r ! ' lies n o t i n its
e n u n c i a t e d c o n t e n t , b u t i n t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t this m e s s a g e was u t t e r e d at
a l l - t h e r e a l m e s s a g e c o n s i s t s in t h e very a c t o f d e l i v e r i n g this m e s s a g e
(like a person who, when nobody is a c c u s i n g h i m o f theft, already
vehemently defends himself: 'I did not s t e a l it!' - w h y d o e s h e defend
h i m s e l f , w h e n n o b o d y was e v e n t h i n k i n g o f a c c u s i n g h i m ? ) . T h e f a c t t h a t
t h e m e s s a g e was d e l i v e r e d a t all is t h u s l i k e t h e w h e e l b a r r o w w h i c h s h o u l d
b e ' e x c l u d e d i n ' t h e c o n t e n t r a t h e r t h a n ' i n c l u d e d o u t ' o f it: it tells us a
lot, p r o v i d i n g t h e crucial e l e m e n t with r e g a r d to t h e c o n t e n t (theft).
This formula, 'include m e out', provides the most succinct definition o f
t h e obsessional^ s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e . T h a t is t o say: w h a t is t h e g o a l o f t h e
obsessional attitude? T o achieve the position o f a p u r e invisible m e d i a t o r
- t h a t is, t o play, in i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s , t h e r o l e o f w h a t , i n c h e m i s t r y ,
o n e calls a 'catalyst': the substance which speeds up, o r e v e n sets in
m o t i o n , a p r o c e s s o f c h e m i c a l r e a c t i o n without itself c h a n g i n g o r b e i n g
a f f e c t e d in a n y w a y . F r o m m y p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , I r e c a l l t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f o n e o f m y b e n e v o l e n t i n t e r v e n t i o n s . I was s l e e p i n g in a
f r i e n d ' s a p a r t m e n t i n a r o o m i n w h i c h m y f r i e n d , a n analyst, r e c e i v e d h i s
p a t i e n t s ; c l o s e t o t h i s r o o m was a n o t h e r r o o m i n w h i c h a n o t h e r a n a l y s t
a l s o r e c e i v e d p a t i e n t s . S o o n c e , i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e day, I r e t u r n e d b r i e f l y
to t h e a p a r t m e n t to leave a p a c k a g e t h e r e ; s i n c e voices told m e that t h e
o t h e r a n a l y s t was r e c e i v i n g p a t i e n t s i n h i s r o o m , I t i p t o e d s i l e n t l y i n t o m v
r o o m a n d p u t t h e p a c k a g e i n t o a c h e s t . W h i l e I was d o i n g t h i s , I n o t i c e d
a b o o k o n t h e t a b l e w h i c h d i d n o t b e l o n g t h e r e ; I a l s o saw a g a p in t h e
b o o k s h e l v e s w h e r e this b o o k obviously fitted - so, u n a b l e to resist t h e
compulsive temptation, I put t h e b o o k b a c k i n its p r o p e r place, then
tiptoed out o f the apartment. Later 1 learned from my friend that bv
d o i n g t h i s , b y s i m p l y p u t t i n g a n o b j e c t b a c k i n its p r o p e r p l a c e , I h a d
c a u s e d the analyst f r o m t h e a d j a c e n t r o o m to have a nervous breakdown.
T h e b o o k I f o u n d o n t h e t a b l e was t o b e r e t u r n e d by t h i s a n a l y s t t o t h e
f r i e n d i n w h o s e r o o m I was s l e e p i n g . J u s t b e f o r e I a r r i v e d , this a n a l y s t
e n t e r e d m v r o o m a n d , s i n c e h e was l a t e a n d a p a t i e n t was a l r e a d y w a i t i n g
f o r h i m , j u s t t h r e w t h e b o o k o n t h e t a b l e . I m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r I left, t h e
p a t i e n t h a d to g o to t h e toilet, so t h e analyst u s e d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f t h e
s h o r t b r e a k t o e n t e r m y r o o m a g a i n a n d p u t t h e b o o k b a c k i n its p r o p e r
place - o n e c a n i m a g i n e his s h o c k w h e n h e n o t i c e d t h a t the book xuas
already back in its proper place on the shelf. O n l y two o r t h r e e m i n u t e s p a s s e d
b e t w e e n h i s two visits t o t h e r o o m , a n d h e h a d n o t h e a r d n o i s e s ( s i n c e 1
t i p t o e d in a n d o u t ) , so h e was c o n v i n c e d t h a t h e h i m s e l f m u s t h a v e put
t h e b o o k t h e r e . H o w e v e r , s i n c e h e c l e a r l y r e m e m b e r e d at t h e s a m e time-
that only a short while ago h e had j u s t thrown the b o o k on the table, h e
t h o u g h t h e was h a v i n g h a l l u c i n a t i o n s a n d l o s i n g c o n t r o l o v e r h i s a c t s -
even m y friend, to w h o m t h e analyst later told t h e story, t h o u g h t t h e latter
was l o s i n g h i s m i n d . . . .
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 the couple's unawareness that another agent has
intervened in the situation. . . . This, then, is t h e unattainable ideal
towards which the obsessional neurotic strives: to be 'included' (to
intervene in a situation), but in the mode o f 'out', o f an invisible
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 counted, included, 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
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 the 'impossible'
inscription o f subjectivity i n t o the series a n d the empty form ( o f the
' s i g n i f i e r w i t h o u t s i g n i f i e d ' ) is c r u c i a l h e r e : t h e s e r i e s is ' s u b j e c t i v i z e d '
w h e n a n d o n l y w h e n o n e o f its e l e m e n t s is a n e m p t y e l e m e n t - t h a t is, a n
e l e m e n t w h i c h i n s c r i b e s i n t h e s e r i e s its v e r y f o r m a l p r i n c i p l e : t h i s e l e m e n t
does n o t simply ' m e a n n o t h i n g ' ; rather, it ' m e a n s N o t h i n g n e s s i t s e l f and,
as s u c h , r e p r e s e n t s t h e s u b j e c t .
W e a r e t h e r e f o r e b a c k a t t h e m y s t e r y o f reflection, o f t h e s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l
reflexive turn that is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l with subjectivity. R e p r e s s i o n first
e m e r g e s as a n a t t e m p t t o regulate desires c o n s i d e r e d ' i l l i c i t ' b y t h e p r e d o m
i n a n t s o c i o - s y m b o l i c o r d e r ; h o w e v e r , this p o w e r o f r e p r e s s i o n c a n m a i n
t a i n i t s e l f i n t h e p s y c h i c e c o n o m y o n l y i f i t is s u s t a i n e d b y t h e desire for
regulation - if, t h a t is, t h e v e r y f o r m a l a c t i v i t y o f r e g u l a t i o n / r e p r e s s i o n /
subjection b e c o m e s libidinally invested a n d turns into an autonomous
source o f libidinal satisfaction. T h i s satisfaction provided by t h e very
regulatory activity, t h i s desire for regulation, plays exactly the same
s t r u c t u r a l r o l e as t h e w h e e l b a r r o w i n t h e s t o r y q u o t e d b y L e a d e r : w e c a n
c l o s e l y i n s p e c t all t h e d e s i r e s t h e s u b j e c t e n d e a v o u r s t o r e g u l a t e , b u t w e
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 to
remain unsatisfied (and thus turn into a 'reflected' desire, a 'desire to
desire). Perhaps 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 its
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 and/or
r e a d y t o count/include the form into content, 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 may-
a 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:
every p o s i t i v e s t a t u t e t o w h i c h t h i s a c t r e f e r s i n o r d e r t o l e g i d m i z e i t s e l f is
34
self-referentially p o s i t e d by this a c t itself.
T h e b a s i c p a r a d o x o f S c h m i t t ' s p o s i t i o n is t h a t h i s very p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t
l i b e r a l - d e m o c r a t i c f o r m a l i s m i n e x o r a b l y g e t c a u g h t in t h e f o r m a l i s t trap.
S c h m i t t targets the utilitarian-enlightened g r o u n d i n g o f the political in
s o m e p r e s u p p o s e d set o f neutral-universal n o r m s or strategic rules which
(should) regulate the interplay o f individual interests ( e i t h e r in the guise
o f l e g a l n o r m a t i v i s m a la K e l s e n , o r i n t h e g u i s e o f e c o n o m i c u t i l i t a r i a n
i s m ) : it is n o t p o s s i b l e t o p a s s d i r e c t l y f r o m a p u r e n o r m a t i v e o r d e r t o t h e
a c t u a l i t y o f s o c i a l life - t h e n e c e s s a r y m e d i a t o r b e t w e e n t h e t w o is a n a c t
o f W i l l , a d e c i s i o n , g r o u n d e d o n l y i n i t s e l f , w h i c h imposes a c e r t a i n o r d e r
o r legal h e r m e n e u t i c s ( r e a d i n g o f abstract rules). A n y n o r m a t i v e order,
t a k e n in itself, r e m a i n s s t u c k i n a b s t r a c t f o r m a l i s m ; it c a n n o t b r i d g e the
g a p t h a t s e p a r a t e s it f r o m a c t u a l life. H o w e v e r - a n d t h i s is t h e c o r e o f
S c h m i t t ' s a r g u m e n t a t i o n - t h e d e c i s i o n w h i c h b r i d g e s t h i s g a p is n o t a
decision for some c o n c r e t e order, but primarily the decision for the
f o r m a l p r i n c i p l e o f o r d e r as s u c h . T h e c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t o f t h e imposed
o r d e r is a r b i t r a r y , d e p e n d e n t o n t h e S o v e r e i g n ' s will, l e f t t o h i s t o r i c a l
c o n t i n g e n c y - t h e principle of order, t h e Dass-Sein o f O r d e r , h a s p r i o r i t y o v e r
its c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t , o v e r its Was-Sein. T h a t is t h e m a i n f e a t u r e o f m o d e r n
c o n s e r v a t i v i s m , w h i c h s h a r p l y d i s t i n g u i s h e s it f r o m e v e r y k i n d o f t r a d i t i o n
alism: m o d e r n conservativism, even m o r e than liberalism, assumes the
lesson o f the dissolution o f the traditional set o f values a n d / o r authorities
- t h e r e is n o l o n g e r a n y p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t w h i c h c o u l d b e p r e s u p p o s e d as
the universally accepted frame of reference. (Hobbes was the first
explicitly to posit this d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the p r i n c i p l e o f o r d e r a n d any
c o n c r e t e o r d e r . ) T h e p a r a d o x t h u s l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o n l y way t o
o p p o s e l e g a l n o r m a t i v e f o r m a l i s m is t o r e v e r t t o d e c i s i o n i s t f o r m a l i s m -
t h e r e is n o way o f e s c a p i n g f o r m a l i s m w i t h i n t h e h o r i z o n o f m o d e r n i t y .
A n d d o e s n o t this g a p also provide t h e implicit political b a c k g r o u n d for
L a c a n ' s l o g i c o f t h e u n i v e r s a l a n d its c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n ? I t is e a s y t o
translate Schmitt's critique o f liberalism into L a c a n e s e : what liberalism
m i s r e c o g n i z e s is t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e r o l e o f t h e e x c e p t i o n a l / e x c e s s i v e M a s t e r -
S i g n i f i e r . T h i s r e f e r e n c e t o L a c a n a l s o e n a b l e s us t o a c c o u n t f o r the
necessary ambiguity o f Schmitt's notion o f e x c e p t i o n : it stands simul
taneously for the intrusion o f the Real (of the pure contingency that
p e r t u r b s t h e u n i v e r s e o f s y m b o l i c automaton) and f o r t h e g e s t u r e o f t h e
Sovereign who (violently, without foundation in the symbolic norm)
i m p o s e s a s y m b o l i c n o r m a t i v e o r d e r : i n L a c a n e s e , it s t a n d s f o r objet petit a
as well as f o r S , , t h e M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r .
This double nature o f the foundational 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: the very act of fulfilling the Law
undermines its direct authority. 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 is
eminently modern: 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
involves a radical disruption o f the O l d Ways - t r u e r e l i g i o n is a c r a z y
wager on the Impossible we have to m a k e 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 its c o n t e n t - the perception that what really
matters is t h e a c t as s u c h , i n d e p e n d e n t o f its c o n t e n t (or 'ordering',
independent o f the positive d e t e r m i n a t e order). The paradox (which
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 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 of a purely formal, abyssal act of decision, without
any grounds in the actual properties and acts of concerned humans (since they
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
universal Will inevitably, without 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
36
places, both in t h e deserts and in t h e s e a .
T
W hy, t h e n , d i d G o d c r e a t e t h e w o r l d i n t h e first p l a c e ? F o r t h e s a k e o f
C h r i s t ' s a r r i v a l - i n o r d e r , t h a t is, f o r t h e w o r l d t o b e d e l i v e r e d by C h r i s t .
Here M a l e b r a n c h e inverts 'God so loved the world, that he gave his
only son' into 'It would be unworthy o f G o d t o love t h e world, i f this
work were not inseparable from his s o n ' . From this inversion, Male
b r a n c h e is n o t a f r a i d t o d r a w t h e o n l y l o g i c a l , a l b e i t m o r b i d , c o n c l u s i o n
that G o d the F a t h e r ' n e v e r h a d a m o r e a g r e e a b l e sight t h a n that o f his
3 7
o n l y son f a s t e n e d to t h e cross to re-establish o r d e r in t h e u n i v e r s e ' . As
s u c h , C h r i s t is t h e o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e o f G r a c e : i n c o n t r a s t to G o d the
F a t h e r , C h r i s t t h e S o n d i s p e n s e s G r a c e with r e g a r d to individual merits,
b u t s i n c e h e is c o n s t r a i n e d b y t h e finite h o r i z o n o f a h u m a n soul, h e acts
and makes his choices following his p a r t i c u l a r will, a n d is p r o n e to
mistakes.
M a l e b r a n c h e t h u s g i v e s a t h e o l o g i c a l twist t o t h e s t a n d a r d Cartesian
epistemological occasionalism: for him, occasionalism is n o t only or
p r i m a r i l y a t h e o r y o f p e r c e p t i o n a n d v o l i t i o n ( w e d o n o t s e e b o d i e s , 'we
s e e all t h i n g s i n G o d ' ; o u r m i n d is n o t c a p a b l e o f d i r e c t l y m o v i n g even
the smallest b o d y ) , but also the theory o f Salvation, since the h u m a n soul
o f C h r i s t is t h e o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f G r a c e t o p a r t i c u l a r
persons. Here M a l e b r a n c h e relies o n a h o m o l o g y with the domain of
N a t u r e i n w h i c h , i f w e a r e t o e x p l a i n e v e n t X , w e n e e d g e n e r a l laws t h a t
r e g u l a t e p h y s i c a l p r o c e s s e s as w e l l as t h e t e x t u r e o f p r i o r p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t s
w h i c h , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h g e n e r a l laws, g e n e r a t e e v e n t X - g e n e r a l laws
b e c o m e effective only t h r o u g h the t e x t u r e o f particular e x i s t e n c e s that
a c t u a l i z e t h e m . I n a s i m i l a r way, G o d t h e F a t h e r s u s t a i n s t h e g e n e r a l laws
o f G r a c e , w h i l e C h r i s t a c t s a s its o c c a s i o n a l c a u s e a n d d e t e r m i n e s w h o will
3 8
a c u t a l l y b e t o u c h e d by G r a c e . I n t h i s way, M a l e b r a n c h e e n d e a v o u r s to
a v o i d t h e t w o e x t r e m e s : b e f o r e t h e F a l l , G o d d i d p l a n t o p r o v i d e G r a c e to
all men (in contrast to Calvinism, which advocates predestination -
s e l e c t i o n o f t h e few - b e f o r e t h e F a l l ) ; b e c a u s e o f A d a m ' s Fall, however,
sin is u n i v e r s a l ; all m e n d e s e r v e t o b e l o s t , a n d i n o r d e r t o r e d e e m the
w o r l d , G o d s e n t H i s S o n , C h r i s t , s o t h a t it is C h r i s t a l o n e w h o c a n furnish
the 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 . However, Christ's soul was

human and, as s u c h , p r o n e to h u m a n limitations; his t h o u g h t s were
' 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 encountered;
h e was p e r p l e x e d a n d intrigued 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 according to simple Cartesian laws w h i c h , from an individual
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, 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
Hegel, to his thesis o n how abstract universality coincides with arbitrary
subjectivity? The relationship between the general laws o f G r a c e and
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: 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 - as in the
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 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
3 9
lar i n t e r e s t s .
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 the
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 abun
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 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
4 0
- 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 ' .
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
4 1
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 - 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
in the subject's capacity to withhold or grant 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, then, happens in an act of (human) freedom? Malebranche's
a n s w e r is r a d i c a l a n d consistent: ' N o t h i n g . . . . T h e o n l y t h i n g we d o is
stop ourselves, put ourselves at rest.' This is 'an immanent act which
4 3
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 ' , 'an act which docs nothing
4 1
and which makes the general cause [ G o d ] do 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 decided
en 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 c o n s e n t . Is not
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 'truth'
of the Hegelian Absolute 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.il- t 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
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
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
7
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 laissez-
faire 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
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 pleasure-
in-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 .
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' (signifi
L
c a n t l y , h i s k e y e s s a y o n A l t h u s s e r b e a r s t h e t i t l e Tais-toi, Althusserf: 'Shut
up [remain silent], Althusser!'). In a revealing commemorative essay,
B a l i b a r d e s c r i b e s t h e last p h a s e o f A l t h u s s c r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l a c t i v i t y ( e v e n
p r i o r t o h i s u n f o r t u n a t e m e n t a l h e a l t h p r o b l e m s ) as a s y s t e m a t i c p u r s u i t
o f ( o r e x e r c i s e i n ) s e l f - d e s t r u c t i o n , as i f A l t h u s s e r was c a u g h t i n t h e v o r t e x
o f a systematic u n d e r m i n i n g a n d subverting o f his own previous t h e o r e t i
cal p r o p o s i t i o n s . A g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f this d e b r i s o f t h e A l t h u s s e r i a n
theoretical edifice, B a l i b a r painfully e n d e a v o u r s to f o r m u l a t e his own
p o s i t i o n , n o t always i n a fully c o n s i s t e n t way, o f t e n c o m b i n i n g t h e s t a n d a r d
Althusserian references ( S p i n o z a ) with r e f e r e n c e s to Althusser's arch
enemies (note the growing importance o f Hegel in Balibar's recent
essays).
R a n c i e r e , w h o a l s o b e g a n as a s t r i c t A l t h u s s e r i a n ( w i t h a c o n t r i b u t i o n
t o Lire le Capital), then ( i n La lecon d'Allhusser), accomplished a violent
gesture o f distancing, which e n a b l e d h i m to follow his own p a t h , focusing
o n w h a t h e p e r c e i v e d as t h e m a i n n e g a t i v e a s p e c t o f A l t h u s s e r ' s thought:
his t h e o r e t i c i s t elitism, his i n s i s t e n c e o n t h e g a p f o r e v e r s e p a r a t i n g the
universe o f scientific c o g n i t i o n from that o f ideological ( m i s ) r e c o g n i t i o n
in w h i c h t h e c o m m o n m a s s e s are i m m e r s e d . A g a i n s t this s t a n c e , w h i c h
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 and Ideology in Marxist Theory)
was still s t r o n g l y A l t h u s s e r i a n (the notion o f ideological interpellation
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 Hegemony
and Socialist Strategy (written with C h a n t a l M o u f f e ) , 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 ; the
notion of the subject is reconceptualized as the very operator 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 to b e ' c o u n t e d as O n e ' , its s t r u c t u r e must
always-already be a meta-structure that designates it as o n e (i.e. the
signified structure o f the situation m u s t b e r e d o u b l e d in the symbolic
n e t w o r k o f s i g n i f i e r s ) . W h e n a s i t u a t i o n is t h u s ' c o u n t e d as O n e ' , i d e n t i
fied b y its s y m b o l i c s t r u c t u r e , w e h a v e t h e ' s t a t e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n ' . Here
B a d i o u is p l a y i n g o n t h e a m b i g u i t y o f t h e t e r m s t a t e : ' s t a t e o f t h i n g s ' as
well as S t a t e ( i n t h e p o l i t i c a l s e n s e ) - t h e r e is n o ' s t a t e o f s o c i e t y ' w i t h o u t
a ' s t a t e ' i n w h i c h t h e s t r u c t u r e o f s o c i e t y is r e - p r e s e n t e d / r e d o u b l e d .
T h i s s y m b o l i c reduplicatio already involves the m i n i m a l dialectic o f V o i d
a n d E x c e s s . T h e p u r e m u l t i p l e o f B e i n g is n o t y e t a m u l t i t u d e o f O n e s ,
s i n c e , as w e h a v e j u s t s e e n , t o h a v e O n e , t h e p u r e m u l t i p l e must be
' c o u n t e d as O n e ' ; f r o m the standpoint o f the state o f a situation, the
p r e c e d i n g m u l t i p l e c a n o n l y a p p e a r as nothing, s o n o t h i n g is t h e 'proper
n a m e o f B e i n g as B e i n g ' p r i o r t o its s y m b o l i z a t i o n . T h e V o i d is t h e c e n t r a l
category o f ontology from Democritus' atomism onwards: 'atoms' are
n o t h i n g b u t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s o f t h e V o i d . T h e e x c e s s c o r r e l a t i v e to this V o i d
t a k e s two f o r m s . O n t h e o n e h a n d , e a c h s t a t e o f t h i n g s i n v o l v e s a t l e a s t
o n e excessive e l e m e n t w h i c h , a l t h o u g h it c l e a r l y b e l o n g s to t h e s i t u a t i o n ,
is n o t ' c o u n t e d ' b y it, p r o p e r l y i n c l u d e d i n it ( t h e ' n o n - i n t e g r a t e d ' rabble
i n a s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n , e t c . ) : t h i s e l e m e n t is p r e s e n t e d , b u t n o t r e - p r e s e n t e d .
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e r e is t h e e x c e s s o f r e - p r e s e n t a t i o n o v e r p r e s e n t a
t i o n : t h e a g e n c y t h a t b r i n g s a b o u t t h e p a s s a g e f r o m s i t u a t i o n t o its s t a t e
( S t a t e i n s o c i e t y ) is always i n e x c e s s w i t h r e g a r d t o w h a t it s t r u c t u r e s : S t a t e
power is n e c e s s a r i l y ' e x c e s s i v e ' , it n e v e r simply a n d transparently re
presents society ( t h e i m p o s s i b l e liberal d r e a m o f a state r e d u c e d to the
s e r v i c e o f civil s o c i e t y ) , b u t a c t s as a v i o l e n t i n t e r v e n t i o n in w h a t it r e
presents.
T h i s , t h e n , is t h e s t r u c t u r e o f B e i n g . F r o m t i m e t o t i m e , h o w e v e r , i n a
wholly c o n t i n g e n t , u n p r e d i c t a b l e way, o u t o f reach for Knowledge o f
B e i n g , an Event takes place that b e l o n g s to a wholly different dimension
- t h a t , p r e c i s e l y , o f n o n - B e i n g . L e t us t a k e F r e n c h s o c i e t y i n t h e late
eighteenth c e n t u r y : t h e s t a t e o f s o c i e t y , its s t r a t a , e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l ,
ideological conflicts, a n d so o n , are accessible to knowledge. However, n o
a m o u n t o f K n o w l e d g e will e n a b l e u s t o p r e d i c t o r a c c o u n t f o r t h e p r o p e r l y
u n a c c o u n t a b l e E v e n t c a l l e d t h e ' F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ' . I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e ,
t h e E v e n t e m e r g e s ex nihilo: i f it c a n n o t b e a c c o u n t e d f o r i n t e r m s o f t h e
s i t u a d o n , t h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t i t is s i m p l y a n i n t e r v e n t i o n f r o m O u t s i d e
o r B e y o n d - i t a t t a c h e s i t s e l f p r e c i s e l y t o t h e V o i d o f e v e r y s i t u a t i o n , t o its
i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y a n d / o r its e x c e s s . T h e E v e n t is t h e T r u t h o f t h e
situation that m a k e s visible/legible what the 'official' situation had to
' r e p r e s s ' , b u t i t is a l s o always l o c a l i z e d - t h a t is t o say, t h e T r u t h is always
t h e T r u t h of a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n . T h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n , f o r e x a m p l e , is
the Event which makes visible/legible the excesses and inconsistencies,
the 'lie', o f the ancien regime, and it is t h e T r u t h of t h e ancien regime
s i t u a t i o n , l o c a l i z e d , a t t a c h e d t o it. A n E v e n t t h u s i n v o l v e s its o w n s e r i e s o f
determinations: the E v e n t itself; its n a m i n g (the designation 'French
R e v o l u t i o n ' is n o t a n o b j e c t i v e c a t e g o r i z i n g b u t p a r t o f t h e E v e n t i t s e l f ,
t h e way its f o l l o w e r s p e r c e i v e d a n d s y m b o l i z e d t h e i r a c t i v i t y ) ; its u l t i m a t e
Goal ( t h e s o c i e t y o f fully r e a l i z e d e m a n c i p a t i o n , o f freedom-equality-
fraternity); its ' o p e r a t o r ' (the political m o v e m e n t s struggling for the
R e v o l u t i o n ; a n d , l a s t b u t n o t l e a s t , its subject, t h e a g e n t w h o , o n b e h a l f o f
the Truth-Event, intervenes in the historical multiple o f the situation a n d
discerns/identifies in it s i g n s - e f f e c t s o f t h e Event. W h a t defines the
s u b j e c t is h i s fidelity t o t h e E v e n t : t h e s u b j e c t c o m e s after t h e E v e n t a n d
p e r s i s t s i n d i s c e r n i n g its t r a c e s w i t h i n h i s s i t u a t i o n .
T h e s u b j e c t is t h u s , f o r B a d i o u , a finite c o n t i n g e n t e m e r g e n c e : n o t o n l y
is T r u t h n o t ' s u b j e c t i v e ' i n t h e s e n s e o f b e i n g s u b o r d i n a t e d t o h i s w h i m s ,
b u t t h e s u b j e c t h i m s e l f ' s e r v e s t h e T r u t h ' t h a t t r a n s c e n d s h i m ; h e is n e v e r
fully a d e q u a t e t o t h e i n f i n i t e o r d e r o f T r u t h , s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t always h a s
t o o p e r a t e w i t h i n a finite m u l t i p l e o f a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h h e d i s c e r n s t h e
signs o f T r u t h . T o m a k e this c r u c i a l p o i n t clear, l e t us take the e x a m p l e
o f t h e C h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n ( w h i c h p e r h a p s p r o v i d e s the e x a m p l e o f a T r u t h -
E v e n t ) : t h e E v e n t is C h r i s t ' s i n c a r n a t i o n a n d d e a t h ; its u l t i m a t e G o a l is
t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t , t h e f i n a l R e d e m p t i o n ; its ' o p e r a t o r ' i n t h e m u l t i p l e
of the historical situation is t h e C h u r c h ; its ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e c o r p u s o f
believers who intervene in their situation on b e h a l f o f the Truth-Event,
s e a r c h i n g i n it f o r s i g n s o f G o d . ( O r , t o t a k e t h e e x a m p l e o f l o v e : w h e n I
fall p a s s i o n a t e l y i n l o v e , I b e c o m e ' s u b j e c t i v i z e d ' b y r e m a i n i n g f a i t h f u l t o
this E v e n t a n d f o l l o w i n g it i n m y l i f e . )
T o d a y , however, w h e n even t h e m o s t radical i n t e l l e c t u a l s u c c u m b s to
T H E P O L I T I C S OF T R U T H 131
the compulsion to d i s t a n c e h i m s e l f f r o m Communism, it s e e m s more

appropriate 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 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 to follow old
patterns as i f n o t h i n g had happened, just a minor 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
3
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 ) . H e r e o n e can readily grasp
the gap that separates B a d i o u from 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 o f truths' (or, rather,
'truth-effects'). Truth is c o n t i n g e n t ; i t h i n g e s o n a c o n c r e t e historical
situation; i t is t h e truth of t h i s s i t u a t i o n , but in 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 points
o f failure are a structural necessity. Crucial for the 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
to base a political m o v e m e n t on 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 conditions
o f multiplicity and contingency, not only philosophy but the properly
meta-physkal dimension: the infinite Truth is ' e t e r n a l ' and 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 tradition) is m a n ' s hubris, his a r r o g a n t assumption that he
o c c u p i e s t h e c e n t r a l p l a c e in t h e universe a n d / o r t h a t h e is endowed
w i t h t h e d i v i n e r i g h t t o d o m i n a t e all o t h e r b e i n g s a n d e x p l o i t t h e m for
his profit. This hubris, which disturbs the rightful balance o f cosmic
powers, s o o n e r o r later forces N a t u r e to re-establish that b a l a n c e : today's
e c o l o g i c a l , s o c i a l a n d p s y c h i c c r i s i s is i n t e r p r e t e d as t h e u n i v e r s e ' s j u s t i f i e d
answer to m a n ' s p r e s u m p t i o n . O u r o n l y s o l u t i o n thus lies in t h e shift o f
the global paradigm, in a d o p t i n g t h e n e w h o l i s t i c a t t i t u d e in w h i c h w e
will humbly assume our constrained place in the global Order of
Being. . . .
I n c o n t r a s t to this c l i c h e , o n e s h o u l d a s s e r t t h e e x c e s s o f s u b j e c t i v i t y
( w h a t H e g e l c a l l e d t h e ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' ) as t h e o n l y h o p e o f r e d e m p
t i o n : t r u e evil lies n o t i n t h e e x c e s s o f s u b j e c t i v i t y as s u c h , b u t i n its
' o n t o l o g i z a t i o n ' , i n its r e i n s c r i p t i o n i n t o s o m e g l o b a l c o s m i c f r a m e w o r k .
Already in de S a d e , e x c e s s i v e c r u e l t y is o n t o l o g i c a l l y ' c o v e r e d ' b y the
o r d e r o f N a t u r e as t h e ' S u p r e m e B e i n g o f E v i l ' ; b o t h N a z i s m a n d S t a l i n i s m
involved t h e r e f e r e n c e to s o m e g l o b a l O r d e r o f B e i n g (in t h e c a s e o f
Stalinism, the dialectical organization o f the m o v e m e n t o f m a t t e r ) .
T r u e a r r o g a n c e is t h u s t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e hubris
o f s u b j e c t i v i t y : it l i e s i n f a l s e h u m i l i t y - t h a t is to say, it e m e r g e s w h e n the
s u b j e c t p r e t e n d s to s p e a k a n d act o n b e h a l f o f t h e G l o b a l C o s m i c O r d e r ,
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 . 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 to a higher Truth which cuts into and disturbs the old
pagan order 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 Wisdoms; even 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 . T h e problem o f philosophical thought
lies p r e c i s e l y in how the universality o f 'woman' emerges 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 Event,
which, precisely, transcends the ' 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 , the span between the Event
and its final End (between Christ's death and the Last Judgement,
between Revolution and Communism, between 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
p r o m i s e o f i m p o s s i b l e F u l l n e s s is a c t u a l l y r e a l i z e d - t h a t , t o paraphrase
D e r r i d a , d e m o c r a c y is n o l o n g e r m e r e l y a venir b u t h a s a c t u a l l y a r r i v e d ;
from this, deconstructionists draw the conclusion that the principal
e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l d u t y is t o m a i n t a i n t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e V o i d o f t h e c e n t r a l
i m p o s s i b i l i t y and e v e r y p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t g i v i n g b o d y t o it - t h a t is, n e v e r
fully t o s u c c u m b t o t h e e n t h u s i a s m o f h a s t y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a p o s i t i v e
E v e n t with the redemptive Promise that is always 'to c o m e ' . In this
deconstructionist stance, admiration f o r t h e R e v o l u t i o n i n its Utopian
enthusiastic aspect g o e s h a n d in h a n d with the conservative m e l a n c h o l i c
i n s i g h t t h a t e n t h u s i a s m i n e v i t a b l y t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s i t e , i n t o t h e w o r s t
t e r r o r , the m o m e n t we e n d e a v o u r to t r a n s p o s e it i n t o t h e positive struc
t u r i n g p r i n c i p l e o f social reality.
It m a y s e e m that B a d i o u r e m a i n s within this framework: does n o t h e
a l s o w a r n a g a i n s t t h e desastre o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y t e m p t a t i o n t o c o n f o u n d
t h e T r u t h - E v e n t with the o r d e r o f B e i n g : o f the a t t e m p t to ' o n t o l o g i z e '
Truth into the ontological principle o f the order of Being? However,
t h i n g s a r e m o r e c o m p l e x : B a d i o u ' s p o s i t i o n is t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e u n i v e r s a l
O r d e r has t h e status o f a s e m b l a n c e , f r o m time to time, in a c o n t i n g e n t
a n d u n p r e d i c t a b l e way, a ' m i r a c l e ' c a n h a p p e n i n t h e g u i s e o f a T r u t h -
E v e n t that deservedly s h a m e s a p o s t m o d e r n i s t s c e p t i c . W h a t h e h a s in
m i n d is a v e r y p r e c i s e p o l i t i c a l e x p e r i e n c e . F o r e x a m p l e , i n F r a n c e , d u r i n g
the first Mitterrand government in the early 1980s, all well-meaning
Leftists were sceptical a b o u t M i n i s t e r o f J u s t i c e R o b e r t B a d i n t e r ' s inten
tion to abolish the d e a t h p e n a l t y a n d i n t r o d u c e o t h e r progressive r e f o r m s
o f t h e p e n a l c o d e . T h e i r s t a n c e was ' Y e s , o f c o u r s e w e s u p p o r t h i m ; b u t is
t h e s i t u a t i o n y e t r i p e f o r it? W i l l t h e p e o p l e , t e r r i f i e d b y t h e r i s i n g c r i m e
r a t e , b e w i l l i n g t o s w a l l o w it? I s n ' t t h i s a c a s e o f i d e a l i s t i c o b s t i n a c y t h a t
c a n o n l y w e a k e n o u r g o v e r n m e n t , a n d d o us m o r e h a r m than good?'.
B a d i n t e r simply i g n o r e d the catastrophic p r e d i c t i o n s o f the o p i n i o n polls,
a n d p e r s i s t e d - w i t h t h e s u r p r i s i n g r e s u l t t h a t , all o f a s u d d e n , it was t h e
majority o f the p e o p l e who c h a n g e d their m i n d s a n d started to support
him.
A s i m i l a r e v e n t h a p p e n e d i n I t a l y i n t h e m i d 1 9 7 0 s , w h e n t h e r e was a
r e f e r e n d u m o n divorce. In private, the Left, even the C o m m u n i s t s - who,
of course, supported the right to divorce - were sceptical about the
o u t c o m e , fearing that the majority o f p e o p l e were n o t yet m a t u r e e n o u g h ,
that they would b e f r i g h t e n e d by the i n t e n s e C a t h o l i c p r o p a g a n d a depict
ing a b a n d o n e d children and m o t h e r s , a n d so on. T o the great surprise o f
e v e r y o n e , h o w e v e r , the r e f e r e n d u m was a g r e a t s e t b a c k f o r t h e Church
and the Right, since a considerable majority o f 6 0 p e r c e n t voted for the
right to divorce. Events like this d o o c c u r in 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 the standpoint o f what B a d i o u calls ' a n interpreting
,(i
intervention - if, t h a t is, o n e s p e a k s f r o m a s u b j e c t i v e l y e n g a g e d p o s i t i o n ,
o r - t o p u t it m o r e f o r m a l l y - i f o n e i n c l u d e s i n t h e d e s i g n a t e d s i t u a t i o n
t h e a c t o f n a m i n g itself: t h e c h a o t i c events in F r a n c e at t h e e n d o f t h e
e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y c a n b e i d e n t i f i e d as t h e ' F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n ' o n l y f o r
those w h o a c c e p t the 'wager' that s u c h an E v e n t exists. B a d i o u formally
d e f i n e s intervention as ' e v e r y p r o c e d u r e b y m e a n s o f w h i c h a m u l t i p l e is
7
r e c o g n i z e d as a n e v e n t ' - s o 'it will r e m a i n f o r e v e r d o u b t f u l if t h e r e was
a n e v e n t a t a l l , e x c e p t f o r t h e i n t e r v e n o r [I'intervenant] who d e c i d e d that
8
he belonged to the situation'. Fidelity to the Event designates the
c o n t i n u o u s effort o f traversing the field o f knowledge from the standpoint
o f E v e n t , i n t e r v e n i n g i n it, s e a r c h i n g f o r t h e s i g n s o f T r u t h . A l o n g t h e s e
lines, B a d i o u also interprets the P a u l i n e triad o f Faith, H o p e a n d Love:
F a i t h is f a i t h i n t h e E v e n t ( t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e E v e n t - C h r i s t ' s r i s i n g f r o m
t h e d e a d - r e a l l y t o o k p l a c e ) ; H o p e is t h e h o p e t h a t t h e final r e c o n c i l i a
t i o n a n n o u n c e d b y t h e E v e n t ( t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t ) will a c t u a l l y o c c u r ;
L o v e is t h e p a t i e n t s t r u g g l e f o r t h i s t o h a p p e n , t h a t is, t h e l o n g and
a r d u o u s w o r k t o a s s e r t o n e ' s fidelity t o t h e E v e n t .
B a d i o u calls t h e l a n g u a g e that e n d e a v o u r s to n a m e t h e T r u t h - E v e n t t h e
' 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 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
referent ('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 within, not from without. This,
however, in n o way m e a n s that the subject-language involves 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 its
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 'wager'
that this void will be filled w h e n the Goal is r e a c h e d , when Truth
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 (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 not
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 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
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: 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, a n d in a
more directly messianic, proto-religious mode by W a l t e r B e n j a m i n in
'Theses on the Philosophy o f History': 'truth' e m e r g e s when a victim,
from his p r e s e n t catastrophic position, gains a s u d d e n insight into the
e n t i r e p a s t as a s e r i e s o f c a t a s t r o p h e s t h a t l e d t o h i s c u r r e n t predicament.
S o , w h e n we r e a d a t e x t o n T r u t h , w e s h o u l d b e c a r e f u l n o t t o c o n f u s e
t h e level o f K n o w l e d g e with t h e level o f T r u t h . F o r e x a m p l e , although
Marx himself used 'proletariat' as s y n o n y m o u s w i t h ' t h e w o r k i n g class'
n o r m a l l y , o n e c a n n o n e t h e less d i s c e r n in his w o r k a c l e a r t e n d e n c y to
c o n c e i v e ' t h e w o r k i n g c l a s s ' as a d e s c r i p t i v e t e r m b e l o n g i n g t o t h e d o m a i n
o f K n o w l e d g e (the o b j e c t o f ' n e u t r a l ' s o c i o l o g i c a l study, a social s t r a t u m
subdivided into c o m p o n e n t s , etc.); whereas 'proletariat' designates the
o p e r a t o r o f T r u t h , t h a t is, t h e e n g a g e d a g e n t o f d i e r e v o l u t i o n a r y s t r u g g l e .
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
it is always r e c o g n i z e d as s u c h r e t r o a c t i v e l y , t h r o u g h t h e a c t o f D e c i s i o n
t h a t d i s s o l v e s i t - t h a t is, b y m e a n s o f w h i c h w e a l r e a d y p a s s o v e r it. F o r
e x a m p l e , N a z i s m as a p s e u d o - E v e n t c o n c e i v e s o f i t s e l f as t h e D e c i s i o n f o r
social H a r m o n y a n d O r d e r against the C h a o s o f m o d e r n liberal-Jewish-
class-warfare society - h o w e v e r , m o d e r n society n e v e r p e r c e i v e s itself in
t h e first p e r s o n as f u n d a m e n t a l l y ' c h a o t i c ' , it p e r c e i v e s ' c h a o s ' ( o r 'dis
o r d e r ' o r ' d e g e n e r a t i o n ' ) as a l i m i t e d , c o n t i n g e n t d e a d l o c k , a t e m p o r a r y
c r i s i s - m o d e r n s o c i e t y a p p e a r s as f u n d a m e n t a l l y ' c h a o t i c ' o n l y f r o m the
s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e D e c i s i o n f o r O r d e r , t h a t is, o n c e t h e D e c i s i o n is already
made. O n e s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e resist t h e retroactive illusion a c c o r d i n g to
w h i c h D e c i s i o n follows the insight into the o p e n undecidability o f the
s i t u a t i o n : i t is o n l y t h e D e c i s i o n i t s e l f t h a t r e v e a l s t h e p r e v i o u s S t a t e as
' u n d e c i d a b l e ' . P r i o r t o D e c i s i o n , w e i n h a b i t a S i t u a t i o n w h i c h is e n c l o s e d
i n its h o r i z o n ; f r o m w i t h i n this h o r i z o n , the V o i d constitutive o f this
S i t u a t i o n is b y d e f i n i t i o n i n v i s i b l e ; t h a t is t o say, u n d e c i d a b i l i t y is r e d u c e d
t o - a n d a p p e a r s as - a m a r g i n a l d i s t u r b a n c e o f t h e g l o b a l S y s t e m . A f t e r
t h e D e c i s i o n , u n d e c i d a b i l i t y is o v e r , s i n c e w e i n h a b i t t h e n e w d o m a i n o f
Truth. T h e gesture that c l o s e s / d e c i d e s the Situation (again) thus absol
u t e l y c o i n c i d e s w i t h t h e g e s t u r e t h a t ( r e t r o a c t i v e l y ) o p e n s it u p .
T h e E v e n t is t h u s t h e V o i d o f a n i n v i s i b l e l i n e s e p a r a t i n g o n e c l o s u r e
f r o m a n o t h e r : p r i o r t o it, t h e S i t u a t i o n was c l o s e d ; t h a t is, f r o m w i t h i n its
h o r i z o n , ( w h a t will b e c o m e ) t h e E v e n t n e c e s s a r i l y a p p e a r s as skandalon, as
an u n d e c i d a b l e , c h a o t i c intrusion that has n o place in the State o f the
S i t u a t i o n ( o r , t o p u t it i n m a t h e m a t i c a l t e r m s , t h a t is 'supernumerary');
o n c e t h e E v e n t t a k e s p l a c e a n d is a s s u m e d as s u c h , t h e very previous
Situation appears as u n d e c i d a b l e Chaos. F o r an established political
O r d e r , t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y t u r m o i l t h a t t h r e a t e n s t o o v e r t h r o w it is a c h a o t i c
d i s l o c a t i o n , w h i l e f r o m t h e v i e w p o i n t o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n , ancien regime i t s e l f
is a n a m e f o r d i s o r d e r , f o r a n i m p e n e t r a b l e a n d u l t i m a t e l y 'irrational'
d e s p o t i s m . H e r e B a d i o u is c l e a r l y o p p o s e d to the D e r r i d e a n ethics o f
o p e n n e s s t o t h e E v e n t i n its u n p r e d i c t a b l e a l t e r i t y : s u c h a n e m p h a s i s o n
u n p r e d i c t a b l e A l t e r i t y as t h e u l t i m a t e h o r i z o n r e m a i n s w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s
o f a S i t u a t i o n , a n d s e r v e s o n l y t o d e f e r o r b l o c k t h e D e c i s i o n - it i n v o l v e s
us i n t h e ' p o s t m o d e r n i s t ' i n d e f i n i t e o s c i l l a t i o n o f ' h o w d o we k n o w t h i s
truly is t h e E v e n t , n o t j u s t a n o t h e r s e m b l a n c e o f t h e E v e n t ? '
H o w are w e t o d r a w a d e m a r c a t i o n l i n e b e t w e e n a t r u e E v e n t a n d its
s e m b l a n c e ? Is n o t B a d i o u c o m p e l l e d to rely h e r e o n a 'metaphysical'
o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n T r u t h a n d its s e m b l a n c e ? A g a i n , t h e a n s w e r i n v o l v e s
t h e way a n E v e n t r e l a t e s t o t h e S i t u a t i o n w h o s e T r u t h it a r t i c u l a t e s : N a z i s m
was a p s e u d o - E v e n t a n d t h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n was a n a u t h e n t i c E v e n t ,
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 the Decision which purports to (re)introduce
Order into this C h a o s . In o t h e r words, what 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 cabaret songs about money and sexual
promiscuity created the background that made 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 opposes
this s u b l i m e effect ( 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
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 lesson: the Owl of
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 , 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 to
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 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:
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 the
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 : 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, and that this
event, precisely, does not fit a n y o f t h e f o u r generiques o f the event he
1 0
e n u m e r a t e s (love, art, s c i e n c e , p o l i t i c s ) ?
S o , p e r h a p s , i f we t a k e B a d i o u ' s t h o u g h t i t s e l f as a ' s i t u a t i o n ' o f B e i n g ,
s u b d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r generiques, ( C h r i s t i a n ) r e l i g i o n i t s e l f is h i s ' s y m p t o m a l
torsion', the e l e m e n t that belongs to the d o m a i n o f T r u t h without b e i n g
o n e o f its a c k n o w l e d g e d p a r t s o r s u b s p e c i e s ? T h i s s e e m s t o i n d i c a t e t h a t
the Truth-Event consists in the e l e m e n t a r y ideological gesture o f interpel
lating individuals (parts o f a 'situation' o f B e i n g ) into subjects ( b e a r e r s /
followers of Truth). One is t e m p t e d to go even a step further: the
p a r a d i g m a t i c e x a m p l e o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is n o t o n l y r e l i g i o n i n g e n e r a l
b u t , s p e c i f i c a l l y , Christian r e l i g i o n c e n t r e d o n the E v e n t o f Christ's arrival
a n d d e a t h (as K i e r k e g a a r d h a d already p o i n t e d out, Christianity inverts
t h e s t a n d a r d m e t a p h y s i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n E t e r n i t y a n d T i m e : in a
way, E t e r n i t y i t s e l f h i n g e s o n t h e t e m p o r a l E v e n t o f C h r i s t ) . S o p e r h a p s
B a d i o u c a n a l s o b e r e a d as t h e l a s t g r e a t a u t h o r i n t h e F r e n c h t r a d i t i o n o f
Catholic dogmaticists from Pascal and Malebranche on (we n e e d only
r e c a l l t h a t two o f h i s k e y r e f e r e n c e s a r e P a s c a l a n d C l a u d e l ) . F o r y e a r s t h e
p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n r e v o l u t i o n a r y M a r x i s m a n d M e s s i a n i c C h r i s t i a n i t y was a
c o m m o n topic a m o n g liberal critics like B e r t r a n d Russell, who dismissed
M a r x i s m as a s e c u l a r i z e d v e r s i o n o f M e s s i a n i c r e l i g i o u s i d e o l o g y ; B a d i o u ,
in contrast (following a line from the later E n g e l s to F r e d r i c J a m e s o n ) ,
fully e n d o r s e s t h i s h o m o l o g y .
T h i s r e a d i n g is f u r t h e r c o n f i r m e d b y B a d i o u ' s p a s s i o n a t e d e f e n c e o f S t
Paul as t h e one who articulated the Christian Truth-Event - Christ's
R e s u r r e c t i o n - as t h e ' u n i v e r s a l s i n g u l a r ' ( a s i n g u l a r e v e n t t h a t interpel
lates individuals into subjects universally, irrespectively o f their race, sex,
social class . . .) a n d t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e followers' fidelity to i t . " Of
c o u r s e , h e r e B a d i o u is w e l l a w a r e t h a t t o d a y , i n o u r e r a o f m o d e r n s c i e n c e ,
o n e c a n n o l o n g e r a c c e p t t h e f a b l e o f t h e m i r a c l e o f R e s u r r e c t i o n as t h e
form o f the Truth-Event. Although the Truth-Event does designate the
o c c u r r e n c e o f s o m e t h i n g which, from within the horizon o f the predomi
n a n t o r d e r o f K n o w l e d g e , a p p e a r s i m p o s s i b l e ( t h i n k o f the l a u g h t e r with
which the Greek philosophers greeted St Paul's assertion of Christ's
R e s u r r e c t i o n o n his visit t o A t h e n s ) , t o d a y , a n y l o c a t i o n o f t h e Truth-
E v e n t at t h e level o f s u p e r n a t u r a l m i r a c l e s necessarily entails regression
i n t o o b s c u r a n t i s m , s i n c e t h e e v e n t o f S c i e n c e is i r r e d u c i b l e a n d c a n n o t b e
u n d o n e . T o d a y , o n e c a n a c c e p t as t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , as t h e i n t r u s i o n o f t h e
traumatic Real that shatters the predominant symbolic texture, only-
occurrences which take place in a universe c o m p a t i b l e with scientific
k n o w l e d g e , e v e n i f t h e y m o v e a t its b o r d e r s a n d q u e s t i o n its p r e s u p p o s i
tions - the 'sites' of the Event today are scientific discovery itself,
the political act, artistic invention, the psychoanalytic confrontation
with love. . . .
T h a t is t h e p r o b l e m with G r a h a m Greene's drama The Potting Shed,
which endeavours to resuscitate t h e C h r i s t i a n version o f t h e shattering
i m p a c t o f t h e i m p o s s i b l e R e a l : t h e life o f t h e f a m i l y o f a g r e a t p o s i t i v i s t
p h i l o s o p h e r who d e d i c a t e d his w h o l e effort to fighting religious supersti
t i o n s is t h o r o u g h l y s h a t t e r e d by a n u n e x p e c t e d m i r a c l e : h i s s o n , t h e o b j e c t
o f t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s g r e a t e s t l o v e , is m o r t a l l y ill a n d a l r e a d y p r o c l a i m e d
d e a d w h e n , m i r a c u l o u s l y , h e is b r o u g h t b a c k t o life b y m e a n s o f w h a t ,
evidently, c a n n o t b e anything b u t a d i r e c t intervention o f Divine G r a c e .
T h e s t o r y is t o l d i n r e t r o s p e c t f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f a f a m i l y f r i e n d w h o ,
a f t e r t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s d e a t h , w r i t e s h i s b i o g r a p h y a n d is p u z z l e d b y a n
e n i g m a i n t h e l a t t e r ' s life: w h y , a c o u p l e o f y e a r s b e f o r e h i s d e a t h , d i d t h e
p h i l o s o p h e r s u d d e n l y s t o p w r i t i n g ; w h y d i d h e l o s e h i s will t o live, as i f h i s
life was s u d d e n l y d e p r i v e d o f m e a n i n g , a n d e n t e r a p e r i o d o f r e s i g n a t i o n ,
passively awaiting his d e a t h ? I n t e r v i e w i n g the surviving family m e m b e r s ,
h e s o o n d i s c o v e r s t h a t t h e r e is a d a r k f a m i l y s e c r e t n o b o d y w a n t s t o t a l k
a b o u t , until, finally, o n e o f t h e family b r e a k s d o w n a n d c o n f e s s e s to h i m
t h a t t h e s h a t t e r i n g s e c r e t is t h e m i r a c u l o u s r e s u s c i t a t i o n o f t h e p h i l o s
opher's son, which rendered his e n t i r e theoretical work, his lifelong
engagement, meaningless. . . . Intriguing as i t is, s u c h a story cannot
e f f e c t i v e l y e n g a g e us t o d a y .
A p r o p o s o f S t Paul, B a d i o u tackles the p r o b l e m o f l o c a t i n g his position
w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e f o u r generiques that g e n e r a t e effective truths (science,
p o l i t i c s , a r t , l o v e ) - t h a t is, w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e f a c t t h a t ( t o d a y , at l e a s t )
Christianity, based o n a fabulous event o f Resurrection, c a n n o t b e c o u n t e d
as a n e f f e c t i v e T r u t h - E v e n t , b u t m e r e l y as its s e m b l a n c e . H i s proposed
s o l u t i o n is t h a t S t P a u l is t h e a n t i - p h i l o s o p h i c a l theoretician of the formal
conditions of the truth-procedure, what he provides is t h e first detailed
articulation o f how fidelity to a T r u t h - E v e n t o p e r a t e s i n its universal
d i m e n s i o n : t h e e x c e s s i v e , surnumeraire Real o f a Truth-Event ('Resurrec
t i o n ' ) that e m e r g e s by G r a c e (i.e. c a n n o t b e a c c o u n t e d for in t h e terms
o f the c o n s t i t u e n t s o f t h e given s i t u a t i o n ) sets in m o t i o n , in t h e s u b j e c t s
w h o r e c o g n i z e t h e m s e l v e s i n its c a l l , t h e m i l i t a n t ' w o r k o f L o v e ' , t h a t is,
the struggle to disseminate, with persistent fidelity, t h i s T r u t h in its
u n i v e r s a l s c o p e , as c o n c e r n i n g e v e r y o n e . S o a l t h o u g h S t P a u l ' s p a r t i c u l a r
message is n o longer operative for us, the very terms in which he
formulates the operative m o d e o f the Christian religion do possess a
u n i v e r s a l s c o p e as r e l e v a n t f o r e v e r y T r u t h - E v e n t : e v e r y T r u t h - E v e n t l e a d s
t o a k i n d o f ' R e s u r r e c t i o n , ' - t h r o u g h f i d e l i t y t o it a n d a l a b o u r o f L o v e
o n its b e h a l f , o n e e n t e r s a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n i r r e d u c i b l e t o m e r e service des
biens, t o t h e s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f a f f a i r s i n t h e d o m a i n o f B e i n g , t h e d o m a i n
o f Immortality, o f Life u n e n c u m b e r e d by d e a t h . . . . N o n e t h e less, the
problem remains o f how i t was p o s s i b l e f o r the first and still most
pertinent description o f the m o d e o f operation o f the fidelity to a T r u t h -
E v e n t t o o c c u r a p r o p o s o f a T r u t h - E v e n t t h a t is a m e r e s e m b l a n c e , n o t a n
actual Truth.
F r o m a H e g e l i a n s t a n d p o i n t t h e r e is a d e e p n e c e s s i t y i n t h i s , c o n f i r m e d
by t h e fact that in o u r c e n t u r y t h e p h i l o s o p h e r w h o p r o v i d e d t h e definitive
d e s c r i p t i o n o f a n a u t h e n t i c p o l i t i c a l act ( H e i d e g g e r i n Being and Time) was
s e d u c e d b y a p o l i t i c a l a c t t h a t was u n d o u b t e d l y a fake, n o t an actual
Truth-Event ( N a z i s m ) . S o it is as if, i f o n e is to e x p r e s s the formal
s t r u c t u r e o f f i d e l i t y t o t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , o n e h a s t o d o it a p r o p o s o f a n
E v e n t t h a t is m e r e l y its o w n s e m b l a n c e . P e r h a p s t h e l e s s o n o f all t h i s is
m o r e r a d i c a l t h a n it a p p e a r s : w h a t i f w h a t B a d i o u c a l l s t h e T r u t h - E v e n t is,
a t its m o s t r a d i c a l , a p u r e l y f o r m a l a c t o f d e c i s i o n , n o t o n l y n o t b a s e d o n
a n a c t u a l t r u t h , b u t u l t i m a t e l y indifferent t o t h e p r e c i s e status ( a c t u a l o r
fictitious) o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t it refers to? W h a t i f we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e with
a n i n h e r e n t key c o m p o n e n t o f the T r u t h - E v e n t - what i f t h e true fidelity
t o t h e E v e n t is ' d o g m a t i c ' i n t h e p r e c i s e s e n s e o f u n c o n d i t i o n a l F a i t h , o f
an attitude which does n o t ask for g o o d r e a s o n s a n d w h i c h , for that very
reason, c a n n o t b e refuted by any ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n ' ?
S o , b a c k t o o u r m a i n l i n e o f a r g u m e n t : B a d i o u d e f i n e s as ' g e n e r i c ' t h e
m u l t i p l e within a situation t h a t has n o p a r t i c u l a r p r o p e r t i e s , r e f e r e n c e to
w h i c h w o u l d e n a b l e us t o classify i t as its s u b s p e c i e s : t h e ' g e n e r i c ' m u l t i p l e
b e l o n g s t o t h e s i t u a t i o n , b u t is n o t p r o p e r l y i n c l u d e d i n it as its s u b s p e c i e s
(the ' r a b b l e ' in H e g e l ' s philosophy o f law, f o r example). A multiple
e l e m e n t / p a r t o f t h e s i t u a t i o n w h i c h d o e s n o t fit i n t o it, w h i c h s t i c k s o u t ,
is g e n e r i c p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as i t d i r e c t l y g i v e s b o d y t o t h e b e i n g o f t h e
situation as s u c h . It subverts the situation by directly e m b o d y i n g its
universality. A n d , with r e g a r d t o B a d i o u ' s own classification o f g e n e r i c
p r o c e d u r e s i n f o u r s p e c i e s ( p o l i t i c s , art, s c i e n c e , l o v e ) , d o e s n o t r e l i g i o u s
i d e o l o g y o c c u p y p r e c i s e l y t h i s g e n e r i c p l a c e ? I t is n o n e of them, yet
1 2
p r e c i s e l y as s u c h it gives b o d y t o t h e g e n e r i c as s u c h .
Is n o t t h i s i d e n t i t y o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t a n d i d e o l o g y f u r t h e r confirmed
b y futur anterieur as t h e s p e c i f i c t e m p o r a l i t y o f g e n e r i c p r o c e d u r e s ? S t a r t
ing from the n a m i n g o f the Event (Christ's death, R e v o l u t i o n ) , generic
p r o c e d u r e s e a r c h e s f o r its s i g n s i n t h e m u l t i t u d e w i t h a v i e w t o t h e final
g o a l t h a t will b r i n g full p l e n i t u d e ( t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t , C o m m u n i s m , o r ,
i n M a l l a r m e , le Livre). G e n e r i c p r o c e d u r e s thus involve a t e m p o r a l l o o p :
fidelity to the E v e n t e n a b l e s t h e m to j u d g e t h e h i s t o r i c m u l t i p l e f r o m t h e
s t a n d p o i n t o f p l e n i t u d e to c o m e , b u t t h e arrival o f this p l e n i t u d e already
i n v o l v e s t h e s u b j e c t i v e a c t o f D e c i s i o n — o r , i n P a s c a l i a n , t h e ' w a g e r ' o n it.
A r e w e t h u s n o t c l o s e t o w h a t L a c l a u d e s c r i b e s as h e g e m o n y ? L e t u s t a k e
the democratic-egalitarian political Event: reference to the D e m o c r a t i c
R e v o l u t i o n e n a b l e s us t o r e a d h i s t o r y as a c o n t i n u o u s d e m o c r a t i c s t r u g g l e
a i m i n g at total e m a n c i p a t i o n ; the present situation is e x p e r i e n c e d as
fundamentally 'dislocated', 'out o f j o i n t ' (the corruption of the ancien
regime, c l a s s s o c i e t y , f a l l e n t e r r e s t r i a l l i f e ) w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e p r o m i s e o f a
redeemed future. F o r the language-subject, 'now' is always a t i m e of
a n t a g o n i s m , split b e t w e e n t h e c o r r u p t 'state o f t h i n g s ' a n d t h e p r o m i s e o f
Truth.
S o , a g a i n , is n o t B a d i o u ' s n o t i o n o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t u n c a n n i l y c l o s e t o
Althusser's notion o f (ideological) interpellation? Isn't the process Badiou
is d e s c r i b i n g t h a t o f a n i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p e l l a t e d i n t o a s u b j e c t b y a C a u s e ?
( S i g n i f i c a n t l y , i n o r d e r t o d e s c r i b e t h e f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e o f fidelity t o t h e
T r u t h - E v e n t , h e u s e s t h e s a m e e x a m p l e as A l t h u s s e r i n h i s d e s c r i p t i o n o f
t h e p r o c e s s o f i n t e r p e l l a t i o n . ) Is n o t t h e c i r c u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e
E v e n t a n d t h e s u b j e c t ( t h e s u b j e c t serves t h e E v e n t in his fidelity, but the
E v e n t i t s e l f is v i s i b l e as s u c h o n l y t o a n a l r e a d y e n g a g e d s u b j e c t ) t h e v e r y
circle o f ideology? P r i o r to c o n s t r a i n i n g t h e notion o f the s u b j e c t to
ideology - t o i d e n t i f y i n g t h e s u b j e c t as s u c h as i d e o l o g i c a l - Althusser
e n t e r t a i n e d for a s h o r t time t h e idea o f t h e f o u r m o d a l i t i e s o f subjectivity:
t h e i d e o l o g i c a l s u b j e c t , the s u b j e c t in art, t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s ,
t h e s u b j e c t o f s c i e n c e . Is t h e r e n o t a c l e a r p a r a l l e l b e t w e e n B a d i o u ' s f o u r
g e n e r i c s o f t r u t h (love, art, s c i e n c e , p o l i t i c s ) a n d t h e s e f o u r m o d a l i t i e s o f
subjectivity ( w h e r e love c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s ,
the topic o f psychoanalysis, a n d politics, o f course, to the subject o f
i d e o l o g y ) ? T h e p a r a d o x is t h u s t h a t B a d i o u ' s o p p o s i t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e
a n d truth s e e m s to turn exactly a r o u n d Althusser's opposition o f ideology
a n d s c i e n c e : ' n o n - a u t h e n t i c ' k n o w l e d g e is l i m i t e d t o t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f
B e i n g , b l i n d t o its s t r u c t u r a l v o i d , t o its s y m p t o m a l torsion; while the
engaged Truth that subjectivizes provides authentic insight into a
situation.
St P a u l with B a d i o u
A c c o r d i n g to a d e e p - a l b e i t u n e x p e c t e d - logic, t h e t o p i c o f P a u l i n e
C h r i s t i a n i t y is a l s o c r u c i a l f o r B a d i o u ' s c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h p s y c h o a n a l y s i s .
W h e n B a d i o u adamantly o p p o s e s the ' m o r b i d obsession with d e a t h ' , w h e n
h e o p p o s e s t h e T r u t h - E v e n t t o t h e d e a t i i d r i v e , a n d s o o n , h e is a t h i s
w e a k e s t , s u c c u m b i n g t o t h e temptation of the non-thought. I t is s y m p t o m a t i c
t h a t B a d i o u is c o m p e l l e d t o i d e n t i f y t h e l i b e r a l - d e m o c r a t i c service des biens,
t h e s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f t h i n g s in t h e positivity o f B e i n g w h e r e 'nothing
a c t u a l l y h a p p e n s ' , with t h e ' m o r b i d o b s e s s i o n w i t h d e a t h ' . A l t h o u g h one
c a n e a s i l y s e e t h e e l e m e n t o f t r u t h i n t h i s e q u a t i o n ( m e r e service d£s biens,
d e p r i v e d o f t h e d i m e n s i o n o f T r u t h , f a r f r o m b e i n g a b l e t o f u n c t i o n as
' h e a l t h y ' everyday life, n o t b o t h e r e d by ' e t e r n a l ' q u e s t i o n s , n e c e s s a r i l y
r e g r e s s e s i n t o n i h i l i s t i c m o r b i d i t y - as C h r i s t i a n s w o u l d p u t it, t h e r e is t r u e
L i f e o n l y i n C h r i s t , a n d life o u t s i d e t h e E v e n t o f C h r i s t s o o n e r o r l a t e r
t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s i t e , a m o r b i d d e c a d e n c e ; w h e n w e d e d i c a t e o u r life t o
excessive p l e a s u r e s , t h e s e very p l e a s u r e s a r e s o o n e r o r l a t e r s p o i l e d ) , o n e
s h o u l d n o n e t h e less insist h e r e o n w h a t L a c a n calls t h e s p a c e o r d i s t a n c e
between the two deaths: t o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s C h r i s t i a n t e r m s , i n o r d e r t o b e
a b l e to o p e n o n e s e l f u p to t h e life o f t r u e E t e r n i t y , o n e h a s to suspend
o n e ' s a t t a c h m e n t t o ' t h i s ' life a n d e n t e r t h e d o m a i n o f ate, t h e domain
b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h s , t h e d o m a i n o f t h e ' u n d e a d ' .
T h i s p o i n t is w o r t h y o f m o r e d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n , s i n c e i t c o n d e n s e s
t h e gap t h a t s e p a r a t e s B a d i o u f r o m L a c a n a n d psychoanalysis in g e n e r a l .
B a d i o u , o f c o u r s e , is a l s o w e l l a w a r e o f t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f two d e a t h s (and
two L i v e s ) : w h e n S t P a u l o p p o s e s L i f e a n d D e a t h ( S p i r i t is L i f e , w h i l e
F l e s h b r i n g s D e a t h ) , this o p p o s i t i o n o f Life a n d D e a t h has n o t h i n g to d o
w i t h t h e b i o l o g i c a l o p p o s i t i o n o f life a n d d e a t h as p a r t s o f t h e c y c l e o f
g e n e r a t i o n a n d c o r r u p t i o n , o r with t h e s t a n d a r d P l a t o n i c o p p o s i t i o n o f
Soul a n d Body: for St Paul, 'Life' and ' D e a t h ' , Spirit a n d Flesh, designate
two s u b j e c t i v e s t a n c e s , t w o ways t o live o n e ' s life. S o w h e n S t P a u l s p e a k s
o f D e a t h a n d R e s u r r e c t i o n - rising i n t o t h e e t e r n a l Life in C h r i s t - this
h a s n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h b i o l o g i c a l life a n d d e a t h b u t , r a t h e r , p r o v i d e s t h e
c o - o r d i n a t e s o f t h e two f u n d a m e n t a l 'existential attitudes' (to use this
m o d e r n t e r m anachronistically). T h i s leads B a d i o u to a specific interpre
t a t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n i t y w h i c h radically dissociates Death, and Resurrection: they
are n o t the same, they are n o t even dialectically i n t e r c o n n e c t e d in the
sense o f gaining access to eternal Life by paying the price o f suffering
w h i c h r e d e e m s us f r o m o u r s i n s . F o r B a d i o u , C h r i s t ' s d e a t h o n t h e C r o s s
s i m p l y s i g n a l s t h a t ' G o d b e c a m e m a n ' , t h a t e t e r n a l T r u t h is s o m e t h i n g
i m m a n e n t to h u m a n life, a c c e s s i b l e to every h u m a n b e i n g . T h e m e s s a g e
o f the fact that G o d h a d to b e c a m e m a n a n d to die (to suffer the fate o f
all f l e s h ) in o r d e r t o r e s u r r e c t is t h a t E t e r n a l L i f e is s o m e t h i n g a c c e s s i b l e
t o h u m a n i t y , t o all m e n as f i n i t e m o r t a l b e i n g s : e a c h o f us c a n b e t o u c h e d
by the G r a c e o f the T r u t h - E v e n t a n d e n t e r the d o m a i n o f E t e r n a l Life.
H e r e B a d i o u is o p e n l y a n t i - H e g e l i a n : t h e r e is n o d i a l e c t i c s o f L i f e and
D e a t h , i n t h e s e n s e o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t o f R e s u r r e c t i o n e m e r g i n g as t h e
m a g i c r e v e r s a l o f n e g a t i v i t y i n t o p o s i t i v i t y w h e n w e a r e fully r e a d y t o ' t a r r y
with the negative', to assume our mortality and suffering a t its most
r a d i c a l . T h e T r u t h - E v e n t is s i m p l y a r a d i c a l l y N e w B e g i n n i n g ; i t d e s i g n a t e s
the violent, traumatic a n d c o n t i n g e n t intrusion o f a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n not
' m e d i a t e d ' by the d o m a i n o f terrestrial finitude a n d corruption.
O n e m u s t t h u s avoid t h e pitfalls o f t h e m o r b i d m a s o c h i s t m o r a l i t y that
p e r c e i v e s s u f f e r i n g as i n h e r e n t l y r e d e e m i n g : t h i s m o r a l i t y r e m a i n s w i t h i n
the c o n f i n e s o f the L a w (which d e m a n d s from us a p r i c e for the a d m i s s i o n
t o E t e r n a l L i f e ) , a n d is t h u s n o t y e t at t h e l e v e l o f t h e p r o p e r l y C h r i s t i a n
n o t i o n o f L o v e . As B a d i o u p u t s it, C h r i s t ' s d e a t h is n o t i n i t s e l f t h e T r u t h -
E v e n t , it s i m p l y p r e p a r e s t h e s i t e f o r t h e E v e n t ( R e s u r r e c t i o n ) b y a s s e r t i n g
the identity o f G o d a n d M a n - the fact that the infinite d i m e n s i o n o f
I m m o r t a l T r u t h is a l s o a c c e s s i b l e t o a h u m a n finite m o r t a l ; w h a t u l t i m a t e l y
m a t t e r s is o n l y t h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f t h e d e a d (i.e. h u m a n - m o r t a l ) Christ,
signalling that each h u m a n b e i n g can be r e d e e m e d and can enter the
d o m a i n o f E t e r n a l L i f e , t h a t is, p a r t i c i p a t e in t h e T r u t h - E v e n t .
T h e r e i n lies t h e m e s s a g e o f Christianity: t h e positivity o f B e i n g , the
O r d e r o f t h e c o s m o s r e g u l a t e d b y its L a w s , w h i c h is t h e d o m a i n o f finitude
and mortality (from the standpoint o f the cosmos, o f the totality o f
positive B e i n g , we a r e m e r e l y p a r t i c u l a r b e i n g s d e t e r m i n e d by o u r specific
p l a c e in t h e g l o b a l o r d e r - t h e L a w is u l t i m a t e l y a n o t h e r n a m e f o r the
O r d e r o f c o s m i c J u s t i c e , w h i c h a l l o c a t e s t o e a c h o f us h i s o r h e r proper
p l a c e ) , is n o t ' a l l t h e r e i s ' ; t h e r e is a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n , t h e d i m e n s i o n o f
T r u e L i f e i n L o v e , a c c e s s i b l e t o all o f us t h r o u g h D i v i n e G r a c e , s o t h a t w e
c a n all p a r t i c i p a t e i n it. C h r i s t i a n R e v e l a t i o n is t h u s a n e x a m p l e (although
p r o b a b l y the e x a m p l e ) o f h o w w e , h u m a n b e i n g s , a r e n o t c o n s t r a i n e d t o
the positivity o f B e i n g ; o f how, f r o m t i m e to time, in a c o n t i n g e n t and
unpredictable way, a T r u t h - E v e n t c a n o c c u r that opens up t o us the
p o s s i b i l i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n A n o t h e r L i f e by r e m a i n i n g f a i t h f u l to the
Truth-Event. T h e interesting thing to n o t e is h o w Badiou here turns
a r o u n d t h e s t a n d a r d o p p o s i t i o n o f t h e L a w as u n i v e r s a l a n d G r a c e (or
c h a r i s m a ) as p a r t i c u l a r , t h e i d e a t h a t w e a r e all s u b j e c t e d t o t h e u n i v e r s a l
D i v i n e L a w , w h e r e a s o n l y s o m e o f us a r e t o u c h e d b y G r a c e , a n d c a n t h u s
b e r e d e e m e d : i n B a d i o u ' s r e a d i n g o f S t P a u l , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t is L a w
i t s e l f w h i c h , ' u n i v e r s a l ' as i t m a y a p p e a r , is u l t i m a t e l y ' p a r t i c u l a r i s t ' (a
l e g a l o r d e r always i m p o s e s s p e c i f i c d u t i e s a n d r i g h t s o n u s , i t is always a
Law defining a specific c o m m u n i t y at the expense o f excluding the
m e m b e r s o f o t h e r e t h n i c , e t c . , c o m m u n i t i e s ) , w h i l e D i v i n e G r a c e is t r u l y
u n i v e r s a l , t h a t is, n o n - e x c l u s i v e , a d d r e s s i n g all h u m a n s i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f
their r a c e , sex, social status, a n d so o n .
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, there
are a l s o two d e a t h s : the biological death and Death in the 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, which also directly
c o n c e r n s psychoanalysis: for B a d i o u , the opposition 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
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
l s
doit.
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
u l t i m a t e R e d e m p t i o n ? I f t h i s is h o w t h i n g s a r e , t h e n t h e a n s w e r t o t h e
question 'Should we continue to sin in order that grace may
a b o u n d ? ' ( R o m a n s 6: I ) is a f f i r m a t i v e : i t is o n l y a n d p r e c i s e l y b y i n d u l g i n g
i n S i n t h a t w e e n a b l e G o d to p l a y H i s p a r t as o u r S a v i o u r . B u t S t P a u l ' s
e n t i r e e f f o r t is t o b r e a k o u t o f t h i s v i c i o u s c y c l e i n w h i c h t h e p r o h i b i t i v e
L a w a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n g e n e r a t e a n d s u p p o r t e a c h o t h e r .
I n h i s Philosophical Notebooks, L e n i n m a d e t h e w e l l - k n o w n s t a t e m e n t t h a t
e v e r y o n e w h o a i m s a t r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g M a r x ' s Capital s h o u l d r e a d t h e
w h o l e o f H e g e l ' s Logic in d e t a i l . H e t h e n d i d it h i m s e l f , supplementing
q u o t e s f r o m H e g e l w i t h h u n d r e d s o f 'sirs' a n d m a r g i n a l c o m m e n t s l i k e :
' T h e first p a r t o f t h i s s e n t e n c e c o n t a i n s a n i n g e n i o u s d i a l e c t i c a l i n s i g h t ;
t h e s e c o n d p a r t is t h e o l o g i c a l r u b b i s h ! ' A t a s k a w a i t i n g t r u e L a c a n i a n
d i a l e c t i c a l m a t e r i a l i s t s is t o r e p e a t t h e s a m e g e s t u r e w i t h S t P a u l , s i n c e ,
a g a i n , e v e r y o n e w h o a i m s a t r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g L a c a n ' s Ecrils should
r e a d the e n t i r e t e x t o f R o m a n s a n d C o r i n t h i a n s in detail: o n e c a n n o t wait
f o r a L a c a n i a n v o l u m e o f Theological Notebooks, w i t h q u o t e s a c c o m p a n i e d
b y h u n d r e d s o f 'sics a n d c o m m e n t s l i k e : ' T h e first p a r t o f t h i s s e n t e n c e
p r o v i d e s t h e d e e p e s t i n s i g h t i n t o L a c a n i a n e t h i c s , w h i l e t h e s e c o n d p a r t is
1 4
j u s t theological rubbish!' . . ,
S o , b a c k to t h e long quote from Romans: the direct result o f the
i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e L a w is t h u s t h a t it divides the subject a n d introduces a
m o r b i d c o n f u s i o n b e t w e e n life a n d d e a t h : t h e s u b j e c t is d i v i d e d b e t w e e n
( c o n s c i o u s ) o b e d i e n c e t o t h e L a w a n d ( u n c o n s c i o u s ) d e s i r e f o r its t r a n s
g r e s s i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e l e g a l p r o h i b i t i o n itself. I t is n o t I , t h e s u b j e c t ,
who transgress the L a w , i t is n o n - s u b j e c t i v i z e d ' S i n ' itself, t h e sinful
i m p u l s e s in w h i c h I d o n o t r e c o g n i z e myself, a n d w h i c h I even hate.
B e c a u s e o f this split, m y ( c o n s c i o u s ) S e l f is u l t i m a t e l y e x p e r i e n c e d as
' d e a d ' , as d e p r i v e d o f l i v i n g i m p e t u s ; w h i l e ' l i f e ' , e c s t a t i c a f f i r m a t i o n o f
living e n e r g y , c a n a p p e a r only in the guise o f ' S i n ' , o f a transgression t h a t
gives rise to a m o r b i d s e n s e o f guilt. M y a c t u a l life-impulse, m y d e s i r e ,
a p p e a r s t o m e as a f o r e i g n a u t o m a t i s m t h a t p e r s i s t s i n f o l l o w i n g its p a t h
i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f m y c o n s c i o u s W i l l a n d i n t e n t i o n s . S t P a u l ' s p r o b l e m is
thus not the standard m o r b i d moralistic o n e ( h o w to crush transgressive
impulses, how finally to purify myself o f sinful urges), but its exact
o p p o s i t e : h o w c a n I b r e a k o u t o f this vicious cycle o f t h e L a w a n d desire,
o f t h e P r o h i b i t i o n a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , w i t h i n w h i c h I c a n a s s e r t my
l i v i n g p a s s i o n s o n l y i n t h e g u i s e o f t h e i r o p p o s i t e , as a m o r b i d death
d r i v e ? H o w w o u l d it b e p o s s i b l e f o r m e t o e x p e r i e n c e m y l i f e - i m p u l s e n o t
as a f o r e i g n a u t o m a t i s m , as a b l i n d ' c o m p u l s i o n t o r e p e a t ' m a k i n g me
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 the
Christian 'way o f t h e Spirit' is p r e c i s e l y t h e magic break, the New
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 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 on
prohibitions (which then generate the transgressive desire to 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 :
' "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 to the letter o f the Law, and his
d e c e n t r e d desire which, operating 'automatically', against the subject's
c o n s c i o u s will, c o m p e l s h i m t o ' d o w h a t h e h a t e s ' , t o t r a n s g r e s s t h e L a w
a n d i n d u l g e i n i l l i c i t jouissance. O n the o t h e r h a n d , we have the more
radical division b e t w e e n this e n t i r e d o m a i n o f the Law/desire, o f the
p r o h i b i t i o n g e n e r a t i n g its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , a n d t h e p r o p e r l y C h r i s t i a n way
of Love which marks a New Beginning, breaking out o f the deadlock o f
L a w a n d its t r a n s g r e s s i o n .
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 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 the
connection between Law and d e s i r e is r e a l i z e d ? Is n o t 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 guilt,
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 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 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
15
analysis - does it leave us clinging to that d i a l e c t i c ?
T h e c r u c i a l t h i n g h e r e is t h e l a s t p h r a s e , w h i c h c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t , f o r
L a c a n , t h e r e is ' a way o f d i s c o v e r i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p t o das Ding some
1 1
w h e r e b e y o n d the Law' ' - the whole p o i n t o f the ethics o f psychoanalysis
is t o f o r m u l a t e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t a v o i d s t h e pitfalls o f
t h e s u p e r e g o i n c u l p a t i o n that a c c o u n t s for the ' m o r b i d ' e n j o y m e n t o f sin,
w h i l e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a v o i d i n g w h a t K a n t c a l l e d Schwdrrnerei, the obscurant
ist c l a i m t o g i v e v o i c e t o ( a n d thus to legitimize o n e ' s position by a
r e f e r e n c e to) a spiritual illumination, a direct insight into the impossible
R e a l T h i n g . W h e n L a c a n f o r m u l a t e s his m a x i m o f psychoanalytic ethics,
' ne pas ceder sur son desir, t h a t is, ' d o n ' t c o m p r o m i s e , d o n ' t give way o n
y o u r d e s i r e ' , t h e d e s i r e i n v o l v e d h e r e is n o l o n g e r t h e t r a n s g r e s s i v e d e s i r e
generated by the prohibitory Law, a n d thus involved in a 'morbid'
d i a l e c t i c w i t h t h e L a w ; r a t h e r , it is fidelity t o o n e ' s d e s i r e i t s e l f t h a t is
e l e v a t e d t o t h e l e v e l o f e t h i c a l d u t y , s o t h a t 'ne pas ceder sur son desir is
1 7
u l t i m a t e l y a n o t h e r way o f s a y i n g ' D o y o u r d u t y ! '
It would t h e r e f o r e b e t e m p t i n g to risk a B a d i o u i a n - P a u l i n e r e a d i n g o f
t h e e n d o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , d e t e r m i n i n g i t as a N e w B e g i n n i n g , a s y m b o l i c
' r e b i r t h ' - t h e r a d i c a l r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f t h e a n a l y s a n d ' s s u b j e c t i v i t y in s u c h
a way t h a t t h e v i c i o u s c y c l e o f t h e s u p e r e g o is s u s p e n d e d , left behind.
D o e s n o t L a c a n h i m s e l f provide a n u m b e r o f hints that t h e e n d o f analysis
o p e n s u p t h e d o m a i n o f Love beyond Law, u s i n g t h e v e r y P a u l i n e t e r m s t o
w h i c h B a d i o u r e f e r s ? N e v e r t h e l e s s , L a c a n ' s way is n o t t h a t o f S t P a u l o r
B a d i o u : p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is n o t ' p s y c h o s y n t h e s i s ' ; it d o e s n o t a l r e a d y posit a
' n e w h a r m o n y ' , a n e w T r u t h - E v e n t ; it - as it w e r e - m e r e l y w i p e s t h e s l a t e
c l e a n for o n e . H o w e v e r , this ' m e r e l y ' s h o u l d b e p u t in q u o t a t i o n marks,
b e c a u s e it is L a c a n ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t , i n t h i s n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f ' w i p i n g
the slate clean', something (a void) is c o n f r o n t e d which is already
' 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 the
'night of the world', the self-withdrawal, the absolute 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 death
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 o f the exact
status o f this d o m a i n 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 ' super
ego connection between Law and 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 in
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, o f the monstrous
, s
'undead' object-libido.
T h i s d o m a i n , in w h i c h O e d i p u s ( o r K i n g L e a r , to take a n o t h e r e x e m
plary case) finds himself after 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 attitude,
cursing everyone around h i m . . . . D o e s n o t this figure of Oedipus at
T H E POLITICS OF T R U T H 155
C o l o n n u s c o n f r o n t us with the i n h e r e n t deadlock, the impossibility o f

jouissance, 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 trans
gressed the Prohibition and paid the price by having 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 o f this 'life beyond death' later (in Seminar XT)
theorized by Lacan as lamella, the undead-indestructible object, Life
d e p r i v e d o f s u p p o r t i n t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r . T h i s , p e r h a p s , is c o n n e c t e d
with today's p h e n o m e n o n o f cyberspace: the m o r e o u r (experience of)
r e a l i t y is ' v i r t u a l i z e d ' , c h a n g e d i n t o a s c r e e n - p h e n o m e n o n encountered
o n an interface, the m o r e the 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' t h a t resists b e i n g
integrated into the interface appears as t h e horrifying remainder of
u n d e a d Life - n o w o n d e r images o f such a formless ' u n d c a d ' substance
o f L i f e a b o u n d i n t o d a y ' s s c i e n c e - f i c t i o n h o r r o r n a r r a t i v e s , f r o m Alien on.
L e t u s r e c a l l t h e w e l l - k n o w n s c e n e f r o m T e r r y G i l l i a m ' s Brazil, t o w h i c h
I have often referred - t h e s c e n e in w h i c h t h e w a i t e r in a h i g h - c l a s s
restaurant r e c o m m e n d s to his c u s t o m e r s the best suggestions f r o m the
day's m e n u ( ' T o d a y , o u r t o u r n e d o s is r e a l l y s p e c i a l ! ' , e t c . ) . Y e t w h a t t h e
c u s t o m e r s g e t o n m a k i n g t h e i r c h o i c e is a d a z z l i n g c o l o u r p h o t o g r a p h o f
the m e a l o n a stand above the plate, a n d o n the plate itself a l o a t h s o m e ,
20
e x c r e m c n t a l , paste-like lump:' this split b e t w e e n the i m a g e o f the food
a n d t h e R e a l o f its f o r m l e s s e x c r e m e n t a l r e m n a n t exemplifies perfectly
the disintegration o f reality into the ghostlike, substanccless a p p e a r a n c e
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 o f the Real - the

obsession with this remainder is t h e price we have to pay for the
suspension o f the paternal P r o h i b i t i o n / L a w that sustains a n d 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 fully
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 ('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' 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
the direct e m b o d i m e n t of what Lacan c a l l s plus-de-jouir, the 'surplus-
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 f o r by a n y s y m b o l i c
idealization. W h e n L a c a n uses the term 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 as ' n o longer any e n j o y m e n t ' ) ; following this model, one is
tempted to s p e a k h e r e o f this f o r m l e s s 'indivisible r e m a i n d e r ' 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 his D e s t i n y as a c a s e o f plus d'homme - he
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 bitter
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 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 monster',
bound 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 emphasizes,
there a r c two m a i n ways o f c o p i n g with this 'remainder': 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 perpet
ual m o t i o n (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)
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
1
Lacanian 'barred' subject (s).-
One 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 the
agalma, 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 empirico-transcendental couple that characterizes
modern 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 Truth,
precisely because he did not k n o w C h r i s t p e r s o n a l l y - as s u c h he was
excluded from the initiatoiy deadlock o f those who were 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:
any idiot can bring a b o u t simple stupid miracles like walking on water o r
m a k i n g f o o d fall d o w n f r o m h e a v e n - t h e t r u e m i r a c l e , as H e g e l p u t it, is
t h a t o f t h e u n i v e r s a l t h o u g h t , a n d it t o o k S t P a u l t o p e r f o r m it, t h a t is, t o
translate the idiosyncratic Christ-Event into the f o r m o f universal thought.
T h e Lacanian Subject
W h a t , t h e n , is t h e s u b j e c t h e r e ? T h e s u b j e c t is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e w i t h t h e
o n t o l o g i c a l g a p b e t w e e n t h e universal a n d t h e p a r t i c u l a r - with o n t o l o g i
c a l u n d e c i d a b i l i t y , w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t it is n o t p o s s i b l e t o d e r i v e H e g e m o n y
o r T r u t h d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e g i v e n p o s i t i v e o n t o l o g i c a l s e t : t h e ' s u b j e c t ' is
t h e act, t h e decision b y m e a n s o f w h i c h w e p a s s f r o m t h e p o s i t i v i t y o f t h e
given m u l t i t u d e to t h e T r u t h - E v e n t a n d / o r to H e g e m o n y . T h i s p r e c a r i o u s
status o f t h e subject relies o n t h e K a n t i a n a n t i - c o s m o l o g i c a l insight that
r e a l i t y is ' n o n - a l l ' , o n t o l o g i c a l l y n o t fully c o n s t i t u t e d , s o it n e e d s the
s u p p l e m e n t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s c o n t i n g e n t g e s t u r e to o b t a i n a s e m b l a n c e o f
o n t o l o g i c a l c o n s i s t e n c y . ' S u b j e c t ' is n o t a n a m e f o r t h e g a p o f f r e e d o m
a n d c o n t i n g e n c y that infringes u p o n the positive o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r , active
i n its i n t e r s t i c e s ; r a t h e r , ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e c o n t i n g e n c y t h a t g r o u n d s t h e v e r y
p o s i t i v e o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r , t h a t is, t h e ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r ' w h o s e self-
effacing gesture transforms the pre-ontological chaotic multitude into the
s e m b l a n c e o f a positive ' o b j e c t i v e ' o r d e r o f reality. I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e ,
e v e r y o n t o l o g y is ' p o l i t i c a l ' : b a s e d o n a d i s a v o w e d c o n t i n g e n t ' s u b j e c t i v e '
2 3
act o f decision. S o K a n t was r i g h t : t h e v e r y i d e a o f t h e u n i v e r s e , o f t h e
All o f r e a l i t y , as a t o t a l i t y w h i c h e x i s t s i n i t s e l f , h a s t o b e r e j e c t e d as a
p a r a l o g i s m - t h a t is t o say, w h a t l o o k s l i k e a n epistemological limitation of
o u r capacity to grasp reality ( t h e fact that we a r e f o r e v e r p e r c e i v i n g reality
f r o m o u r f i n i t e t e m p o r a l s t a n d p o i n t ) is t h e p o s i t i v e ontological condition of
r e a l i t y itself.
H e r e , h o w e v e r , o n e s h o u l d a v o i d t h e fatal t r a p o f c o n c e i v i n g t h e s u b j e c t
as t h e a c t , t h e g e s t u r e , w h i c h i n t e r v e n e s a f t e r w a r d s i n o r d e r t o fill i n t h e
o n t o l o g i c a l gap, a n d insist o n t h e i r r e d u c i b l e vicious cycle o f subjectivity:
' t h e w o u n d is h e a l e d o n l y by t h e s p e a r w h i c h s m o t e i t ' , t h a t is, t h e s u b j e c t
'is' t h e very g a p filled in by t h e g e s t u r e o f s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n ( w h i c h , i n
L a c l a u , e s t a b l i s h e s a n e w h e g e m o n y ; w h i c h , i n R a n c i e r e , gives v o i c e t o t h e
'part o f n o part'; w h i c h , in B a d i o u , a s s u m e s fidelity to the Truth-Event;
e t c . ) . In short, the L a c a n i a n answer to the question asked ( a n d answered
in a n e g a t i v e w a y ) b y s u c h d i f f e r e n t p h i l o s o p h e r s as A l t h u s s e r , Derrida
and Badiou - 'Can the gap, the o p e n i n g , the Void which precedes the
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' is a
name for this irreducible circularity, for a, power which does not fight an external
resisting force (say, the inertia of the given substantial order), but an obstacle that
24
is absolutely inherent, which ultimately 'is' the subject itself.' In other words,
t h e s u b j e c t ' s very e n d e a v o u r 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
5
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 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' via t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f s o m e new Master-Signifier; while for
Badiou, the different facets of negativity (ethical catastrophes) 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 its
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.' 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
universality with s o m e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t t h a t h e g e m o n i z e s i t ) , w h i l e t h e
s u b j e c t is t h e n e g a t i v e g e s t u r e o f b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o f B e i n g
that o p e n s up the space o f possible subjectivization.
I n L a c a n e s e , t h e s u b j e c t p r i o r t o s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n is t h e p u r e n e g a t i v i t y
o f t h e d e a t h d r i v e p r i o r t o its r e v e r s a l i n t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h s o m e
2 7
new Master-Signifier. O r - t o p u t it i n a n o t h e r w a y - L a c a n ' s p o i n t is n o t
t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is i n s c r i b e d i n t o t h e v e r y o n t o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f the
u n i v e r s e as its c o n s t i t u t i v e v o i d , b u t t h a t 'subject' designates the contingency of
an Act that sustains the very ontological order of being. ' S u b j e c t ' d o e s n o t o p e n
u p a h o l e i n t h e full o r d e r o f B e i n g : ' s u b j e c t ' is t h e c o n t i n g e n t - e x c e s s i v e
g e s t u r e that constitutes the very universal o r d e r o f B e i n g . T h e o p p o s i t i o n
b e t w e e n t h e s u b j e c t qua o n t o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g a n d
t h e s u b j e c t qua c o n t i n g e n t p a r t i c u l a r e m e r g e n c e is t h e r e f o r e f a l s e : the
s u b j e c t is t h e c o n t i n g e n t e m e r g e n c e / a c t t h a t s u s t a i n s t h e v e r y u n i v e r s a l
o r d e r o f B e i n g . T h e s u b j e c t is n o t s i m p l y t h e e x c e s s i v e hubris through
which a particular e l e m e n t disturbs the global o r d e r o f B e i n g by positing
itself - a particular element - as its c e n t r e ; t h e s u b j e c t is, r a t h e r , the
p a r a d o x o f a p a r t i c u l a r e l e m e n t that sustains t h e very universal f r a m e .
L a c a n ' s n o t i o n o f t h e a c t as r e a l is t h u s o p p o s e d t o b o t h L a c l a u a n d
B a d i o u . I n L a c a n , a c t is a p u r e l y negative c a t e g o r y : t o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s
t e r m s , it s t a n d s f o r t h e g e s t u r e o f b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o f B e i n g ,
f o r t h e r e f e r e n c e t o t h e V o i d a t its c o r e , prior to filling this Void. I n this
p r e c i s e s e n s e , t h e act involves t h e d i m e n s i o n o f d e a t h drive that g r o u n d s
a decision (to a c c o m p l i s h a h e g e m o n i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ; to e n g a g e in a
fidelity to a T r u t h ) , b u t c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to it. T h e L a c a n i a n death
drive (a category Badiou adamandy opposes) is t h u s a g a i n a k i n d of
'vanishing mediator' between Being and Event: there is a 'negative'
g e s t u r e c o n s t i t u t i v e o f t h e s u b j e c t w h i c h is t h e n o b f u s c a t e d i n ' B e i n g ' ( t h e
a s
e s t a b l i s h e d o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r ) a n d in fidelity t o t h e E v e n t .
This minimal distance between the death drive and sublimation,
between the negative gesture o f suspension-withdrawal-contraction and
t h e p o s i t i v e g e s t u r e o f filling its v o i d , is n o t j u s t a t h e o r e t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n
b e t w e e n t h e two a s p e c t s , w h i c h a r e i n s e p a r a b l e i n o u r a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e :
as w e h a v e a l r e a d y s e e n , t h e w h o l e o f L a c a n ' s e f f o r t is p r e c i s e l y f o c u s e d
o n t h o s e l i m i t - e x p e r i e n c e s in w h i c h the s u b j e c t finds h i m s e l f c o n f r o n t e d
w i t h t h e d e a t h d r i v e a t its p u r e s t , p r i o r t o its r e v e r s a l i n t o s u b l i m a t i o n . Is
n o t L a c a n ' s analysis o f A n t i g o n e f o c u s e d o n t h e m o m e n t w h e n s h e finds
h e r s e l f i n t h e s t a t e 'in b e t w e e n t h e two d e a t h s ' , r e d u c e d t o a l i v i n g d e a t h ,
e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e s y m b o l i c d o m a i n ? - " ' Is t h i s n o t s i m i l a r t o t h e u n c a n n y
figure of Oedipus a t C o l o n n u s w h o , a f t e r f u l f i l l i n g h i s d e s t i n y , is a l s o
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 Shake
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 figures who
find t h e m s e l v e s in this void, trespassing the 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' (the Holocaust, etc.) and his
insistence that the different f a c e t s o f Evil a r e m e r e l y s o m a n y 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 ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' villainy, b u t the constitutive
background o f t h e G o o d itself, t h e terrifying a m b i g u o u s s o u r c e o f its
p o w e r ; t h e r e is a d o m a i n ' 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 fictions that we call ' t r u t h s ' . I f
there is a n 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.
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 thought
a n d m o r a l stance that limit themselves to t h e O r d e r of Being and its
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 the
matic the d o m a i n b e y o n d t h e L a w , t h a t is, t h e m o d e o f operation of
fidelity to t h e T r u t h - E v e n t - 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 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 can operate only against the

background of the traumatic encounter xuith the undead/monstrous Thing, what
a r e B a d i o u ' s f o u r generiques - 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 the
structure o f the Real b e n e a t h the symbolic fiction; 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 between
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 i s d i f f e r e n c e lies i n
t h e fact t h a t i n a T r u t h - E v e n t the void o f the d e a t h drive, o f radical
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 - 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 'non-
thought', to a naive traditional (pre-critical, pre-Kantian) opposition o f
two o r d e r s ( t h e finitude 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 and the possibility o f
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 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 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
the horizon o f h u m a n 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 finite transcendental
subject. (If the 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 Truth-
E 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 the
specific m o d e o f h u m a n finitude. F o r Kant himself, the finitude o f the
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 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
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 finally separates B a d i o u from L a c a n c a n also be
formulated in terms o f the 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 names
the Event - w h o , by p r o d u c i n g a n e w point de caption, 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 the
four possible subjective stances towards the Truth-Event, he added 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 Mystic. T h e M a s t e r p r e t e n d s to n a m e , a n d t h u s d i r e c d y translate i n t o
s y m b o l i c fidelity, t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e a c t - t h a t is, t h e d e f i n i n g feature
o f t h e M a s t e r ' s g e s t u r e is t o c h a n g e t h e a c t i n t o a n e w M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r , t o
g u a r a n t e e the c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e E v e n t . In c o n t r a s t to
the Master, the Hysteric maintains the ambiguous attitude o f division
towards the act, insisting o n the s i m u l t a n e o u s necessity a n d impossibility
(ultimate failure) o f its s y m b o l i z a t i o n : t h e r e was a n Event, but each
s y m b o l i z a t i o n o f t h e E v e n t a l r e a d y b e t r a y s its t r u e t r a u m a t i c i m p a c t - t h a t
is t o say, t h e H y s t e r i c r e a c t s t o e a c h s y m b o l i z a t i o n o f t h e E v e n t w i t h a ' ce
nest pas ca\ t h a t ' s n o t it. I n c o n t r a s t t o b o t h o f t h e m , t h e p e r v e r s e a g e n t
o f U n i v e r s i t y d i s c o u r s e d i s a v o w s t h a t t h e r e was t h e e v e n t o f a n a c t i n t h e
first place - with his chain o f knowledge, he wants to reduce the
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e a c t t o j u s t a n o t h e r t h i n g t h a t c a n b e e x p l a i n e d away
as p a r t o f t h e n o r m a l r u n o f t h i n g s ; i n o t h e r w o r d s , i n c o n t r a s t t o the
Master, who wants to ensure the continuity b e t w e e n the Event a n d its
consequences, and the Hysteric, who insists o n the gap that forever
s e p a r a t e s a n E v e n t f r o m its ( s y m b o l i c ) c o n s e q u e n c e s , U n i v e r s i t y d i s c o u r s e
aims at 'suturing' the field o f c o n s e q u e n c e s by e x p l a i n i n g t h e m away
without any r e f e r e n c e to the E v e n t ('Love? It's n o t h i n g but the result o f a
series o f o c c u r r e n c e s in your n e u r o n a l network!', etc.).
T h e f o u r t h a t t i t u d e B a d i o u a d d s is t h a t o f t h e M y s t i c , w h i c h is t h e e x a c t
o b v e r s e o f perverse University d i s c o u r s e ; i f t h e latter wants to isolate t h e
symbolic chain o f c o n s e q u e n c e s from their founding Event, t h e Mystic
w a n t s t o i s o l a t e t h e E v e n t f r o m t h e n e t w o r k o f its s y m b o l i c c o n s e q u e n c e s :
h e insists o n t h e i n e f f a b i l i t y o f t h e E v e n t , a n d disregards its s y m b o l i c
c o n s e q u e n c e s . F o r t h e M y s t i c , w h a t m a t t e r s is t h e bliss o f o n e ' s i m m e r s i o n
in t h e Event, w h i c h o b l i t e r a t e s t h e e n t i r e s y m b o l i c reality. L a c a n , h o w e v e r ,
i n c o n t r a s t t o B a d i o u , a d d s as t h e f o u r t h term to the triad o f Master,
Hysteric a n d University pervert the discourse o f the analyst: f o r him,
m y s t i c i s m is t h e i s o l a t e d p o s i t i o n o f t h e p s y c h o t i c i m m e r s e d i n his/her
puissance and, as s u c h , n o t a d i s c o u r s e (a s o c i a l l i n k ) at all. S o the
consistency o f L a c a n ' s entire edifice hinges on the fact that a fourth
discursive p o s i t i o n is p o s s i b l e , w h i c h is n o t t h a t o f a M a s t e r , t h a t o f t h e
Hysteric, o r that o f the University. T h i s position, while m a i n t a i n i n g the
g a p b e t w e e n t h e E v e n t a n d its s y m b o l i z a t i o n , a v o i d s t h e h y s t e r i c a l t r a p
and, instead o f b e i n g c a u g h t in the vicious cycle o f p e r m a n e n t failure,
a f f i r m s t h i s g a p as p o s i t i v e a n d p r o d u c t i v e : it a s s e r t s t h e R e a l o f t h e E v e n t
as t h e ' g e n e r a t o r ' , t h e g e n e r a t i n g c o r e t o b e e n c i r c l e d r e p e a t e d l y b y t h e
subject's symbolic productivity.
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

face o f Badiou's critique constitute t h e very o p p o s i t e o f t h e standard

psychoanalytic scepticism about the final o u t c o m e o f the revolutionary
process ( 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 - does he not thereby repeat Kant's
n o t i o n o f signs that a n n o u n c e the n o u m e n a l 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
31
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 : 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 and
the correlative excess o f presentation over re-presentation that 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
3 2
excess and inconsistency o f the ontological o r d e r ?
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 with the Kantian
infinite ethical effort. W h e n T r u t h pretends to g r a s p / n a m e 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 OK T R U T H 167
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 'totalitarian' destructive rage. This

innomable 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,
for Badiou, precisely defined in each o f the four 'generics' o f Truth:
community in p o l i t i c s , s e x u a l puissance in love, a n d so on. From the
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 structured
in a ' f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy' - t h a t i s , i t is t h e c o r e o f puissance, and an
authentic a c t does i n t e r v e n e in this c o r e . S o - to put it s u c c i n c t l y - for
Lacan, the authentic 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 , t h e a c t as the
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. Here
one can see the crucial weight o f the L a c a n i a n distinction between the
act 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 in a
positive Truth-procedure. F o r this reason, one should stick to Lacan's
thesis that 'truth has the structure 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 to
remain a fiction p r e c i s e l y i n s o f a r as t h e innomable Real 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
pre-scientific wisdom; politics (with all t h e passion o r struggle that this n o t i o n involves) is
r e d u c e d to an i m m a t u r e ideological version o r f o r e r u n n e r o f t h e a r t o f social gestion. . . .
1 1 . S e e Alain B a d i o u , Saint Paul. La fondation de I'universalisme, Paris: Presses Universitaires
de F r a n c e 1 9 9 7 .
12. O f c o u r s e , B a d i o u simultaneously mobilizes t h e association of ' g e n e r i c ' with 'generat
ing': it is this ' g e n e r i c ' e l e m e n t that enables us to ' g e n e r a t e ' propositions o f t h e subject-
l a n g u a g e in which T r u t h resonates.
1 3 . R o m a n s 7: 7 to 7: 1 8 ( q u o t e d from The. Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version,
Nashville, T N : T h o m a s Nelson Publishers 1 9 9 0 ) .
14. F o r B a d i o u , St Paul's f u n d a m e n t a l p r o b l e m was that o f t h e a p p r o p r i a t e discourse: to
assert a u t h e n t i c Christian universalism, St P a u l has to b r e a k with G r e e k philosophical
sophistry as well as with Jewish p r o p h e t i c o b s c u r a n t i s m , which is still t h e p r e d o m i n a n t
discursive m o d e o f the Gospels. H e r e , however, o n e should p e r h a p s c o m p l i c a t e the p i c t u r e
a little: m a y b e Christ's o b s c u r e parables in t h e Gospels a r e m o r e subversive than they a p p e a r ;
maybe they a r e t h e r e precisely t o p e r p l e x a n d frustrate t h e disciples w h o a r e u n a b l e to
d i s c e r n a c l e a r m e a n i n g in t h e m ; maybe the well-known s t a t e m e n t from Matthew 19: 12 -
'Let a n y o n e a c c e p t [or, as it is also translated: u n d e r s t a n d ] this who c a n ' - is to be r e a d
literally, as a signal that t h e s e a r c h for a d e e p e r m e a n i n g is misleading; m a y b e they a r e to be
taken like t h e p a r a b l e o f the D o o r o f the Law in Kafka's Trial, s u b m i t t e d to an e x a s p e r a t i n g
literal r e a d i n g by the priest, a r e a d i n g that yields n o d e e p e r m e a n i n g . So maybe these
parables a r e not the r e m a i n d e r o f the old Jewish p r o p h e t i c discourse but, r a t h e r , its
i m m a n e n t m o c k i n g subversion. A n d , incidentally, isn't it striking that this 'Let a n y o n e a c c e p t
this who c a n ' is p r o n o u n c e d by Christ r e g a r d i n g t h e p r o b l e m o f castration? H e r e is t h e full
q u o t e : 'Not everyone c a n a c c e p t / u n d e r s t a n d this t e a c h i n g , b\rt only t h o s e l o w h o m it is
given. F o r t h e r e a r e e u n u c h s who have b e e n so from birth, a n d t h e r e a r e e u n u c h s w h o have
b e e n m a d e e u n u c h s by others, a n d t h e r e a r e e u n u c h s for t h e sake o f the k i n g d o m o f heaven.
L e t a n y o n e a c c e p t / u n d e r s t a n d this who c a n ' ( M a t t h e w 19: 1 1 - 1 2 ) . W h a t is ultimately
u n g r a s p a b l e , beyond c o m p r e h e n s i o n , is the fact o f c a s t r a t i o n in its different modalities.
15. J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, L o n d o n : Rorrtledge 1 9 9 2 , pp. 8 3 - 4 .
16. Ibid., p. 8 4 .
17. A n o t h e r p r o b l e m h e r e is the status o f t h e r e f e r e n c e to Kant: in so far as K a n t is
c o n c e i v e d o f as t h e p h i l o s o p h e r o f the Law in B a d i o u ' s Pauline sense, Lacarr's 'Kant avec
Sade' retains its full validity - that is, t h e statirs o f t h e Kantian m o r a l Law r e m a i n s that o f a
s u p e r e g o - f o r m a t i o n , so that its 'truth' is the Sadeian universe o f m o r b i d perversion. However,
t h e r e is a n o t h e r way o f c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g the Kantian m o r a l injunction which delivers it from
s u p e r e g o c o n s t r a i n t s . (See A p p e n d i x III o f Slavoj Zizek, The Plague of Fantasies, L o n d o r r :
Verso 1997.)
18. S e c j a c q u e s L a c a n , The Foul Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, New York: N o r t o n
1 9 7 9 , pp. 1 9 7 - 8 .
19. J a c q u e s L a c a n , The Seminar, Book II: The Ego in Freud's Theory arid in the Technique, of
Psychoanalysis, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 9 1 , pp. 2 3 1 - 2 .
2 0 . This s c e n e from Brazil is psychotic, since it involves t h e d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e Symbolic
- that is to say, what h a p p e n s in it is what L a c a n describes as t h e psychotic torsion o f t h e
' s c h e m e L ' o f symbolic c o m m u n i c a t i o n : symbolic reality falls apart into, on the o n e side, the
p u r e Real o f the e x c r e m e n t a n d , o n the o t h e r , t h e p u r e I m a g i n a r y o f t h e substanceless
h a l l u c i n a t o r y i m a g e . . . . ( S e e J a c q u e s L a c a n , 'On a Question P r e l i m i n a r y t o Any Possible
T r e a t m e n t o f Psychosis', in Enils: A Selection, New York: N o r t o n 1 9 7 7 . ) In short, what takes
p l a c e in this s c e n e is t h e dissolution o f the B o r r o m e a n knot in which, irr the intricate
i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n between t h e t h r e e dimensions, e a c h c o u p l e o f t h e m is linked t h r o u g h the
third: when the efficiency o f the Symbolic is s u s p e n d e d , t h e lirrk between the o t h e r two
d i m e n s i o n s ( I m a g i n a r y a n d R e a l ) that sustains o u r 'sense o f reality' is cut.
2 1 . T h e other famous quip o f t h e e m b i t t e r e d O e d i p u s is p r o n o u n c e d by t h e C h o r u s ,
which claims that the greatest b o o n g r a n t e d lo a m o r t a l h u m a n being is n o t to be b o r n at
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 ex-
timate: 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
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 emphasized, the triad Traditionalism-

Modernism-Postmodernism provides 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 ironic
self-probing), and postmodern (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 philoso-
phico-political positions: the (traditionalist) communitarians (Taylor and
o t h e r s ) , t h e ( m o d e r n ) universalists (Rawls, H a b e r m a s ) , a n d the ( p o s t m o d
ern) 'dispersionists' ( 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 reduction
of the political, s o m e v e r s i o n o f pre-political 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
1
alternative political project.
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 universalist,
who conceals the particular kernel o f his alleged universality). The
universalists' problem is t h a t their universalism is always too narrow,
grounded 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

differend, 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
2
( o f diversity, t o l e r a n c e . . . ) ?
Three contemporary 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 ruling political/police space), Ranciere
o p t s f o r a political mode 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 173
Event), which is still c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e in Marx, they both start by

asserting a constitutive and irreducible gap that undermines the 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 structure
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 — 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 'ethical'
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 against the back
ground o f the 'undecidable' 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 formal
ism: they b o t h elaborate a quasi-transcendental theory (of ideological
hegemony or o f T r u t h ) , which is d e s t i n e d to serve 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 other
'ordinary' people) who reject the police frame defining their '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
that describes the working o f the political field, without implying any
specific prise de parti, and the prevalence given to a p a r t i c u l a r leftist
p o l i t i c a l p r a c t i c e . T h i s t e n s i o n was a l r e a d y c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e w o r k
o f M i c h e l F o u c a u l t , w h o s e r v e s as t h e p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e f o r m o s t o f t h e s e
a u t h o r s : h i s n o t i o n o f P o w e r is p r e s e n t e d as a n e u t r a l t o o l t h a t d e s c r i b e s
t h e way t h e e n t i r e field o f e x i s t i n g p o w e r s t r u c t u r e s a n d resistances to
t h e m f u n c t i o n s . F o u c a u l t l i k e d t o p r e s e n t h i m s e l f as a d e t a c h e d p o s i t i v i s t ,
l a y i n g b a r e t h e c o m m o n m e c h a n i s m s t h a t u n d e r l i e t h e activity o f p a s s i o n
ately o p p o s e d political agents; o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , o n e c a n n o t avoid the
impression t h a t F o u c a u l t is s o m e h o w passionately on the side o f the
' o p p r e s s e d ' , o f t h o s e w h o are c a u g h t in the m a c h i n e r y o f ' d i s c i p l i n e a n d
p u n i s h m e n t ' , a n d a i m s t o give t h e m t h e c h a n c e t o u t t e r , t o e n a b l e them
t o s t a r t t o ' s p e a k f o r t h e m s e l v e s ' . . . . D o w e n o t find, o n a d i f f e r e n t l e v e l ,
t h e s a m e t e n s i o n in L a c l a u ? L a c l a u ' s n o t i o n o f h e g e m o n y d e s c r i b e s t h e
universal m e c h a n i s m o f ideological ' c e m e n t ' which binds any social body
t o g e t h e r , a n o t i o n t h a t c a n a n a l y s e all p o s s i b l e s o c i o p o l i t i c a l o r d e r s , f r o m
F a s c i s m t o l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y ; o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , L a c l a u n o n e t h e less
3
advocates a determinate political option, 'radical d e m o c r a c y ' .
H e g e m o n y a n d Its S y m p t o m s
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
4
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 ' strangely
e c h o e s M a r x ' s thesis o n the passage from 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 freedom
finds 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
should depict 'typical' h e r o e s in '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 which
were n o t 'typical', which were sad r e m a i n d e r s o f the past, instead o f
focusing on phenomena which were ' t y p i c a l ' in the precise sense o f
expressing the deeper underlying 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 (the majority o f the people were not
yet like t h a t ) , b u t n o n e 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 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 every
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 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
m o m e n t we p e r c e i v e as ' t y p i c a l ' t h e c a s e o f a b o r t i o n i n a l a r g e l o w e r - c l a s s
family u n a b l e to c o p e e c o n o m i c a l l y with a n o t h e r child, the perspective
5
c h a n g e s radically. . . .
' S i n g l e u n e m p l o y e d m o t h e r ' is t h u s a sintlwme i n t h e .strict L a c a n i a n
s e n s e : a k n o t , a p o i n t at w h i c h all t h e l i n e s o f t h e p r e d o m i n a n t i d e o l o g i c a l
argumentation ( t h e r e t u r n to family values, t h e r e j e c t i o n o f t h e welfare
s t a t e a n d its ' u n c o n t r o l l e d ' s p e n d i n g , e t c . ) m e e t . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , i f w e
'untie' this sinthome, the efficiency o f its e n t i r e i d e o l o g i c a l e d i f i c e is
s u s p e n d e d . W e c a n s e e n o w i n w h a t s e n s e t h e p s y c h o a n a l y d c sinthome is t o
b e o p p o s e d to t h e m e d i c a l s y m p t o m : t h e l a t t e r is a s i g n o f s o m e more
f u n d a m e n t a l p r o c e s s t a k i n g p l a c e o n a n o t h e r l e v e l . W h e n o n e c l a i m s , say,
t h a t f e v e r is a s y m p t o m , t h e i m p l i c a d o n is t h a t w e s h o u l d n o t c u r e o n l y
t h e s y m p t o m , b u t a t t a c k its c a u s e s d i r e c t i y . ( O r , i n s o c i a l s c i e n c e s , w h e n
o n e c l a i m s t h a t a d o l e s c e n t v i o l e n c e is a s y m p t o m o f t h e g l o b a l c r i s i s o f
v a l u e s a n d t h e w o r k e t h i c , t h e i m p l i c a t i o n is t h a t o n e s h o u l d a t t a c k t h e
problem 'at its r o o t ' , by directly addressing problems o f the family,
e m p l o y m e n t , e t c . , n o t o n l y by p u n i s h i n g t h e o f f e n d e r s . ) T h e sinthome, in
c o n t r a s t , is n o t a ' m e r e s y m p t o m ' , b u t that which holds together the
'thing itself - i f o n e u n t i e s it, t h e ' t h i n g i t s e l f disintegrates. F o r that
r e a s o n , p s y c h o a n a l y s i s a c t u a l l y does c u r e b y a d d r e s s i n g t h e sinthome. . ..
T h i s e x a m p l e m a k e s it c l e a r i n w h a t s e n s e ' t h e u n i v e r s a l r e s u l t s f r o m a
constitutive split in w h i c h t h e n e g a t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r identity transforms
this identity into the symbol o f identity and fullness as such':'' the
Universal e m e r g e s within the Particular when some particular content
s t a r t s t o f u n c t i o n as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r t h e a b s e n t U n i v e r s a l - t h a t is t o say,
t h e u n i v e r s a l is o p e r a t i v e o n l y t h r o u g h t h e s p l i t i n t h e p a r t i c u l a r . A c o u p l e
o f y e a r s a g o , t h e E n g l i s h y e l l o w p r e s s f o c u s e d o n s i n g l e m o t h e r s as t h e
s o u r c e o f all t h e evils o f m o d e r n s o c i e t y , f r o m t h e b u d g e t c r i s i s t o j u v e n i l e
d e l i n q u e n c y - in this i d e o l o g i c a l s p a c e , the universality o f t h e 'modern
s o c i a l E v i l ' was o p e r a t i v e o n l y t h r o u g h t h e s p l i t o f t h e f i g u r e o f ' s i n g l e
m o t h e r ' i n t o i t s e l f i n its p a r t i c u l a r i t y a n d i t s e l f as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r the
'modern social Evil'. Owing to the c o n t i n g e n t c h a r a c t e r o f this link
b e t w e e n t h e U n i v e r s a l a n d t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t w h i c h f u n c t i o n s as its
s t a n d - i n ( i . e . t h e f a c t t h a t t h i s l i n k is t h e o u t c o m e o f a political struggle for
hegemony), the existence o f the U n i v e r s a l always r e l i e s o n an empty
signifier: ' P o l i t i c s is p o s s i b l e because the constitutive impossibility o f
society c a n o n l y r e p r e s e n t itself t h r o u g h t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f e m p t y signifi-
7
ers.' S i n c e ' s o c i e t y d o e s n ' t e x i s t ' , its u l t i m a t e u n i t y c a n b e s y m b o l i z e d
only in t h e guise o f a n e m p t y signifier h e g e m o n i z e d by s o m e p a r t i c u l a r
c o n t e n t - t h e s t r u g g l e f o r this c o n t e n t is t h e p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e . I n o t h e r
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 Master- 2
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
8
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 .
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 finally, in t h e
modern post-revolutionary state, actuality a n d notion overlap. 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 the
unity o f the S t a t e is u l t i m a t e l y always experienced by individuals 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

struggle for appropriation 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 by c l a i m s t h a t t h i s h a d been
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
' 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 narrative. O f course, 'readability' is n o t a neutral
criterion, it d e p e n d s on ideological struggle: the fact that, 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 was u n a b l e to account for the g l o b a l crisis, Nazi anti-
Semitism rendered this crisis ' m o r e convincingly readable' than the
socialist-revolutionary narrative is t h e c o n t i n g e n t result 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 which
different particular contents tight for h e g e m o n y , a n d the classic Marxist
notion o f ideological 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:
'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 . . .' - tendentially, at least, this approach
considers the hidden ' 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 domains
( 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 , actively p a r t i c i p a t e in
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 the very notion of human 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 are
e x p l o i t e d b e c a u s e t h e y a r e n o t p a i d t h e full v a l u e o f t h e i r w o r k . The
c e n t r a l t h e s i s o f M a r x ' s n o t i o n o f ' s u r p l u s - v a l u e ' is t h a t a worker is exploited,
even when he is fully paid'; e x p l o i t a t i o n is t h u s n o t o p p o s e d t o t h e just'
e q u i v a l e n t e x c h a n g e ; i t f u n c t i o n s , r a t h e r , as its p o i n t o f i n h e r e n t e x c e p
t i o n - t h e r e is o n e c o m m o d i t y ( t h e w o r k f o r c e ) w h i c h is e x p l o i t e d p r e c i s e l y
w h e n it is ' p a i d its full v a l u e ' . ( T h e f u r t h e r p o i n t n o t to b e m i s s e d is t h a t
t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h i s excess is s t r i c t l y e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e universalization of
t h e e x c h a n g e - f u n c t i o n : t h e m o m e n t t h e e x c h a n g e - f u n c t i o n is u n i v e r s a l
i z e d - t h a t is, t h e m o m e n t it b e c o m e s t h e s t r u c t u r i n g principle o f the
w h o l e o f e c o n o m i c life - t h e e x c e p t i o n e m e r g e s , s i n c e at t h i s p o i n t the
w o r k f o r c e i t s e l f b e c o m e s a c o m m o d i t y e x c h a n g e d o n t h e m a r k e t . M a r x in
effect a n n o u n c e s h e r e t h e L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f t h e Universal w h i c h involves
a c o n s t i t u t i v e e x c e p t i o n . ) T h e b a s i c p r e m i s s o f s y m p t o m a l r e a d i n g is t h u s
t h a t every i d e o l o g i c a l universality n e c e s s a r i l y gives rise to a p a r t i c u l a r ' e x -
t i m a t e ' e l e m e n t , t o a n e l e m e n t w h i c h - p r e c i s e l y as a n i n h e r e n t , n e c e s s a r y
product o f t h e p r o c e s s d e s i g n a t e d by t h e universality - simultaneously
u n d e r m i n e s it: t h e s y m p t o m is a n e x a m p l e w h i c h s u b v e r t s t h e U n i v e r s a l
1 0
w h o s e e x a m p l e it i s .
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 within the Particular
itself in t h e guise o f t h e gap that separates the particular hegemonic
c o n t e n t o f an ideological universality from the symptom that 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 Uni
versal (justice'), t h e particular content which hegemonizes the empty
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, the symp
tomatic excess which undermines this h e g e m o n i c content (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 is t h e dialectical unity o f Universal a n d Particular; the
individual (the symptomatic excess) b e a r s witness to t h e gap 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 a
traditional liberal a n d a Marxist radical about the scope o f the 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 o f p u b l i c affairs - n o t o n l y
intimate ( 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 the
very perception o f something as 'apolitical', 'private', and so on, is
grounded 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 for
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 ' content
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 by a true t h e o i y , so that
o n c e we gain access to this c o n t e n t , we c a n m e a s u r e h o w c l o s e t o it
different theories o f the political have c o m e . T h e nominalist account,
on the contrary, reduces the whole p r o b l e m to t h e different 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
e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l c o n f u s i o n , a n d is t h u s n e u t r a l i z e d i n t o a p e a c e f u l c o e x i s
t e n c e o f t h e p l u r a l i t y o f m e a n i n g s . W h a t g e t s l o s t i n b o t h c a s e s is t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e struggle for h e g e m o n y ( f o r t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t w h i c h will
f u n c t i o n as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h e p o l i t i c a l ) is g r o u n d l e s s :
t h e u l t i m a t e R e a l w h i c h c a n n o t b e f u r t h e r g r o u n d e d in s o m e o n t o l o g i c a l
structure.
H e r e , h o w e v e r , o n e s h o u l d a d d a g a i n t h a t i f t h e M a r x i s t ' s o p e r a t i o n is
t o b e e f f e c t i v e , it h a s t o i n v o l v e t h e s y m p t o m a l r e a d i n g o f t h e l i b e r a l ' s
position, which endeavours to d e m o n s t r a t e how the liberal's constriction
o f the s c o p e o f t h e 'political' has to disavow - to e x c l u d e violently - the
p o l i t i c a l c h a r a c t e r o f s o m e t h i n g w h i c h , according to the liberal's own definition
of the term, s h o u l d e n t e r t h e s c o p e o f t h e p o l i t i c a l ; a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e , how
this very exclusion of something from the political is a political gesture par
excellence. T h e standard e x a m p l e : the liberal definition o f 'private family
l i f e ' as a p o l i t i c a l n a t u r a l i z e s - a n d / o r c h a n g e s i n t o h i e r a r c h i c a l r e l a t i o n s
g r o u n d e d in pre-political p s y c h o l o g i c a l attitudes, in d i f f e r e n c e s in h u m a n
n a t u r e , in a p r i o r i c u l t u r a l c o n s t a n t s , a n d s o o n - a w h o l e s e t o f r e l a t i o n s
of subordination a n d exclusion that actually d e p e n d o n political power
relations.
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 operation
of hegemony - which sutures the Universal to a particular content.
A l t h o u g h L a c l a u ' s a n d B a d i o u ' s n o t i o n s o f t h e s u b j e c t s e e m s to b e very
s i m i l a r ( i n b o t h c a s e s , t h e s u b j e c t is n o t a s u b s t a n t i a l a g e n t b u t e m e r g e s
i n t h e c o u r s e o f a n a c t o f d e c i s i o n / c h o i c e t h a t is n o t g r o u n d e d in a n y
prc-given factual O r d e r ) , t h e y a r e n o n e t h e less s e p a r a t e d bv d i f f e r e n t
stances towards 'deconstruction'.
L a c l a u ' s m o v e is d e c o n s t r u c t i v e - t h a t is why, f o r h i m , t h e o p e r a t i o n o f
h e g e m o n y i n t h e c o u r s e o f w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t e m e r g e s is t h e e l e m e n t a r y
m a t r i x o f ideology: h e g e m o n y involves a kind o f structural s h o r t circuit
between the Particular and the Universal, and the fragility o f every
h e g e m o n i c o p e r a t i o n is g r o u n d e d i n t h e u l t i m a t e l y ' i l l u s o r y ' c h a r a c t e r o f
t h i s s h o r t c i r c u i t ; t h e t a s k o f t h e o r y is p r e c i s e l y t o ' d e c o n s t r u c t ' it, t h a t is,
t o d e m o n s t r a t e h o w e v e r y h e g e m o n i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is i n h e r e n t l y u n s t a b l e ,
the contingent outcome of a struggle - in short, for L a c l a u , every
h e g e m o n i c o p e r a t i o n is u l t i m a t e l y ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' . F o r B a d i o u , i n c o n t r a s t , a
T r u t h - E v e n t is t h a t w h i c h c a n n o t b e ' d e c o n s t r u c t e d ' , r e d u c e d t o a n e f f e c t
o f an intricate, overdetermined texture o f ' t r a c e s ' ; h e r e B a d i o u introduces
the tension between the Necessity o f a global situation and the c o n t i n g e n t
e m e r g e n c e o f its T r u t h . F o r B a d i o u ( i n h i s a n t i - P l a t o n i c m o d e , d e s p i t e h i s
l o v e o f P l a t o ) , N e c e s s i t y is a c a t e g o r y o f v e r a c i t y , o f t h e o r d e r o f B e i n g ,
w h i l e T r u t h is i n h e r e n t l y c o n t i n g e n t , i t c a n o c c u r o r n o t . S o if, a g a i n s t t h e
deconstructionist and/or postmodern politics o f 'undecidability' and
' s e m b l a n c e ' , B a d i o u - to paraphrase Saint-Just's well-known c o m m e n t o n
' h a p p i n e s s as a p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r ' - w a n t s t o ( r e ) a s s e r t truth as a political
factor, this d o e s n o t mean that h e wants to r e t u r n to t h e premodern
g r o u n d i n g o f politics in s o m e eternal neutral o r d e r o f T r u t h . F o r B a d i o u ,
Truth itself is a theologico-political notion: t h e o l o g i c a l i n s o f a r as r e l i g i o u s
r e v e l a t i o n is t h e u n a v o w e d paradigm o f his n o t i o n o f t h e Truth-Event;
p o l i t i c a l b e c a u s e T r u t h is n o t a s t a t e t o b e p e r c e i v e d b y m e a n s o f a n e u t r a l
intuition, but a matter o f (ultimately political) e n g a g e m e n t . Consequently,
for B a d i o u , subjectivization designates the event o f T r u t h that disrupts the
closure o f the h e g e m o n i c ideological d o m a i n a n d / o r the existing social
edifice (the O r d e r o f B e i n g ) ; while for Laclau, the gesture o f subjectiviza-
t i o n is t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f e s t a b l i s h i n g a ( n e w ) h e g e m o n y , a n d is as s u c h
1 2
the elementary gesture o f ideology.
In a way, e v e r y t h i n g seems to hinge on the relationship between
K n o w l e d g e a n d T r u t h . B a d i o u limits K n o w l e d g e to a positive e n c y c l o p a e
d i c g r a s p o f B e i n g w h i c h is, as s u c h , b l i n d t o t h e d i m e n s i o n o f T r u t h as
E v e n t : K n o w l e d g e k n o w s o n l y v e r a c i t y ( a d e q u a t i o n ) , n o t T r u t h , w h i c h is
'subjective' ( n o t in t h e s t a n d a r d s e n s e o f subjectivism, but l i n k e d t o a
' w a g e r ' , t o a d e c i s i o n / c h o i c e w h i c h i n a way t r a n s c e n d s t h e s u b j e c t , s i n c e
t h e s u b j e c t h i m s e l f / h e r s e l f is n o t h i n g b u t t h e activity o f p u r s u i n g the
consequences o f the Decision). I s it n o t a fact, however, that every
c o n c r e t e , socially o p e r a t i v e field o f K n o w l e d g e p r e s u p p o s e s a T r u t h - E v e n t ,
s i n c e it is u l t i m a t e l y a k i n d o f ' s e d i m e n t a t i o n ' o f a n E v e n t , its ' o n t o l o g i z a -
t i o n ' , s o t h a t t h e t a s k o f a n a l y s i s is p r e c i s e l y t o u n e a r t h t h e E v e n t ( t h e
e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n ) w h o s e s c a n d a l o u s d i m e n s i o n always l u r k s b e h i n d
1 1
' d o m e s t i c a t e d ' knowledge? ' W e c a n also see now the gap which separates
B a d i o u f r o m L a c l a u : f o r B a d i o u , a n E v e n t is a c o n t i n g e n t r a r e o c c u r r e n c e
w i t h i n t h e g l o b a l o r d e r o f B e i n g ; w h i l e f o r L a c l a u ( t o p u t it i n B a d i o u ' s
t e r m s ) , a n y O r d e r o f B e i n g is i t s e l f always a ' s e d i m e n t a t i o n ' o f s o m e p a s t
E v e n t , a ' n o r m a l i z a t i o n ' o f a f o u n d i n g E v e n t ( f o r e x a m p l e , t h e C h u r c h as
the Institution o f Order is s e d i m e n t e d f r o m t h e E v e n t o f C h r i s t , say) -
every positive o n t o l o g i c a l o r d e r already relies o n a disavowed ethico-
political decision.
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 every
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 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 opposite
s t r i v i n g : a n u n c a n n y active will to disrupt? ( I t was H e g e l w h o , a p r o p o s o f
Understanding, emphasized how, instead of complaining about the
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 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 of Understanding t h a t is c a p a b l e o f tearing
asunder what belongs together in nature, 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
1 4
m a j o r i t y will b e a b l e t o r e c o g n i z e its a u t h e n t i c l o n g i n g s . In short, every
h e g e m o n i c u n i v e r s a l i t y h a s t o i n c o r p o r a t e at least two p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s :
the 'authentic' popular c o n t e n t a n d its ' d i s t o r t i o n ' by t h e r e l a t i o n s o f
domination and exploitation. O f course Fascist ideology 'manipulates'
authentic popular longing for a true community and social solidarity
against fierce competition and e x p l o i t a t i o n ; o f c o u r s e it 'distorts' the
e x p r e s s i o n o f t h i s l o n g i n g in o r d e r t o l e g i t i m i z e t h e c o n t i n u a d o n o f t h e
relations o f social d o m i n a t i o n a n d e x p l o i t a t i o n . I n o r d e r to b e a b l e to
a c h i e v e t h i s e f f e c t , h o w e v e r , it n o n e t h e l e s s h a s t o i n c o r p o r a t e authentic
popular l o n g i n g . I d e o l o g i c a l h e g e m o n y is t h u s not the case of some
particular c o n t e n t d i r e c t l y f i l l i n g in the void o f the empty Universal;
rather, the very f o r m o f ideological universality bears witness to the
s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n ( a t l e a s t ) two p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t s : t h e ' p o p u l a r ' c o n t e n t
expressing the secret longings o f the d o m i n a t e d majority, a n d the specific
c o n t e n t expressing the interests o f the forces o f domination.
O n e is t e m p t e d t o r e f e r h e r e t o t h e F r e u d i a n d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the
latent dream-thought a n d t h e u n c o n s c i o u s desire e x p r e s s e d in a d r e a m :
t h e two a r e n o t t h e s a m e , s i n c e t h e u n c o n s c i o u s d e s i r e a r t i c u l a t e s i t s e l f ,
i n s c r i b e s itself, t h r o u g h the very ' w o r k i n g - t h r o u g h ' , translation, o f the
l a t e n t d r e a m - t h o u g h t i n t o t h e e x p l i c i t t e x t o f a d r e a m . I n t h e s a m e way,
t h e r e is n o t h i n g ' F a s c i s t ' ( ' r e a c t i o n a r y ' , e t c . ) i n t h e ' l a t e n t dream-thought'
o f the Fascist ideology (the longing for authentic c o m m u n i t y a n d social
solidarity, e t c . ) ; what a c c o u n t s for the p r o p e r l y Fascist c h a r a c t e r o f the
F a s c i s t i d e o l o g y is t h e way t h i s ' l a t e n t d r e a m - t h o u g h t ' is transformed/
e l a b o r a t e d by the ideological 'dream-work' into the explicit ideological
text which continues to l e g i t i m i z e social r e l a t i o n s o f e x p l o i t a t i o n and
d o m i n a t i o n . A n d is it n o t t h e s a m e w i t h t o d a y ' s r i g h t - w i n g p o p u l i s m ? A r e
n o t liberal critics t o o q u i c k in dismissing t h e very values p o p u l i s m refers
t o as i n h e r e n t l y ' f u n d a m e n t a l i s t ' o r ' p r o t o - F a s c i s t ' ?
N o n - i d e o l o g y ( w h a t F r e d r i c J a m e s o n calls t h e U t o p i a n m o m e n t present
e v e n i n t h e m o s t a t r o c i o u s i d e o l o g y ) is t h u s a b s o l u t e l y i n d i s p e n s a b l e : i n a
way, i d e o l o g y is n o t h i n g b u t t h e f o r m o f a p p e a r a n c e , t h e f o r m a l d i s t o r t i o n /
displacement, o f non-ideology. T o return to the worst i m a g i n a b l e case -
was not Nazi anti-Semitism grounded in the Utopian longing for an
a u t h e n t i c c o m m u n i t y l i f e , i n t h e fully j u s t i f i e d r e j e c t i o n o f t h e i r r a t i o n a l i t y
of capitalist exploitation, and so on? Our point, again, is t h a t it is
t h e o r e t i c a l l y a n d politically w r o n g to c o n d e m n t h e l o n g i n g for a u t h e n t i c
c o m m u n i t y life as s u c h as ' p r o t o - F a s c i s t ' , t o d e n o u n c e it as a ' t o t a l i t a r i a n
fantasy' - to s e a r c h for t h e p o s s i b l e ' r o o t s ' o f F a s c i s m in this very l o n g i n g
(the standard mistake o f the liberal-individualist critique o f F a s c i s m ) : the
n o n - i d e o l o g i c a l U t o p i a n c h a r a c t e r o f t h i s l o n g i n g is t o b e fully a s s e r t e d .
What makes it ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' is its a r t i c u l a t i o n , t h e way this l o n g i n g is
f u n c t i o n a l i z e d as t h e l e g i t i m i z a t i o n o f a v e r y s p e c i f i c n o t i o n o f c a p i t a l i s t
exploitation (the result o f Jewish influence, the p r e d o m i n a n c e o f financial
over 'productive' capital, w h i c h tends towards a h a r m o n i o u s 'partnership
186 THE TICKLISH SLTBJECT
w i t h w o r k e r s . . . ) a n d h o w t o o v e r c o m e it ( b y g e t t i n g r i d o f t h e J e w s , o f
course).
C r u c i a l f o r a s u c c e s s f u l i d e o l o g y is t h u s t h e t e n s i o n within its p a r t i c u l a r
content between the t h e m e s a n d motifs that b e l o n g to the 'oppressed'
a n d t h o s e w h i c h b e l o n g t o t h e ' o p p r e s s o r s ' : r u l i n g i d e a s a r c never d i r e c t l y
t h e i d e a s o f t h e r u l i n g c l a s s . L e t u s t a k e w h a t is a r g u a b l y t h e ultimate
example, Christianity - how did it b e c o m e the ruling ideology? By
i n c o r p o r a t i n g a s c r i e s o f m o t i f s a n d a s p i r a t i o n s o f t h e o p p r e s s e d ( t r u t h is
on the side o f t h e suffering and humiliated; power corrupts . . .) and
r e a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e m i n s u c h a way t h a t t h e y b e c a m e c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the
existing relations o f domination. A n d the same holds even for Fascism.
The fundamental ideological contradiction o f F a s c i s m is t h a t between
o r g a n i c i s m a n d m e c h a n i c i s m : the corporatist-organic aestheticized vision
of the Social B o d y and the extreme 'technologization', mobilization,
destruction, wiping-out, o f the last vestiges o f 'organic' communities
(families, universities, local s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t traditions) at the level o f the
actual 'micro-practices' o f the power exercise. In Fascism, the aestheti
c i z e d o r g a n i c i s t c o r p o r a t e i d e o l o g y is t h u s t h e v e r y f o r m o f an unpre
c e d e n t e d technological mobilization o f society which disrupts 'organic'
links.'"' T h i s p a r a d o x e n a b l e s us t o a v o i d t h e l i b e r a l - m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t trap
o f c o n d e m n i n g e v e r y c a l l f o r a r e t u r n to o r g a n i c ( e t h n i c , e t c . ) l i n k s as
' p r o t o - F a s c i s t ' : w h a t d e f i n e s F a s c i s m is, r a t h e r , a s p e c i f i c c o m b i n a t i o n o f
o r g a n i c i s t c o r p o r a t i s m a n d t h e d r i v e t o r u t h l e s s m o d e r n i z a t i o n . T o p u t it
i n y e t a n o t h e r way: i n e v e r y a c t u a l F a s c i s m , o n e always e n c o u n t e r s ele
m e n t s w h i c h m a k e us say: ' T h i s is n o t y e t f u l l - b l o w n F a s c i s m ; t h e r e a r e still
i n c o n s i s t e n t e l e m e n t s o f leftist t r a d i t i o n s o r l i b e r a l i s m i n i t ' ; h o w e v e r , t h i s
r e m o v a l f r o m — this d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s — t h e p h a n t o m o f ' p u r e ' F a s c i s m is
F a s c i s m tout court. ' F a s c i s m ' , i n its i d e o l o g y a n d p r a c t i c e , is n o t h i n g b u t a
certain formal principle o f distortion o f social antagonism, a certain logic
o f its d i s p l a c e m e n t by a c o m b i n a t i o n a n d c o n d e n s a t i o n o f inconsistent
attitudes.
T h e s a m e d i s t o r t i o n is d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e f a c t t h a t , t o d a y , t h e o n l y c l a s s
w h i c h , i n its ' s u b j e c t i v e ' s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n , e x p l i c i t l y c o n c e i v e s o f a n d pre
s e n t s i t s e l f as a c l a s s is t h e n o t o r i o u s ' m i d d l e c l a s s ' w h i c h is p r e c i s e l y t h e
'non-class': the allegedly hard-working middle strata o f society which
d e f i n e t h e m s e l v e s n o t o n l y b y t h e i r a l l e g i a n c e t o firm m o r a l a n d r e l i g i o u s
standards, b u t by a d o u b l e o p p o s i t i o n to b o t h ' e x t r e m e s ' o f the social
space - non-patriotic 'deracinated' rich c o r p o r a t i o n s on the o n e side;
poor excluded immigrants and ghetto-members on the other. T h e 'mid
d l e c l a s s ' g r o u n d s its i d e n t i t y in t h e e x c l u s i o n o f b o t h e x t r e m e s w h i c h ,
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 ' 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, the impossible intersec
tion 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 intruding immigrants), presents
i t s e l f as t h e neutral common ground o f Society. In other words, the
' 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 '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 d e t e r m i n e d place in the hierarchical social edifice) not
only d e m a n d e d t h a t t h e i r v o i c e b e h e a r d a g a i n s t t h o s e in p o w e r , those
w h o e x e r t e d s o c i a l c o n t r o l - t h a t is, t h e y n o t o n l y p r o t e s t e d t h e w r o n g [le
tort] t h e y s u f f e r e d , a n d w a n t e d t h e i r v o i c e t o h e h e a r d , t o b e r e c o g n i z e d
as i n c l u d e d i n t h e p u b l i c s p h e r e , o n a n e q u a l f o o t i n g with t h e ruling
oligarchy and aristocracy - even m o r e , they, t h e e x c l u d e d , those with
no fixed place within the social edifice, presented t h e m s e l v e s as the

representatives, the stand-ins, for the W h o l e o f Society, for the true
Universality ('we - the "nothing", n o t c o u n t e d in the o r d e r - are the
p e o p l e , we are All against o t h e r s w h o stand only for their particular
privileged interest'). In short, political conflict designates 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 empty
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, the principled
equality o f all m e n qua speaking beings. Politics p r o p e r 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 as s u c h , against the aristocracy and the
clergy) to the demise o f ex-European Socialism (in which 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 against H a b e r m a s , the political struggle proper is
therefore not a rational debate between multiple interests, but the
struggle for o n e ' s voice to b e h e a r d and 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 nomenklatura),
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 (for h i g h e r wages,
better working conditions, etc.), but t h e i r v e r y r i g h t to b e h e a r d and
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 nomenklatura
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 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 ,
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , as t h e o p e r a t o r w h i c h will b r i n g a b o u t t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t
17
o f a post-political rational society. S o m e t i m e s t h e shift f r o m p o l i t i c s p r o p e r
to police can be only a matter o f a change from the definite to the
indefinite article, like the East G e r m a n crowds d e m o n s t r a t i n g against the
C o m m u n i s t r e g i m e i n t h e last days o f t h e G D R : first t h e y s h o u t e d ' W e a r e
the p e o p l e ! ' ['Wir sind das V o l k ! ' ] , t h e r e b y p e r f o r m i n g the gesture of
p o l i t i c i z a t i o n at its p u r e s t - t h e y , t h e e x c l u d e d c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y 'scum'
o f the official W h o l e o f the P e o p l e , with n o p r o p e r p l a c e in t h e official
space (or, m o r e precisely, with only tides like 'counter-revolutionaries',
' h o o l i g a n s ' , o r - at best - 'victims o f b o u r g e o i s p r o p a g a n d a ' reserved for
t h e m ) , c l a i m e d t o s t a n d f o r the p e o p l e , f o r ' a l l ' ; a c o u p l e o f days l a t e r ,
h o w e v e r , t h e s l o g a n c h a n g e d i n t o ' W e a r e a/one people!' [ ' W i r s i n d ein
V o l k ! ' ] , clearly signalling the closure o f the m o m e n t a r y authentic political
opening, the reappropriation o f the d e m o c r a t i c i m p e t u s by the thrust
towards the reunification o f Germany, which m e a n t rejoining Western
G e r m a n y ' s liberal-capitalist p o l i c e / p o l i t i c a l order.
In J a p a n , the caste o f u n t o u c h a b l e s is c a l l e d t h e burakumim those
w h o a r e involved in c o n t a c t with d e a d flesh (butchers, leatherworkers,
g r a v e d i g g e r s ) a n d a r e s o m e t i m e s e v e n r e f e r r e d t o as eta ( ' m u c h filth).
E v e n now, in the ' e n l i g h t e n e d ' p r e s e n t , w h e n they are n o l o n g e r o p e n l y
despised, they are silently i g n o r e d - n o t o n l y d o c o m p a n i e s still a v o i d
hiring them, or parents allowing their children to marry them,
but, u n d e r the 'politically c o r r e c t ' p r e t e n c e n o t o f offending them, one
prefers to i g n o r e the issue. H o w e v e r , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t , a n d t h e p r o o f o f
the pre-political (or, rather, non-political) 'corporate' functioning of
Japanese s o c i e t y , is t h e fact that although voices are heard on their
b e h a l f (we c o u l d simply m e n t i o n t h e g r e a t a n d r e c e n t l y d e a d S u e S u m i i
w h o , i n h e r i m p r e s s i v e s e r i e s o f n o v e l s The River with No Bridge, used the
reference to burakumin to expose the meaninglessness o f the entire
J a p a n e s e caste hierarchy - significantly, h e r primordial traumatic experi
e n c e was t h e s h o c k w h e n , as a c h i l d , s h e w i t n e s s e d how, in o r d e r to
honour the Emperor, a relative o f hers scratched the toilet used by
t h e v i s i t i n g E m p e r o r to p r e s e r v e a p i e c e o f his s h i t as a s a c r e d relic),
t h e burakumin d i d n o t a c t i v e l y politicize their destiny, did n o t constitute
their position as t h a t o f singulier universe!,, claiming that, precisely as
the 'part o f n o part', they stand for the true universality o f J a p a n e s e
8
society. . . . '
T h e r e is a s c r i e s o f d i s a v o w a l s o f this p o l i t i c a l m o m e n t , o f t h e proper
logic o f political conflict:
• arche-politics: 'communitarian' attempts to define a traditional close,

organically structured 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
1 9
tive power;
• 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 transforma
tion o f the 'administration of people' into the '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 war
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 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 the
properly traumatic dimension o f the political: s o m e t h i n g emerged in
A n c i e n t G r e e c e u n d e r t h e n a m e o f demos d e m a n d i n g its r i g h t s , a n d , f r o m
t h e very b e g i n n i n g (i.e. f r o m P l a t o ' s Republic) t o t h e r e c e n t revival o f
liberal 'political philosophy', 'political philosophy' was a n attempt to
suspend the destabilizing potential o f the political, to disavow and/or
r e g u l a t e it i n o n e way o r a n o t h e r : b r i n g i n g a b o u t a r e t u r n to a pre-
political social body, fixing the rules o f political c o m p e t i t i o n , and so
2
forth.*
'Political philosophy' is t h u s , in all its different forms, a kind of
'defence-formation', and p e r h a p s its t y p o l o g y c o u l d b e e s t a b l i s h e d via
r e f e r e n c e to the different modalities o f d e f e n c e against s o m e traumatic
e x p e r i e n c e in p s y c h o a n a l y s i s . I t m a y s e e m , h o w e v e r , t h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s ,
the psychoanalytic a p p r o a c h to politics, also involves the r e d u c t i o n o f the
p r o p e r p o l i t i c a l d i m e n s i o n . T h a t is t o say, w h e n o n e a p p r o a c h e s p o l i t i c s
th r o u g h the psychoanalytic network, one usually focuses on Freud's
elaboration o f the notion o f the 'crowd' apropos o f the Army a n d the
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 (Army, Church,
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], 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
2 3
supplement: 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 necessary supplement of
power, (political) power itself is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y at the root 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 'pre-
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 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
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 'objective', 'disinterested' scientific knowledge of
social processes - this c o i n c i d e n c e o p e n s u p a space for 'totalitarian'
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 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 in their strict a d h e r e n c e t o t h e i d e a l o f egaliberte - in their
attempt to realize this i d e a ] d i r e c t l y , t o i m p o s e it o n to reality; this
c o i n c i d e n c e o f the p u r e s t idealism with 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
1
m e a n s o f scientific knowledge.-
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 :
2 0
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 . 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
t o t a l i t a r i a n M a s t e r fully a c c e p t s t h e l o g i c o f ' I a m a M a s t e r o n l y i n s o f a r
as y o u t r e a t m e as o n e ' - t h a t is t o say, h i s p o s i t i o n i n v o l v e s n o r e f e r e n c e
t o s o m e t r a n s c e n d e n t g r o u n d ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , h e e m p h a t i c a l l y tells his
f o l l o w e r s : ' I n m y s e l f , I a m n o t h i n g ; all m y s t r e n g t h d e r i v e s f r o m y o u ; I a m
o n l y t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f y o u r d e e p e s t strivings; t h e m o m e n t I l o s e m v
r o o t s i n y o u , I a m l o s t . . .'. H i s e n t i r e l e g i t i m a c y d e r i v e s f r o m t h i s p o s i t i o n
o f pure servant o f the People: the m o r e he 'modestly' diminishes and
instrumentalizes his role, the more he emphasizes that he merely
e x p r e s s e s a n d realizes t h e strivings o f t h e P e o p l e themselves, w h o a r e t h e
true Master, the m o r e all-powerful a n d u n t o u c h a b l e h e b e c o m e s , s i n c e
a n y a t t a c k o n h i m is e f f e c t i v e l y a n a t t a c k o n t h e P e o p l e t h e m s e l v e s , o n
t h e i r i n n e r m o s t l o n g i n g s . . . . ' T h e P e o p l e ' is t h u s s p l i t i n t o a c t u a l i n d i v i d
u a l s ( p r o n e t o t r e a s o n a n d all k i n d s o f h u m a n w e a k n e s s e s ) a n d the P e o p l e
e m b o d i e d in t h e M a s t e r . T h e s e t h r e e l o g i c s ( t h a t o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l M a s t e r ,
o f the d e m o c r a t i c regulated fight for the empty place o f Power, o f the
totalitarian Master) fit t h e three modes o f the disavowal o f politics
c o n c e p t u a l i z e d by R a n c i e r e : t h e t r a d i t i o n a l M a s t e r f u n c t i o n s within the
s p a c e o f a r c h e - p o l i t i c s ; d e m o c r a c y i n v o l v e s p a r a - p o l i t i c s , t h a t is, t h e g e n t r i -
fication o f politics p r o p e r in regulated a g o n i s m ( t h e rules o f e l e c t i o n s
a n d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e d e m o c r a c y , e t c . ) ; t h e t o t a l i t a r i a n M a s t e r is p o s s i b l e
only within the space o f meta-politics.
Perhaps the distinction between the Communist and Fascist Master
r e s i d e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t - d e s p i t e all t h e t a l k a b o u t r a c i a l s c i e n c e , a n d s o
o n - t h e i n n e r m o s t l o g i c o f F a s c i s m is n o t m e t a - p o l i t i c a l b u t u l t r a - p o l i t i c a l :
t h e F a s c i s t M a s t e r is a w a r r i o r i n p o l i t i c s . S t a l i n i s m at its ' p u r e s t ' (the
p e r i o d o f g r e a t p u r g e s i n t h e l a t e 1 9 3 0 s ) is a m u c h m o r e paradoxical
p h e n o m e n o n than the Trotskyite narratives o f the alleged betrayal o f the
a u t h e n t i c r e v o l u t i o n by t h e n e w nomenklatura w o u l d like to have us believe:
Stalinism, rather, is t h e point o f radical (self-relating) negativity that
functions as a kind o f 'vanishing mediator' between the 'authentic'
revolutionary phase o f the late 1 9 1 0 s / e a r l y 1920s a n d the stabilization o f
t h e nomenklatura i n t o a N e w C l a s s a f t e r S t a l i n ' s d e a t h . T h a t is t o say: w h a t
c h a r a c t e r i z e s this Stalinist m o m e n t , this effective ' p o i n t o f (revolutionary)
m a d n e s s ' , is t h e i n h e r e n t t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e n e w nomenklatura and the
L e a d e r w h o is d r i v e n t o r e p e a t e d ' i r r a t i o n a l ' p u r g e s , s o t h a t t h e nomenkla
tura is u n a b l e to stabilize itself into a New Class: the self-enhancing
( ' b o o t s t r a p ' ) cycle o f T e r r o r potentially involves everyone, n o t only the
e n t i r e ' o r d i n a r y ' p o p u l a t i o n b u t a l s o t h e h i g h e s t nomenklatura - everyone
( w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e O n e , S t a l i n h i m s e l f ) was u n d e r permanent
threat o f liquidation.
O n e is t h u s l e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t S t a l i n i n f a c t l o s t h i s f i g h t a g a i n s t the
nomenklatura ( a n d t h e r e b y t h e b u l k o f his ' r e a l ' p o w e r ) i n t h e l a t e 1 9 3 0 s ,
with t h e e n d o f the G r e a t P u r g e s (ironically, this m o m e n t c o i n c i d e d with
t h e ridiculous i n c r e a s e in p u b l i c a d u l a t i o n o f the figure o f Stalin, his
c e l e b r a t i o n as t h e g r e a t e s t g e n i u s o f m a n k i n d , a n d s o o n , as i f t h e l o s s o f
' r e a l ' p o w e r was s o m e h o w c o m p e n s a t e d b y t h e g a i n i n s y m b o l i c p o w e r .
W h a t t h e nomenklatura o f f e r e d S t a l i n was a r o l e c o m p a r a b l e t o t h a t o f t h e
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l m o n a r c h w h o d o t s t h e i ' s , b u t is d e p r i v e d o f a c t u a l e x e c u
tive p o w e r ( o r , a t l e a s t , h a s t o s h a r e it w i t h h i s e q u a l s , m e m b e r s o f t h e
s e n i o r i n n e r c i r c l e ) ; Stalin, o f course, could n o t resign h i m s e l f to such a
s y m b o l i c r o l e , a n d his p o s t - W o r l d - W a r - I I activity ( t h e J e w i s h D o c t o r s ' P l o t ,
the planned anti-Semitic purge, e t c . ) betrays his effort to r e g a i n real
power, a n effort w h i c h u l t i m a t e l y r e m a i n e d u n s u c c e s s f u l . S o , in t h e last
y e a r s o f his life, w i t h t h e r e s i s t a n c e o f t h e nomenklatura g r o w i n g , S t a l i n was
m o r e a n d m o r e i s o l a t e d as a p a r a n o i a c m a d m a n w h o s e w o r d s n o l o n g e r -
p o s s e s s e d d i r e c t p e r f o r m a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y - his w o r d s (say, h i s a c c u s a t i o n s
of treason against the senior members o f the nomenklatura) were no
l o n g e r ' a c t e d u p o n ' . I n t h e last C o m m u n i s t Party c o n g r e s s a t t e n d e d by
S t a l i n (in 1 9 5 2 ) , S t a l i n , in h i s s p e e c h , a c c u s e d M o l o t o v a n d Kaganovich
o f b e i n g traitors a n d E n g l i s h spies; after Stalin's s p e e c h , M o l o t o v simply
stood up and claimed that Comrade S t a l i n was w r o n g , since he and
K a g a n o v i c h always h a d b e e n a n d r e m a i n e d g o o d B o l s h e v i k s - a n d , t o t h e
amazement o f the party delegates present, nothing happened: the two
accused m e n retained their s e n i o r posts - something that would have
b e e n u n t h i n k a b l e a c o u p l e o f years before.
Also with r e g a r d to actual social c h a n g e , o r ' c u t in t h e s u b s t a n c e o f the
s o c i a l b o d y ' , t h e t r u e r e v o l u t i o n was n o t t h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n , b u t t h e
c o l l e c t i v i z a t i o n o f t h e l a t e 1 9 2 0 s . T h e O c t o b e r R e v o l u t i o n left t h e sub
stance o f the social body (the intricate network o f family a n d other
r e l a t i o n s ) i n t a c t ; i n t h i s r e s p e c t it was s i m i l a r t o t h e F a s c i s t r e v o l u t i o n ,
which also merely i m p o s e d a new form of executive power on to the
existing network o f social relations - o r rather, p r e c i s e l y in o r d e r to
maintain this n e t w o r k o f social relations. F o r that reason, the Fascist
r e v o l u t i o n was a f a k e e v e n t , a r e v o l u t i o n - tire s e m b l a n c e o f a radical
c h a n g e - which t o o k place so that ' n o t h i n g would really c h a n g e ' , so that
things (i.e. the f u n d a m e n t a l capitalist relations o f p r o d u c t i o n ) would
b a s i c a l l y r e m a i n t h e s a m e . I t was o n l y t h e f o r c e d c o l l e c t i v i z a t i o n o f t h e
late 1920s which thoroughly subverted and dismembered the 'social
substance' (the inherited network o f relations), perturbing and cutting
2 6
deeply into the most fundamental social fabric.
POLITICAL SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS V I C I S S I T U D E S 195
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 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 'appear
ance' o f equality-freedom 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 subversive
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, 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 between appearance and the postmodern notion of
simulacrum 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
2 7
here. 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 assertion o f the Brave
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 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
t h e s o c i a l b o d y s u b d i v i d e d i n t o p a r t s . T h e r e is ' a p p e a r a n c e ' i n s o f a r as a
p a r t n o t i n c l u d e d in t h e W h o l e o f t h e S o c i a l B o d y ( o r i n c l u d e d / e x c l u d e d
i n a way a g a i n s t w h i c h i t p r o t e s t s ) s y m b o l i z e s its p o s i t i o n as t h a t o f a
W r o n g , c l a i m i n g , a g a i n s t o t h e r parts, t h a t it stands f o r the universality o f
egaliberte. h e r e we a r e d e a l i n g with a p p e a r a n c e i n c o n t r a s t to t h e 'reality'
o f the structured social body. T h e old conservative m o t t o o f ' k e e p i n g up
a p p e a r a n c e s ' t h u s t a k e s a n e w twist t o d a y : it n o l o n g e r s t a n d s f o r the
' w i s d o m ' a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h it is b e t t e r n o t t o d i s t u r b t h e r u l e s o f s o c i a l
etiquette t o o m u c h , since social c h a o s m i g h t ensue. T o d a y , the effort to
'keep up appearances' stands, rather, for the effort to maintain the
properly political space against the onslaught o f the postmodern all-
2 8
e m b r a c i n g s o c i a l b o d y , w i t h its m u l t i t u d e o f p a r t i c u l a r i d e n t i t i e s .
T h i s is a l s o h o w o n e has to r e a d H e g e l ' s famous dictum from his
Phenomenology: ' t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is a p p e a r a n c e qua a p p e a r a n c e ' . In a
s e n t i m e n t a l a n s w e r t o a c h i l d a s k i n g h i m w h a t G o d ' s f a c e is l i k e , a p r i e s t
answers that w h e n e v e r the child e n c o u n t e r s a human face irradiating
b e n e v o l e n c e a n d g o o d n e s s , w h o e v e r this face b e l o n g s to, h e c a t c h e s a
g l i m p s e o f H i s f a c e . . . . T h e t r u t h o f t h i s s e n t i m e n t a l p l a t i t u d e is t h a t t h e
S u p r a s e n s i b l e ( G o d ' s f a c e ) is d i s c e r n i b l e as a m o m e n t a r y , f l e e t i n g a p p e a r
a n c e , t h e ' g r i m a c e ' o f a n e a r t h l y f a c e . I t is this d i m e n s i o n o f ' a p p e a r a n c e '
transubstantiating a p i e c e o f reality i n t o s o m e t h i n g which, for a brief
m o m e n t , i r r a d i a t e s t h e s u p r a s e n s i b l e E t e r n i t y t h a t is m i s s i n g in t h e l o g i c
o f t h e s i m u l a c r u m : in t h e s i m u l a c r u m , w h i c h b e c o m e s i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e
f r o m t h e R e a l , e v e r y t h i n g is h e r e , a n d n o o t h e r , t r a n s c e n d e n t dimension
effectively 'appears' in/through it. H e r e we are b a c k at the Kantian
p r o b l e m a t i c o f t h e s u b l i m e : in K a n t ' s f a m o u s r e a d i n g o f t h e enthusiasm
evoked by the French Revolution in the enlightened public around
E u r o p e , t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y e v e n t s f u n c t i o n e d as a s i g n t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e
dimension o f trans-phenomenal Freedom, o f a free society, appeared.
' A p p e a r a n c e ' is t h u s n o t s i m p l y t h e d o m a i n of phenomena, but those
' m a g i c m o m e n t s ' in w h i c h a n o t h e r , noumcnal dimension momentarily
' a p p e a r s ' in ( ' s h i n e s t h r o u g h ' ) s o m e e m p i r i c a l / c o n t i n g e n t p h e n o m e n o n .
S o - b a c k t o H e g e l : ' t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is a p p e a r a n c e qua a p p e a r a n c e '
d o e s n o t s i m p l y m e a n t h a t t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is n o t a p o s i t i v e e n t i t y beyond
p h e n o m e n a , b u t the i n h e r e n t p o w e r o f negativity which m a k e s appear
a n c e ' m e r e l y a n a p p e a r a n c e ' , t h a t is, s o m e t h i n g t h a t is n o t i n i t s e l f fully
actual, b u t c o n d e m n e d to perish in the p r o c e s s o f self-sublation. It also
m e a n s t h a t t h e S u p r a s e n s i b l e is e f f e c t i v e o n l y as r e d o u b l e d , s e l f - r e f l e c t e d ,
self-related a p p e a r a n c e : the S u p r a s e n s i b l e c o m e s i n t o e x i s t e n c e in the
guise o f an appearance of Another Dimension which interrupts the

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 in w h i c h the Real o f a deadly rage
transpires/appears. In this s e n s e , t h e R e a l i t s e l f is a n 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 that 'there is
something beneath p h e n o m e n a l reality');
• f i n a l l y ( a n d it is o n l y h e r e t h a t w e e n c o u n t e r w h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a l l s
t h e ' f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y ' , as w e l l as t h e m o s t r a d i c a l p h e n o m e n o l o g i -
c a l n o t i o n o f ' p h e n o m e n a ' ) , t h e a p p e a r a n c e w h i c h fills t h e void i n t h e
m i d s t o f r e a l i t y , t h a t is, t h e a p p e a r a n c e w h i c h c o n c e a l s t h e f a c t t h a t ,
b e n e a t h t h e p h e n o m e n a , t h e r e is n o t h i n g t o c o n c e a l .
T h e p r o b l e m w i t h K a n t is t h a t h e t e n d s t o c o n f u s e t h e l a s t two l e v e l s . T h a t
is t o say, t h e paradox t o b e a c c e p t e d is t h a t t h e realm o f noumenal
Freedom, o f the Supreme G o o d , appears as s u c h (as n o u m e n a l ) only
from the p h e n o m e n a l perspective o f the finite s u b j e c t : i n itself, i f w e g e t
t o o c l o s e t o it, it c h a n g e s i n t o t h e m o n s t r o u s R e a l . . . . H e r e Heidegger
was o n t h e r i g h t t r a c k w i t h h i s i n s i s t e n c e o n t e m p o r a l i t y as t h e ultimate
unsurpassable h o r i z o n , t h a t is, o f e t e r n i t y i t s e l f as a c a t e g o r y w h i c h has
meaning only within the temporal experience of a finite subject: in
exactiy the same way, w h a t K a n t was n o t fully aware o f is h o w the
distinction between (our e x p e r i e n c e of) n o u m e n a l freedom and temporal
i m m e r s i o n i n p h e n o m e n a is a d i s t i n c t i o n i n t e r n a l t o o u r finite temporal
experience.
Post-Politics
T o d a y , h o w e v e r , we a r e d e a l i n g with a n o t h e r f o r m o f the d e n e g a t i o n o f
t h e p o l i t i c a l , p o s t m o d e r n post-politics, which n o longer merely 'represses'
t h e p o l i t i c a l , t r y i n g t o c o n t a i n it a n d p a c i f y t h e ' r e t u r n s o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ' ,
b u t m u c h m o r e e f f e c t i v e l y ' f o r e c l o s e s ' it, s o t h a t t h e p o s t m o d e r n f o r m s o f
e t h n i c v i o l e n c e , with t h e i r ' i r r a t i o n a l ' e x c e s s i v e c h a r a c t e r , a r e n o l o n g e r
simple 'returns o f the repressed' but, rather, represent a case o f the
f o r e c l o s e d ( f r o m t h e S y m b o l i c ) w h i c h , as w e k n o w f r o m L a c a n , r e t u r n s i n
t h e Real. I n post-politics, t h e c o n f l i c t o f global i d e o l o g i c a l visions e m b o d
ied in d i f f e r e n t parties which compete for power is r e p l a c e d by the
collaboration o f enlightened technocrats (economists, public opinion
s p e c i a l i s t s . . . ) a n d l i b e r a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t s ; via t h e p r o c e s s o f n e g o t i a t i o n
o f interests, a c o m p r o m i s e is r e a c h e d i n the guise o f a m o r e o r less
universal consensus. Post-politics thus emphasizes the n e e d to leave old
ideological divisions b e h i n d and confront n e w issues, a r m e d with the
necessary expert knowledge and free deliberation that takes people's
concrete needs and demands into account.
T h e b e s t f o r m u l a t h a t e x p r e s s e s t h e p a r a d o x o f p o s t - p o l i t i c s is p e r h a p s
T o n y B l a i r ' s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f N e w L a b o u r as t h e ' R a d i c a l C e n t r e ' : i n
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 apply
them, whatever their ( i d e o l o g i c a l ) origins. A n d what are these '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 the very framework that determines how things work. T o
say t h a t g o o d ideas are 'ideas that work' means 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 'art o f the possible': authentic p o l i t i c s is,
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. ''
When this d i m e n s i o n 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 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 subject 'work
ing class' d e m a n d i n g 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
immigrant, ever m o r e prevented 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. 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 : what
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 together
workers' protests against r e d u c i n g their rights a n d right-wing insistence
on fidelity t o t h e W e s t e r n c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e : h e p e r c e i v e s b o t h as p i t i f u l
remainders o f the 'age o f ideology' which have n o relevance in today's
post-ideological universe. However, t h e two r e s i s t a n c e s t o g l o b a l i z a t i o n
f o l l o w t o t a l l y i n c o m p a t i b l e l o g i c s : t h e R i g h t insists o n a particular commu
n a l i d e n t i t y (ethnos o r habitat) threatened by the o n s l a u g h t o f globaliza
tion; while for the Left, the dimension under threat is that of
politicization, o f articulating 'impossible' u n / i w a / d e m a n d s ('impossible'
f r o m within the existing s p a c e o f W o r l d O r d e r ) .
H e r e o n e s h o u l d o p p o s e globalization a n d universalization: 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 pre
cludes the d i m e n s i o n o f universality that appears in politicization proper.
T h e p a r a d o x is t h a t t h e r e is n o Universal p r o p e r without the process o f
political litigation, o f the 'part of no 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 o f post-politics to the n o t i o n of
excessive, non-functional 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 , pro
3 1
p o s e d by B a l i b a r : a cruelty whose manifestations range from 'fundamen
talist' racist a n d / o r religious slaughter to t h e '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 secondary rationalization. The answer we ultimately
obtain from a skinhead is t h a t it m a k e s him feel good to 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 /rf-Evil, that is, Evil s t r u c t u r e d and motivated by t h e most
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
3 2
the object.
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 ('non-
sublimated') hatred o f O t h e r n e s s , a n d the post-political multiculturalist
universe o f tolerance o f difference, in w h i c h nobody 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
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 'mature' universe of the
negotiated coexistence o f different groups - 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
1 3
Balibar, 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
M
he's doing, but he's nevertheless doing i t ' . T h e symbolically efficient
knowledge embedded i n t h e s u b j e c t ' s a c t u a l s o c i a l praxis disintegrates
i n t o , o n t h e o n e h a n d , e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' v i o l e n c e with n o i d e o l o g i c o -
political foundation and, on the o t h e r , i m p o t e n t external reflecdon that
leaves t h e s u b j e c t ' s acts intact. I n t h e g u i s e o f this cynically i m p o t e n t
r e f l e c t i n g s k i n h e a d w h o , with a n i r o n i c s m i l e , e x p l a i n s the r o o t s o f his
s e n s e l e s s l y v i o l e n t b e h a v i o u r to t h e p e r p l e x e d j o u r n a l i s t , t h e e n l i g h t e n e d
t o l e r a n t m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t b e n t o n ' u n d e r s t a n d i n g ' f o r m s o f e x c e s s i v e vio
l e n c e g e t s h i s o w n m e s s a g e i n its i n v e r t e d , t r u e f o r m - i n s h o r t , as L a c a n
w o u l d h a v e p u t it, a t t h i s p o i n t t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n h i m a n d t h e
' o b j e c t ' o f h i s study, t h e i n t o l e r a n t s k i n h e a d , is t h o r o u g h l y s u c c e s s f u l .
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 the universality o f rights is m e t by outbursts of
violence). Nowhere is t h i s c o n t r a s t stronger than in the case o f 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 as dumb
low-class S o u t h e r n rednecks. Today, however, the very terrain 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 false'
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 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 , African-
American 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
l e s b i a n m o t h e r a r e a d e q u a t e l y c a t a l o g u e d r i g h t d o w n t o its m o s t s p e c i f i c
features, t h e c o n c e r n e d s u b j e c t n o n e t h e less s o m e h o w 'feels' that t h e r e
is s o m e t h i n g ' w r o n g ' a n d ' f r u s t r a t i n g ' i n t h i s v e r y e f f o r t to m e t e o u t j u s t i c e
t o h e r s p e c i f i c p r e d i c a m e n t - w h a t s h e is d e p r i v e d o f is t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
'metaphoric' elevation o f h e r specific 'wrong' into a stand-in for the
universal ' w r o n g ' . T h e o n l y way to a r t i c u l a t e this universality - t h e fact
t h a t I , p r e c i s e l y , a m not m e r e l y t h a t s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l e x p o s e d t o a s e t o f
s p e c i f i c i n j u s t i c e s - c o n s i s t s , t h e n , i n its a p p a r e n t o p p o s i t e , i n t h e thor
o u g h l y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' e x c e s s i v e o u t b u r s t o f v i o l e n c e . T h e o l d H e g e l i a n r u l e is
a g a i n c o n f i r m e d h e r e : t h e o n l y way f o r a u n i v e r s a l i t y t o c o m e i n t o e x i s
t e n c e , t o ' p o s i t ' i t s e l f ' a s s u c h ' , is i n t h e g u i s e o f its v e r y o p p o s i t e , o f w h a t
c a n n o t b u t a p p e a r as a n e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' w h i m . T h e s e v i o l e n t passages
a Vacte b e a r w i t n e s s t o s o m e u n d e r l y i n g antagonism that can no longer be
f o r m u l a t e d - s y m b o l i z e d in p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l t e r m s . T h e o n l y way to c o u n
t e r a c t t h e s e e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' o u t b u r s t s is t o a p p r o a c h t h e q u e s t i o n o f
w h a t n o n e t h e less r e m a i n s f o r e c l o s e d in t h e very a l l - i n c l u s i o n a r y / t o l e r a n t
post-political logic, a n d to actualize this f o r e c l o s e d d i m e n s i o n in some
new m o d e o f political subjectivization.
L e t us r e c a l l t h e s t a n d a r d e x a m p l e o f a p o p u l a r p r o t e s t ( m a s s d e m o n
s t r a t i o n , s t r i k e , b o y c o t t ) d i r e c t e d a t a s p e c i f i c p o i n t , t h a t is, f o c u s i n g o n a
particular d e m a n d ('Abolish that new tax! Justice for the imprisoned!
S t o p exploiting that natural r e s o u r c e ! ' . . .) - the situation b e c o m e s polit
icized when this p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d s t a r t s t o f u n c t i o n as a metaphoric
c o n d e n s a t i o n o f the g l o b a l o p p o s i t i o n against T h e m , t h o s e in p o w e r , so
t h a t t h e p r o t e s t is n o l o n g e r a c t u a l l y j u s t a b o u t t h a t d e m a n d , b u t about
t h e universal d i m e n s i o n t h a t r e s o n a t e s in t h a t p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d (for this
reason, protesters often feel s o m e h o w deceived w h e n those in power
a g a i n s t w h o m t h e i r p r o t e s t was a d d r e s s e d s i m p l y a c c e p t t h e i r d e m a n d -
as if, i n t h i s way, t h e y h a v e s o m e h o w f r u s t r a t e d t h e m , d e p r i v i n g t h e m o f
t h e t r u e a i m o f t h e i r p r o t e s t in t h e very guise o f a c c e p t i n g t h e i r d e m a n d ) .
W h a t p o s t - p o l i t i c s t e n d s t o p r e v e n t is p r e c i s e l y t h i s m e l a p h o r i c u n i v e r s a l i -
zation o f p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d s : post-politics m o b i l i z e s t h e vast a p p a r a t u s o f
experts, social workers, a n d so o n , to r e d u c e the overall d e m a n d (com
plaint) o f a particular group to j u s t this d e m a n d , with its particular
content - no wonder this s u f f o c a t i n g c l o s u r e gives b i r t h to 'irrational'
o u t b u r s t s o f v i o l e n c e as t h e o n l y way t o give e x p r e s s i o n t o t h e d i m e n s i o n
b e y o n d particularity.
T h i s a r g u m e n t a t i o n is n o t t o b e c o n f u s e d w i t h t h e p o i n t , m a d e b y m a n y
a conservative critic, a c c o r d i n g to which violent outbursts signify the
return o f the repressed of our anaemic liberal Western civilization.
POLITICAL SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS VICISSITUDES 205
E x e m p l a r y h e r e is M a r i o V a r g a s L l o s a ' s a r g u m e n t a t i o n t h a t ' t h e h o o l i g a n
3 5
is n o b a r b a r i a n : h e is a n e x q u i s i t e a n d t e r r i b l e p r o d u c t o f c i v i l i z a t i o n ' .
L l o s a t a k e s as h i s s t a r t i n g p o i n t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t t h e t y p i c a l v i o l e n t
s o c c e r f a n is n o t a n u n e m p l o y e d lumpenproletarian but a comfortably off
m i d d l e - c l a s s w o r k e r , t h a t is, t h e v e r y e p i t o m e o f g e n t i e g o o d m a n n e r s a n d
civilized c o m p a s s i o n - his violent outbursts are ' r e t u r n s o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ' ,
the reassertion o f the violent orgy increasingly p r o h i b i t e d by o u r civilized
liberal societies. T h r o u g h a m i s l e a d i n g r e f e r e n c e to F r e u d , L l o s a mystifies
a n d n a t u r a l i z e s c u r r e n t v i o l e n t o u t b u r s t s : as i f t h e r e is a fixed, irreducible
propensity towards violent outbursts in h u m a n n a t u r e , a n d w h e n sacred
o r g i e s a r e n o l o n g e r p e r m i t t e d as its l e g i t i m a t e e x p r e s s i o n , t h i s p r o p e n s i t y
h a s t o find a n o t h e r way t o e x p r e s s itself. . . . I n c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o t h i s l i n e
of argumentation, m y p o i n t is m u c h stronger: the neo-Nazi skinhead's
e t h n i c v i o l e n c e is n o t t h e ' r e t u r n o f t h e r e p r e s s e d ' o f t h e l i b e r a l m u l t i c u l -
t u r a l i s t t o l e r a n c e , b u t directly generated by it, its o w n c o n c e a l e d t r u e f a c e .
Is T h e r e a Progressive ILurocentrism?
T h i s c o n c e p t u a l f r a m e e n a b l e s us t o a p p r o a c h E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n Social
i s m i n a n e w way. T h e p a s s a g e f r o m a c t u a l l y e x i s t i n g S o c i a l i s m t o a c t u a l l y
existing capitalism in E a s t e r n E u r o p e b r o u g h t about a series o f c o m i c
reversals o f sublime democratic enthusiasm into the ridiculous. The
dignified East G e r m a n crowds gathering a r o u n d Protestant c h u r c h e s a n d
h e r o i c a l l y d e f y i n g Stasi t e r r o r s u d d e n l y t u r n e d i n t o v u l g a r c o n s u m e r s o f
bananas and cheap pornography; the civilized C z e c h s m o b i l i z e d by the
appeal o f Havel a n d o t h e r cultural icons suddenly turned into cheap
swindlers o f W e s t e r n tourists. . . . T h e d i s a p p o i n t m e n t was m u t u a l : the
W e s t , w h i c h b e g a n b y i d o l i z i n g t h e E a s t e r n d i s s i d e n t m o v e m e n t as t h e r e
i n v e n t i o n o f its o w n t i r e d d e m o c r a c y , d i s a p p o i n t e d l y d i s m i s s e s t h e p r e s e n t
p o s t - S o c i a l i s t r e g i m e s as a m i x t u r e o f t h e c o r r u p t e x - C o m m u n i s t o l i g a r c h y
a n d / o r ethnic and religious fundamentalists (even the dwindling liberals
a r e m i s t r u s t e d as i n s u f f i c i e n t l y ' p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t ' : w h e r e is t h e i r f e m i n i s t
awareness? etc.); the East, which began b y i d o l i z i n g t h e W e s t as the
e x a m p l e o f a f f l u e n t d e m o c r a c y t o b e f o l l o w e d , finds i t s e l f i n t h e w h i r l p o o l
o f r u t h l e s s c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n a n d e c o n o m i c c o l o n i z a t i o n . S o was all t h i s
worth the effort?
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
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 this E v e n t w h i c h t o o k place in between, this 'vanishing
mediator', in this m o m e n t o f democratic enthusiasm, 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 gap
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 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, and
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 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 the
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 to reinscribe
these events in their police/political framework, by 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 ,
rational, depoliticized atmosphere, a n d a b u n c h o f extremist provocateurs

3 6
w h o served foreign interests. 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
3 7
this, t h e battle was i n a way already w o n . 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 into the Western liberal-democratic notion o f
freedom (multiparty representational political g a m e cum g l o b a l market
economy).
Emblematic to the point o f caricature h e r e was t h e figure o f Dan
Rather, the American news r e p o r t e r , on Tiananmen Square 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 demanding
(in short, if you scratch t h e yellow skin 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 egaliberte
(the unconditional demand for freedom-equality which 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 to the debilitating alternative o f choosing
between a knave a n d a f o o l , o r is t h e r e a tertium datur? Perhaps the
contours o f this tertium datur can be discerned via r e f e r e n c e to the
fundamental 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
of the human rights o f the four a c c u s e d ' . Officially, the goal o f the
C o m m i t t e e was s i m p l y t o g u a r a n t e e f a i r t r e a t m e n t f o r t h e f o u r a c c u s e d ;
however, the Committee turned into the major oppositional political
force, practically t h e S l o v e n e version o f the C z e c h Civic F o r u m o r East
G e r m a n Neues Forum, the body which co-ordinated democratic opposition,
a de facto r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f civil s o c i e t y .
The Committee's programme c o n s i s t e d o f f o u r i t e m s ; t h e first three
directiy c o n c e r n e d the a c c u s e d , while the 'devil in t h e detail', o f c o u r s e ,
was t h e f o u r t h i t e m , w h i c h s a i d t h a t t h e C o m m i t t e e w a n t e d t o c l a r i f y t h e
entire b a c k g r o u n d o f the arrest o f the four accused, a n d thus contribute
to c r e a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s in w h i c h such arrests would no longer be
possible - a c o d e d way o f s a y i n g t h a t w e w a n t e d the abolition o f the
existing Socialist regime. O u r demand 'Justice for the four accused!'
s t a r t e d t o f u n c t i o n as t h e m e t a p h o r i c c o n d e n s a t i o n o f t h e d e m a n d for
t h e global o v e r t h r o w o f t h e Socialist r e g i m e . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , in a l m o s t
daily n e g o t i a t i o n s with t h e C o m m i t t e e , C o m m u n i s t Party officials were
always a c c u s i n g u s o f a ' h i d d e n a g e n d a ' , c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e l i b e r a t i o n o f
t h e f o u r a c c u s e d was n o t o u r t r u e g o a l - t h a t w e w e r e ' e x p l o i t i n g a n d
manipulating the arrest and trial f o r o t h e r , d a r k e r political goals'. In
short, the C o m m u n i s t s w a n t e d to play t h e ' r a t i o n a l ' d e p o l i t i c i z e d g a m e :
they wanted to deprive the slogan 'Justice for the four accused!' o f
its e x p l o s i v e g e n e r a l c o n n o t a t i o n , a n d r e d u c e it t o its l i t e r a l meaning,
w h i c h c o n c e r n e d j u s t a m i n o r l e g a l m a t t e r ; t h e y c y n i c a l l y c l a i m e d t h a t it
was w e , t h e Committee, who were behaving 'non-democratically' and
manipulating the fate o f t h e a c c u s e d , using g l o b a l p r e s s u r e a n d black
mailing strategies instead o f focusing o n the particular p r o b l e m o f their
plight.
T h i s is p o l i t i c s p r o p e r : t h e m o m e n t i n w h i c h a p a r t i c u l a r d e m a n d is n o t
simply part o f the negotiation o f interests but aims at s o m e t h i n g more,
and starts to function as t h e metaphoric condensation o f the global
r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f t h e e n t i r e s o c i a l s p a c e . T h e r e is a c l e a r c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n
this subjectivization a n d today's proliferation o f postmodern 'identity
p o l i t i c s ' w h o s e g o a l is t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e , t h a t is, p r e c i s e l y t h e a s s e r t i o n o f
o n e ' s particular identity, o f o n e ' s p r o p e r p l a c e within t h e social structure.
T h e p o s t m o d e r n i d e n t i t y p o l i t i c s o f p a r t i c u l a r ( e t h n i c , s e x u a l , e t c . ) life
styles p e r f e c t l y fits t h e depoliticized notion o f society, in w h i c h every
p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p is ' a c c o u n t e d f o r ' , h a s its s p e c i f i c s t a t u s ( o f victim)
a c k n o w l e d g e d t h r o u g h affirmative a c t i o n o r o t h e r m e a s u r e s d e s t i n e d to
g u a r a n t e e social justice. T h e fact t h a t this k i n d o f j u s t i c e m e t e d o u t to
victimized m i n o r i t i e s r e q u i r e s an i n t r i c a t e p o l i c e a p p a r a t u s ( f o r identify-
i n g t h e g r o u p i n q u e s t i o n , f o r p u n i s h i n g o f f e n d e r s a g a i n s t its r i g h t s - h o w
legally to define sexual h a r a s s m e n t o r racial injury?, a n d so o n - for
providing the preferential treatment which should compensate for the
w r o n g t h i s g r o u p h a s s u f f e r e d ) is d e e p l y s i g n i f i c a n t : w h a t is u s u a l l y p r a i s e d
as ' p o s t m o d e r n p o l i t i c s ' ( t h e p u r s u i t o f p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e s w h o s e r e s o l u t i o n
m u s t b e n e g o t i a t e d w i t h i n t h e ' r a t i o n a l ' g l o b a l o r d e r a l l o c a t i n g its p a r t i c u
lar c o m p o n e n t its p r o p e r p l a c e ) is t h u s e f f e c t i v e l y t h e e n d o f p o l i t i c s
proper.
S o while everyone s e e m s to a g r e e that today's post-political liberal-
d e m o c r a t i c g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s t r e g i m e is t h e r e g i m e o f t h e n o n - e v e n t (in
N i e t z s c h e ' s t e r m s , o f t h e L a s t M a n ) , t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e r e we a r e to l o o k
for the Event remains open. T h e o b v i o u s s o l u t i o n is: i n s o f a r as w e
experience contemporary postmodern s o c i a l life as ' n o n - s u b s t a n t i a l ' the
proper a n s w e r is t h e m u l t i t u d e o f p a s s i o n a t e , o f t e n v i o l e n t r e t u r n s to
' r o o t s ' , t o d i f f e r e n t f o r m s o f e t h n i c a n d / o r r e l i g i o u s ' s u b s t a n c e ' . W h a t is
' s u b s t a n c e ' i n s o c i a l e x p e r i e n c e ? I t is t h e v i o l e n t e m o t i o n a l m o m e n t o f
'recognition', when o n e b e c o m e s aware o f o n e ' s 'roots', o f o n e ' s 'true
b e l o n g i n g ' , t h e m o m e n t i n t h e f a c e o f w h i c h l i b e r a l r e f l e x i v e d i s t a n c e is
u t t e r l y i m p o t e n t - all o f a s u d d e n , a d r i f t i n t h e w o r l d , o n e finds oneself
in t h e grip o f a k i n d o f a b s o l u t e l o n g i n g for ' h o m e ' , a n d everything else,
3 8
everyday c o m m o n c o n c e r n s , b e c o m e s u n i m p o r t a n t . . . .
Here, however, one must fully endorse Badiou's point that these
'returns to the S u b s t a n c e ' are themselves i m p o t e n t in the face o f the
global m a r c h o f C a p i t a l : t h e y a r e its i n h e r e n t s u p p l e m e n t , the limit/
c o n d i t i o n o f its f u n c t i o n i n g , s i n c e - as D e l e u z e e m p h a s i z e d y e a r s a g o -
capitalist 'deterritorialization' is always accompanied by re-emerging
' r e t e r r i t o r i a l i z a t i o n s ' . M o r e p r e c i s e l y , t h e r e is a n i n h e r e n t s p l i t i n t h e f i e l d
o f particular identities themselves c a u s e d by the o n s l a u g h t o f capitalist
globalization: o n the o n e hand, the so-called 'fundamentalisms', whose
b a s i c f o r m u l a is t h a t o f t h e I d e n t i t y o f o n e ' s o w n g r o u p , i m p l y i n g the
practice o f excluding the threatening O t h e r ( s ) : F r a n c e for the French
(against Algerian i m m i g r a n t s ) , A m e r i c a for A m e r i c a n s (against the His
panic invasion), Slovenia for Slovenians (against the excessive p r e s e n c e o f
3 3
' S o u t h e r n e r s ' , immigrants f r o m the ex-Yugoslav r e p u b l i c s ) ; on the other
h a n d , t h e r e is p o s t m o d e r n multiculturalist 'identity polities', aiming at
t h e t o l e r a n t c o e x i s t e n c e o f ever-shifting, ' h y b r i d ' lifestyle g r o u p s , divided
into endless subgroups ( H i s p a n i c w o m e n , b l a c k gays, white m a l e AIDS
patients, lesbian m o t h e r s . . . ) .
This ever-growing flowering o f groups a n d subgroups in their hybrid
and fluid, shifting identities, e a c h insisting o n the right to assert its
s p e c i f i c way o f life a n d / o r c u l t u r e , t h i s i n c e s s a n t d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , is p o s s i b l e
a n d t h i n k a b l e o n l y a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f c a p i t a l i s t g l o b a l i z a t i o n ; i t is
t h e v e r y way c a p i t a l i s t g l o b a l i z a t i o n a f f e c t s o u r s e n s e o f e t h n i c a n d o t h e r
forms o f community belonging: the only link c o n n e c t i n g these multiple
groups is t h e l i n k o f C a p i t a l i t s e l f , always r e a d y t o satisfy t h e specific
d e m a n d s o f e a c h g r o u p a n d s u b g r o u p (gay tourism, H i s p a n i c m u s i c . . . ) .
Furthermore, the opposition between fundamentalism and postmodern
p l u r a l i s t i d e n t i t y p o l i t i c s is u l t i m a t e l y a f a k e , c o n c e a l i n g a d e e p e r s o l i d a r i t y
( o r , to p u t it i n H e g e l e s e , s p e c u l a t i v e i d e n t i t y ) : a m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t can
e a s i l y find e v e n t h e m o s t ' f u n d a m e n t a l i s t ' e t h n i c identity attractive, but
o n l y i n s o f a r as it is t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h e s u p p o s e d l y a u t h e n t i c O t h e r (say,
in the U S A , Native A m e r i c a n tribal identity); a f u n d a m e n t a l i s t g r o u p c a n
e a s i l y a d o p t , i n its s o c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g , t h e p o s t m o d e r n s t r a t e g i e s o f i d e n t i t y
politics, presenting i t s e l f as o n e o f the threatened minorities, simply
s t r i v i n g t o m a i n t a i n its s p e c i f i c way o f life a n d c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y . T h e l i n e
of separation between multiculturalist identity politics a n d fundamental
i s m is t h u s p u r e l y f o r m a l ; it o f t e n depends merely on the different
p e r s p e c t i v e f r o m w h i c h t h e o b s e r v e r views a m o v e m e n t f o r m a i n t a i n i n g a
g r o u p identity.
U n d e r t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , t h e E v e n t in the guise o f t h e ' r e t u r n to r o o t s '
c a n b e o n l y a s e m b l a n c e t h a t fits t h e c a p i t a l i s t c i r c u l a r m o v e n e n t p e r f e c t l y
o r - in t h e w o r s t c a s e - l e a d s t o a c a t a s t r o p h e l i k e N a z i s m . T h e s i g n o f
t o d a y ' s i d e o l o g i c o - p o l i t i c a l c o n s t e l l a t i o n is t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s e k i n d s o f
pseudo-Events constitute the only a p p e a r a n c e s o f Events which s e e m to
p o p u p (it is o n l y r i g h t - w i n g p o p u l i s m w h i c h t o d a y d i s p l a y s t h e a u t h e n t i c
political p a s s i o n o f a c c e p t i n g t h e struggle, o f o p e n l y admitting that, pre
c i s e l y i n s o f a r as o n e c l a i m s t o s p e a k f r o m a u n i v e r s a l s t a n d p o i n t , one
d o e s n o t a i m t o p l e a s e e v e r y b o d y , b u t is r e a d y t o i n t r o d u c e a division of
' U s ' versus ' T h e m ' ) . It has often b e e n r e m a r k e d that, despite hating the
guts o f B u c h a n a n in t h e U S A , L e P e n in F r a n c e o r H a i d e r in Austria,
e v e n L e f t i s t s f e e l a k i n d o f r e l i e f at t h e i r a p p e a r a n c e - finally, i n t h e m i d s t
o f t h e r e i g n o f t h e a s e p t i c p o s t - p o l i t i c a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f p u b l i c affairs,
t h e r e is s o m e o n e w h o r e v i v e s a p r o p e r p o l i t i c a l p a s s i o n o f d i v i s i o n and
c o n f r o n t a t i o n , a c o m m i t t e d b e l i e f in political issues, a l b e i t in a d e p l o r a b l y
repulsive form. . . . W e are thus m o r e a n d m o r e deeply l o c k e d into a
c l a u s t r o p h o b i c s p a c e within w h i c h we c a n o n l y oscillate b e t w e e n the n o n -
event o f the s m o o t h r u n n i n g o f the liberal-democratic capitalist global
New World O r d e r a n d fundamentalist Events (the rise o f local proto-
Fascisms, e t c . ) , which temporarily disturb the calm surface o f the capitalist
o c e a n - n o w o n d e r t h a t , in t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , H e i d e g g e r m i s t o o k t h e
p 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 undermine
capitalist globalization from the standpoint 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 tra
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. 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 religious
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 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 ,
is t h e v e r y r a d i c a l externality o f the religious Call: A b r a h a m is u n a b l e to

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 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 internalize it.
W e can see now how Kierkegaard 'surmounts' the ' m o d e r n age' 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 one should return here to the well-known Kierkegaardian
opposition between Socratic reminiscence and Christian repetition. The
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 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 S o u l ' s j o u r n e y o f i n n e r self-discovery and
p u r i f i c a t i o n is p r o f o u n d l y 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 the
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 , that o f
'traversing the fantasy', rather, designates the subject's (symbolic) rebirth,
his ( r e - ) c r e a t i o n ex nihilo, a j u m p 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 .
T h e T h r e e Universals
T h e s e i m p a s s e s d e m o n s t r a t e h o w t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e U n i v e r s a l is m u c h
4 0
m o r e c o m p l e x t h a n i t a p p e a r s . I t was B a l i b a r who elaborated the three
levels o f universality w h i c h vaguely follow t h e L a c a n i a n triad o f Real,
I m a g i n a r y a n d S y m b o l i c : the 'real' universality o f globalization, with the
s u p p l e m e n t a r y process o f 'internal e x c l u s i o n s ' (the e x t e n t to which, today,
the fate o f e a c h o f us h i n g e s o n the intricate web o f global market
relations); the universality of the fiction that regulates ideological
hegemony ( C h u r c h o r S t a t e as t h e u n i v e r s a l 'imagined communities',
w h i c h allow the s u b j e c t to a c q u i r e a d i s t a n c e towards i m m e r s i o n in his
i m m e d i a t e social g r o u p - class, profession, sex, religion . . . - a n d posit
h i m s e l f as a f r e e s u b j e c t ) ; t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f a n I d e a l , as e x e m p l i f i e d b y
t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y d e m a n d f o r egaliberte, w h i c h r e m a i n s a n unconditional
excess, setting in m o t i o n permanent insurrection against the existing
o r d e r , a n d c a n thus n e v e r b e ' g e n t r i f i e d ' , i n c l u d e d in t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r .
T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n t h e s e t h r e e u n i v e r
sals is n e v e r s t a b l e a n d fixed: the notion o f freedom and equality can
serve as the hegemonic idea which enables us to identify with our
particular social role (I a m a poor artisan, but p r e c i s e l y as s u c h I
p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e life o f m y n a t i o n - s t a t e as a n e q u a l a n d f r e e c i t i z e n . . . ) ,
o r as t h e i r r e d u c i b l e e x c e s s w h i c h d e s t a b i l i z e s t h e f i x e d s o c i a l o r d e r . W h a t ,
i n t h e J a c o b i n u n i v e r s e , was t h e d e s t a b i l i z i n g u n i v e r s a l i t y o f t h e Ideal
setting in m o t i o n the incessant process o f social transformation later
b e c a m e the ideological fiction allowing e a c h individual to identify with
his specific p l a c e in the social space. T h e alternative here is: is the
universal 'abstract' (potentially opposed to c o n c r e t e c o n t e n t ) or 'con
c r e t e ' (in the s e n s e that I e x p e r i e n c e m y very p a r t i c u l a r m o d e o f social
life as m y s p e c i f i c way o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the universal social order)?
B a l i b a r ' s p o i n t is, o f c o u r s e , t h a t t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o is i r r e
ducible: the excess o f abstract-negative-ideal u n i v e r s a l i t y , its unsetding-
destabilizing force, c a n n e v e r b e fully i n t e g r a t e d into the harmonious
41
whole o f a 'concrete universality'.
H o w e v e r , t h e r e is a n o t h e r t e n s i o n , t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e two m o d e s
o f ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' itself, w h i c h s e e m s m o r e c r u c i a l t o d a y . T h a t is t o
say, the 'real' universality o f today's globalization through the market
i n v o l v e s its o w n hegemonic fiction (or even ideal) of multiculturalist
tolerance, respect for and protection o f h u m a n rights a n d democracy,
a n d s o o n ; it i n v o l v e s its o w n p s e u d o - H e g e l i a n ' c o n c r e t e u n i v e r s a l i t y ' o f a
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 in its p a r t i c u l a r i t y . S o a
tension inevitably e m e r g e s b e t w e e n this p o s t m o d e r n , post-nation-state,
'concrete universality', and the earlier 'concrete 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 the repression o f authentic local ways o f life and/or their
reinscription into the new e n c o m p a s s i n g 'invented tradition'. In other
words, 'national tradition' 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
2
m o d e r n i z a t i o n b u t the true ethnic tradition itself in its unbearable factuality.*
W h a t c o m e s a f t e r is t h e (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 'life
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 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' national i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was a n 'artificial', violently imposed
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 hand, the nation-state 'sublates' organic local forms of
identification into universal 'patriotic' identification; on the 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
two c o n s t i t u e n t parts, t h e t r a n s n a t i o n a l m a r k e t f u n c t i o n a n d t h e r e l a t i o n
4 3
ship to the e t h n i c T h i n g .
I t is t h e r e f o r e o n l y today, in c o n t e m p o r a r y 'fundamentalist' ethnic,
religious, lifestyle, a n d so o n , c o m m u n i t i e s , t h a t t h e split b e t w e e n the
abstract form o f c o m m e r c e and the relationship to t h e particular e t h n i c
T h i n g , i n a u g u r a t e d b y t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t p r o j e c t , is fully r e a l i z e d : t o d a y ' s
postmodern ethnic o r religious 'fundamentalism' and x e n o p h o b i a are not
only n o t 'regressive' but, o n the contrary, offer the s u p r e m e p r o o f o f the
final e m a n c i p a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m i c l o g i c o f t h e m a r k e t f r o m t h e attach
m e n t t o t h e e t h n i c T h i n g . T h a t is t h e h i g h e s t s p e c u l a t i v e e f f o r t o f t h e
d i a l e c t i c o f s o c i a l life: n o t in d e s c r i b i n g t h e m e d i a t i o n process o f the
p r i m o r d i a l i m m e d i a c y (say, t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f o r g a n i c c o m m u n i t y in
' a l i e n a t e d ' individualist society), b u t in e x p l a i n i n g h o w this very m e d i a t i o n
process characteristic o f modernity can give birth to new forms of
' o r g a n i c ' i m m e d i a c y , like t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y ' c h o s e n ' o r ' i n v e n t e d ' com
4 4
m u n i t i e s ( ' l i f e s t y l e c o m m u n i t i e s ' : gays, e t c . ) .
Multiculturalism
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
p o w e r is n o l o n g e r a n a t i o n - s t a t e b u t t h e g l o b a l c o m p a n y i t s e l f . I n the
l o n g t e r m , w e s h a l l all n o t o n l y w e a r B a n a n a R e p u b l i c s h i r t s b u t a l s o live
in b a n a n a republics.
A n d , o f c o u r s e , t h e i d e a l f o r m o f i d e o l o g y o f t h i s g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m is
multiculturalism, the attitude which, from a kind o f empty global position,
t r e a t s each l o c a l c u l t u r e as t h e c o l o n i z e r treats c o l o n i z e d p e o p l e - as
' n a t i v e s ' w h o s e mores a r e t o b e c a r e f u l l y s t u d i e d a n d ' r e s p e c t e d ' . T h a t is t o
say: t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t r a d i t i o n a l i m p e r i a l i s t c o l o n i a l i s m a n d g l o b a l
c a p i t a l i s t s e l f - c o l o n i z a t i o n is e x a c t l y t h e s a m e as t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n
W e s t e r n c u l t u r a l i m p e r i a l i s m a n d m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m - j u s t as g l o b a l c a p i t a l
ism involves the p a r a d o x o f c o l o n i z a d o n without t h e c o l o n i z i n g nation-
s t a t e m e t r o p o l i s , m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m i n v o l v e s a p a t r o n i z i n g E u r o c e n t r i s t dis
tance and/or respect for local cultures without roots in one's own
particular culture. In other words, multiculturalism is a disavowed,
i n v e r t e d , self-referential f o r m o f r a c i s m , a ' r a c i s m with a d i s t a n c e ' - it
' r e s p e c t s ' t h e O t h e r ' s i d e n t i t y , c o n c e i v i n g t h e O t h e r as a s e l f - e n c l o s e d
'authentic' community towards which the multiculturalist maintains a
distance m a d e possible by h i s / h e r privileged universal position. Multicul
t u r a l i s m is a r a c i s m w h i c h e m p t i e s its o w n p o s i t i o n o f all p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t
( t h e m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t is n o t a d i r e c t r a c i s t ; h e o r s h e d o e s n o t o p p o s e to
t h e O t h e r t h e particular values o f his o r h e r o w n c u l t u r e ) ; n o n e t h e less
h e o r s h e r e t a i n s t h i s p o s i t i o n as t h e p r i v i l e g e d empty point of universality
f r o m w h i c h o n e is a b l e t o a p p r e c i a t e (and depreciate) other particular
c u l t u r e s p r o p e r l y - m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t r e s p e c t f o r t h e O t h e r ' s s p e c i f i c i t y is
t h e very f o r m o f asserting o n e ' s own superiority.
From the standpoint o f the post-Marxist anti-essentialist n o t i o n of
p o l i t i c s as t h e field o f h e g e m o n i c struggle with n o pre-established rules
t h a t w o u l d d e f i n e its p a r a m e t e r s i n a d v a n c e , it is e a s y t o r e j e c t t h e v e r y
notion o f the ' l o g i c o f C a p i t a l ' as p r e c i s e l y t h e r e m a i n d e r o f the old
essentialist stance: far from b e i n g r e d u c i b l e to an ideologico-cultural effect
o f the e c o n o m i c process, the passage from standard cultural imperialism
t o t h e m o r e t o l e r a n t m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m w i t h its o p e n n e s s t o w a r d s t h e w e a l t h
o f h y b r i d e t h n i c , s e x u a l , a n d s o o n , i d e n t i t i e s is t h e r e s u l t o f a l o n g a n d
difficult politico-cultural struggle whose final outcome was in no way
g u a r a n t e e d by the a priori co-ordinates o f the 'logic o f Capital'. . . . T h e
crucial point, h o w e v e r , is t h a t this s t r u g g l e for the p o l i t i c i z a t i o n and
a s s e r t i o n o f m u l t i p l e e t h n i c , s e x u a l , a n d o t h e r i d e n t i t i e s always t o o k p l a c e
a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f a n i n v i s i b l e y e t all t h e m o r e f o r b i d d i n g b a r r i e r :
the g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m was a b l e to i n c o r p o r a t e the gains o f the
p o s t m o d e r n politics o f identities to t h e e x t e n t that they did n o t disturb
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
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 that the multicultur-
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, rather, the opposite: the stain o f particular r o o t s is the
phantasmic screen which c o n c e a l s the fact that t h e s u b j e c t is 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 should
reverse the standard Freudian explanation ( ' 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 more
4 5
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 Struggles
in France), Marx provides a similar e x a m p l e o f such a double deception:
the Party o f O r d e r which t o o k over after the R e v o l u t i o n publicly sup
ported 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 - 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, the s a m e g o e s for today's capitalist, w h o still
clings to s o m e p a r t i c u l a r cultural heritage, identifying i t as t h e 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
B u s h i d o c o d e , e t c . ) , o r for t h e reverse c a s e o f t h e W e s t e r n j o u r n a l i s t in
s e a r c h o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r s e c r e t o f J a p a n e s e s u c c e s s : this very r e f e r e n c e t o a
p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r a l f o r m u l a is a s c r e e n f o r t h e universal anonymity o f
Capital. T h e true h o r r o r lies n o t in t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t h i d d e n b e n e a t h
t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f g l o b a l C a p i t a l b u t , r a t h e r , i n t h e f a c t t h a t C a p i t a l is
e f f e c t i v e l y a n a n o n y m o u s g l o b a l m a c h i n e b l i n d l y r u n n i n g its c o u r s e ; t h a t
t h e r e is i n f a c t n o p a r t i c u l a r S e c r e t A g e n t a n i m a t i n g it. T h e h o r r o r is n o t
the ( p a r t i c u l a r living) g h o s t in t h e (dead universal) m a c h i n e , but the
( d e a d universal) m a c h i n e in t h e very h e a r t o f e a c h (particular living)
ghost. The conclusion to b e drawn is t h u s that the problematic of
multiculturalism (the hybrid c o e x i s t e n c e o f diverse cultural life-worlds)
w h i c h i m p o s e s i t s e l f t o d a y is t h e f o r m o f a p p e a r a n c e o f its o p p o s i t e , o f
t h e m a s s i v e p r e s e n c e o f c a p i t a l i s m as global w o r l d s y s t e m : it b e a r s w i t n e s s
to the u n p r e c e d e n t e d h o m o g e n i z a t i o n o f today's world.
It is i n f a c t as if, s i n c e t h e h o r i z o n o f s o c i a l i m a g i n a t i o n no longer
a l l o w s us t o e n t e r t a i n t h e i d e a o f a n e v e n t u a l d e m i s e o f c a p i t a l i s m - s i n c e ,
as we m i g h t p u t it, e v e r y b o d y t a c i t l y a c c e p t s t h a t capitalism is here to stay -
c r i t i c a l e n e r g y h a s f o u n d a s u b s t i t u t e o u t l e t i n f i g h t i n g f o r c u l t u r a l dif
ferences which leave the basic h o m o g e n e i t y o f the capitalist world-system
i n t a c t . S o we a r e f i g h t i n g o u r P C b a t t l e s f o r t h e r i g h t s o f e t h n i c m i n o r i t i e s ,
o f gays a n d l e s b i a n s , o f d i f f e r e n t l i f e s t y l e s , a n d s o f o r t h , w h i l e c a p i t a l i s m
p u r s u e s its t r i u m p h a n t m a r c h - a n d t o d a y ' s c r i t i c a l t h e o r y , i n t h e g u i s e o f
' c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s ' , is p e r f o r m i n g t h e u l t i m a t e s e r v i c e f o r t h e unrestrained
development o f capitalism by a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the ideological
e f f o r t t o r e n d e r its m a s s i v e p r e s e n c e i n v i s i b l e : i n t h e p r e d o m i n a n t form
of postmodern 'cultural criticism', the very m e n t i o n o f c a p i t a l i s m as a
w o r l d s y s t e m t e n d s t o give r i s e t o a c c u s a t i o n s o f ' e s s e n t i a l i s m ' , 'fundamen
t a l i s m ' , a n d s o o n . T h e p r i c e o f t h i s d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m y is
t h a t t h e d o m a i n o f p o l i t i c s i t s e l f is i n a way d e p o l i t i c i z e d : p o l i t i c a l struggle-
proper is t r a n s f o r m e d into the cultural struggle for the r e c o g n i t i o n o f
4 6
marginal identities and the tolerance o f differences.
The falsity o f elitist multiculturalist liberalism lies in the tension
between content and form which already characterized the first great
ideological project o f tolerant universalism, that o f Freemasonry: the
d o c t r i n e o f F r e e m a s o n r y (the universal b r o t h e r h o o d o f all m e n b a s e d o n
the light o f R e a s o n ) clearly c l a s h e s with its f o r m o f expression and
organization ( a s e c r e t s o c i e t y w i t h its i n i t i a t i o n r i t u a l s ) ; t h a t is, i t is t h e
v e r y f o r m o f e x p r e s s i o n a n d a r t i c u l a t i o n o f F r e e m a s o n r y w h i c h b e l i e s its
p o s i t i v e d o c t r i n e . I n a s t r i c t l y h o m o l o g o u s way, t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y ' p o l i t i
cally c o r r e c t ' liberal attitude which perceives itself as s u r p a s s i n g the
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, within its own society, as a
narrow elidst upper-middle-class circle 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 t h e way t h e O t h e r regulates t h e s p e c i f i c i t y o f its
jouissance, t o l e r a n c e stops. Significantly, t h e s a m e multiculturalists w h o
o p p o s e E u r o c e n t r i s m a l s o , as a r u l e , o p p o s e t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y , d i s m i s s i n g
it as a r e m a i n d e r o f p r i m i t i v e b a r b a r i c c u s t o m s o f v e n g e a n c e - here, t h e i r
h i d d e n true E u r o c e n t r i s m b e c o m e s visible ( t h e i r e n t i r e argumentation
a g a i n s t t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y is s t r i c t l y ' E u r o c e n t r i s t ' , i n v o l v i n g t h e l i b e r a l
notions o f h u m a n dignity a n d penalty, a n d relying o n an evolutionary
s c h e m a from primitive \ i o l e n l sociedes to m o d e r n tolerant societies able
to o v e r c o m e the principle o f v e n g e a n c e ) .
• 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: i f t h e first a t t i t u d e is u n a b l e to perceive the
s p e c i f i c c u l t u r a l jouissance w h i c h e v e n a 'victim' c a n find in a p r a c t i c e o f
a n o t h e r c u l t u r e t h a t a p p e a r s c r u e l a n d b a r b a r i c t o us ( v i c t i m s o f c l i t o r i -
dectomy often p e r c e i v e i t a s t h e way t o r e g a i n t h e p r o p e r l y feminine
d i g n i t y ) , t h e s e c o n d a t t i t u d e fails t o p e r c e i v e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e O t h e r is
split in itself - that m e m b e r s o f a n o t h e r c u l t u r e , far f r o m simply identify
i n g with their c u s t o m s , c a n a c q u i r e a d i s t a n c e towards t h e m a n d revolt
against them - in such cases, r e f e r e n c e to the 'Western' notion of
universal h u m a n rights c a n well serve as t h e catalyst w h i c h sets i n m o t i o n
an authentic protest against the constraints o f one's own culture. In o t h e r
w o r d s , t h e r e is n o h a p p y m e d i u m b e t w e e n ' t o o m u c h ' a n d ' n o t e n o u g h ' ;
so w h e n a m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t r e p l i e s to o u r c r i t i c i s m with a d e s p e r a t e plea:
' W h a t e v e r I d o is w r o n g - e i t h e r I a m t o o t o l e r a n t t o w a r d s t h e i n j u s t i c e
t h e O t h e r suffers, o r I a m i m p o s i n g m y o w n values o n to t h e O t h e r - so
w h a t d o y o u w a n t m e t o d o ? ' , o u r a n s w e r s h o u l d b e : ' N o t h i n g ! A s l o n g as
you remain stuck in y o u r false p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , you can do nothing!'
W h a t t h e l i b e r a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t fails t o n o t i c e is t h a t e a c h o f t h e two
c u l t u r e s e n g a g e d i n ' c o m m u n i c a t i o n ' is c a u g h t i n its o w n antagonism
which has prevented it f r o m fully 'becoming itself - and the only
a u t h e n t i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n is t h a t o f ' s o l i d a r i t y i n a c o m m o n struggle',
w h e n I d i s c o v e r t h a t t h e d e a d l o c k w h i c h h a m p e r s m e is a l s o t h e d e a d l o c k
which hampers the Other.
D o e s this m e a n that t h e s o l u t i o n lies in a c k n o w l e d g i n g t h e 'hybrid'
character of each identity? I t is e a s y t o praise the hybridity of the
p o s t m o d e r n m i g r a n t s u b j e c t , n o l o n g e r a t t a c h e d to specific e t h n i c r o o t s ,
f l o a t i n g freely b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l c i r c l e s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , two totally
different s o c i o p o l i t i c a l levels a r e c o n d e n s e d h e r e : o n t h e o n e h a n d the
cosmopolitan upper- and upper-middle-class a c a d e m i c , always w i t h the
p r o p e r visas e n a b l i n g h i m t o c r o s s b o r d e r s w i t h o u t a n y p r o b l e m i n o r d e r
to carry o u t his (financial, a c a d e m i c . . .) business, a n d thus a b l e to ' e n j o y
the difference'; o n the o t h e r h a n d the p o o r ( i m ) m i g r a n t worker driven
f r o m his h o m e by p o v e r t y o r ( e t h n i c , r e l i g i o u s ) v i o l e n c e , f o r w h o m the
c e l e b r a t e d 'hybridity' d e s i g n a t e s a very t a n g i b l e t r a u m a t i c e x p e r i e n c e o f
n e v e r b e i n g able to settle d o w n p r o p e r l y a n d legalize his status, t h e s u b j e c t
f o r w h o m s u c h s i m p l e t a s k s as c r o s s i n g a b o r d e r o r r e u n i t i n g w i t h his
f a m i l y c a n b e a n e x p e r i e n c e full o f a n x i e t y , a n d d e m a n d i n g g r e a t e f f o r t .
F o r t h i s s e c o n d s u b j e c t , b e i n g u p r o o t e d f r o m h i s t r a d i t i o n a l way o f life is
a t r a u m a t i c s h o c k w h i c h destabilizes his e n t i r e e x i s t e n c e - to tell h i m that
h e s h o u l d e n j o y t h e h y b r i d i t y a n d t h e l a c k o f fixed i d e n t i t y o f h i s d a i l y
l i f e , t h e f a c t t h a t h i s e x i s t e n c e is m i g r a n t , n e v e r i d e n t i c a l - t o - i t s e l f , a n d s o
o n , i n v o l v e s t h e s a m e c y n i c i s m as t h a t a t w o r k i n t h e ( p o p u l a r i z e d v e r s i o n
of) Deleuze and Guattari's celebration o f the schizo-subject whose rhizo-
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 assumes the form of the
H e g e l i a n infinite judgement, w h i c h p o s i t s t h e s p e c u l a t i v e i d e n t i t y o f two
t h o r o u g h l y i n c o m p a t i b l e t e r m s : ' A d o r n o ( t h e m o s t s o p h i s t i c a t e d "elitist"
critical theorist) is B u c h a n a n (the lowest p o i n t o f American rightist
4 7
populism).' T h a t is t o say: t h e s e c r i t i c s o f p o s t m o d e r n multiculturalist
e l i t i s m ( f r o m C h r i s t o p h e r L a s c h t o P a u l P i c c o n e ) t a k e t h e risk o f e n d o r s
ing neo-conservative populism, with its n o t i o n s o f the reassertion of
c o m m u n i t y , l o c a l d e m o c r a c y a n d a c t i v e c i t i z e n s h i p , as t h e o n l y p o l i t i c a l l y
r e l e v a n t a n s w e r t o t h e all-pervasive p r e d o m i n a n c e o f ' i n s t r u m e n t a l Rea
48
son', o f the bureaucratization and instrumcntalization o f o u r life-world.
O f c o u r s e , it is e a s y t o d i s m i s s t o d a y ' s p o p u l i s m as a n o s t a l g i c r e a c t i v e
f o r m a t i o n a g a i n s t t h e p r o c e s s o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n , a n d as s u c h inherently
paranoiac, in s e a r c h o f a n e x t e r n a l c a u s e o f m a l i g n a n c y , o f a s e c r e t a g e n t
w h o p u l l s t h e s t r i n g s a n d is t h u s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e w o e s o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n
(Jews, i n t e r n a t i o n a l Capital, n o n - p a t r i o t i c m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t m a n a g e r s , state
b u r e a u c r a c y . . . ) ; t h e p r o b l e m is, r a t h e r , t o c o n c e i v e o f t h i s n e w p o p u l i s m
as a n e w f o r m o f ' f a l s e t r a n s p a r e n c y ' w h i c h , f a r f r o m p r e s e n t i n g a s e r i o u s
o b s t a c l e t o c a p i t a l i s t m o d e r n i z a t i o n , p a v e s t h e way f o r it. W h a t t h e s e l e f t i s t
a d v o c a t e s o f p o p u l i s m fail t o p e r c e i v e is t h u s t h e f a c t t h a t t o d a y ' s p o p u l
i s m , f a r f r o m p r e s e n t i n g a t h r e a t t o g l o b a l c a p i t a l i s m , r e m a i n s its i n h e r e n t
product.
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 ,
e c o l o g y , e t c . ) . H o w e v e r , t h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h i s v e r y f o r m o f t h e p o l i t i c a l
s p a c e is i n c r e a s i n g l y t h r e a t e n e d b y t h e o n s l a u g h t o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n ; c o n s e
q u e n t l y , o n e c a n n o t s i m p l y r e t u r n t o it o r r e v i t a l i z e it: t h e post-nation-
state logic o f Capital r e m a i n s t h e R e a l w h i c h lurks in t h e background,
w h i l e all t h r e e m a i n leftist r e a c t i o n s t o t h e p r o c e s s o f g l o b a l i z a t i o n ( l i b e r a l
m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m ; t h e a t t e m p t to e m b r a c e p o p u l i s m by d i s c e r n i n g , b e n e a t h
its f u n d a m e n t a l i s t appearance, resistance to 'instrumental reason'; the
attempt to k e e p o p e n the space o f the political) s e e m inappropriate.
Although t h e last a p p r o a c h is b a s e d on an accurate insight into the
complicity between multiculturalism and fundamentalism, it a v o i d s the
c r u c i a l q u e s t i o n : how are we to reinvent the political space in today's conditions
of globalization? T h e politicization o f the series o f particular struggles which
l e a v e s t h e g l o b a l p r o c e s s o f C a p i t a l i n t a c t is c l e a r l y n o t s u f f i c i e n t . T h i s
m e a n s that o n e should reject the opposition which, within the frame o f
l a t e c a p i t a l i s t l i b e r a l d e m o c r a c y , i m p o s e s i t s e l f as t h e m a i n a x i s o f i d e o
logical struggle: the tension b e t w e e n ' o p e n ' post-ideological universalist
liberal t o l e r a n c e a n d the particularist 'new fundamentalisms'. Against the
l i b e r a l C e n t r e w h i c h p r e s e n t s i t s e l f as n e u t r a l , p o s t - i d e o l o g i c a l , r e l y i n g o n
t h e r u l e o f Law, o n e s h o u l d r e a s s e r t t h e o l d leftist m o t i f o f t h e n e c e s s i t y
to s u s p e n d t h e n e u t r a l s p a c e o f Law.
O f course, b o t h Left a n d R i g h t involve their own m o d e o f suspension
o f the Law on behalf o f some higher or m o r e fundamental interest. T h e
rightist suspension, from anti-Dreyfussards to Oliver N o r t h , acknowledges
its v i o l a t i o n o f t h e l e t t e r o f t h e L a w , b u t j u s t i f i e s it b y r e f e r e n c e t o s o m e
h i g h e r n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t : it p r e s e n t s its v i o l a t i o n as a p a i n f u l self-sacrifice
4 9
for the g o o d o f the N a t i o n . A s f o r t h e l e f t i s t s u s p e n s i o n , it is e n o u g h to
m e n t i o n two films, Under Fire a n d Watch on the Rhine. T h e first t a k e s p l a c e
during the Nicaraguan revolution, when an A m e r i c a n photo-journalist
faces a t r o u b l e s o m e d i l e m m a : j u s t b e f o r e the victory o f the revolution,
S o m o z i s t a s kill a c h a r i s m a t i c S a n d i n i s t a l e a d e r , s o t h e S a n d i n i s t a s a s k t h e
j o u r n a l i s t t o f a k e a p h o t o o f t h e i r d e a d l e a d e r , p r e s e n t i n g h i m as still alive
a n d t h u s b e l y i n g t h e S o m o z i s t a s ' c l a i m s a b o u t h i s d e a t h - i n t h i s way, h e
would contribute t o a swift v i c t o r y f o r t h e r e v o l u t i o n and shorten the
agony o f prolonged bloodshed. Professional ethics, o f course, strictly
p r o h i b i t s u c h a n a c t , s i n c e it v i o l a t e s t h e u n b i a s e d o b j e c t i v i t y ' o f r e p o r t i n g
a n d m a k e s t h e j o u r n a l i s t a n i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e p o l i t i c a l fight; t h e j o u r n a l i s t
nevertheless c h o o s e s the 'leftist' o p t i o n a n d fakes the p h o t o . . . . I n Watch
on the Rhine, b a s e d o n a p l a y b y L i l l i a n H e l l m a n , t h i s d i l e m m a is e v e n
more a c u t e : in the late 1930s, a fugitive family o f G e r m a n political
emigrants involved in the anti-Nazi struggle comes t o stay w i t h their
distant relatives, an idyllic a i l - A m e r i c a n small-town middle-class 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 the
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 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 the
abstract m o r a l frame - or, to p a r a p h r a s e K i e r k e g a a r d , to a c c o m p l i s h a
k i n d of political suspension 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 to
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 that,
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 logic.
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 o f the E t h i c a l b y its anti-
universalist stance - 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 (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 - character o f social
life, accepting the necessity o f 'taking s i d e s ' , is t h e o n l y way to be
effectively 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 to universality itself 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
split i n t o the 'false' c o n c r e t e universality that legitimizes the existing
division o f the W h o l e into functional parts, and the impossible/real
demand 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 again). T h e leftist

p o l i t i c a l g e s t u r e par excellence (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 of inherent exception/
exclusion, the 'abject', of the concrete positive order, 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 universal
content (a c o m m o n notion o f humanity, etc.); rather, 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 the
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 place
within this hierarchy, 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

tions - or, to put it in contemporary terms, a site of performative
contradictions (they were addressed as e q u a l s - participating in the
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 excluded
from 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 , '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 should in no way
advocate the return to substantial identities - t h e p o i n t is p r e c i s e l y t o
a s s e r t hybridity as the site of the 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
5 2
the gesture o f subjectivization). J u d i t h B u t l e r develops a powerful argu
m e n t against the abstract a n d politically regressive opposition between
e c o n o m i c struggle and the 'merely cultural' q u e e r struggle 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 regime,
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 , to absorb
them 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
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
3
s a m e d e s t i n y awaits q u e e r d e m a n d s ? " ' 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
ent sexual practices and identities (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 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 a
passionate fight for the assertion o f the Truth that enthuses 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 and
w o m e n . . .) m a d e him into a proto-Leninist militant fighting 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 to
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 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 ' 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 and
'proletariat' 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 Truth,
t h i s l i n k is n o t a d e t e r m i n i n g c a u s a l c o n n e c t i o n , a n d t h e two l e v e l s m u s t
b e strictly d i s t i n g u i s h e d : to b e a ' p r o l e t a r i a n ' involves a s s u m i n g a c e r t a i n
subjective stance ( o f class s t r u g g l e d e s t i n e d to achieve the Redemption
t h r o u g h R e v o l u t i o n ) w h i c h , i n p r i n c i p l e , c a n b e a d o p t e d b y any i n d i v i d u a l
- to p u t it in religious terms, irrespective o f his ( g o o d ) works, any
i n d i v i d u a l c a n b e ' t o u c h e d b y G r a c e ' a n d i n t e r p e l l a t e d as a p r o l e t a r i a n
s u b j e c t . T h e l i n e t h a t s e p a r a t e s t h e two o p p o s i n g s i d e s in t h e c l a s s s t r u g g l e
is t h e r e f o r e n o t ' o b j e c t i v e ' , i t is n o t t h e l i n e s e p a r a t i n g two p o s i t i v e s o c i a l
g r o u p s , b u t u l t i m a t e l y radically subjective — it i n v o l v e s t h e p o s i t i o n i n d i v i d
uals a s s u m e towards the Truth-Event. Subjectivity and universalism are
t h u s n o t o n l y n o t e x c l u s i v e , b u t two s i d e s o f t h e s a m e c o i n : it is p r e c i s e l y
b e c a u s e 'class s t r u g g l e ' i n t e r p e l l a t e s individuals to a d o p t t h e s u b j e c t i v e
s t a n c e o f a ' p r o l e t a r i a n ' t h a t its a p p e a l is u n i v e r s a l , a i m i n g at e v e r y o n e
w i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n . T h e d i v i s i o n it m o b i l i z e s is n o t t h e d i v i s i o n b e t w e e n
two w e l l - d e f i n e d s o c i a l g r o u p s , b u t t h e d i v i s i o n , w h i c h r u n s ' d i a g o n a l l y ' t o
the social division in the O r d e r o f B e i n g , b e t w e e n t h o s e w h o r e c o g n i z e
t h e m s e l v e s i n t h e c a l l o f t h e T r u t h - E v e n t , b e c o m i n g its f o l l o w e r s , and
those who deny or ignore it. I n H e g e l e s e , the existence o f the true
Universal (as o p p o s e d to the false 'concrete' Universality o f the all-
encompassing global Order o f Being) is t h a t o f a n e n d l e s s a n d i n c e s
santly divisive s t r u g g l e ; it is u l t i m a t e l y the division between the two
notions ( a n d material practices) o f Universality: those who advocate the
p o s i t i v i t y o f t h e O r d e r o f B e i n g as t h e u l t i m a t e h o r i z o n o f k n o w l e d g e a n d
action, and those who a c c e p t the efficiency o f the d i m e n s i o n o f Truth-
E v e n t i r r e d u c i b l e to ( a n d u n a c c o u n t a b l e in the t e r m s o f ) t h e O r d e r o f
Being.
T h a t is t h e u l t i m a t e g a p t h a t s e p a r a t e s N a z i s m f r o m C o m m u n i s m : i n
N a z i s m , a J e w is u l t i m a t e l y g u i l t y s i m p l y b e c a u s e h e is a J e w , b e c a u s e o f
h i s d i r e c t n a t u r a l p r o p e r t i e s , b e c a u s e o f w h a t h e is; w h i l e e v e n in the
d a r k e s t days o f S t a l i n i s m a m e m b e r o f t h e b o u r g e o i s i e o r a r i s t o c r a c y is
n o t g u i l t y per se, t h a t is, d i r e c t l y b e c a u s e o f h i s s o c i a l s t a t u s - t h e r e is
always a m i n i m u m o f s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n i n v o l v e d ; p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e c l a s s
s t r u g g l e r e l i e s o n t h e s u b j e c t i v e a c t o f d e c i s i o n . I n a p e r v e r t e d way, t h e
very function o f confession in the Stalinist show trial attests to this
difference: for the guilt o f the traitor to b e effective, the a c c u s e d must
c o n f e s s , t h a t is, s u b j e c t i v e l y a s s u m e h i s g u i l t , in c l e a r c o n t r a s t t o N a z i s m ,
w h e r e a n a n a l o g o u s c o n f e s s i o n b y a J e w t h a t h e was p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a p l o t
against Germany would be m e a n i n g l e s s . It is at this point that the
revisionist historians' a r g u m e n t a t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h e Nazi H o l o
caust was already foreshadowed by the Leninist liquidation of the
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 against the Jewish plot was a
repetition/copy o f the Communist class struggle - h o w e v e r , far 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 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 get
the notion o f s o c i e t y as a c o r p o r a t e body threatened by an 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 first
case the gap between Us and Them, the enemy, and the 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 universel is,
like fiadiou's thought, profoundly C h r i s t o l o g i c a l : is n o t the ultimate
'universal singular', the singular individual standing for humanity, Christ
himself? D o e s n o t t h e r e v o l u t i o n o f Christianity lie in t h e fact that, in
a c c o r d a n c e with t h e l o g i c o f ' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e s y m p t o m ' , it o f f e r s as
t h i s s i n g u l a r p o i n t , w h i c h s t a n d s f o r t h e t r u e U n i v e r s a l , n o t w h a t is ' t h e
h i g h e s t o f M a n ' b u t t h e lowest e x c r e m e n t a l r e m a i n d e r - o n l y by identify-
i n g w i t h this r e m a i n d e r , b y imitatio 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 authenticity o f the pathetic 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 moment
we try t o provide the pathetic identification with the symptom, the
a s s e r t i o n o f t h e universel singulier, 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 and the 'postmodern' assertion o f
particular identities reappears 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 its s a t i s f a c t i o n
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 universel flourishes on
bombarding the Police/Power edifice with impossible demands, with
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 demand
i n g that y o u d o this, I a m actually d e m a n d i n g 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 eternal c o m p l a i n t o f revolutionary radicals: o n c e the
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
5 4
modest reformist proposal.
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 opposed
subjects o f the enunciation o f the statement that asserts the universel
singulier- 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 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 excluded
non-part claiming: 'We are the true Universal [the People, Society,
Nation...!]' - this reversal, a l t h o u g h apparently purely symmetrical,
n e v e r p r o d u c e s d i r e c t s y m m e t r i c a l e f f e c t s . W h a t w e e n c o u n t e r h e r e is a
key feature o f t h e m e c h a n i s m that g e n e r a t e s ( i d e o l o g i c a l ) s e m b l a n c e : the
s y m m e t r i c a l reversal that p r o d u c e s an a s y m m e t r i c a l result. In M a r x , for
e x a m p l e , t h e s i m p l e i n v e r s i o n o f t h e ' d e v e l o p e d ' to t h e ' g e n e r a l ' f o r m o f
e q u i v a l e n c e ( f r o m t h e s t a t e i n w h i c h c o m m o d i t y A e x p r e s s e s its v a l u e i n
t h e s e r i e s o f c o m m o d i t i e s B , C, D , E , F . . ., t o t h e s t a t e i n w h i c h c o m m o d
ity A itself expresses - gives body to - the value of commodities
B , C, D , E , F . . . ) g i v e s rise t o t h e e f f e c t o f f e t i s h i s m ; t h a t is, it c o n f e r s o n
A the aura o f a c o m m o d i t y that has to possess s o m e mysterious ingredient
e n a b l i n g it t o f u n c t i o n as t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f all t h e o t h e r s .
H e g e l also o f t e n b r i n g s a b o u t t h e d e e p e s t speculative shift, a c h a n g e in
t h e w h o l e terrain o f t h o u g h t , by m e a n s o f a s i m p l e s y m m e t r i c a l inversion.
The s t a t e m e n t ' T h e S e l f is t h e S u b s t a n c e ' is i n n o way e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e
s t a t e m e n t ' T h e S u b s t a n c e is t h e S e l f : t h e first a s s e r t s t h e s i m p l e s u b o r d i
n a t i o n o f t h e S e l f t o t h e S u b s t a n c e ( ' I r e c o g n i z e m y s e l f as b e l o n g i n g t o
my social S u b s t a n c e ' ) , while the s e c o n d involves the subjectivization o f
t h e S u b s t a n c e i t s e l f . L o u i s X I V d i d n o t say: ' I a m t h e S t a t e ' ; w h a t h e s a i d
was: 'L'Etat e'est mot: o n l y in t h e s e c o n d v e r s i o n is t h e f i n i t e S e l f p o s i t e d
as t h e t r u t h o f t h e S u b s t a n c e itself, s o t h a t w h e n L o u i s X I V issues a
d e c r e e , it is n o t o n l y h i m ( t h i s finite i n d i v i d u a l ) w h o is s p e a k i n g , it is t h e
S u b s t a n c e itself which speaks t h r o u g h h i m (in the precise sense o f the
L a c a n i a n 'moi, la verite, parte). T h e r e i n , in t h e n e c e s s i t y o f this reversal,
lies o n e o f H e g e l ' s c r u c i a l i n s i g h t s : t h e a p p a r e n t l y modest gesture of
asserting the subordination (the belonging) o f subject to Substance
s o o n e r o r l a t e r r e v e a l s i t s e l f as s t a n d i n g f o r its e x a c t o p p o s i t e , f o r the
subjectivization o f the Substance itself. T h e r e i n a l s o lies t h e core of
C h r i s t i a n i t y : n o t o n l y is m a n d i v i n e , God Himself has to become man ( w i t h all
the latter's finite a t t r i b u t e s ) . F o r t h a t s a m e r e a s o n , 'life is a n i l l u s i o n ' is
n o t t h e s a m e as ' i l l u s i o n is l i f e ' : 'life is a n i l l u s i o n ' s t a n d s f o r t h e B a r o q u e
attitude o f the m e l a n c h o l i c awareness o f t h e illusory c h a r a c t e r o f terres
t r i a l life (d la C a l d e r o n ) , w h i l e ' i l l u s i o n is l i f e ' i n v o l v e s a p o s i t i v e N i e t z -
s c h e a n a t t i t u d e o f fully e m b r a c i n g a n d a s s e r t i n g t h e g a m e o f a p p e a r a n c e s
against the 'nihilist' search for a t r a n s c e n d e n t 'true' r e a l i t y - o r , if we
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 traumatic kernel in psychoanalysis: denegation, disavowal,
repression stricto sensu ( c o i n c i d i n g with the return o f the repressed),
f o r e c l o s u r e . . . why?
A l t h o u g h t h e s e a u t h o r s m a d e i m p o r t a n t p r o g r e s s with r e g a r d to t h e i r
Althusserian starting point (their everlasting merit is t h a t they went
forward f r o m A l t h u s s e r w i t h o u t allowing t h e m s e l v e s to b e i m m e r s e d in
t h e p o s t m o d e r n a n d / o r d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t m o r a s s ) , t h e y s e e m t o fall i n t o
the trap o f 'marginalist' politics, a c c e p t i n g the logic o f m o m e n t a r y out
bursts o f an 'impossible' radical politicization that contains the seeds o f
its o w n f a i l u r e a n d h a s t o r e c e d e i n t h e f a c e o f t h e e x i s t i n g O r d e r (the
c o u p l e s o f T r u t h - E v e n t versus O r d e r o f B e i n g ; o f politics versus police; o f
egaliberte v e r s u s i m a g i n a r y u n i v e r s a l i t y ) . T h i s c o m m o n f e a t u r e is c l o s e l y
l i n k e d to t h e r e d u c t i o n o f the s u b j e c t to t h e p r o c e s s o f subjectivization.
W h a t R a n c i e r e a i m s at is t h e p r o c e s s b y m e a n s o f w h i c h a ' p a r t o f n o p a r t '
b e c o m e s i n v o l v e d i n l i t i g a t i o n f o r its p l a c e w i t h i n t h e s o c i a l visibility; w h a t
B a d i o u a i m s at is e n g a g e m e n t g r o u n d e d in fidelity to t h e T r u d i - E v e n t ;
what B a l i b a r a i m s at is a p o l i t i c a l a g e n t insisting o n his 'impossible'
d e m a n d f o r egaliberte a g a i n s t a n y p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f its a c t u a l i z a t i o n . I n all
t h e s e c a s e s , s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n , o f c o u r s e , is n o t t o b e c o n f u s e d w i t h what
Althusser had in m i n d w h e n he elaborated the notion o f ideological
( m i s ) r e c o g n i t i o n a n d i n t e r p e l l a t i o n : h e r e s u b j e c t i v i t y is n o t d i s m i s s e d as a
f o r m o f m i s r e c o g n i t i o n ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , it is a s s e r t e d as t h e m o m e n t i n
which the ontological gap/void b e c o m e s palpable, as a g e s t u r e that
u n d e r m i n e s the positive o r d e r o f B e i n g , o f the differential structure o f
S o c i e t y , o f p o l i t i c s as p o l i c e .
I t is c r u c i a l t o p e r c e i v e t h e l i n k b e t w e e n t h i s r e d u c t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t t o
s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n a n d t h e way t h e t h e o r e t i c a l e d i f i c e o f t h e s e a u t h o r s r e l i e s
o n t h e b a s i c o p p o s i t i o n o f two l o g i c s : la politique/police a n d le politique in
R a n c i e r e ; B e i n g a n d T r u t h - E v e n t in B a d i o u ; even, p e r h a p s , t h e i m a g i n a r y
u n i v e r s a l o r d e r v e r s u s egaliberte i n B a l i b a r . I n all t h e s e c a s e s , t h e s e c o n d
p o i n t is p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l , i n t r o d u c e s t h e g a p in t h e p o s i t i v e o r d e r o f
Being: a situation b e c o m e s 'politicized' when a particular d e m a n d starts
to function as a s t a n d - i n for the impossible Universal. T h u s we have
various forms o f the opposition between Substance a n d Subject, between
a positive ontological order (police, Being, structure) and a gap of
impossibility w h i c h p r e v e n t s a final c l o s u r e o f this o r d e r a n d / o r disturbs
its b a l a n c e . T h e u l t i m a t e r e f e r e n c e o f t h e s e t h r e e f o r m s o f d u a l i t y s e e m s
to b e t h e K a n t i a n o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n t h e c o n s t i t u t e d o r d e r o f o b j e c t i v e
r e a l i t y a n d t h e I d e a o f F r e e d o m t h a t c a n f u n c t i o n o n l y as a r e g u l a t i v e
p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e , s i n c e it is n e v e r o n t o l o g i c a l l y fully a c t u a l i z e d . ' J u s t i c e ' ,
the rectificadon o f the fundamental a n d constitutive ontological injustice
o f t h e u n i v e r s e , is p r e s e n t e d as a n u n c o n d i t i o n a l impossible demand,
p o s s i b l e o n l y a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f its o w n i m p o s s i b i l i t y : t h e m o m e n t
a p o l i t i c a l m o v e m e n t p r e t e n d s fully t o r e a l i z e J u s t i c e , t o t r a n s l a t e i t i n t o
a n a c t u a l s t a t e o f t h i n g s , t o p a s s f r o m t h e s p e c t r a l democratie ci venir to
'actual d e m o c r a c y ' , we a r e in totalitarian c a t a s t r o p h e - i n K a n t i a n t e r m s ,
t h e S u b l i m e c h a n g e s i n t o t h e M o n s t r o u s . . . . O f c o u r s e , t h e s e two l e v e l s
a r e n o t s i m p l y e x t e r n a l : t h e s p a c e f o r t h e p o l i t i c a l T r u t h - E v e n t is o p e n e d
up by t h e s y m p t o m a t i c void in the order o f B e i n g , by t h e necessary
i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n its s t r u c t u r a l order, by the constitutive p r e s e n c e o f a
surnumfraire, o f a n e l e m e n t w h i c h is i n c l u d e d i n t h e t o t a l i t y o f O r d e r ,
a l t h o u g h tirere is n o p r o p e r p l a c e f o r it i n t h i s t o t a l i t y , a n d w h i c h , f o r t h i s
v e r y r e a s o n - s i n c e it is a n e l e m e n t w i t h o u t f u r t h e r p a r t i c u l a r s p e c i f i c a
tions - professes to b e t h e i m m e d i a t e e m b o d i m e n t o f t h e W h o l e . O n t h e
o t h e r h a n d , the properly political intervention endeavours to b r i n g a b o u t
c h a n g e i n t h e o r d e r o f p o l i c e , its r e s t r u c t u r i n g ( s o t h a t w h a t was h i t h e r t o
' i n v i s i b l e ' a n d / o r ' n o n e x i s t e n t ' i n its s p a c e b e c o m e s v i s i b l e ) .
Two Hegelian conclusions should be drawn from this: ( 1 ) t h e very
n o t i o n o f politics involves c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n t h e political a n d a p o l i t i c a l /
p o l i c e - t h a t is, p o l i t i c s is t h e a n t a g o n i s m b e t w e e n p o l i t i c s p r o p e r a n d t h e
apolitical attitude ( ' d i s o r d e r ' a n d O r d e r ) ; ( 2 ) for this r e a s o n , p o l i t i c s ' is
a g e n u s w h i c h is iLs o w n s p e c i e s : w h i c h , u l t i m a t e l y , h a s two s p e c i e s , i t s e l f
a n d its ' c o r p o r a t i s t ' / p o l i c e n e g a t i o n . D e s p i t e t h i s H e g e l i a n twist, h o w e v e r ,
we a r e d e a l i n g h e r e w i t h a l o g i c w h i c h i n c l u d e s its o w n f a i l u r e i n a d v a n c e ,
w h i c h c o n s i d e r s its full s u c c e s s as its u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e , w h i c h s t i c k s t o its
marginal c h a r a c t e r as t h e ultimate sign o f its a u t h e n t i c i t y , and thus
e n t e r t a i n s a n a m b i g u o u s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s its p o l i l i c o - o n t o l o g i c a l o p p o s i t e ,
t h e p o l i c e O r d e r o f B e i n g : i t h a s t o r e f e r t o it, it needs it as t h e b i g e n e m y
( ' P o w e r ' ) w h i c h m u s t b e t h e r e in o r d e r f o r us t o e n g a g e i n o u r m a r g i n a l /
subversive activity - t h e very i d e a o f a c c o m p l i s h i n g a total s u b v e r s i o n o f
t h i s O r d e r ( ' g l o b a l r e v o l u t i o n ' ) is d i s m i s s e d as p r o t o - t o t a l i t a r i a n .
T h i s criticism should not be misread as r e l y i n g o n the traditional
Hegelian opposition o f abstract and c o n c r e t e universality: against the
a s s e r t i o n o f r a d i c a l n e g a t i v i t y as t h e o b v e r s e o f u n i v e r s a l i t y - o f t h e l o g i c
of the Ought that indefinitely postpones its a c t u a l i z a t i o n - I am not
a d v o c a t i n g t h e n e c e s s i t y o f e m b r a c i n g t h e ' c o n c r e t e ' p o s i t i v e o r d e r as t h e
r e a l i z e d S u p r e m e G o o d . T h e H e g e l i a n m o v e h e r e is n o t a r e s i g n e d - h e r o i c
a c c e p t a n c e o f the positive O r d e r as t h e o n l y p o s s i b l e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f
R e a s o n , b u t t o f o c u s o n , to reveal, h o w t h e p o l i c e / p o l i t i c a l O r d e r itself
a l r e a d y r e l i e s o n a s e r i e s o f d i s a v o w e d / m i s r e c o g n i z e d political a c t s , h o w its
f o u n d i n g g e s t u r e is p o l i t i c a l (in t h e r a d i c a l s e n s e o f t h e t e r m , as o p p o s e d
t o p o l i c e ) - i n H e g e l e s e , h o w p o s i t i v e O r d e r is n o t h i n g b u t t h e p o s i t i v a -
tion o f the radical negativity.
L e t us t a k e R a n c i e r e ' s c e n t r a l n o t i o n o f rnesentente ('misapprehension'),
w h i c h o c c u r s w h e n t h e e x c l u d e d / i n v i s i b l e ' p a r t o f n o p a r t ' p o l i t i c i z e s its
p r e d i c a m e n t and disturbs the established police/political structure o f the
s o c i a l s p a c e , its s u b d i v i s i o n i n p a r t s , b y a s s e r t i n g i t s e l f as t h e s t a n d - i n f o r
the W h o l e and d e m a n d i n g t h e r e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f its p a r t i c u l a r position,
that is, a new mode o f its visibility (say, a w o m a n 'politicizes' her
p r e d i c a m e n t t h e m o m e n t s h e p r e s e n t s h e r l i m i t a t i o n t o t h e private family
s p a c e as a c a s e o f political injustice). Does not the ambiguous relationship
b e t w e e n t h e e x p l i c i t p o w e r / p o l i c e d i s c o u r s e a n d its o b s c e n e d o u b l e a l s o
i n v o l v e a k i n d o f nwsentente? Is n o t this o b s c e n e d o u b l e (the publicly
disavowed message ' b e t w e e n the l i n e s ' ) the 'invisible', non-public con
d i t i o n o f p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e p o l i c e a p p a r a t u s ? P o w e r is
t h u s n o t a u n i q u e / f l a t d o m a i n o f visibility, t h e s e l f - t r a n s p a r e n t machine
t o w h i c h t h e ' p e o p l e ' o p p o s e s its d e m a n d to reveal, to a c c e p t into the
public discursive s p a c e , its d e m a n d s - that is, t o reject/subvert the
( n o n - ) i d e n t i c a l s t a t u s it e n j o y s w i t h i n the power/police discourse; the
( a l m o s t ) s y m m e t r i c a l o p p o s i t e to t h i s is the refusal of the public power/police
discourse to 'hear/understand' its own message between the lines, t h e o b s c e n e
s u p p o r t o f its f u n c t i o n i n g - c o n f r o n t e d w i t h it, it r e j e c t s it w i t h c o n t e m p t
as u n w o r t h y o f its d i g n i t y . . . .
What Power 'refuses t o s e c ' is n o t s o m u c h the (non-)part of the
' p e o p l e ' e x c l u d e d f r o m the p o l i c e s p a c e but, r a t h e r , the invisible s u p p o r t
o f its o w n p u b l i c p o l i c e a p p a r a t u s . ( I n t e r m s o f a v u l g a r c l a s s a n a l y s i s :
t h e r e is n o r u l e o f a r i s t o c r a c y w i t h o u t t h e h i d d e n - p u b l i c l y u n a c k n o w l e d
ged - support o f the Lumpenproletariat.) Our point is t h u s that the
m a r g i n a l i s t r a d i c a l r e f u s a l to a s s u m e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r P o w e r ( i n L a c a n e s e ;
its h i d d e n d e m a n d f o r t h e M a s t e r i n t h e g u i s e o f his p u b l i c p r o v o c a t i o n -
see Lacan's diagnosis o f the hysterical character o f the student rebellion
o f M a y ' 6 8 ) is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o ( o r t h e o b v e r s e o f ) P o w e r ' s h i d d e n
l i n k with its o w n d i s a v o w e d o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t — w h a t a truly ' s u b v e r s i v e '
p o l i t i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n h a s t o strive t o i n c l u d e i n t h e p u b l i c s p a c e is a b o v e
all this o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t o n w h i c h t h e P o w e r / P o l i c e itself relies. T h e
o r d e r o f p o l i c e is n e v e r s i m p l y a p o s i t i v e o r d e r : to f u n c t i o n a t all, it h a s to
c h e a t , t o m i s n a m e , a n d s o o n - in short, to engage in politics, t o d o w h a t its
s u b v e r s i v e o p p o n e n t s a r e s u p p o s e d to d o .
In K a n t ' s political thought, the basic p r i n c i p l e (the equivalent o f the
m o r a l c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e ) is t h e ' t r a n s c e n d e n t a l p r i n c i p l e o f p u b l i c i t y ' :
'All a c t s w h i c h c o n c e r n t h e r i g h t s o f o t h e r p e o p l e a n d w h o s e m a x i m d o e s
not coincide, with their publicly announced aim, are w r o n g . . . . All
guiding principles which n e e d publicity (if they are not to miss their goal)
5 5
a r e in a c c o r d with j u s t i c e a n d with p o l i t i c s . ' In the political domain,
w r o n g o r evil is a n a c t w h o s e a c t u a l a i m c o n t r a d i c t s its p u b l i c l y a n n o u n c e d
g o a l : as K a n t e m p h a s i z e s a g a i n a n d a g a i n , e v e n t h e w o r s t t y r a n t p u b l i c l y
pretends to work for the g o o d o f the p e o p l e , while p u r s u i n g his own
power and wealth. W e may put this s a m e m a x i m i n a n e g a t i v e way: a
p o l i t i c s is ' w r o n g ( u n j u s t ) ' w h e n it h o l d s t h a t t h e p u b l i c d i s c l o s u r e o f its
actual motives (or, rather, m a x i m s ) would be self-defeating: even a tyrant
c a n n o t publicly say: ' I a m i m p o s i n g t h i s l a w i n o r d e r t o c r u s h m y e n e m i e s
a n d i n c r e a s e m y w e a l t h . ' - I t is a g a i n s t t h i s b a c k g r o u n d t h a t o n e s h o u l d
locate the thesis on the superego supplement o f public ideological
d i s c o u r s e : t h e s u p e r e g o o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t is p r e c i s e l y t h e s u p p o r t o f
t h e p u b l i c i d e o l o g i c a l t e x t w h i c h , i n o r d e r t o b e o p e r a t i v e , has to remain
publicly disavowed: its p u b l i c a v o w a l is s e l f - d e f e a t i n g . A n d our point is
t h a t s u c h a d i s a v o w a l is c o n s t i t u t i v e o f w h a t R a n c i e r e c a l l s t h e o r d e r o f
'police'.
T h e n o t i o n o f t h e I d e a l o f egaliberte as a r e a l / i m p o s s i b l e u n c o n d i t i o n a l
d e m a n d b e t r a y e d i n its e v e r y p o s i t i v i z a t i o n , a d e m a n d w h i c h c a n a c t u a l i z e
i t s e l f o n l y in t h o s e s h o r t i n t e r m e d i a r y m o m e n t s o f P o w e r / P o l i c e V a c u u m
when the 'people' 'spontaneously' organizes itself outside the official
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e p o l i t i c a l m a c h i n e r y ( s e e t h e f a s c i n a t i o n o f m a n y L e f t i s t s for
' s p o n t a n e o u s c o u n c i l d e m o c r a c y ' in the early, ' a u t h e n t i c ' stages o f t h e
r e v o l u t i o n ) , b r i n g s r a d i c a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y p u r i s t s u n c a n n i l y c l o s e to t h o s e
conservatives who endeavour to p r o v e the necessary and unavoidable
betrayal o r 'regression into terror' o f e v e r y r e v o l u t i o n , as i f t h e only

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 Sendero
Luminoso. O n e is t e m p t e d 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 authentic
i n t h e s e n s e o f fully assuming the consequences 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 the service des biens or o f the p o l i t i c s as P o l i c e ) and the radical,
unconditional demand f o r egaliberte w h i c h s i g n a l s t h e 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, 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 their
demand - this u n c o n d i t i o n a l demand targets the political M a s t e r not
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 and
prefer (publicly or secretly) to avoid the burden o f taking 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 ruthless readiness to make the
necessary compromises or break the letter o f the L a w in order 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 service
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 fighting,
what t h e y a r e p r o v o k i n g with their unconditional demand, 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 for
egaliberte remains within the confines o f the hysterical provocation a i m e d
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 ,
5 6
the conversion o f Truth into B e i n g . 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
ical terms, the fear 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 i n s o m e p r e c e d i n g A c t . There is no Order of Being as a
positive ontologically consistent Whole, t h e false s e m b l a n c e o f s u c h a n 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 heaun-
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 prevents/differs/
displaces the closure o f the ontological edifice: the p r o p e r deconstruction-
ist 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 remain
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 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 SUBJECTIVIZATION AND ITS VICISSITUDES 239
for Kant, absolute negativity designates an impossible moment of the

future, a future which will never turn into the present, for Hegel 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 , s i n c e its w i t h d r a w a l o p e n s up the space for
the minimal (social) organization o f the Present. T h e r e are m a n y names
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 Socrates
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 - 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 grounded
a higher, m o r e rational 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
t h e i r 'false'/distorted unity, that is, in a Universality that effectively privileges s o m e narrow-

p 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', desubjectiv-
ized 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 pre-
political 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 ambiguity-
c 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
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-on-
a-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.
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 subversive
potential o f perversions are s o o n e r o r later l e d to t h e denial of the
F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s . T h i s d e n i a l is t h e o r e t i c a l l y g r o u n d e d in t h e f a c t ,
e m p h a s i z e d by F r e u d himself, that for psychoanalysis, hysteria a n d psycho
sis - not pemersion - o f f e r a way i n t o t h e U n c o n s c i o u s : t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is
not a c c e s s i b l e v i a p e r v e r s i o n s . F o l l o w i n g F r e u d , L a c a n r e p e a t e d l y i n s i s t e d
t h a t p e r v e r s i o n is always a s o c i a l l y c o n s t r u c t i v e a t t i t u d e , w h i l e h y s t e r i a is
m u c h m o r e subversive a n d t h r e a t e n i n g to the p r e d o m i n a n t h e g e m o n y . It
m a y s e e m t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n is t h e o p p o s i t e : d o n ' t p e r v e r t s o p e n l y r e a l i z e
a n d p r a c t i s e w h a t h y s t e r i c s o n l y s e c r e t l y d r e a m a b o u t ? O r , w i t h r e g a r d to
the Master: do hysterics n o t m e r e l y p r o v o k e the M a s t e r in an ambiguous
way w h i c h , in e f f e c t , a m o u n t s to a n a p p e a l a d d r e s s e d to t h e M a s t e r to
assert his authority again and more strongly, while perverts actually
undermine t h e M a s t e r ' s p o s i t i o n ? ( T h i s is h o w o n e u s u a l l y u n d e r s t a n d s
F r e u d ' s t h e s i s t h a t p e r v e r s i o n is t h e n e g a t i v e o f n e u r o s i s . ) T h i s v e r y f a c t ,
h o w e v e r , c o n f r o n t s us w i t h t h e p a r a d o x o f t h e F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s : t h e
U n c o n s c i o u s d o e s not c o n s i s t o f t h e s e c r e t p e r v e r s e s c e n a r i o s w e d a y d r e a m
a b o u t a n d ( i n s o f a r as w e r e m a i n h y s t e r i c s ) s h i r k f r o m r e a l i z i n g , w h i l e
perverts h e r o i c a l l y ' d o it'. W h e n we d o this, w h e n we realize ('act o u t ' )
o u r s e c r e t p e r v e r s e f a n t a s i e s , e v e r y t h i n g is d i s c l o s e d , y e t t h e U n c o n s c i o u s
is s o m e h o w m i s s e d - w h y ?
B e c a u s e t h e F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s is not t h e s e c r e t p h a n t a s m i c c o n t e n t ,
b u t s o m e t h i n g t h a t i n t e r v e n e s in between, in t h e p r o c e s s o f t h e t r a n s l a t i o n /
transposition o f the secret phantasmic c o n t e n t into the text o f the dream
( o r t h e h y s t e r i c a l s y m p t o m ) . T h e U n c o n s c i o u s is t h a t w h i c h , p r e c i s e l y , is
obfuscated b y t h e p h a n t a s m i c s c e n a r i o s t h e p e r v e r t is a c t i n g o u t : t h e p e r
vert, with his c e r t a i n t y a b o u t w h a t b r i n g s e n j o y m e n t , o b f u s c a t e s t h e gap,
the 'burning question', the stumbling block, that 'is' the core o f the
U n c o n s c i o u s . T h e p e r v e r t is t h u s t h e ' i n h e r e n t t r a n s g r e s s o r ' par excellence.
h e b r i n g s to l i g h t , s t a g e s , p r a c t i s e s t h e s e c r e t f a n t a s i e s t h a t s u s t a i n the
predominant public discourse, while the hysterical position precisely
d i s p l a y s d o u b t a b o u t w h e t h e r t h o s e s e c r e t p e r v e r s e f a n t a s i e s a r e ' r e a l l y it'.
H y s t e r i a is n o t s i m p l y t h e b a t t l e g r o u n d b e t w e e n s e c r e t d e s i r e s a n d sym
b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n s ; it a l s o , a n d a b o v e a l l , a r t i c u l a t e s t h e g n a w i n g doubt
w h e t h e r secret desires really c o n t a i n what they p r o m i s e - w h e t h e r our
inability to e n j o y really h i n g e s o n l y o n s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n s . In other
words, the pervert precludes the Unconscious because he knoxvs the
a n s w e r ( t o w h a t b r i n g s puissance, to the O t h e r ) ; h e has n o doubts about
it; h i s p o s i t i o n is u n s h a k e a b l e ; w h i l e t h e h y s t e r i c d o u b t s - t h a t is, h e r
p o s i t i o n is t h a t o f a n e t e r n a l a n d c o n s t i t u t i v e (self-)questioning: W h a t
does the O t h e r want from m e ? W h a t a m I for the O t h e r ? . . .
T h i s o p p o s i t i o n o f p e r v e r s i o n a n d h y s t e r i a is e s p e c i a l l y p e r t i n e n t t o d a y ,
in o u r e r a o f t h e ' d e c l i n e o f O e d i p u s ' , w h e n t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c m o d e o f
s u b j e c t i v i t y is n o l o n g e r the subject integrated into the paternal Law
through symbolic castration, but the 'polymorphously perverse' subject
following t h e s u p e r e g o i n j u n c t i o n to enjoy. T h e q u e s t i o n o f h o w we a r e
to hystericize t h e s u b j e c t c a u g h t in t h e c l o s e d l o o p o f p e r v e r s i o n ( h o w we
are to i n c u l c a t e t h e d i m e n s i o n o f lack a n d q u e s t i o n i n g in h i m ) b e c o m e s
m o r e u r g e n t in view o f today's p o l i t i c a l s c e n e : t h e s u b j e c t o f late capitalist
m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s is p e r v e r s e , w h i l e t h e ' d e m o c r a t i c s u b j e c t ' ( t h e m o d e o f
subjectivity i m p l i e d by t h e m o d e r n d e m o c r a c y ) is i n h e r e n t l y hysterical
(the abstract citizen correlative to the e m p t y place of P o w e r ) . In other
w o r d s , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e bourgeois c a u g h t u p i n m a r k e t m e c h a
n i s m s a n d t h e citoyen e n g a g e d i n t h e u n i v e r s a l p o l i t i c a l s p h e r e is, in its
subjective e c o n o m y , the relationship b e t w e e n perversion a n d hysteria. S o
w h e n R a n c i e r e c a l l s o u r a g e ' p o s t - p o l i t i c a l ' , h e is a i m i n g p r e c i s e l y at t h i s
shift in p o l i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e ( t h e s o c i a l l i n k ) f r o m h y s t e r i a to perversion:
'post-politics' is t h e p e r v e r s e m o d e of administering s o c i a l affairs, the
m o d e deprived o f the 'hystericized' universal/out-of-joint dimension.
O n e o f t e n h e a r s t h e c l a i m t h a t t o d a y h y s t e r i a is n o l o n g e r s c x u a l i z e d
b u t is, r a t h e r , t o b e l o c a t e d i n t h e d o m a i n o f n o n - s e x u a l i z e d v i c t i m i z a t i o n ,
o f the w o u n d o f s o m e traumatic v i o l e n c e that cuts i n t o t h e very soul o f
o u r b e i n g . H o w e v e r , w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h y s t e r i a o n l y i n s o f a r as t h e
victimized s u b j e c t entertains an a m b i g u o u s attitude o f fascination towards
t h e w o u n d , in so f a r as h e s e c r e t l y t a k e s ' p e r v e r s e ' p l e a s u r e in it, in s o f a r
PASSIONATE (DIS) ATTACHMENTS 249
£1 the very s o u r c e o f p a i n e x e r t s a m a g n e t i s m - h y s t e r i a is p r e c i s e l y t h e
name for this s t a n c e o f a m b i v a l e n t f a s c i n a t i o n i n t h e f a c e o f t h e o b j e c t
(hat terrifies a n d r e p e l s u s . A n d t h i s e x c e s s o f p l e a s u r e in p a i n is a n o t h e r
jttame for sexualization: t h e m o m e n t i t is t h e r e , t h e s i t u a t i o n is s e x u a l i z e d ,
t h e s u b j e c t is c a u g h t i n t h e p e r v e r s e l o o p . I n o t h e r w o r d s , o n e s h o u l d
n o n e the less s t i c k to t h e o l d F r e u d i a n t h e s i s o n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l l y s e x u a l
character o f hysteria: wasn't Freud's Dora, the paradigmatic case o f
hysteria, c o n t i n u a l l y c o m p l a i n i n g a b o u t b e i n g victimized by t h e m a n i p u
lations o f h e r father a n d M r K?
W h a t c o m p l i c a t e s t h e issue further is t h a t o n e s h o u l d definitely not
d i r e c d y qualify h o m o s e x u a l i t y ( o r a n y o t h e r s e x u a l p r a c t i c e t h a t v i o l a t e s
the h e t e r o s e x u a l n o r m ) a s a ' p e r v e r s i o n ' . T h e q u e s t i o n t o b e a s k e d is,
rather: h o w is t h e f a c t o f h o m o s e x u a l i t y inscribed into the subject's
s y m b o l i c u n i v e r s e ? W h a t s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e s u s t a i n s it? T h e r e d e f i n i t e l y is
a perverse h o m o s e x u a l i t y ( t h e m a s o c h i s t o r s a d i s t p r e t e n d i n g to possess
k n o w l e d g e a b o u t w h a t p r o v i d e s puissance t o t h e O t h e r ) ; b u t t h e r e is a l s o
a hysterical h o m o s e x u a l i t y ( o p t i n g for it in o r d e r to c o n f r o n t t h e e n i g m a
of ' W h a t a m I f o r t h e O t h e r ? W h a t d o e s t h e O t h e r w a n t ( f r o m m e ) ? ' , a n d
so o n . S o , f o r L a c a n , t h e r e is n o d i r e c t c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n forms o f
sexual p r a c t i c e (gay, lesbian, straight) a n d t h e ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' subjective
symbolic economy (perverse, hysterical, p s y c h o t i c ) . L e t us take the
e x t r e m e c a s e o f c o p r o p h a g y ( e a t i n g e x c r e m e n t ) : e v e n s u c h a p r a c t i c e is
n o t n e c e s s a r i l y ' p e r v e r s e ' , s i n c e it c a n w e l l b e i n s c r i b e d i n t o a h y s t e r i c a l
economy - that is t o say, it c a n w e l l f u n c t i o n as a n e l e m e n t o f the
hysterical provocation a n d q u e s t i o n i n g o f t h e O t h e r ' s desire: what i f I e a t
shit i n o r d e r t o t e s t h o w I s t a n d with r e g a r d t o t h e O t h e r ' s d e s i r e - will h e
still l o v e m e w h e n h e s e e s m e d o i n g it? W i l l h e finally a b a n d o n m e as h i s
o b j e c t ? I t c a n a l s o f u n c t i o n as p s y c h o t i c if, say, t h e s u b j e c t i d e n t i f i e s h i s
p a r t n e r ' s s h i t as t h e m i r a c u l o u s D i v i n e s u b s t a n c e , s o t h a t by s w a l l o w i n g it
he g e t s in t o u c h w i t h G o d , r e c e i v e s H i s e n e r g y . O r , o f c o u r s e , it c a n
f u n c t i o n as p e r v e r s i o n i f t h e s u b j e c t , w h i l e d o i n g it, a s s u m e s t h e p o s i t i o n
o f t h e o b j e c t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e O t h e r ' s d e s i r e ( i f h e d o e s it i n o r d e r t o
generate enjoyment in his p a r t n e r ) .
On a more general l e v e l , it is i n t e r e s t i n g lo note how, when one
describes new p h e n o m e n a , o n e as a r u l e o v e r l o o k s t h e i r predominant
hysterical functioning a n d prefers the allegedly m o r e 'radical' perverse o r
psychotic functioning. Say, in t h e case o f cyberspace, we are bombarded
with i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w h i c h e m p h a s i z e h o w c y b e r s p a c e o p e n s u p t h e p o s s i
bility o f p o l y m o r p h o u s p e r v e r s e p l a y i n g w i t h a n d p e r m a n e n t r e s h a p i n g o f
o n e ' s symbolic identity, o r h o w it involves a r e g r e s s i o n to t h e psychotic
i n c e s t u o u s i m m e r s i o n i n t o t h e S c r e e n as t h e m a t e r n a l T h i n g t h a t swallows
us, d e p r i v i n g us o f t h e c a p a c i t y o f s y m b o l i c d i s t a n c e a n d r e f l e c t i o n . I t c a n ,
h o w e v e r , b e a r g u e d t h a t t h e m o s t c o m m o n r e a c t i o n o f all o f us w h e n w e
a r e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h c y b e r s p a c e is still t h a t o f h y s t e r i c a l p e r p l e x i t y , o f
p e r m a n e n t q u e s t i o n i n g : ' H o w d o I s t a n d w i t h r e s p e c t t o this a n o n y m o u s
O t h e r ? W h a t d o e s I t w a n t f r o m m e ? W h a t g a m e is it p l a y i n g w i t h m e ? ' . . .
W i t h r e g a r d to this c r u c i a l o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n hysteria a n d p e r v e r s i o n ,
i t is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e t h a t A d o r n o ' s Philosophy of the New Music, that
m a s t e r p i e c e o f the dialectical analysis o f the 'class struggle in music',
resorts to t h e clinical c a t e g o r i e s of, precisely, hysteria a n d p e r v e r s i o n in
o r d e r t o e l a b o r a t e t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f t h e two f u n d a m e n t a l tendencies in
modern music, designated by the names Schoenberg and Stravinsky:
S c h o e n b e r g ' s 'progressive' m u s i c displays the c l e a r features o f an e x t r e m e
hysterical tension (anxiety-laden reactions to traumatic e n c o u n t e r s ) ; while
S t r a v i n s k y , in h i s p a s t i c h e - l i k e t r a v e r s i n g o f a l l p o s s i b l e m u s i c a l styles,
d i s p l a y s n o less c l e a r f e a t u r e s o f p e r v e r s i o n , t h a t is, o f r e n o u n c i n g the
d i m e n s i o n o f subjectivity p r o p e r , o f a d o p t i n g t h e stance o f e x p l o i t i n g the
polymorphous m u l t i t u d e , with n o r e a l s u b j e c t i v e e n g a g e m e n t w i t h any
specific c l e m e n t o r m o d e .
A n d - to give this o p p o s i t i o n a p h i l o s o p h i c a l twist - o n e is t e m p t e d t o
c l a i m that this fidelity t o t h e t r u t h o f h y s t e r i a a g a i n s t t h e p e r v e r t ' s false
t r a n s g r e s s i o n is w h a t l e d L a c a n , i n t h e l a s t y e a r s o f h i s t e a c h i n g , t o c l a i m
p a t h e t i c a l l y : ' I r e b e l a g a i n s t p h i l o s o p h y [fe m'insurge contre la philosophie].'
A p r o p o s o f this g e n e r a l c l a i m , t h e L e n i n i s t q u e s t i o n s h o u l d be asked
i m m e d i a t e l y : w h i c h ( s i n g u l a r ) p h i l o s o p h y d i d L a c a n have in m i n d ; w h i c h
p h i l o s o p h y was, f o r h i m , a s t a n d - i n f o r p h i l o s o p h y ' a s s u c h ' ? F o l l o w i n g a
s u g g e s t i o n by F r a n c o i s R e g n a u l t ( w h o draws a t t e n t i o n to the fact that
L a c a n m a d e t h i s s t a t e m e n t i n 1 9 7 5 , i n t h e w a k e o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f Anti-
1
Oedipus ), o n e could argue that the p h i l o s o p h y actually u n d e r fire, far
f r o m s t a n d i n g f o r s o m e t r a d i t i o n a l H e g e l i a n m e t a p h y s i c s , is n o n e other
than that o f Gilles D e l e u z e , a p h i l o s o p h e r o f globalized perversion if ever
there was o n e . T h a t is t o say, is n o t Deleuze's critique o f 'Oedipal'
7
psychoanalysis an e x e m p l a r ) case o f t h e perverse rejection o f hysteria?
Against the hysterical subject w h o maintains an ambiguous attitude
towards symbolic authority (like the psychoanalyst who acknowledges the
p a t h o l o g i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f ' r e p r e s s i o n ' , b u t n o n e the less c l a i m s that
' r e p r e s s i o n ' is t h e c o n d i t i o n o f c u l t u r a l p r o g r e s s , s i n c e o u t s i d e s y m b o l i c
a u t h o r i t y t h e r e is o n l y t h e p s y c h o t i c v o i d ) , t h e p e r v e r t b r a v e l y g o e s t o t h e
l i m i t i n u n d e r m i n i n g t h e v e r y f o u n d a t i o n s o f s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y a n d fully
e n d o r s i n g the multiple productivity o f prc-symbolit libidinal flux . . . for
PASSIONATE ( D I S ) ATTACHMENTS 251
L a c a n , o f c o u r s e , t h i s ' a n t i - O e d i p a l ' r a d i c a l i z a t i o n o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is t h e
very m o d e l o f t h e trap to b e a v o i d e d at a n y cost: t h e m o d e l o f false
s u b v e r s i v e r a d i c a l i z a t i o n t h a t fits t h e e x i s t i n g p o w e r c o n s t e l l a t i o n p e r f e c t l y .
In other words, for L a c a n , the philosopher's i a d i c a l i t y ' , his fearless
q u e s t i o n i n g o f all p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , is t h e m o d e l o f t h e f a l s e t r a n s g r e s s i v e
radicalily.
F o r F o u c a u l t , a p e r v e r s e p h i l o s o p h e r i f e v e r t h e r e was o n e , t h e r e l a t i o n
ship between prohibition and desire is c i r c u l a r , a n d one o f absolute
i m m a n e n c e : power a n d resistance (counter-power) presuppose and gen
e r a t e e a c h o t h e r - t h a t is, t h e v e r y p r o h i b i t i v e m e a s u r e s t h a t c a t e g o r i z e
and r e g u l a t e illicit desires effectively g e n e r a t e them. Simply recall the
proverbial figure o f the early Christian ascetic who, in his detailed
description o f situations to b e avoided, since they provoke sexual tempta
tions, displays an e x t r a o r d i n a r y k n o w l e d g e o f b o w s e d u c t i o n works ( o f
how a simple smile, a glance, a defensive gesture o f the hands, a d e m a n d
f o r h e l p , c a n c a n y a s e x u a l i n n u e n d o . . . ) . T h e p r o b l e m h e r e is t h a t , a f t e r
insisting that t h e disciplinary p o w e r m e c h a n i s m s p r o d u c e t h e very o b j e c t
o n w h i c h t h e y e x e r t t h e i r f o r c e ( t h e s u b j e c t is n o t o n l y that w h i c h is
oppressed by t h e power but emerges h i m s e l f as t h e product o f this
oppression) -
T h e man described for us, whom we are invited to free, is already in himself t h e
effect of a subjection [assujetlissement] m u c h m o r e profound than himself. A
'soul' inhabits him and brings him to e x i s t e n c e , which is itself a factor in the
mastery that power exercises over the bodv. T h e soul is the effect a n d instru
ment o f a political autonomy; the soul is the prison o f the body.-
- 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 that this absolute

continuity o f resistance to power is n o t enough to 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 and
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' in
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 the
culpabilizing universal moral order. 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 to his
cynical description o f power relations after the Fall, w h e r e power and
3
resistance overlap.
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 Sexuality,

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 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 of
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 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 effect
(legal and criminal measures engender their own forms of 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. Foucault's ultimate example would have been the
nineteenth-century workers' m o v e m e n t for the 'liberation o f work': as
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 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
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' is
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 can
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 bypass
ing the level of subjectivization' ( t h a t is, t h e w h o l e problematic 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 History
of Sexuality), 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, how thev
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 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.
4
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 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
5
pleasure. . . , 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 anti-
d i a l e c t i c i a n par excellence, 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 us
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 and
harassment (we l e a r n that 'fat', 'stupid', 'short-sighted' . . . are to be

replaced by 'weight-challenged', etc.); the catch is, r a t h e r , that 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 power
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 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 pre
existing positive B o d y in which one could 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 is t o say: t h e standard Habermasian argument against
Foucault and 'post-structuralists' 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 any
normative standard e x e m p t from the c o n t i n g e n t historical context, they
are unable to ground resistance to the existing power edifice. 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 repressive' disciplinary m e c h
anisms themselves o p e n up 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 they
generate a surplus in their object. Although the reference to some
F e m i n i n e Essence (from t h e E t e r n a l F e m i n i n e to m o r e 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 foundation
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 . 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 .
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 is t h i s
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 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 self-
a 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 the ideological
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 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 may appear Eurocentrist, c o n d e m n i n g the colon
ized to repeat the 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
o p p o s i t e r e a d i n g . T h a t is t o say: i f w e g r o u n d o u r r e s i s t a n c e t o i m p e r i a l i s t
E u r o c e n t r i s m in t h e r e f e r e n c e to s o m e k e r n e l o f p r e v i o u s e t h n i c identity,
we a u t o m a t i c a l l y a d o p t t h e p o s i d o n o f a victim resisting modernization,
o f a p a s s i v e o b j e c t o n w h i c h i m p e r i a l i s t p r o c e d u r e s w o r k . If, h o w e v e r , w e
conceive our r e s i s t a n c e as a n excess that results from t h e way brutal
imperialist intervention disturbed o u r previous self-enclosed identity, o u r
p o s i t i o n b e c o m e s m u c h s t r o n g e r , s i n c e w e c a n c l a i m t h a t o u r r e s i s t a n c e is
grounded in t h e i n h e r e n t d y n a m i c s o f the i m p e r i a l i s t system - t h a t the
i m p e r i a l i s t s y s t e m itself, t h r o u g h its i n h e r e n t antagonism, activates the
forces t h a t will b r i n g about its d e m i s e . ( T h e situation here is s t r i c t l y
h o m o l o g o u s t o t h a t o f h o w t o g r o u n d f e m i n i n e r e s i s t a n c e : i f w o m a n is ' a
s y m p t o m o f m a n ' , t h e locus at w h i c h t h e i n h e r e n t a n t a g o n i s m s o f the
p a t r i a r c h a l s y m b o l i c o r d e r e m e r g e , t h i s i n n o way c o n s t r a i n s t h e s c o p e o f
f e m i n i s t r e s i s t a n c e b u t p r o v i d e s it with a n e v e n s t r o n g e r d e t o n a t i n g f o r c e . )
Or - to put it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - the premiss according to which
r e s i s t a n c e t o p o w e r is i n h e r e n t a n d i m m a n e n t t o t h e p o w e r e d i f i c e ( i n
the sense that it is g e n e r a t e d by the inherent dynamic o f the power
e d i f i c e ) i n n o way o b l i g e s us t o d r a w t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t e v e r y r e s i s t a n c e
is c o - o p t e d i n a d v a n c e , i n c l u d e d i n t h e e t e r n a l g a m e P o w e r plays w i t h
itself - the key point is t h a t through the effect o f proliferation, of
producing an e x c e s s o f r e s i s t a n c e , t h e very i n h e r e n t antagonism of a
s y s t e m m a y well s e t i n m o t i o n a p r o c e s s w h i c h l e a d s t o its o w n ultimate
7
downfall.
I t s e e m s t h a t s u c h a n o t i o n o f a n t a g o n i s m is w h a t F o u c a u l t l a c k s : f r o m
t h e f a c t t h a t e v e r y r e s i s t a n c e is g e n e r a t e d ( ' p o s i t e d ' ) b y t h e P o w e r e d i f i c e
itself, f r o m t h i s a b s o l u t e i n h e r e n c e o f r e s i s t a n c e to P o w e r , h e s e e m s t o
d r a w t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t r e s i s t a n c e is c o - o p t e d i n a d v a n c e , t h a t it c a n n o t
s e r i o u s l y u n d e r m i n e t h e s y s t e m - t h a t is, h e p r e c l u d e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t
t h e s y s t e m itself, o n a c c o u n t o f its i n h e r e n t i n c o n s i s t e n c y , m a y g i v e b i r t h
t o a f o r c e w h o s e e x c e s s it is n o l o n g e r a b l e t o m a s t e r a n d w h i c h thus
d e t o n a t e s its u n i t y , its c a p a c i t y t o r e p r o d u c e itself. I n s h o r t , F o u c a u l t d o e s
n o t c o n s i d e r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a n e f f e c t e s c a p i n g , o u t g r o w i n g its c a u s e , s o
t h a t a l t h o u g h it e m e r g e s as a f o r m o f r e s i s t a n c e t o p o w e r a n d is as s u c h
a b s o l u t e l y i n h e r e n t t o it, it c a n o u t g r o w a n d e x p l o d e it. ( T h e p h i l o s o p h i
c a l p o i n t t o b e m a d e h e r e is t h a t t h i s is t h e f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f the
d i a l e c t i c a l - m a t e r i a l i s t n o t i o n o f ' e f f e c t ' : t h e e f f e c t c a n ' o u t d o ' its c a u s e ; it
can be ontologically 'higher' than its c a u s e . ) O n e is t h u s t e m p t e d to
reverse the Foucauldian notion o f an all-encompassing power edifice
w h i c h a l w a y s - a l r c a d y c o n t a i n s its t r a n s g r e s s i o n , t h a t w h i c h a l l e g e d l y e l u d e s
it: w h a t i f t h e p r i c e t o b e p a i d is t h a t t h e p o w e r m e c h a n i s m c a n n o t e v e n
c o n t r o l itself, b u t h a s t o r e l y o n a n o b s c e n e p r o t u b e r a n c e a t its v e r y h e a r t ?
I n o t h e r w o r d s : w h a t e f f e c t i v e l y e l u d e s t h e c o n t r o l l i n g g r a s p o f P o w e r is
n o t s o m u c h t h e e x t e r n a l I n - i t s e l f it t r i e s t o d o m i n a t e b u t , r a t h e r , the
8
o b s c e n e s u p p l e m e n t w h i c h s u s t a i n s its o w n o p e r a t i o n .
A n d t h i s is w h y F o u c a u l t l a c k s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n o d o n o f the subject:
the s u b j e c t is b y d e f i n i t i o n i n e x c e s s o v e r its c a u s e , a n d as s u c h it e m e r g e s
with t h e reversal o f t h e r e p r e s s i o n o f sexuality i n t o t h e s e x u a l i z a t i o n o f
the r e p r e s s i v e m e a s u r e s t h e m s e l v e s . T h i s i n s u f f i c i e n c y o f F o u c a u l t ' s t h e o r
e t i c a l e d i f i c e c a n b e d i s c e r n e d i n t h e way, i n h i s e a r l y History of Madness,
h e is a l r e a d y o s c i l l a t i n g b e t w e e n two r a d i c a l l y o p p o s e d views: t h e view t h a t
madness is n o t s i m p l y a p h e n o m e n o n that exists in itself a n d is o n l y
s e c o n d a r i l y t h e o b j e c t o f d i s c o u r s e s , b u t is itself t h e p r o d u c t o f a m u l t i t u d e
o f ( m e d i c a l , l e g a l , b i o l o g i c a l . . . ) d i s c o u r s e s a b o u t itself; a n d t h e o p p o s i t e
view, a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h o n e s h o u l d 'liberate' madness from the hold
e x e r t e d o v e r it b y t h e s e d i s c o u r s e s , a n d ' l e t m a d n e s s i t s e l f s p e a k V
Ideological Interpellation
T h e w o r k o f J u d i t h B u t l e r is o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t h e r e : w h i l e s h e t a k e s as
h e r s t a r t i n g p o i n t t h e F o u c a u l d i a n a c c o u n t o f s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n as s u b j e c
tion through performative disciplinatory practices, she none the less
p e r c e i v e s t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d flaws i n F o u c a u l t ' s e d i f i c e , a n d endeavours
t o s u p p l e m e n t it by r e f e r e n c e t o a s e r i e s o f o t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l c o n c e p t s a n d
e d i f i c e s , f r o m H e g e l via p s y c h o a n a l y s i s t o A l t h u s s e r ' s n o t i o n o f i d e o l o g i c a l
i n t e r p e l l a t i o n as c o n s t i t u t i v e o f s u b j e c t i v i t y , c o m b i n i n g all i h e s e r e f e r e n c e s
i n a way w h i c h is far f r o m t h e e c l e c t i c m o n s t r o s i t y u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as
'creative synthesis'.
In h e r reading o f the Hegelian dialectics o f lord and b o n d s m a n , Butler
f o c u s e s o n t h e h i d d e n c o n t r a c t b e t w e e n t h e two: ' t h e i m p e r a t i v e to t h e
b o n d s m a n consists in the f o l l o w i n g f o r m u l a t i o n : y o u b e m y b o d y for m e ,
1
b u t d o n o t l e t m e k n o w t h a t t h e b o d y t h a t y o u a r e is m y b o d y ' . " T h e
d i s a v o w a l o n t h e p a r t o f t h e l o r d is t h u s d o u b l e : first, t h e l o r d d i s a v o w s
h i s o w n b o d y , h e p o s e s as a d i s e m b o d i e d d e s i r e a n d c o m p e l s t h e b o n d s
m a n t o a c t as h i s b o d y ; s e c o n d l y , t h e b o n d s m a n h a s t o d i s a v o w t h e fact
t h a t h e a c t s m e r e l y as t h e l o r d ' s b o d y a n d a c t as a n a u t o n o m o u s a g e n t , as
i f t h e b o n d s m a n ' s b o d i l y l a b o u r i n g f o r t h e l o r d is n o t i m p o s e d o n him
b u t is h i s a u t o n o m o u s activity. . . This structure o f double (and thereby
self-effacing) disavowal also expresses the patriarchal matrix of the
r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n m a n a n d w o m a n : i n a first m o v e , w o m a n is p o s i t e d
as a m e r e p r o j e c t i o n / r e f l e c t i o n o f m a n , h i s i n s u b s t a n t i a l s h a d o w , h y s t e r i
c a l l y i m i t a t i n g b u t n e v e r a b l e r e a l l y t o a c q u i r e t h e m o r a l s t a t u r e o f a fully
c o n s t i t u t e d self-identical subjectivity; however, this status o f a m e r e reflec
tion has itself to b e disavowed and the w o m a n provided with a false
a u t o n o m y , as i f s h e a c t s as s h e d o e s w i t h i n the logic o f patriarchy on
a c c o u n t o f h e r own a u t o n o m o u s logic ( w o m e n are 'by nature' submissive,
c o m p a s s i o n a t e , s e l f - s a c r i f i c i n g . . . ) . T h e p a r a d o x n o t t o b e m i s s e d h e r e is
that the bondsman ( s e r v a n t ) is all t h e m o r e the servant, the m o r e he
( m i s ) p e r c e i v e s h i s p o s i t i o n as t h a t o f a n a u t o n o m o u s a g e n t ; a n d t h e s a m e
g o e s f o r w o m a n - t h e u l t i m a t e f o r m o f h e r s e r v i t u d e is t o ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e
h e r s e l f , w h e n s h e a c t s i n a ' f e m i n i n e ' s u b m i s s i v e - c o m p a s s i o n a t e way, as a n
a u t o n o m o u s agent. For that reason, the W e i n i n g e r i a n ontological denigra
t i o n o f w o m a n as a m e r e ' s y m p t o m ' o f m a n — as t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f m a l e
f a n t a s y , as t h e h y s t e r i c a l i m i t a t i o n o f t r u e m a l e s u b j e c t i v i t y - is, w h e n it is
o p e n l y a d m i t t e d a n d fully a c c e p t e d , f a r m o r e s u b v e r s i v e t h a n t h e false
direct assertion o f feminine a u t o n o m y - perhaps the ultimate feminist
s t a t e m e n t is to p r o c l a i m o p e n l y : ' I d o n o t e x i s t i n m y s e l f , I a m m e r e l y t h e
O t h e r ' s fantasy e m b o d i e d ' .
T h e s a m e holds for the relationship b e t w e e n t h e subject a n d the Ins
titution: the b u r e a u c r a t i c / s y m b o l i c Institution n o t only r e d u c e s the sub
j e c t t o its m o u t h p i e c e , b u t a l s o w a n t s t h e s u b j e c t t o d i s a v o w t h e f a c t t h a t
h e is m e r e l y its m o u t h p i e c e a n d t o ( p r e t e n d t o ) a c t as a n autonomous
a g e n t - a p e r s o n with a h u m a n t o u c h a n d p e r s o n a l i t y , n o t j u s t a faceless
b u r e a u c r a t . T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is n o t o n l y t h a t s u c h a n a u t o n o m i z a t i o n
is d o u b l y f a l s e , s i n c e it i n v o l v e s a d o u b l e d i s a v o w a l , b u t a l s o t h a t t h e r e is
n o subject prior to the Institution (prior to language as t h e ultimate
i n s t i t u t i o n ) : s u b j e c t i v i t y is p r o d u c e d as t h e v o i d i n t h e v e r y s u b m i s s i o n o f
t h e l i f e - s u b s t a n c e o f t h e R e a l t o t h e I n s t i t u t i o n . If, t h e n - as A l t h u s s e r
w o u l d h a v e p u t it - t h e p e r c e p t i o n that, p r i o r to i n t e r p e l l a t i o n , the s u b j e c t
is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y there is p r e c i s e l y t h e effect and p r o o f o f successful
interpellation, does not the Lacanian assertion o f a subject prior to
interpellation/subjectivization repeat the very ideological illusion that
A l l h u s s e r e n d e a v o u r s to d e n o u n c e ? O r - to take a n o t h e r a s p e c t o f the
s a m e c r i t i c a l a r g u m e n t - in s o f a r as i d e o l o g i c a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s u c c e e d s
p r e c i s e l y i n a s m u c h as I p e r c e i v e m y s e l f as a 'full h u m a n person' who
' c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to a p u p p e t , to an i n s t r u m e n t o f s o m e ideological big
O t h e r ' , is n o t t h e t h e s i s o n i n t e r p e l l a t i o n ' s n e c e s s a r y ' f a i l u r e t h e v e r y s i g n
o f its u l t i m a t e s u c c e s s ? A n i n t e r p e l l a t i o n s u c c e e d s p r e c i s e l y w h e n I p e r
c e i v e m y s e l f as ' n o t o n l y that.' but a 'complex person who, among other
things, is a l s o that' - in short, imaginary' distance 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 which constitutes my symbolic identity nor the
phantasmic object, that 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,
r a t h e r , is t h a t o f subject ivization: h o w d o i n d i v i d u a l s t h e m s e l v e s s u b j e c t i v i z e
t h e i r c o n d i t i o n , h o w d o t h e y e x p e r i e n c e t h e m s e l v e s as s u b j e c t s ? I f I a m
i n s c r i b e d i n t o a s e c r e t s t a t e file w i t h o u t b e i n g a w a r e o f it, this simply
d o e s n ' t c o n c e r n m y s u b j e c t i v i t y . M u c h m o r e i n t e r e s t i n g is t h e opposite
case, in w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f in t h e call o f a n O t h e r w h i c h
'doesn't exist' - say, in t h e Call o f G o d : Althusser's p o i n t is t h a t my
r e c o g n i t i o n i n t h e i n t e r p e l l a t i v e c a l l o f t h e O t h e r is p e r f o r m a t i v e i n the
s e n s e t h a t , i n t h e v e r y g e s t u r e o f r e c o g n i t i o n , it constitutes ( o r ' p o s i t s ' ) this
big O t h e r - G o d ' e x i s t s ' i n s o f a r as b e l i e v e r s r e c o g n i z e t h e m s e l v e s as
h e a r i n g a n d ( d i s ) o b e y i n g H i s C a l l ; t h e S t a l i n i s t p o l i t i c i a n e x e r t s his p o w e r
i n s o f a r as h e r e c o g n i z e s h i m s e l f as i n t e r p e l l a t e d b y t h e b i g O t h e r o f
History, serving its P r o g r e s s ; a democratic politician who 'serves the
p e o p l e ' constitutes the a g e n c y ( P e o p l e ) t h e r e f e r e n c e to w h i c h legitimizes
h i s activity.
If, t h e n , t o d a y , in t h e g u i s e o f d e t a i l e d d a t a b a s e s t h a t c i r c u l a t e i n t h e
c o r p o r a t e c y b e r s p a c e a n d d e t e r m i n e what we effectively are for the big
1 2
O t h e r o f the power structure - t h a t is, h o w o u r s y m b o l i c i d e n t i t y is
c o n s t r u c t e d - a n d w e a r e i n this s e n s e ' i n t e r p e l l a t e d ' b y i n s t i t u t i o n s e v e n
w i t h o u t b e i n g a w a r e o f it, o n e s h o u l d n e v e r t h e l e s s i n s i s t t h a t t h i s ' o b j e c t i v e
i n t e r p e l l a t i o n ' actually affects m y subjectivity o n l y by m e a n s o f t h e fact
t h a t / myself urn well aware of how, outside the grasp of my knowledge, databases
circulate which determine my symbolic identity in the eyes of the social 'big Other'.
M y v e r y a w a r e n e s s o f t h e f a c t t h a t ' t h e t r u t h is o u t t h e r e ' , t h a t files o n m e
circulate which, even if they are factually 'inaccurate', none the less
performatively determine m y s o c i o - s y m b o l i c s t a t u s , is w h a t gives r i s e t o
the specific proto-paranoiac mode o f subjectivization characteristic o f
t o d a y ' s s u b j e c t : it c o n s t i t u t e s m e as a s u b j e c t i n h e r e n t l y r e l a t e d t o and
h a s s l e d by a n e l u s i v e p i e c e o f d a t a b a s e i n w h i c h , b e y o n d m y r e a c h , ' m y
f a t e is writ l a r g e ' .
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 ' )
1 1
which p r e d e t e r m i n e s the space within which the subject can only exist?
S h e is well a w a r e , o f c o u r s e , t h a t t h e s i t e o f t h i s r e s i s t a n c e c a n n o t be
s i m p l y a n d d i r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d as t h e U n c o n s c i o u s : t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r o f
P o w e r is a l s o s u p p o r t e d b y u n c o n s c i o u s ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t s ' - a t t a c h -
PASSIONATE (DIS)ATTACHMENTS 261
m e r i t s t h a t m u s t r e m a i n p u b l i c l y n o n - a c k n o w l e d g e d i f t h e y a r e t o fulfil
their role:
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
11
wrought from t h a t ?
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 expand
1 5
the dominant injunctions or interpellations o f subject formation?' In
short: [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 it r e m a i n s u n a b l e to
rearticulate the d o m i n a n t terms o f productive power'."'
T h a t is t h e 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 opposition,
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 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
1 7
of identity.' 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 gaps that characterize the workings of the
1 8
i m a g i n a r y in l a n g u a g e ' . 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
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. In such a view, resistance appears doomed to perpetual
],>
defeat. •
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 the
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 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 structure o f the socio-symbolic s p a c e . As she is q u i c k to add,
however, this s h o u l d not constrain us to (what she perceives as) 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 fixity o f the Symbolic the Hegelian
dialectics o f presupposing a n d p o s i t i n g : n o t o n l y is t h e s y m b o l i c O r d e r
always-already p r e s u p p o s e d as the sole milieu o f the subject's social
e x i s t e n c e ; t h i s O r d e r i t s e l f e x i s t s , is r e p r o d u c e d , o n l y i n s o f a r as s u b j e c t s
r e c o g n i z e t h e m s e l v e s in it a n d , via r e p e a t e d p e r f o r m a t i v e g e s t u r e s , a g a i n
and again assume their p l a c e s i n it - this, o f c o u r s e , o p e n s up the
possibility o f c h a n g i n g t h e symbolic c o n t o u r s o f o u r socio-symbolic exist
e n c e b y way o f its p a r o d i c a l l y d i s p l a c e d p e r f o r m a t i v e e n a c t i n g s . T h a t is
the thrust o f Butler's anti-Kantianism: she rejects the L a c a n i a n symbolic a
p r i o r i as a n e w v e r s i o n o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l f r a m e w o r k w h i c h fixes the
c o - o r d i n a t e s o f o u r e x i s t e n c e in a d v a n c e , leaving n o s p a c e f o r t h e r e t r o
active d i s p l a c e m e n t o f these p r e s u p p o s e d c o n d i t i o n s . S o w h e n , in a k e y
passage, B u t l e r asks -
W h a t w o u l d it m e a n f o r t h e s u b j e c t t o d e s i r e s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n its c o n t i n u e d
'social e x i s t e n c e ' ? If s u c h a n e x i s t e n c e c a n n o t b e u n d o n e w i t h o u t falling i n t o
some kind of death, can existence nevertheless be risked, death c o u r t e d o r
pursued, in order to e x p o s e and open to t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t h e h o l d o f social
p o w e r o n t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f life's p e r s i s t e n c e ? T h e s u b j e c t is c o m p e l l e d t o r e p e a t
t h e n o r m s by w h i c h it is p r o d u c e d , b u t t h e r e p e t i t i o n e s t a b l i s h e s a d o m a i n of
risk, f o r if o n e fails t o r e i n s l a l e t h e n o r m 'in lite r i g b l way,' o n e b e c o m e s s u b j e c t
to f u r t h e r s a n c t i o n , o n e feels t h e p r e v a i l i n g c o n d i t i o n s o f e x i s t e n c e t h r e a t e n e d .
A n d yet, w i t h o u t a r e p e t i t i o n t h a t risks life - in its c u r r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n - how
m i g h t we begin to i m a g i n e t h e c o n t i n g e n c y o f thai o r g a n i z a t i o n , a n d p e r i b n n a -
tively r e c o n f i g u r e t h e c o n t o u r s o f t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f life?-"
- 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 power on the pre-established set o f
symbolic rules a n d / o r norms.
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. Antigone
effectively 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 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 the
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 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
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', a subversive displacement which remains within the
hegemonic field 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 much
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 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 too pessimistic. O n the one hand she overestimates the
subversive potential o f disturbing the functioning o f the big 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 restructuring o f the
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 .
'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 is, a s s u m e s la douleur d'exister, and thus provides the
minimum o f s u p p o r t to his b e i n g (like Freud's primordially repressed
middle term ' F a t h e r is b e a t i n g m e ' in the t r i a d o f ' A c h i l d is b e i n g
beaten'). This fundamental f a n t a s y is t h o r o u g h l y inter-passive." in it, a
s c e n e o f passive suffering ( s u b j e c t i o n ) is s t a g e d w h i c h simultaneously
sustains a n d t h r e a t e n s the s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g - w h i c h sustains this b e i n g only
i n s o far as it r e m a i n s f o r e c l o s e d (primordially repressed). From this
perspective, a new a p p r o a c h o p e n s u p to t h e r e c e n t artistic practices o f
sadomasochistic performance: is it n o t a f a c t t h a t , i n t h e m , this very
foreclosure is u l t i m a t e l y undone? In other words, what if the open
assuming/staging o f the phantasmic scene o f primordial 'passionate
a t t a c h m e n t s ' is far m o r e s u b v e r s i v e t h a n t h e d i a l e c t i c r e a r t i c u l a t i o n and/
o r d i s p l a c e m e n t o f this s c e n e ?
T h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n B u l l e t a n d L a c a n is t h a t f o r B u t l e r , t h e p r i m o r
dial r e p r e s s i o n (foreclosure) equals the foreclosure o f the primordial
'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' , while for L a c a n the f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy (the
s t u f f " p r i m o r d i a l a t t a c h m e n t s ' a r e m a d e o f ) is a l r e a d y a f i l l e r , a f o r m a t i o n
w h i c h c o v e r s u p a c e r t a i n g a p / v o i d . I t is h e r e , o n this v e r y p o i n t a t w h i c h
t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n B u t l e r a n d L a c a n is a l m o s t i m p e r c e p t i b l e , t h a t w e
e n c o u n t e r the ultimate gap that separates t h e m . B u t l e r again interprets
t h e s e ' p r i m o r d i a l a t t a c h m e n t s ' as t h e s u b j e c t ' s p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s i n a p r o t o -
H e g e l i a n sense o f the term, a n d t h e r e f o r e c o u n t s o n the subject's ability
dialectically to r e a r t i c u l a t e these presuppositions of his/her being, to
r e c o n f i g u r e / d i s p l a c e t h e m : t h e s u b j e c t ' s i d e n t i t y 'will r e m a i n always a n d
f o r e v e r r o o t e d i n its i n j u r y as l o n g as it r e m a i n s a n i d e n t i t y , b u t it d o e s
i m p l y t h a t t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f r e s i g n i f i c a t i o n will r e w o r k a n d u n s e t t l e the
p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t to s u b j e c t i o n w i t h o u t w h i c h s u b j e c t f o r m a t i o n -
a n d r e - f o r m a t i o n - c a n n o t s u c c e e d ' . ' " W h e n s u b j e c t s a r c c o n f r o n t e d with
a f o r c e d c h o i c e in w h i c h r e j e c t i n g an i n j u r i o u s i n t e r p e l l a t i o n amounts
t o n o t e x i s t i n g a t all - w h e n , u n d e r t h e t h r e a t o f n o n e x i s t e n c e , t h e y a r e ,
as it w e r e , e m o t i o n a l l y b l a c k m a i l e d i n t o i d e n t i f y i n g w i l h the imposed
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 , relies o n the dis
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 ' 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 first
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 its
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 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 - i n all t h e s e
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 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
t o w a r d s it, w h a t h o l d s a c o m m u n i t y t o g e t h e r is n o t t h e d i r e c t l y s h a r e d
m o d e o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e s a m e o b j e c t b u t , r a t h e r , its e x a c t o p p o s i t e :
the s h a r e d m o d e o f disidenlification, o f delegating the m e m b e r s ' hatred o r
love to a n o t h e r agent through whom they love o r h a t e . T h e Christian
c o m m u n i t y , f o r i n s t a n c e , is h e l d t o g e t h e r b y t h e s h a r e d d e l e g a t i o n o f
t h e i r b e l i e f to s o m e s e l e c t e d individuals (saints, priests, m a y b e only Christ
alone) who are 'supposed to really believe'. T h e function of symbolic
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is t h u s t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f d i r e c t i m m e r s i o n in ( o r f u s i o n
with) t h e o b j e c t o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n : i t is t o m a i n t a i n t h e proper distance
towards the object ( f o r this reason, the Church as I n s t i t u t i o n always
p e r c e i v e d z e a l o t s as its u l t i m a t e e n e m i e s : b e c a u s e o f t h e i r d i r e c t i d e n t i f i
cation a n d belief, they t h r e a t e n t h e distance t h r o u g h which t h e religious
i n s t i t u t i o n m a i n t a i n s i t s e l f ) . A n o t h e r e x a m p l e : if, i n a l o v e melodrama
d e p i c t i n g a c o u p l e m a k i n g l o v e , we w e r e a l l o f a s u d d e n t o p e r c e i v e t h a t
the c o u p l e is a c t u a l l y h a v i n g s e x ( o r if, i n a s n u f f m o v i e , w c b e c o m e a w a r e
that t h e v i c t i m is a c t u a l l y b e i n g t o r t u r e d t o d e a t h ) , t h i s t h o r o u g h l y ruins
the p r o p e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with the narrative reality. F r o m my youth, 1
r e m e m b e r t h e P o l i s h s p e c t a c l e Pharaoh ( 1 9 6 0 ) , i n w h i c h t h e r e is a s c e n e
w h e r e a h o r s e is s a c r i f i c e d : w h e n I , t h e s p e c t a t o r , n o t i c e d t h a t t h e h o r s e
was a c t u a l l y b e i n g s t a b b e d t o d e a t h b v l a n c e s , this i n s t a n t l y o b s t r u c t e d m y
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e n a r r a t i v e . . . . A n d t h e p o i n t is t h a t t h e s a m e g o e s
f o r ' r e a l l i f e ' : o u r s e n s e o f r e a l i t y is always s u s t a i n e d b y a m i n i m u m o f
disidendficalion ( f o r e x a m p l e , w h e n we e n g a g e i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n with
o t h e r p e o p l e , we ' r e p r e s s ' o u r a w a r e n e s s o f h o w they sweat, d e f e c a t e a n d
urinate).
B u t i e r is r i g h t t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t s u b j e c t i v i t y i n v o l v e s a two-level o p e r
ation: a primordial 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' , a s u b m i s s i o n / s u b j e c t i o n to
an O t h e r , and its d e n i a l - t h a i is, t h e g a i n i n g o f a m i n i m a l distance
t o w a r d s it w h i c h o p e n s u p t h e s p a c e o f f r e e d o m and autonomy. T h e
p r i m o r d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' is t h u s - t o p u t it i n D e r r i d a n t e r m s -
the condition o f (im)possibility o f freedom a n d r e s i s t a n c e : t h e r e is n o
subjectivity outside it, t h a t is, s u b j e c t i v i t y c a n a s s e r t i t s e l f o n l y as t h e
g a i n i n g o f a d i s t a n c e t o w a r d s its g r o u n d w h i c h c a n n e v e r b e fully ' s u h -
l a t e d ' . H o w e v e r , it is n o n e t h e l e s s t h e o r e t i c a l l y a n d p o l i t i c a l l y c r u c i a l t o
distinguish between the primordial phantasmic 'passionate attachment'
t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is c o m p e l l e d t o r e p r e s s / d i s a v o w i n o r d e r t o g a i n s o c i o -
s y m b o l i c e x i s t e n c e , a n d s u b j e c t i o n t o t h i s very s o c i o - s y m b o l i c o r d e r , w h i c h
p r o v i d e s the s u b j e c t w i t h a d e t e r m i n a t e s y m b o l i c ' m a n d a t e ' (a place o f
i n t e r p e l l a t o r y r e c o g n i t i o n / i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ) . W h i l e t h e two c a n n o t s i m p l y b e
o p p o s e d as ' g o o d ' a n d ' b a d ' ( t h e v e r y s o c i o - s y m b o l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n c a n
s u s t a i n i t s e l f o n l y i f it m a i n t a i n s a n o n - a c k n o w l e d g e d phantasmic sup
p o r t ) , they nevertheless function a c c o r d i n g to different logics.
This confusion between phantasmic 'passionate attachments' and socio-
symbolic identification also a c c o u n t s for the fact that - surprisingly -
B u d e r uses t h e c o u p l e o f s u p e r e g o a n d e g o i d e a l in a naive p r e - L a c a n i a n
way, d e f i n i n g s u p e r e g o as t h e a g e n c y t h a t m e a s u r e s t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e
s u b j e c t ' s a c t u a l e g o a n d t h e e g o i d e a l t h e s u b j e c t is s u p p o s e d t o e m u l a t e ,
a n d finds t h e s u b j e c t g u i l t y o f f a i l u r e i n t h i s e n d e a v o u r . W o u l d it n o t b e
much more productive to follow L a c a n a n d insist o n the opposition
b e t w e e n t h e two t e r m s - o n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e g u i l t m a t e r i a l i z e d i n the
p r e s s u r e e x e r t e d o n t h e s u b j e c t b y t h e s u p e r e g o is n o t as s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
as it m a y s e e m : it is n o t t h e g u i l t c a u s e d b y t h e f a i l e d e m u l a t i o n o f t h e
e g o ideal, but the m o r e fundamental guilt o f accepting the e g o ideal (the
s o c i a l l y d e t e r m i n e d s y m b o l i c r o l e ) as t h e i d e a l t o b e f o l l o w e d i n t h e first
place, a n d thus o f betraying o n e ' s m o r e fundamental desire (the primor
d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' , as B u t l e r w o u l d h a v e p u t i t ) ? I f o n e f o l l o w s
L a c a n , o n e can thus a c c o u n t for the basic p a r a d o x o f the superego, which
lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e m o r e I f o l l o w t h e o r d e r s o f t h e e g o i d e a l , t h e
m o r e g u i l t y I a m - L a c a n ' s p o i n t is t h a t , i n f o l l o w i n g t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e
e g o ideal, I a m in effect guilty - guilty o f betraying my fundamental
p h a n t a s m i c 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' . In o t h e r words, far f r o m feeding o f f
some 'irrational' guilt, the superego manipulates the subject's actual
b e t r a y a l o f his f u n d a m e n t a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' as t h e p r i c e h e had
to pay for entering the socio-symbolic space, and assuming a pre
d e t e r m i n e d p l a c e w i t h i n it.
S o w h a t is s u p e r e g o i n its o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e s y m b o l i c L a w ? T h e p a r e n t a l
f i g u r e w h o is s i m p l y ' r e p r e s s i v e ' i n t h e m o d e o f s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y tells a
child: ' Y o u m u s t g o to G r a n d m a ' s b i r t h d a y parry a n d b e h a v e nicely, even
i f y o u ' r e b o r e d t o d e a t h - I d o n ' t c a r e h o w y o u f e e l , j u s t d o it!' T h e
s u p e r e g o f i g u r e , i n c o n t r a s t , tells t h e c h i l d : ' . A l t h o u g h y o u k n o w how
m u c h G r a n d m a w o u l d l i k e t o s e e y o u , y o u s h o u l d visit h e r o n l y i f y o u
r e a l l y w a n t t o - i f n o t , y o u s h o u l d stay a t h o m e ! ' T h e s u p e r e g o t r i c k lies
i n t h i s false a p p e a r a n c e o f a f r e e c h o i c e , w h i c h , as e v e r y c h i l d k n o w s , is
actually a f o r c e d c h o i c e that involves an even s t r o n g e r o r d e r - n o t o n l y
' Y o u m u s t visit G r a n d m a , h o w e v e r y o u f e e l ! ' , b u t ' Y o u m u s t visit G r a n d m a ,
a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e , you must be glad to do U\' — t h e s u p e r e g o o r d e r s y o u t o
enjoy d o i n g w h a t y o u h a v e t o d o . T h e s a m e g o e s f o r t h e s t r a i n e d r e l a t i o n
ship between lovers or a m a r r i e d couple: when a spouse says t o his
p a r t n e r : ' W e s h o u l d visit m y s i s t e r o n l y i f y o u r e a l l y w a n t t o ! ' , t h e order
b e t w e e n t h e l i n e s is, o f c o u r s e : ' N o t o n l y m u s t y o u a g r e e to visit m y s i s t e r ,
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 to s u p p l e m e n t h e r early 'con

structionist' criticism o f psychoanalysis by a 'positive' 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 the
reflexive turn which defines subjectivity: o n e represses 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
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
2
tion on homosexuality, for it presumes the heterosexualization o f desire. "
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
27
'never' loved and 'never' grieved.'
H e r e B u t l e r s e e m s t o g e t i n v o l v e d i n a k i n d o f J u n g i a n i s m a Verniers: a
m a n is l o n g i n g n o t f o r h i s c o m p l e m e n t a r y f e m i n i n e c o u n t e r p a r t (animus
f o r anima, e t c . ) , b u t f o r s a m e n e s s - it is n o t s a m e n e s s w h i c h ' r e p r e s s e s '
d i f f e r e n c e , it is ( t h e d e s i r e f o r ) d i f f e r e n c e w h i c h f o r e c l o s e s ( t h e d e s i r e
f o r ) s a m e n e s s . . . . H o w e v e r , what a b o u t the fact, q u o t e d by B u t l e r herself,
t h a t t h e m a n , in r e m a i n i n g a t t a c h e d t o t h e c o m p u l s i v e m a l e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ,
fears b e i n g put in t h e ' p a s s i v e ' p o s i t i o n o f f e m i n i n i t y as t h e o n e who
d e s i r e s ( a n o t h e r ) m a n ? W h a t w e h a v e h e r e is t h e o b v e r s e o f t h e m e l a n
c h o l i c i n c o r p o r a t i o n : if, in t h e l a t t e r , o n e becomes w h a t o n e was c o m p e l l e d
t o give u p - desiring as an object ( a m a n ) , t h e n , i n t h e first c a s e , o n e desires
as an object w h a t o n e is a f r a i d t o become (a w o m a n ) : a m a n 'wants the
woman he would never be. He wouldn't be caught dead being her:
t h e r e f o r e h e w a n t s h e r . . . . I n d e e d , h e will n o t i d e n t i f y w i t h h e r , a n d he
will n o t d e s i r e a n o t h e r m a n . T h a t r e f u s a l t o d e s i r e , t h a t s a c r i f i c e o f d e s i r e
under t h e f o r c e o f p r o h i b i t i o n , will i n c o r p o r a t e h o m o s e x u a l i t y as an
2 8
identification with m a s c u l i n i t y . ' H e r e we e n c o u n t e r t h e key a m b i g u i t y o f
B u d e r ' s a r g u m e n t , an a m b i g u i t y w h i c h also affects t h e i n c o n c l u s i v e c h a r
acter o f h e r i m p o r t a n t discussion o f transsexual drag dressing: h e r defini
tion of the foreclosed primordial 'passionate attachment' oscillates
b e t w e e n two s u b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n s from which o n e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n - is
it that o n e d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n as a man, o r t h a t o n e desires to b e a
ttioman d e s i r e d by ( a n d d e s i r i n g ) a n o t h e r m a n ? I n o t h e r w o r d s , is m y
Straight m a s c u l i n e identification the m e l a n c h o l i c incorporation o f my
f o r e c l o s e d a t t a c h m e n t to a n o t h e r m a n , o r a d e f e n c e against a s s u m i n g t h e
subjective position o f a w o m a n (desiring a m a n ) ? Butler herself touches
u p o n this a m b i g u i t y l a t e r i n t h e t e x t , w h e n s h e asks:
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 separate-
1
ness 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 t t a c h m e n t ? I n o t h e r w o r d s , why d o e s a m a n f e a r b e c o m i n g
a woman; why 'wouldn't [he] be caught dead b e i n g h e r ' ? Is it o n l y
b e c a u s e , as s u c h , h e w o u l d d e s i r e ( a n d b e d e s i r e d b y ) a n o t h e r m a n ? L e t
us r e c a l l N e i l J o r d a n ' s The Crying Game, a film in w h i c h we have a
p a s s i o n a t e l o v e b e t w e e n two m e n , s t r u c t u r e d as a h e t e r o s e x u a l affair: t h e
b l a c k t r a n s s e x u a l D i l is a m a n w h o d e s i r e s a n o t h e r m a n as a woman. It
t h u s s e e m s m o r e p r o d u c t i v e t o p o s i t as t h e c e n t r a l e n i g m a t h a t o f s e x u a l
d i f f e r e n c e - not as t h e a l r e a d y e s t a b l i s h e d s y m b o l i c d i f f e r e n c e ( h e t e r o s e x
u a l n o r m a t i v i t y ) b u t , p r e c i s e l y , as t h a t w h i c h f o r e v e r e l u d e s t h e g r a s p o f
normative symbolization.
B u t l e r is r i g h t i n o p p o s i n g t h e P l a t o n i c - J u n g i a n n o t i o n t h a t t h e l o s s
i n v o l v e d i n s e x u a l i o n is t h e l o s s o f t h e o t h e r s e x ( t h e n o t i o n w h i c h o p e n s
u p t h e p a t h t o v a r i o u s o b s c u r a n t i s t a n d r o g y n o u s m y t h s o f t h e two h a l v e s ,
f e m i n i n e a n d m a s c u l i n e , j o i n e d i n a c o m p l e t e h u m a n b e i n g ) : it is w r o n g
' t o a s s u m e f r o m t h e o u t s e t t h a t we o n l y a n d always l o s e t h e o t h e r s e x , f o r
it is as o f t e n t h e c a s e t h a t w c a r e o f t e n in t h e m e l a n c h o l i c b i n d o f having
lost our own sex in order, paradoxically, to become if?" In short, what the
P l a t o n i c - J u n g i a n m v t h fails t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t is t h a t t h e o b s t a c l e o r
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 a
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 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 directly
beingX 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, Women are
from 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 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 , the
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
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 B u t l e r r e j e c t s s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e as ' t h e
p r i m a r y guarantor o f loss i n o u r p s y c h i c l i v e s ' - w h e n s h e disputes the
p r e m i s s t h a t ' a l l s e p a r a t i o n a n d loss [ c a n ] b e t r a c e d b a c k t o t h a t s t r u c t u r
i n g l o s s o f t h e o t h e r s e x b y w h i c h w e e m e r g e as this s e x e d b e i n g i n t h e
1
world', ' s h e silently e q u a t e s sexual difference with the heterosexual
s y m b o l i c n o r m d e t e r m i n i n g w h a t i t is t o b e a ' m a n ' o r a ' w o m a n ' , w h i l e
f o r L a c a n s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is r e a l p r e c i s e l y i n t h e s e n s e t h a t it c a n n e v e r
be properly symbolized, transposed/translated into a symbolic norm
w h i c h fixes t h e s u b j e c t ' s s e x u a l identity - ' t h e r e is n o s u c h t h i n g as a
s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p ' . W h e n L a c a n c l a i m s t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is ' r e a l ' ,
h e is t h e r e f o r e f a r f r o m e l e v a t i n g a h i s t o r i c a l c o n t i n g e n t f o r m o f s e x u a t i o n
into a transhistorical n o r m ('if you do n o t occupy your proper preor
d a i n e d place in t h e h e t e r o s e x u a l o r d e r , as e i t h e r m a n o r w o m a n , y o u a r e
e x c l u d e d , e x i l e d i n t o a p s y c h o t i c abyss o u t s i d e t h e s y m b o l i c d o m a i n ' ) : t h e
c l a i m t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is ' r e a l ' e q u a l s t h e c l a i m t h a t i t is ' i m p o s s i b l e '
- impossible to symbolize, to formulate as a s y m b o l i c n o r m . In other
w o r d s , it is n o t t h a t w e h a v e h o m o s e x u a l s , f e t i s h i s t s , a n d o t h e r p e r v e r t s in
spite of t h e n o r m a t i v e f a c t o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e - t h a t is, as p r o o f s o f t h e
failure o f sexual difference to impose its n o r m ; it is n o t t h a t sexual
d i f f e r e n c e is t h e u l t i m a t e p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e w h i c h a n c h o r s t h e c o n t i n g e n t
d r i f t i n g o f s e x u a l i t y ; i t is, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , o n a c c o u n t o f t h e g a p w h i c h
f o r e v e r persists b e t w e e n t h e real o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e a n d t h e d e t e r m i n a t e
forms o f heterosexual symbolic norms that we have the multitude of
' p e r v e r s e ' f o r m s o f s e x u a l i t y . T h a t is a l s o t h e p r o b l e m w i t h t h e a c c u s a t i o n
t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e i n v o l v e s ' b i n a r y l o g i c ' : in s o f a r as s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e
is r e a l / i m p o s s i b l e , it is p r e c i s e l y not ' b i n a r y ' b u t , a g a i n , t h a t b e c a u s e o f
w h i c h e v e r y ' b i n a r y ' a c c o u n t o f it ( e v e n - t r a n s l a t i o n o f s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e
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
1 2
able, the psychotic'/ 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
'outside': 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 perceives his symbolic mandate 'king' as directly
grounded 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
w
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 .
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 the
p o w e r struggle i n t e r v e n e , n o t s o m e t h i n g primordially given. T h u s both
a i m at a k i n d o f ' m e t a - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l ' g e s t u r e o f a c c o u n t i n g f o r t h e v e r y
genesis o f the a priori t r a n s c e n d e n t a l frame. Every 'historicization', every
symbolization, h a s to ' r e - e n a c t ' the passage from the pre-symbolic X t o
h i s t o r y . A p r o p o s o f O e d i p u s , f o r e x a m p l e , it is e a s y to p l a y t h e g a m e o f
historicization, and to demonstrate bow the Oedipal constellation is
e m b e d d e d i n a s p e c i f i c p a t r i a r c h a l c o n t e x t ; it r e q u i r e s a f a r g r e a t e r e f f o r t
PASSIONATE (DIS) A TTAGHMENTS 275
iiof t h o u g h t t o d i s c e r n , i n t h e v e r y h i s t o r i c a l c o n t i n g e n c y o f t h e Oedipus
c o m p l e x , o n e o f the re-enactments o f the gap which o p e n s up the horizon
!v'©f h i s t o r i c i t y .
r\ I n h e r m o r e r e c e n t writings, B u t l e r h e r s e l f s e e m s to c o n c e d e this p o i n t ,
V h e n she accepts the key distinction b e t w e e n sexual difference a n d the
'social construction of gender': the status o f sexual difference is not
('direcdy that of a contingent socio-symbolic formation; rather, sexual
'difference indicates the enigmatic domain which lies i n b e t w e e n , no
J o n g e r biology a n d n o t yet the space o f socio-symbolic c o n s t r u c t i o n . O u r
p o i n t h e r e w o u l d b e t o e m p h a s i z e h o w t h i s i n - b e t w e e n is t h e v e r y ' c u t '
w h i c h sustains the gap b e t w e e n t h e R e a l a n d t h e c o n t i n g e n t m u l t i t u d e o f
the modes o f its s y m b o l i z a t i o n . I n s h o r t : y e s , o f c o u r s e , t h e wav we
• s y m b o l i z e s e x u a l i t y is n o t d e t e r m i n e d by n a t u r e , it is t h e o u t c o m e o f a
c o m p l e x a n d c o n t i n g e n t s o c i o - s y m b o l i c p o w e r s t r u g g l e ; h o w e v e r , this v e r y
s p a c e o f c o n t i n g e n t s y m b o l i z a t i o n , t h i s v e r y g a p b e t w e e n t h e R e a l a n d its
i S y m b o l i z a t i o n , m u s t b e s u s t a i n e d b y a c u t , a n d ' s y m b o l i c c a s t r a t i o n ' is t h e
L a c a n i a n n a m e f o r t h i s c u t . S o ' s y m b o l i c c a s t r a t i o n ' is n o t t h e ultimate
p o i n t o f s y m b o l i c r e f e r e n c e w h i c h s o m e h o w l i m i t s t h e f r e e flow o f t h e
. m u l t i t u d e o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n s : o n t h e c o n t r a r y , it is t h e very g e s t u r e w h i c h
sustains, k e e p s o p e n , the s p a c e o f c o n t i n g e n t symbolizations.'''
S o , to r e c a p i t u l a t e : t h e a t t r a c t i o n o f B u t l e r ' s a c c o u n t o f sexual differ
e n c e is t h a t it m a k e s i t p o s s i b l e t o s e e t h e a p p a r e n t l y 'natural' state o f
t h i n g s ( p s y c h i c a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e ' n a t u r a l ' s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e ) as t h e r e s u l t
of a redoubled 'pathological' process - o f repressing the 'passionate
a t t a c h m e n t ' t o t h e s a m e s e x . T h e p r o b l e m w i t h it, h o w e v e r , is: i f w e a g r e e
t h a t t h e e n t r y i n t o s y m b o l i c L a w t h a t r e g u l a t e s h u m a n s e x u a l i t y is p a i d
f o r b y a f u n d a m e n t a l r e n u n c i a t i o n , is t h i s r e n u n c i a t i o n in f a c t t h a t o f t h e
same-sex attachment? W h e n B u t l e r asks t h e crucial q u e s t i o n 'Is there
s o m e p a r t o f t h e b o d y w h i c h is n o t p r e s e r v e d i n s u b l i m a t i o n , s o m e p a r t o f
t h e b o d y w h i c h r e m a i n s u n s u b l i m a t e d ? ' (i.e. n o t i n c l u d e d in the s y m b o l i c
t e x t u r e ) , h e r a n s w e r is: ' T h i s b o d i l y r e m a i n d e r , I w o u l d s u g g e s t , s u r v i v e s
f o r s u c h a s u b j e c t in t h e m o d e o f a l r e a d y , i f n o t always, h a v i n g been
d e s t r o y e d , i n a k i n d o f c o n s t i t u t i v e l o s s . T h e b o d y is n o t a site o n w h i c h a
c o n s t r u c t i o n t a k e s p l a c e ; it is a d e s t r u c t i o n o n t h e o c c a s i o n o f w h i c h a
3 1
s u b j e c t is f o r m e d . ' ' D o e s this n o t b r i n g h e r c l o s e to t h e L a c a n i a n n o t i o n
o f lamella, o f the undeacl organ-without-body?
This organ must be called ' u n r e a l , ' in the sense that the unreal is not the
imaginary and p r e c e d e s the subjective it conditions, being in direct contact with
the real. . . . My lamella represents h e r e the part o f a living b e i n g that is lost

37
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 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 ,
; w
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 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
t h e ' r e a l ' f a t h e r is n o t h i n g b u t a c o n t i n g e n t b e a r e r o f t h e p u r e l y f o r m a l
s t r u c t u r a l f u n c t i o n o f s y m b o l i c p r o h i b i t i o n ) ? W h a t b l u r s this c l e a r distinc
t i o n b e t w e e n t h e e m p t y s y m b o l i c f o r m a n d its c o n t i n g e n t p o s i t i v e c o n t e n t
is p r e c i s e l y t h e Real: a s t a i n w h i c h s u t u r e s t h e e m p t y f r a m e o n t o a p a r t o f
its c o n t e n t , t h e ' i n d i v i s i b l e r e m a i n d e r ' o f s o m e ' p a t h o l o g i c a l ' c o n t i n g e n t
m a t e r i a l i t y w h i c h , as it w e r e , ' c o l o u r s ' t h e a l l e g e d l y n e u t r a l u n i v e r s a l i t y o f
the symbolic frame, and thus functions as a k i n d o f umbilical cord
t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e e m p t y f r a m e w o r k o f t h e s y m b o l i c f o r m is a n c h o r e d i n
its c o n t e n t . T h i s s h o r t c i r c u i t b e t w e e n f o r m and c o n t e n t provides the
m o s t s u c c i n c t r e j e c t i o n o r subversion o f (what o n e usually perceives as)
' K a n t i a n f o r m a l i s m ' : t h e very t r a n s c e n d e n t a l - f o r m a l f r a m e w h i c h forms
the h o r i z o n , the c o n d i t i o n o f possibility, o f the c o n t e n t w h i c h appears
w i t h i n it is e n f r a m e d b y a p a r t o f its c o n t e n t , s i n c e it is a t t a c h e d t o a
p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t w i t h i n its c o n t e n t . W h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h h e r e is t h e
paradox o f a kind o f ' p a t h o l o g i c a l a priori': a pathological (in the Kantian
sense o f innerworldly c o n t i n g e n c y ) e l e m e n t that sustains t h e c o n s i s t e n c y
o f t h e f o r m a l f r a m e w i t h i n w h i c h it o c c u r s .
T h i s is a l s o o n e o f t h e p o s s i b l e d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e L a c a n i a n sinthome as
real: the pathological contingent formation that sustains the a priori
u n i v e r s a l f r a m e . I n this p r e c i s e s e n s e , t h e L a c a n i a n sinthome is a ' k n o t ' : a
p a r t i c u l a r i n n e r w o r l d l y p h e n o m e n o n w h o s e e x i s t e n c e is e x p e r i e n c e d as
c o n t i n g e n t - h o w e v e r , t h e m o m e n t o n e t o u c h e s it o r a p p r o a c h e s i t t o o
c l o s e l y , t h i s ' k n o t ' u n r a v e l s a n d , with it, o u r e n t i r e u n i v e r s e - t h a t is, t h e
v e r y p l a c e f r o m w h i c h we s p e a k a n d p e r c e i v e reality d i s i n t e g r a t e s ; we
literally lose the ground from beneath o u r feet. . . . P e r h a p s the best
i l l u s t r a t i o n is t h e p a t r i a r c h a l m e l o d r a m a t i c t h e m e o f ' g o i n g i n through
t h e w r o n g d o o r ' ( t h e wife w h o a c c i d e n t a l l y r e a c h e s i n t o t h e p o c k e t o f h e r
h u s b a n d ' s j a c k e t a n d finds his c o n f i d e n t i a l love letter, thus r u i n i n g her
e n t i r e f a m i l y l i f e ) , w h i c h is r a i s e d t o a m u c h h i g h e r p o w e r i n its s c i e n c e -
fiction version (you accidentally o p e n the w r o n g d o o r a n d witness the
s e c r e t m e e t i n g o f t h e a l i e n s ) . H o w e v e r , t h e r e is n o n e e d t o g e t i n v o l v e d
in such eccentricities; simply think o f the e l e m e n t a r y case o f the fragile
b a l a n c e o f a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h o n e is f o r m a l l y a l l o w e d t o d o something
(ask a certain question, perform a certain a c t ) , b u t is n o n e the less
e x p e c t e d not t o d o it, as i f s o m e u n w r i t t e n r u l e p r o h i b i t e d i t - i f o n e
a c t u a l l y d o e s it, t h e w h o l e s i t u a t i o n e x p l o d e s .
A p r o p o s o f this point, we c a n e l a b o r a t e the line o f s e p a r a t i o n between
M a r x and the standard 'bourgeois' sociologists o f modernity who empha
size t h e u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e s o f p o s t - t r a d i t i o n a l l i f e ( t h e m o d e r n individual
is n o l o n g e r d i r e c t l y i m m e r s e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r t r a d i t i o n , b u t e x p e r i e n c e s
h i m s e l f as a u n i v e r s a l a g e n t c a u g h t i n a c o n t i n g e n t p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e x t a n d
f r e e t o c h o o s e h i s way o f life; h e t h u s e n t e r t a i n s a r e f l e c t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p
t o w a r d s his l i f e - w o r l d , r e l y i n g e v e n i n h i s m o s t ' s p o n t a n e o u s * a c t i v i t i e s
( s e x u a l i t y , l e i s u r e ) o n ' h o w - t o - d o - i t ' m a n u a l s . N o w h e r e is t h i s p a r a d o x o f
r e f l e x i v i t y m o r e e v i d e n t t h a n in d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t s t o b r e a k o u t o f t h e
r e f l e c t e d ways o f m o d e r n i t y a n d r e t u r n t o a m o r e s p o n t a n e o u s ' h o l i s t i c '
life: i n a t r a g i c o m i c way, t h e s e very a t t e m p t s a r e s u p p o r t e d b y a h o s t o f
specialists w h o t e a c h us h o w t o d i s c o v e r o u r true spontaneous Self. . . .
There is a l s o p r o b a b l y nothing more scientific than the growing of
' o r g a n i c f o o d ' : it t a k e s h i g h s c i e n c e t o b e a b l e t o subtract the harmful
e f f e c t s o f i n d u s t r i a l a g r i c u l t u r e . ' O r g a n i c a g r i c u l t u r e ' is t h u s a k i n d o f
H e g e l i a n ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' , t h e t h i r d l i n k i n t h e t r i a d w h o s e first t w o
links are pre-industrial ' n a t u r a l ' a g r i c u l t u r e a n d its n e g a t i o n / m e d i a t i o n ,
i n d u s t r i a l i z e d a g r i c u l t u r e : it is a r e t u r n t o n a t u r e , to a n o r g a n i c way o f
d o i n g t h i n g s ; b u t this v e r y r e t u r n is ' m e d i a t e d ' b y s c i e n c e .
Standard sociologists o f modernity c o n c e i v e o f t h i s ' r e f l e x i v i t y ' as a
q u a s i - t r a n s c e n d e n t a l u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e w h i c h e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f in a s p e c i f i c
way in d i f f e r e n t d o m a i n s o f s o c i a l life: in p o l i t i c s as t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f
the traditional o r g a n i c authoritarian structure by m o d e r n formal d e m o c
racy (and its i n h e r e n t counterpoint, the formalist insistence on the
p r i n c i p l e o f a u t h o r i t y f o r its o w n s a k e ) ; in e c o n o m y as t h e predominance
of commodification and 'alienated' market relations over the more
o r g a n i c f o r m s o f t h e c o m m u n a l p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s ; in t h e e t h i c a l d o m a i n
as t h e split o f t r a d i t i o n a l mores into formal external legality a n d an
i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n n e r m o r a l i t y ; i n l e a r n i n g as t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f t r a d i t i o n a l
initiatory wisdom by the reflected forms o f scientific k n o w l e d g e transmit
t e d b y t h e s c h o o l s y s t e m ; i n a r t as t h e a r t i s t ' s f r e e d o m t o c h o o s e f r o m t h e
multitude o f available 'styles'; a n d so on. 'Reflexivity' ( o r its various
i n c a r n a t i o n s , u p t o t h e F r a n k f u r t S c h o o l ' s ' i n s t r u m e n t a l R e a s o n ' ) is t h u s
c o n c e i v e d as a k i n d o f h i s t o r i c a l a p r i o r i , a f o r m w h i c h 'constitutes',
m o u l d s i n t o t h e s a m e u n i v e r s a l s h a p e , d i f f e r e n t l a y e r s o f s o c i a l life. M a r x ,
however, adds to this a crucial s u p p l e m e n t a r y t u r n o f t h e screw: for h i m ,
all p a r t i c u l a r ' e m p i r i c a l ' d o m a i n s o f s o c i a l life d o n o t e n t e r t a i n t h e s a m e
r e l a t i o n s h i p t o w a r d s t h i s u n i v e r s a l f r a m e ; t h e y a r e n o t all c a s e s o f a p a s s i v e
positive stuff formed by it - there is o n e exceptional 'pathological',
innervvorldly particular content in which the very universal form of
r e f l e x i v i t y is g r o u n d e d , t o w h i c h it is a t t a c h e d b y a k i n d o f u m b i l i c a l c o r d ,
b y w h i c h t h e f r a m e o f t h i s f o r m i t s e l f is e n f r a m e d ; f o r M a r x , o f c o u r s e ,
4
this p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e n t is t h e s o c i a l u n i v e r s e o f c o m m o d i t y e x c h a n g e . "
And a r e we n o t d e a l i n g w i t h the same p a r a d o x in t h e case o f the
Lacanian notion o f fantasy (nbjet petit a qua phantasmic object) as a

supplement to the nonexistence o f the sexual 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 of
41
c o n t i n g e n t m o d e s o f symbolization, sustain itself?
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
1
dissimulation a n d tabulation o f the psyche as a speaking topos.' -
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
i n o n e ' s s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g ( i n t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t v e i n ) is s t r i c t l y i d e n t i
c a l t o s u b m i s s i o n t o t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l i n n e r C a l l o f C o n s c i e n c e . T h a t is
t o say: t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n e x t e r n a l s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s a n d internal
m o r a l L a w is t h a t b e t w e e n r e a l i t y a n d t h e R e a l : s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s c a n still
b e j u s t i f i e d ( o r p r e t e n d to b e j u s t i f i e d ) by o b j e c t i v e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f social
c o e x i s t e n c e (they b e l o n g to the d o m a i n o f the 'reality p r i n c i p l e ' ) ; while
t h e d e m a n d o f t h e m o r a l L a w is u n c o n d i t i o n a l , b r o o k i n g n o e x c u s e -
'You can, because you must!', as K a n t p u t it. F o r t h a t r e a s o n , s o c i a l
r e g u l a t i o n s m a k e p e a c e f u l c o e x i s t e n c e p o s s i b l e , w h i l e m o r a l L a w is a
t r a u m a t i c i n j u n c t i o n t h a t d i s r u p t s it. O n e is t h u s t e m p t e d t o g o a s t e p
further a n d to invert o n c e m o r e t h e relationship b e t w e e n ' e x t e r n a l ' social
n o r m s a n d the i n n e r m o r a l Law: what if the subject invents e x t e r n a l social
n o r m s precisely in o r d e r to e s c a p e t h e u n b e a r a b l e p r e s s u r e o f t h e m o r a l
L a w ? I s n ' t it m u c h e a s i e r t o h a v e a n e x t e r n a l M a s t e r w h o c a n b e d u p e d ,
towards w h o m o n e can m a i n t a i n a m i n i m a l distance a n d private space,
t h a n t o h a v e a n e x - t i m a t e M a s t e r , a s t r a n g e r , a f o r e i g n b o d y in t h e v e r y
heart o f one's being? D o e s n ' t the minimal definition o f Power (the agency
e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e s u b j e c t as t h e f o r c e t h a t e x e r t s its p r e s s u r e o n him
from the Outside, opposing his i n c l i n a t i o n s , thwarting his goals) rely
p r e c i s e l y o n t h i s externalization o f the ex-timate inherent compulsion o f
the Law, o f that which is ' i n y o u more than yourself? This tension
b e t w e e n e x t e r n a l n o r m s a n d t h e i n n e r L a w , w h i c h c a n a l s o give r i s e to
s u b v e r s i v e e f f e c t s (say, o f o p p o s i n g p u b l i c a u t h o r i t y o n b e h a l f o f o n e ' s
i n n e r m o r a l s t a n c e ) , is n e g l e c t e d b y F o u c a u l t .
A g a i n , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t is t h a t t h i s s u b j e c t i o n t o t h e i n n e r L a w d o e s
n o t s i m p l y ' e x t e n d ' o r ' i n t e r n a l i z e ' e x t e r n a l p r e s s u r e ; r a t h e r , it is c o r r e l a t
ive t o t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f external pressure, to the withdrawal-into-self
which creates so-called 'free inner s p a c e ' . T h i s l e a d s us b a c k to the
p r o b l e m a t i c o f fundamental fantasy: w h a t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l f a n t a s y s t a g e s is
precisely the s c e n e o f constitutive s u b m i s s i o n / s u b j e c t i o n that sustains the
subject's 'inner freedom'. This primordial 'passionate attachment' - that
is, t h e s c e n e o f passive s u b m i s s i o n s t a g e d i n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy -
m u s t b e distinguished from m a s o c h i s m in t h e strict, n a r r o w clinical sense:
4 3
as it was e l a b o r a t e d i n d e t a i l b y D e l e u z e , t h i s m a s o c h i s m strictv sensu
already involves an i n t r i c a t e attitude o f disavowal towards t h e f r a m e o f
O e d i p a l symbolic reality. T h e m a s o c h i s t ' s suffering d o e s n o t attest to s o m e
p e r v e r s e e n j o y m e n t o f p a i n as s u c h , b u t is t h o r o u g h l y i n t h e s e r v i c e o f
p l e a s u r e - its e x q u i s i t e s p e c t a c l e ( m a s q u e r a d e ) o f torture and pain, o f
h u m i l i a t i o n to w h i c h t h e m a s o c h i s t s u b j e c t s u b m i t s itself, serves to d u p e
t h e a t t e n t i v e g u a r d o f t h e s u p e r e g o . I n s h o r t , c l i n i c a l m a s o c h i s m is a way
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 required

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 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
4 4
the king. . . . 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
e x p e r i e n c e s a n d is t h u s r e a d y t o a c c e p t , o u t s i d e a n y d e c e p t i v e s t r a t e g y ,
45
pain itself as the source of libidinal satisfaction.
Along these lines, o n e should reread L a p l a n c h e ' s old classic ideas a b o u t
t h e p r i m a l s e d u c t i o n fantasy in w h i c h t h e reflexive i n w a r d t u r n , 'fantas-
ization', sexualization and masochism all coincide - that is, a r e all
4 6
generated in o n e and the same gesture o f 'turning around'. In his
detailed c o m m e n t a r y on the three phases o f the Freudian ' A c h i l d is
b e i n g b e a t e n ' f a n t a s y ( 1 : ' M y f a t h e r is b e a t i n g t h e c h i l d w h o m I h a t e ' ; 2 :
'I a m b e i n g b e a t e n b y m y f a t h e r ' ; 3 : ' A c h i l d is b e i n g b e a t e n ' ) , L a p l a n c h e
insists o n t h e c r u c i a l d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e first p h a s e a n d t h e s e c o n d :
t h e y a r e b o t h u n c o n s c i o u s , t h a t is, t h e y r e p r e s e n t t h e s e c r e t g e n e s i s o f t h e
f i n a l , c o n s c i o u s p h a s e o f t h e f a n t a s y ( ' A c h i l d is b e i n g b e a t e n ' ) ; h o w e v e r ,
w h i l e t h e first p h a s e is s i m p l y t h e r e p r e s s e d m e m o r y o f s o m e r e a l e v e n t
w i t n e s s e d b y t h e c h i l d ( t h e p a r e n t b e a t i n g h i s b r o t h e r ) , a n d c a n as s u c h
b e r e m e m b e r e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t r e a t m e n t , t h e s e c o n d is
p r o p e r l y p h a n t a s m i c a n d , f o r t h a t very r e a s o n , ' p r i m o r d i a l l y repressed'.
T h i s p h a s e was n e v e r c o n s c i o u s l y i m a g i n e d , b u t was f o r e c l o s e d f r o m the
v e r y b e g i n n i n g ( h e r e we h a v e a p e r f e c t c a s e o f t h e f o r e c l o s e d s a m e - s e x
p r i m o r d i a l ' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' B u t l e r f o c u s e s o n ) ; f o r t h i s r e a s o n , it
c a n n e v e r b e r e m e m b e r e d ( i . e . s u b j e c t i v e l y a s s u m e d by t h e s u b j e c t ) , but
s i m p l y r e t r o a c t i v e l y r e c o n s t r u c t e d as t h e R e a l w h i c h h a s t o b e p r e s u p p o s e d
i f o n e is to a c c o u n t f o r t h e final, c o n s c i o u s p h a s e o f t h e f a n t a s y : '. . . what
is repressed is not the memory but the fantasy derived from it or subtending it in
this case, n o t t h e actual s c e n e in w h i c h t h e father w o u l d have beaten
4 7
a n o t h e r child, b u t the fantasy o f b e i n g b e a t e n by the f a t h e r ' .
S o the passage from the initial, outward-directed 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
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 within

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 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
18
scious is c o n f i r m e d .
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
p o s i t i o n o f ' se faire. . . ' , 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 'fantas-
m 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 'fantas-
matization' 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 a
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 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 enigma
and confusion were to be only on the side of the child, in his
( m i s ) p e r c e p t i o n as s o m e t h i n g m y s t e r i o u s o f w h a t , f o r t h e p a r e n t s them
s e l v e s , is a t h o r o u g h l y natural and unproblematic activity, t h e n there
definitely would b e a ' n o r m a l ' sexual relationship. However, the worn-out
p h r a s e ' d e e p i n s i d e e v e r y a d u l t , t h e r e is a c h i l d w h o is still a l i v e ' is n o t
without foundation, i f it is p r o p e r l y u n d e r s t o o d as m e a n i n g t h a t even
w h e n t h e p r o v e r b i a l two c o n s e n t i n g a d u l t s e n g a g e i n ' n o r m a l a n d h e a l t h y '
s e x in the privacy o f t h e i r b e d r o o m , they are n e v e r q u i t e a l o n e in t h e r e :
t h e r e is always a ' f a n t a s m a t i z e d ' child's gaze o b s e r v i n g t h e m , a gaze -
u s u a l l y ' i n t e r n a l i z e d ' - o n a c c o u n t o f w h i c h t h e i r a c t i v i t y is u l t i m a t e l y
i m p e n e t r a b l e t o t h e m s e l v e s . O r - t o p u t it i n y e t a n o t h e r way - t h e p o i n t
o f t h e s c e n e o f p r i m o r d i a l s e d u c t i o n is n o t t h a t a d u l t s a c c i d e n t a l l y i n f r i n g e
upon the child, disturbing his fragile b a l a n c e with a display o f their
jouissance - t h e p o i n t , r a t h e r , is t h a t t h e c h i l d ' s g a z e is i n c l u d e d , c o m p r e
hended, from the very b e g i n n i n g in the situation o f adult parental
s e x u a l i t y , r a t h e r l i k e K a f k a ' s p a r a b l e o f t h e D o o r o f t h e L a w : j u s t as t h e
m a n f r o m t h e c o u n t r y d i s c o v e r s at t h e e n d t h a t t h e s c e n e o f t h e m a j e s t i c
entrance to the palace o f the L a w was s t a g e d o n l y for his gaze, the
p a r e n t a l s e x u a l display, far f r o m unintentionally disturbing the child's
e q u i l i b r i u m , is i n a way ' t h e r e o n l y f o r t h e c h i l d ' s g a z e ' . Is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e
paradisiacal fantasy t h a t o f p a r e n t s c o p u l a t i n g in f r o n t o f t h e i r child, w h o
observes them and makes comments? We are thus dealing with the
s t r u c t u r e o f a t e m p o r a l l o o p : t h e r e is s e x u a l i t y n o t o n l y b e c a u s e o f a g a p
between adult sexuality a n d the child's u n p r e p a r e d gaze t r a u m a t i z e d by
its d i s p l a y , b u t b e c a u s e t h i s c h i l d ' s p e r p l e x i t y c o n t i n u e s t o s u s t a i n adult
4 1
s e x u a l activity i t s e l f . ' T h i s p a r a d o x a l s o e x p l a i n s t h e b l i n d s p o t o f t h e
t o p i c o f s e x u a l h a r a s s m e n t : there is no sex without an element of 'harassment'
( o f the p e r p l e x e d gaze violently s h o c k e d , traumatized, by t h e uncanny
c h a r a c t e r o f w h a t is g o i n g o n ) . T h e p r o t e s t a g a i n s t s e x u a l harassment,
a g a i n s t v i o l e n t l y i m p o s e d s e x , is t h u s u l t i m a t e l y the protest against sex as
such, if o n e subtracts from t h e s e x u a l i n t e r p l a y its p a i n f u l l y traumatic
c h a r a c t e r , t h e r e m a i n d e r is s i m p l y n o l o n g e r s e x u a l . ' M a t u r e ' s e x b e t w e e n
the proverbial c o n s e n t i n g adults, deprived o f the traumatic e l e m e n t o f
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 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
0 H
n a k e d ass. . . . 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 another
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 children
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 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
5 1
s o m e s c e n e involving a partial o b j e c t .
Is n o t t h e s u p r e m e c a s e o f s u c h a p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e t h a t s u s t a i n s the
impossible sexual relationship the curling blonde hair in H i t c h c o c k ' s
Vertigo? W h e n , i n t h e l o v e s c e n e i n t h e b a r n t o w a r d s t h e e n d o f t h e f i l m ,
Scottie passionately e m b r a c e s J u d y refashioned into the dead M a d e l e i n e ,
d u r i n g t h e i r f a m o u s 3 6 0 - d e g r e e kiss, h e s t o p s k i s s i n g h e r j u s t l o n g e n o u g h
t o s t e a l a l o o k at h e r n e w l y b l o n d e h a i r , as i f t o r e a s s u r e h i m s e l f t h a t t h e
p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e w h i c h m a k e s h e r i n t o t h e o b j e c t o f d e s i r e is still t h e r e .
. . . Here the opposition between the vortex that threatens to swallow
Scottie (the 'vertigo' o f the tide, t h e deadly T h i n g ) a n d the curl o f the
b l o n d e hair that imitates the vertigo o f the T h i n g , but in a miniaturized,
g e n t r i f i e d f o r m . T h i s c u r l is t h e objet petit a w h i c h c o n d e n s e s t h e i m p o s s i b l e -
d e a d l y T h i n g , s e r v i n g as its s t a n d - i n a n d t h u s e n a b l i n g us t o e n t e r t a i n a
l i v a b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h it w i t h o u t b e i n g s w a l l o w e d b y it.
O r s o n W e l l e s ' s film The Immortal Story, b a s e d o n K a r e n B l i x e n ' s n o v e l , is
o f i n t e r e s t n o t o n l y b e c a u s e it f o c u s e s o n the ambiguous relationship
b e t w e e n m y t h a n d reality: the r i c h o l d m e r c h a n t wants to a c t o u t the
sailors' m y t h i c narrative o f a rich o l d h u s b a n d w h o pays a y o u n g sailor t o
spend t h e n i g h t with his y o u n g wife, a n d thus p r o c u r e a n h e i r to his
w e a l t h - h e w a n t s , as it w e r e , t o c l o s e t h e g a p b e t w e e n m y t h a n d r e a l i t y ,
t h a t is, t o p r o d u c e a s a i l o r w h o will finally b e a b l e t o r e l a t e t h i s m y t h i c
n a r r a t i v e as s o m e t h i n g t h a t a c t u a l l y h a p p e n e d to him (the attempt, o f
c o u r s e , fails: t h e s a i l o r a n n o u n c e s t h a t n o a m o u n t o f m o n e y will i n d u c e
him to tell a n y o n e w h a t happened to h i m ) . M o r e interesting is the
phantasmic staging o f the scene o f lovemaking: b e h i n d a half-transparent
c u r t a i n , o n a b r i g h t l y lit b e d , t h e c o u p l e a r e m a k i n g l o v e , w h i l e t h e o l d
m e r c h a n t sits h a l f - c o n c e a l e d i n a d e e p a r m c h a i r i n t h e d a r k n e s s n e a r b y ,
a n d o v e r h e a r s t h e i r a c t o f l o v e - h e r e w e h a v e t h e T h i r d G a z e as t h e
u l t i m a t e g u a r a n t e e o f t h e s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . T h a t is t o say, it is t h e v e r y
p r e s e n c e o f the silent witness w h o listens to the c o u p l e m a k i n g love that
t r a n s u b s t a n t i a t e s w h a t is u l t i m a t e l y a n e n c o u n t e r b e t w e e n a p a i d s a i l o r
a n d a n a g e d p r o s t i t u t e i n t o a m y t h i c e v e n t t h a t t r a n s c e n d s its m a t e r i a l
c o n d i t i o n s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e m i r a c l e t h a t o c c u r s is n o t t h a t t h e two
lovers s o m e h o w t r a n s c e n d t h e i r m i s e r a b l e real-life situation, f o r g e t a b o u t
the ridiculous c o n d i t i o n s o f their e n c o u n t e r , get i m m e r s e d in e a c h o t h e r
a n d thus p r o d u c e an a u t h e n t i c l o v e - e n c o u n t e r ; they s u c c e e d in transub
stantiating t h a t m i s e r a b l e situation into the m i r a c l e o f a n a u t h e n t i c love-
e n c o u n t e r p r e c i s e l y because t h e y a r e a w a r e t h a t t h e y a r e d o i n g it f o r a
s i l e n t w i t n e s s , t h a t t h e y a r e ' r e a l i z i n g a m y t h ' - t h e two l o v e r s b e h a v e as i f
they are n o l o n g e r m i s e r a b l e real p e o p l e , but actors/agents in another
person's dream. The silent witness, far f r o m intruding in an intimate
s i t u a t i o n a n d s p o i l i n g it, is its k e y c o n s t i t u e n t . I t is a s t a n d a r d c l i c h e t h a t ,
s i m p l e a n d a u s t e r e as it is, The Immortal Story is W e l l e s ' s u l t i m a t e e x e r c i s e
in self-reflection - that t h e o l d m e r c h a n t who stages t h e s c e n e o f love-
m a k i n g ( p l a y e d , o f c o u r s e , b y W e l l e s h i m s e l f ) is t h e o b v i o u s s t a n d - i n f o r
W e l l e s h i m s e l f as d i r e c t o r - p e r h a p s this c l i c h e s h o u l d b e t u r n e d a r o u n d ,
a n d t h e o l d m e r c h a n t o b s e r v i n g t h e s c e n e is t h e s t a n d - i n f o r t h e s p e c t a t o r .
T h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n L a c a n a n d L a p l a n c h e is n e v e r t h e l e s s c r u c i a l
h e r e : f o r L a p l a n c h e , d r i v e is c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h f a n t a s y - t h a t is t o say, it
is t h e v e r y r e f l e x i v e t u r n i n t o p h a n t a s m i c ' i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n ' w h i c h brings
a b o u t t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f instinct into drive; for L a c a n , o n t h e contrary,
t h e r e is a d r i v e b e y o n d f a n t a s y . W h a t d o e s t h i s d r i v e b e y o n d f a n t a s y m e a n ?
P e r h a p s a n o t h e r d i f f e r e n c e a l l o w s us t o t h r o w s o m e l i g h t o n this k e y
point: while o n e c o u l d claim that, for L a c a n also, the 'birthplace' o f
p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is t h e c h i l d ' s t r a u m a t i c e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e impenetrable
' d a r k s p o t ' o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance w h i c h disturbs the c a l m o f his psychic
h o m e o s t a s i s , L a c a n d e t e r m i n e s f a n t a s y as a n answer to t h e e n i g m a o f t h i s
' d a r k s p o t ' ( d e s i g n a t e d , i n h i s ' g r a p h o f d e s i r e ' , b y t h e q u e s t i o n Che vuoi?
- ' W h a t d o e s t h e O t h e r want f r o m m e ? W h a t [as a n o b j e c t ] a m I for t h e
5 2
O t h e r , for his d e s i r e ? ' ) . T h e p r e - p h a n t a s m i c drive w o u l d t h e n d e s i g n a t e
the stance o f exposing oneself to the 'dark spot' o f the O t h e r ' s e n i g m a
w i t h o u t f i l l i n g it w i t h a p h a n t a s m i c a n s w e r . . . . T h u s f o r L a c a n f a n t a s y is a
m i n i m a l ' d e f e n c e - f o r m a t i o n ' , a s t r a t a g e m to e l u d e - what?
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 into
the position o f a helpless witness to sexual interplay b e t w e e n his/her
parents o r o t h e r adults, o r b e t w e e n a d u l t ( s ) 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 by
t h e e n i g m a o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance, 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
sexual gestures and innuendos 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 philosophical
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: is it n o t a n o t h e r name
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 that triggers the n e e d for the
phantasmic primordial 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t ' ? In o t h e r words, what if
we turn the 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
which 'is' the s u b j e c t itself. T h e need for 'passionate attachment' to

provide for a m i n i m u m 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 'abstract
negativity' - 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
ment - 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 from being
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 counter-move
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 , 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 jouissance.™
A p r o p o s o f this p r i m o r d i a l gap, o n e s h o u l d avoid the t e m p t a t i o n to
c o n c e i v e o f it as t h e e f f e c t o f the intervention o f the paternal Law/
Prohibition that disturbs the incestuous dyad o f the child a n d 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 that disturbs the smooth b a l a n c e o f the
pleasure principle, and the paternal Law - not unlike 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 paternal
L a w is u l t i m a t e l y in the service of the 'pleasure principle': it is t h e a g e n c y o f
pacification-normalization which, far from 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
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 ,
5 r >
t h e n y o u m u s t tie m e fast w i t h e v e n m o r e l a s h i n g s . ' T h e o r d e r to 'tie m e
hard in hurtful bonds' is c l e a r l y e x c e s s i v e i n the context o f Circe's
i n s t r u c t i o n s : we p a s s f r o m bonding as a d e f e n c e a g a i n s t t h e e x c e s s i v e
jouissance o f the Sirens' song to b o n d i n g i t s e l f as t h e s o u r c e o f e r o t i c
satisfaction.
T h i s reflexiviry n o n e t h e less a s s u m e s d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s - n o t o n l y
between philosophy and psychoanalysis, b u t also within psychoanalysis
itself: t h e r e f l e x i v i t y o f drive vie h a v e f o c u s e d o n i n t h i s c h a p t e r is n o t t h e
s a m e as t h e h y s t e r i c a l r e f l e x i v i t y o f desire w e d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r 2 ( i . e .
t h e f a c t t h a t h y s t e r i a is d e f i n e d by t h e reversal o f t h e impossibility to
satisfy d e s i r e i n t o t h e d e s i r e t o k e e p d e s i r e i t s e l f u n s a t i s f i e d , e t c . ) . How
a r e t h e s e two r e f l e x i v i t i e s r e l a t e d ? T h e o p p o s i t i o n h e r e is b e t w e e n p e r v e r
s i o n a n d h y s t e r i a : i f d e s i r e ' a s s u c h ' is h y s t e r i c a l , d r i v e ' a s s u c h ' is p e r v e r s e .
T h a t is to say, h y s t e r i a a n d p e r v e r s i o n a r e c a u g h t in a k i n d o f c l o s e d
d e a d l y l o o p w i t h i n w h i c h e a c h o f t h e t w o c a n b e c o n c e i v e d o f as the
r e a c t i o n t o its o p p o s i t e . D r i v e d e f i n e s t h e m a s o c h i s t i c p a r a m e t e r s o f t h e
primordial 'passionate attachment', o f the fundamental fantasy which
g u a r a n t e e s the m i n i m u m o f b e i n g to the subject; subjectivity p r o p e r then
e m e r g e s t h r o u g h the hysterical disavowal o f this p r i m o r d i a l 'passionate
a t t a c h m e n t ' - t h r o u g h t h e s u b j e c t ' s refusal to a s s u m e t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e
o b j e c t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance - the hysterical subject inces
s a n t l y q u e s t i o n s h i s / h e r p o s i t i o n ( h i s / h e r b a s i c q u e s t i o n is ' W h a t a m I f o r
the Other? Why am I what the O t h e r says I a m ? ' ) . S o not only can
h y s t e r i c a l d e s i r e b e c o n c e i v e d o f as t h e d i s a v o w a l o f t h e fundamental
fantasy e n d o r s e d by the pervert; perversion itself ( a s s u m i n g the position
o f t h e o b j e c t - i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e O t h e r ' s jouissance) c a n also b e c o n c e i v e d
o f as t h e e s c a p e i n t o s e l f - o b j e c t i v i z a t i o n w h i c h e n a b l e s m e t o a v o i d the
d e a d l o c k o f t h e r a d i c a l u n c e r t a i n t y o f w h a t I a m as a n o b j e c t — t h e p e r v e r t ,
b y d e f i n i t i o n , knows w h a t , as a n o b j e c t , h e is f o r t h e O t h e r .
D e s i r e a n d d r i v e a r e c l e a r l y o p p o s e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e way t h e y r e l a t e
t o jouissance. F o r L a c a n , t h e t r o u b l e w i t h jouissance is n o t o n l y t h a t it is
u n a t t a i n a b l e , a l w a y s - a l r e a d y l o s t , t h a t it f o r e v e r e l u d e s o u r g r a s p , b u t , e v e n
m o r e , t h a t one can never get rid of it, t h a t its s t a i n d r a g s o n f o r e v e r - t h a t is
t h e p o i n t o f L a c a n ' s c o n c e p t o f s u r p l u s - e n j o y m e n t : t h e very r e n u n c i a t i o n
o f jouissance b r i n g s a b o u t a r e m a i n d e r / s u r p l u s o f jouissance. Desire stands
f o r t h e e c o n o m y i n w h i c h w h a t e v e r o b j e c t w e g e t h o l d o f is ' n e v e r it', t h e
' R e a l T h i n g ' , t h a t w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t is f o r e v e r t r y i n g t o a t t a i n b u t w h i c h
e l u d e s h i m again a n d again, while drive stands for the o p p o s i t e e c o n o m y ,
w i t h i n w h i c h t h e s t a i n o f jouissance always a c c o m p a n i e s o u r a c t s . T h i s a l s o
explains the difference in the reflexivity o f drive and desire: desire
r e f l e x i v e l y d e s i r e s its o w n u n s a t i s f a c t i o n , t h e p o s t p o n e m e n t o f t h e e n c o u n
t e r w i t h jouissance - t h a t is, t h e b a s i c f o r m u l a o f t h e r e f l e x i v i t y o f d e s i r e is
to turn the i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f satisfying desire into the desire for non-
satisfaction; drive, o n the contrary, finds satisfaction in (i.e. b e s m i r c h e s
with t h e stain o f satisfaction) the very m o v e m e n t d e s t i n e d to 'repress'
satisfaction.
W h a t , t h e n , is d r i v e , e s p e c i a l l y i n its m o s t r a d i c a l f o r m , t h a t o f t h e d e a t h
drive? A l o o k at W a g n e r i a n h e r o e s c a n be o f s o m e h e l p h e r e : from their
first p a r a d i g m a t i c case, the Flying D u t c h m a n , they a r e possessed by an
u n c o n d i t i o n a l passion for dying, for finding ultimate p e a c e a n d redemp
t i o n i n d e a t h . T h e i r p r e d i c a m e n t is t h a t at s o m e t i m e in t h e p a s t t h e y
h a v e c o m m i t t e d s o m e u n s p e a k a b l e evil d e e d , s o t h a t t h e y a r e c o n d e m n e d
t o p a y f o r it n o t b y d e a t h , b u t b y b e i n g c o n d e m n e d t o a life o f e t e r n a l
s u f f e r i n g , o f h e l p l e s s l y w a n d e r i n g a r o u n d , u n a b l e t o fulfil t h e i r s y m b o l i c
f u n c t i o n . W h e r e is t h e d e a t h d r i v e h e r e ? I t p r e c i s e l y d o e s not l i e i n t h e i r
l o n g i n g t o d i e , t o find p e a c e i n d e a t h : t h e d e a t h d r i v e , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , is
the very opposite of dying, i t is a n a m e f o r t h e ' u n d e a d ' e t e r n a l life i t s e l f , f o r
the horrible fate of being caught in the endless repetitive cycle of
wandering around in guilt and pain. The final passing-away of the
Wagnerian hero (the death o f the Dutchman, Wotan, Tristan, Amfortas)
is t h e r e f o r e t h e m o m e n t o f t h e i r liberation f r o m t h e c l u t c h e s o f t h e d e a t h
d r i v e . T r i s t a n i n A c t I I I is n o t d e s p e r a t e b e c a u s e o f h i s f e a r o f d y i n g : w h a t
m a k e s h i m s o d e s p e r a t e is t h e f a c t t h a t , w i t h o u t I s o l d e , h e cannot die a n d
is c o n d e m n e d to eternal l o n g i n g - h e a n x i o u s l y awaits h e r a r r i v a l so
t h a t h e c a n d i e . T h e p r o s p e c t h e d r e a d s is n o t t h a t o f d y i n g w i t h o u t I s o l d e
( t h e s t a n d a r d c o m p l a i n t o f a l o v e r ) b u t , r a t h e r , t h a t o f e n d l e s s life w i t h o u t
her. . . .
This gives u s a clue to the paradigmatic Wagnerian song, which,

p r e c i s e l y , is t h e complaint [Klage] 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 lament
of the dying Tristan and the two great complaints o f the 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 p u r e spiritual love (for
Elisabeth) and the excess o f earthly erotic enjoyment (provided 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 hero, condemned to the 'undead' existence of eternal
5 7
suffering.
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
d e a t h ' , K i e r k e g a a r d i n v e r t e d t h e s t a n d a r d d e s p a i r o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l w h o is
s p l i t b e t w e e n t h e c e r t a i n t y t h a t d e a t h is t h e e n d , t h a t t h e r e is n o B e v o n d
o f e t e r n a l l i f e , a n d t h e u n q u e n c h a b l e d e s i r e t o b e l i e v e t h a t d e a t h is n o t
t h e l a s t t h i n g : t h a t t h e r e is a n o t h e r l i f e , w i t h its p r o m i s e o f r e d e m p t i o n
a n d e t e r n a l bliss: K i e r k e g a a r d ' s ' s i c k n e s s u n t o d e a t h ' i n v o l v e s t h e o p p o s i t e
p a r a d o x o f t h e s u b j e c t w h o k n o w s t h a t d e a t h is n o t t h e e n d , t h a t h e h a s
an i m m o r t a l soul, b u t c a n n o t face the e x o r b i t a n t d e m a n d s o f this fact
(the necessity to a b a n d o n vain aesthetic pleasures and work for his
salvation), a n d d e s p e r a t e l y wants to b e l i e v e that d e a t h is t h e e n d , that
t h e r e is n o d i v i n e u n c o n d i t i o n a l d e m a n d e x e r t i n g its p r e s s u r e u p o n h i m .
... S o we have h e r e the individual who desperately wants to die, to
d i s a p p e a r f o r e v e r , b u t k n o w s t h a t h e c a n n o t d o it, s i n c e h e is c o n d e m n e d
t o e t e r n a l life: i m m o r t a l i t y , n o t d e a t h , b e c o m e s t h e u l t i m a t e h o r r o r . I n a
way this r e v e r s a l is a n a l o g o u s to t h e one we just m e n t i o n e d , to the
L a c a n i a n s h i f t f r o m d e s i r e t o d r i v e : d e s i r e d e s p e r a t e l y strives t o a c h i e v e
puissance, its u l t i m a t e o b j e c t w h i c h f o r e v e r e l u d e s it; w h i l e d r i v e , o n the
contrary, involves the o p p o s i t e impossibility - not the impossibility o f
a t t a i n i n g jouissance, b u t t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f g e t t i n g rid of it.
T h e l e s s o n o f d r i v e is t h a t we are condemned to jouissance. w h a t e v e r we d o ,

jouissance 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 and indestructible, endlessly-
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 u p all a r o u n d m e t h r o u g h clo
5 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 in
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 of a
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 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,
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 to
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 Freudian
name for the dimension traditional metaphysics designated as t h a t o f
immortality - 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 ' functions in e x a c d y the
s a m e way as 'heimlich' in the F r e u d i a n unheimlich, as c o i n c i d i n g w i t h its
negation: the 'death drive' designates the dimension o f what horror
fiction calls the 'undead', a strange, immortal, indestructible 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 kernel, a 'fundamental
symptom', the basic formula o f jouissance that they 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 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 de
el
V apparole , 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 pas-de-dialogue
a sa limite dans l-interpretation, 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 -
o f - d i a l o g u e ' as I'apparole, 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
jouissance, 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 h i s / h e r b e i n g , as is t h e c a s e w i t h injurious speech - it i n v o l v e s a
radically self-enclosed assertion o f puissance of empty (meaningless)

s p e e c h . ( I n s h o r t , Vapparole is t o la parole w h a t lalangue is t o le langage.)
I n s o f a r a s , i n Vapparole, we a r e thus d e a l i n g with an idiotic-happy
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, 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 the
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 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 and
its satisfaction in the repeated circuit of puissance, how do we
( r e ) i n t r o d u c e a L i m i t , a n d t h u s return to t h e d o m a i n o f p r o h i b i t i o n / L a w ,
communication of/and m e a n i n g ? T h e o n l y c o n s i s t e n t s o l u t i o n h e r e is
t h a t I'apparole (the L a c a n i a n version o f 'primary narcissism' prior lo the
introduction o f the symbolic Law) is n o t 'primordial'; that there is
s o m e t h i n g w h i c h ( l o g i c a l l y , a t l e a s t ) p r e c e d e s it - t h i s , p r e c i s e l y , is w h a t
we h a v e c a l l e d t h e v i o l e n c e o f p r e - s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n , w h i c h is not t o
b e i d e n t i f i e d with t h e blissful c i r c u i t o f self-satisfied drive. T h i s c i r c u i t o f
d r i v e is t h e u l t i m a t e m a t r i x o f self-affection, o f self-affective c i r c u l a t i o n
( L a c a n h i m s e l f e v o k e s lips k i s s i n g t h e m s e l v e s as t h e perfect figure of
drive; his very f o r m u l a o f drive - 'se faire. . .' - already e v o k e s self-
a f f e c t i o n ) ; w h i l e p r e - s y n t h e t i c i m a g i n a t i o n is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f self-
affection: it stands for a k i n d o f o n t o l o g i c a l ' B i g B a n g ' , f o r t h e p r i m o r d i a l
'violence' o f breaking out o f the i m m e r s i o n a n d enclosure, exploding the
closed circuit, tearing apart any unity o f Life into the free-floating
multiplicity o f spectral a n d m o n s t r o u s 'partial objects'.
E v e n L a c a n ' s o w n p o s i t i o n o n t h i s p o i n t is n o t w i t h o u t its a m b i g u i t i e s .
H i s ' o f f i c i a l ' s t a n c e is b e s t e x e m p l i f i e d b y t h e s h o r t b u t c r u c i a l t e x t a t t h e
2
e n d o f h i s Ecrits, ' F r o m t h e F r e u d i a n Trieb t o t h e D e s i r e o f t h e A n a l y s t ' : ' '
w h a t is t h e a n a l y s a n d to d o w h e n h e r e a c h e s t h e e n d o f t h e a n a l y t i c c u r e ,
t h a t is, w h e n h e ' r e g r e s s e s ' f r o m d e s i r e ( s u s t a i n e d b y f a n t a s y ) t o d r i v e ? I s
h e to a b a n d o n h i m s e l f to t h e s e l f - e n c l o s e d c i r c u i t o f drive? Different
mystical a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l traditions, from Christian mysticism to Nie
t z s c h e , s e e m t o a d v o c a t e t h i s way: a c c e p t t h e c i r c u i t o f t h e ' e t e r n a l r e t u r n
o f t h e s a m e ' , find satisfaction n o t in r e a c h i n g a G o a l b u t in t h e very p a t h
which leads t o it, t h a t is, i n repeatedly missing the Goal. . . . Lacan,
h o w e v e r , i n s i s t s t h a t ' g o i n g t h r o u g h t h e f a n t a s y ' is n o t s t r i c t l y e q u i v a l e n t
t o t h e shift f r o m d r i v e t o d e s i r e : t h e r e is a d e s i r e t h a t r e m a i n s e v e n a f t e r
we h a v e t r a v e r s e d o u r f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy, a desire n o t sustained by a
f a n t a s y , a n d this d e s i r e , o f c o u r s e , is the desire of the analyst — n o t t h e d e s i r e
t o b e c o m e a n a n a l y s t , b u t t h e d e s i r e w h i c h fits t h e s u b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n o f
t h e analyst, t h e d e s i r e o f s o m e o n e w h o h a s u n d e r g o n e 'subjective destitu
tion' a n d a c c e p t e d the role o f the e x c r e m e n t a l abject, desire delivered o f
t h e p h a n t a s m i c n o t i o n t h a t ' t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g i n m e m o r e t h a n m y s e l f ,
a secret treasure which makes m e worthy o f the Other's desire. T h i s
u n i q u e d e s i r e is w h a t , e v e n a f t e r I h a v e fully a s s u m e d ' t h e b i g Other's
nonexistence' - that is, t h e fact that the symbolic order is a mere
s e m b l a n c e - p r e v e n t s m e f r o m i m m e r s i n g m y s e l f in t h e s e l f - e n c l o s u r e o f
d r i v e ' s c i r c u i t a n d its d e b i l i t a t i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n . T h e d e s i r e o f t h e a n a l y s t is
thus s u p p o s e d to sustain the analytic c o m m u n i t y in t h e a b s e n c e o f any
p h a n t a s m i c s u p p o r t ; it is s u p p o s e d to m a k e p o s s i b l e a c o m m u n a l 'big
O t h e r ' that avoids t h e transferential effect o f t h e ' s u b j e c t s u p p o s e d to . . .
[ k n o w , b e l i e v e , e n j o y ] ' . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e d e s i r e o f t h e a n a l y s t is L a c a n ' s
tentative answer to t h e q u e s t i o n : after we have traversed t h e fantasy, a n d
a c c e p t e d t h e ' n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e big O t h e r ' , h o w d o we n o n e t h e less
r e t u r n to s o m e ( n e w ) f o r m o f t h e b i g O t h e r that again m a k e s c o l l e c t i v e
coexistence possible?
W h a t o n e s h o u l d a l s o n o t l o s e s i g h t o f is t h e f a c t t h a t , f o r L a c a n , d r i v e
is n o t ' p r i m o r d i a l ' , a f o u n d a t i o n o u t o f w h i c h , b y m e a n s o f t h e i n t e r v e n
tion o f the symbolic Law, desire emerges. A close reading o f L a c a n ' s
3
'graph o f desire'" shows h o w drive is a m o n t a g e o f elements which
e m e r g e s as a k i n d o f ' n e c e s s a r y b y - p r o d u c t ' o f t h e i n s t i n c t u a l b o d y g e t t i n g
c a u g h t in t h e w e b o f t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r . T h e fact that an i n s t i n c t u a l n e e d
is c a u g h t i n t h e s i g n i f i e r ' s w e b m e a n s t h a t t h e o b j e c t t h a t s a t i s f i e s t h i s
n e e d starts t o f u n c t i o n as t h e s i g n o f t h e ( M ) O t h e r ' s l o v e ; c o n s e q u e n t l y ,
t h e o n l y way to b r e a k o u t o f t h e d e a d l o c k o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s e n s l a v e m e n t t o
t h e O t h e r ' s d e m a n d is v i a t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e s y m b o l i c P r o h i b i t i o n /
L a w w h i c h m a k e s t h e full s a t i s f a c t i o n o f d e s i r e f o r e v e r i m p o s s i b l e . All t h e
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
6 4
o f non-satisfaction. 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
6 5
painful e x p e r i e n c e o f repeatedly missing o n e ' s g o a l .
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
6 6
action: 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 t h e s u b j e c t is c a u g h t , a k i n d o f
acephalous force which persists i n its 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, 'don't compromise your desire"; while the
complementary motto, ' 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 o f the Church in regulating sexual pleasure (the role
e m p h a s i z e d b y F o u c a u l t ) - t h a t is, t o t a k e d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e b o d y l i t e r a l l y ,
t o p r e a c h a n d p r a c t i s e t r u e c h a s t i t y ( s i n c e , as t h e C a t h a r s p u t it, every
6 7
s e x u a l r e u n i o n is i n c e s t u o u s ) . T h e p a r a d o x , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h i s r a d i c a l
renunciation o f sexual pleasure n o t only does n o t deprive the subject o f
jouissance, but even a m p l i f i e s it (the ascetic mystic has an access to
jouissance that is m u c h more intense than the usual standard sexual
p l e a s u r e ) . T h a t is t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e C a t h a r h e r e s y a n d c o u r t l y
love: w h e n , i n s t e a d o f b e i n g allowed s e x u a l p l e a s u r e within t h e c o n f i n e s
o f t h e L a w , b o d i l y s e x u a l i t y is t o t a l l y p r o h i b i t e d , t h i s p r o h i b i t i o n o f t h e
f i n a l s e x u a l u n i f i c a t i o n , t h i s s t r u c t u r e o f amor interruptus prolonged ad
infinitum, gives b i r t h t o c o u r d y l o v e i n w h i c h d e s i r e shifts i n t o d r i v e - in
w h i c h s a t i s f a c t i o n is p r o v i d e d b y t h e v e r y i n d e f i n i t e p o s t p o n e m e n t o f t h e
sexual u n i o n that would bring a b o u t 'actual' satisfaction. Christian crusad
e r s a g a i n s t t h e C a t h a r s w e r e t h e r e f o r e , i n a way, r i g h t i n t h e i r s u s p i c i o n
t h a t t h e a s c e t i c r e n u n c i a t i o n o f e a r t h l y p l e a s u r e s a m o n g t h e C a t h a r s was
d e e p l y a m b i g u o u s , s i n c e it e n g e n d e r e d a m u c h m o r e i n t e n s e jouissance
t h a t u n d e r m i n e d t h e very r e g u l a t i n g p o w e r o f t h e p a t e r n a l s y m b o l i c Law.
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 one

another, 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 o f desire, nor is
desire the result o f shrinking back from 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 - 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
subjectivity. S i n c e e n o u g h theoretical eulogies have b e e n written about
the notorious 'subject o f desire' (the subject divided/thwarted by the
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 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 -
6 S
oneself-seen. ( 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 —
inclusive o f the fundamental 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 to m e in any case.)
H o w e v e r , w h a t k i n d - i f a n y - o f subjectivity 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 to avoid the standard
e x a m p l e s l i k e Back to the Future, l e t us r e c a l l D a v i d L y n c h ' s Lost Highway. A
crucial ingredient o f Lynch's universe is a p h r a s e , a signifying 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, it
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 they
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 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 paternal
figure ( M r Eddy) - the entire narrative o f the film 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 film is b a s e d on the impossibility o f the hero
e n c o u n t e r i n g himself as i n t h e f a m o u s time-warp 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
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 'deeply-
b 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 - from the
future in which, through the work o f psychoanalytic treatment, the
7 0
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 . (In this s e n s e , t h e 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 - Scottie kissing J u d y r e f a s h i o n e d into
M a d e l e i n e in h e r ordinary hotel room - to the past - Scottie 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
7 1
i n t o his p e r s p e c t i v e - t h a t is, he is a l l o w e d to t e l l h i s s i d e o f t h e s t o r y . In
Wes Craven's supreme Wlien a Stranger Calls, a l s o , w e a r e t h r o w n all o f a
sudden into the standpoint o f the pathological compulsive killer pre
s e n t e d i n t h e first p a r t o f t h e f i l m as a b s o l u t e O t h e r n e s s - n o t t o m e n t i o n
Hitchcock's Psycho, in w h i c h , after the Mother is c o n s t r u c t e d as the
horrifying T h i n g , we are, in s o m e shots (like t h e killing o f t h e d e t e c t i v e
7 2
A r b o g a s t ) , v i e w i n g t h e a c t i o n f r o m its p e r s p e c t i v e .
I n all t h e s e c a s e s , t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e / t r a u m a t i c T h i n g - b e y o n d - r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
i t s e l f b e c o m e s ' s u b j e c t i v i z e d ' : this s u b j e c t i v i z a t i o n d o e s n o t 'humanize'
t h e T h i n g , d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t w h a t w e t h o u g h t was a M o n s t e r is in f a c t
a n o r d i n a r y , v u l n e r a b l e p e r s o n - t h e T h i n g r e t a i n s its u n b e a r a b l e O t h e r
n e s s , it is as such t h a t it s u b j e c t i v i z e s i t s e l f . O r , t o p u t it i n t h e t e r m s o f
v i s i o n : t h e T h i n g is first c o n s t r u c t e d as t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e X a r o u n d w h i c h
m y d e s i r e c i r c u l a t e s , as t h e b l i n d s p o t I w a n t t o s e e b u t simultaneously
d r e a d a n d a v o i d s e e i n g , t o o s t r o n g f o r m y e y e s ; t h e n , i n t h e shift towards
d r i v e , I ( t h e s u b j e c t ) ' m a k e m y s e l f s e e n ' as t h e T h i n g - i n a r e f l e x i v e t u r n ,
I s e e myself as It, t h e t r a u m a t i c o b j e c t - T h i n g I d i d n ' t w a n t t o s e e .
A g a i n , d o we n o t find t h e u l t i m a t e e x a m p l e o f this i m p o s s i b l e T h i n g
t h a t 'is' ourselves in t h e s c i e n c e - f i c t i o n t h e m e o f t h e s o - c a l l e d /rf-Machine,
a mechanism that directly materializes our unacknowledged fantasies
( f r o m F r e d W i l c o x ' s The Forbidden Planet to Andrei Tarkovsky's Solaris)?
T h e l a t e s t v a r i a t i o n o n t h i s t h e m e is B a r r y L e v i n s o n ' s Sphere ( 1 9 9 7 ) , in
w h i c h , b e n e a t h t h e o c e a n surface in t h e m i d s t o f t h e Pacific, a g i g a n t i c
s p a c e c r a f t is s u d d e n l y d i s c o v e r e d , h a v i n g s a t t h e r e o n t h e o c e a n f l o o r f o r
three hundred years. T h e three scientists who penetrate it gradually
discover that the mysterious S p h e r e in the middle o f the spacecraft can
r e a c h i n t o y o u r m i n d : it k n o w s y o u r w o r s t f e a r s a n d s t a r t s t o m a k e them
7 S
c o m e true, to m a t e r i a l i z e t h e m . . . ,
U n i n t e r e s t i n g as Sphere is, it n o n e t h e l e s s d e s e r v e s a t t e n t i o n f o r its t i t l e :
as L a c a n s h o w e d in t h e c h a p t e r o f his S e m i n a r o n T r a n s f e r e n c e d e d i c a t e d
4
to this very t h e m e ( ' L a d e r i s i o n de la s p h e r e ' ' ) , t h e fascination e x e r t e d
o n us b y t h e u n t o u c h a b l e , i m p e n e t r a b l e , s e l f - e n c l o s e d a n d s e l f - c o n t a i n e d
form o f a sphere lies in the fact that it e x p r e s s e s perfectly, on the
i m a g i n a r y level, the f o r e c l o s u r e o f castration, o f a c u t that would signal
the presence o f a lack a n d / o r an excess. A n d , paradoxically, since o u r
a c c e s s t o r e a l i t y is c o n d i t i o n e d by t h e c u t o f c a s t r a t i o n , t h e s t a t u s o f t h i s
s p h e r e , far f r o m embodying o n t o l o g i c a l p e r f e c t i o n , is stricto sensu pre-
ontological: the Sphere-Thing appears to us as s o m e t h i n g which, in
c i n e m a t i c t e r m s , o n e c o u l d d e s i g n a t e as a b l u r r e d o b j e c t , a n o b j e c t t h a t is
b y d e f i n i t i o n , a p r i o r i , o u t o f f o c u s . " ' T h i s is n i c e l y c o n v e y e d i n L e v i n s o n ' s
f i l m , i n w h i c h t h e S p h e r e is p e r f e c t l y r o u n d y e t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y s o m e h o w
a l i v e , u n d u l a t i n g a n d v i b r a t i n g , as i f its s u r f a c e c o n s i s t s o f t h e i n f i n i t y o f
m i c r o s c o p i c waves.
T h e S p h e r e is t h u s l i k e t h e s u r f a c e o f T a r k o v s k y ' s S o l a r i s - O c e a n in its
c o i n c i d e n c e o f g l o b a l , o v e r a l l c a l m a n d i n f i n i t e m o b i l i t y - a l t h o u g h i t is
p e r f e c t l y at p e a c e , it is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y e x t r e m e l y a g i t a t e d , s c i n t i l l a t i n g all
the time, s o t h a t it is i m p o s s i b l e t o fix it, t o g e t h o l d o f i t i n its p o s i t i v e
e x i s t e n c e . As s u c h , t h e S p h e r e is n o t h i n g in itself - a p u r e m e d i u m , a
perfect m i r r o r that does not m i r r o r / m a t e r i a l i z e reality b u t only the R e a l
of the subject's fundamental fantasies. W h e n , in the film, the Dustin
Hoffman character angrily rebukes S a m u e l J a c k s o n (playing the African-
A m e r i c a n m a t h e m a t i c i a n ) b e c a u s e h e d o e s n o t w a n t t o d i v u l g e w h a t is i n
the s p h e r e to others, J a c k s o n retorts angrily: ' B u t you also have b e e n in
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 is n o t h i n g to b e s e e n unless we g o b e h i n d it
o u r s e l v e s , as m u c h in order that w e m a y s e e , as t h a t there may be
7 6
something behind there which can be seen.'
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 impos
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 semblance, 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 that
reason, the 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 and then
immediately 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 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?' ' 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
any!'
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 , but
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 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
i n n e r m o s t i d i o s y n c r a t i c w h i m s ; i f t h e r e is a p u p p e t - m a s t e r w h o p u l l s t h e
s t r i n g s , it is o u r s e l v e s , ' t h e T h i n g t h a t t h i n k s ' i n o u r h e a r t .
A n d is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e e x a m p l e o f t h i s c o i n c i d e n c e o f t h e v e r y k e r n e l
o f m y b e i n g with the u l t i m a t e e x t e r n a l i t y o f t h e A l i e n T h i n g Oedipus
himself, w h o , in s e a r c h o f t h e m u r d e r e r o f his father, discovers t h a t h e
h i m s e l f is t h e perpetrator? In this p r e c i s e s e n s e , o n e can claim that
F r e u d ' s t e r m Triebschicksale, t h e ' d e s t i n i e s / v i c i s s i t u d e s o f d r i v e ' , is d e e p l y
j u s t i f i e d , e v e n t a u t o l o g i c a l ; t h e F r e u d i a n ' d r i v e ' is u l t i m a t e l y a n o t h e r n a m e
for 'Destiny', for the reversal t h r o u g h which t h e circle o f Destiny a c c o m
p l i s h e s / c l o s e s i t s e l f ( w h e n D e s t i n y c a t c h e s u p w i t h O e d i p u s , h e is c o n
f r o n t e d w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t h e is t h e m o n s t e r h e is l o o k i n g f o r ) . A n d in
o r d e r t o b r i n g h o m e h o w this d i m e n s i o n o f D e s t i n y o v e r l a p s w i t h the
temporal loop, recall the standard tragic science-fiction t h e m e of a
s c i e n t i s t w h o t r a v e l s i n t o t h e p a s t i n o r d e r t o i n t e r v e n e i n it a n d thus
retroactively c h a n g e (undo) the catastrophic present; all o f a sudden
( w h e n i t is a l r e a d y t o o l a t e ) , h e b e c o m e s a w a r e n o t o n l y t h a t t h e result
( t h e p r e s e n t c a t a s t r o p h e ) is t h e s a m e , b u t t h a t his very attempt to change the
present through his retroactive intervention in the past produced the very catastrophe
he wanted to undo - h i s i n t e r v e n t i o n was i n c l u d e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h i n g s
f r o m t h e very outset. I n this p r o p e r l y d i a l e c t i c a l reversal, t h e a l t e r n a t i v e
reality t h e a g e n t w a n t e d to b r i n g a b o u t turns o u t to b e the very p r e s e n t
c a t a s t r o p h i c reality.
T o t h o s e v e r s e d i n H e g e l i a n p h i l o s o p h y , t h e s e two f e a t u r e s o f d r i v e -
its t e m p o r a l l o o p ; t h e p i t i l e s s a n d i n e x o r a b l e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t
with t h e i n a c c e s s i b l e T h i n g w h o s e l a c k o r withdrawal sustains t h e s p a c e o f
desire - c a n n o t b u t e v o k e two f u n d a m e n t a l features o f the Hegelian
dialectical process: does not Hegel reiterate again and again how the
dialectical p r o c e s s displays t h e c i r c u l a r structure o f a l o o p ( t h e s u b j e c t o f
t h e p r o c e s s , t h e a b s o l u t e I d e a , is n o t g i v e n i n a d v a n c e , b u t is g e n e r a t e d
by t h e p r o c e s s itself - s o , in a p a r a d o x i c a l t e m p o r a l s h o r t circuit, t h e final
R e s u l t r e t r o a c t i v e l y causes itself, g e n e r a t e s its o w n c a u s e s ) ; a n d , further
m o r e , h o w t h e b a s i c m a t r i x o f t h e d i a l e c t i c a l p r o c e s s is t h a t o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s
s e l f - r e c o g n i t i o n i n t h e I n - i t s e l f o f its a b s o l u t e O t h e r n e s s ( r e c a l l t h e s t a n
d a r d figure o f H e g e l a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h I have to r e c o g n i z e m y own
s u b s t a n c e in t h e very f o r c e t h a t s e e m s to resist a n d t h w a r t m y e n d e a v o u r ) .
D o e s t h i s m e a n t h a t ' d r i v e ' is i n h e r e n t l y m e t a p h y s i c a l , t h a t i t p r o v i d e s
the elemental-)' matrix o f the closed circle o f teleology and o f self-
r e c o g n i t i o n i n O t h e r n e s s ? Y e s , b u t w i t h a twist: it is as if, i n d r i v e , t h i s
c l o s e d l o o p o f t e l e o l o g y is m i n i m a l l y d i s p l a c e d o n a c c o u n t o f t h e f a i l u r e
t h a t s e t s i t i n m o t i o n . I t m a y a p p e a r t h a t d r i v e is t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f
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 a fundamental, c o n s t i t u t i v e failure. The most
succinct definition o f the reversal constitutive o f drive is t h e 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 loop o f circular satisfaction, of the
repetitive m o v e m e n t that finds 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 the very f u n d a m e n t a l structure of Selbst-
Bewusstsein, 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 dimension, as t h e T h i n g I
7 8
actually a m .
W e can now pinpoint the opposition between the subject o f desire and
the subject o f drive: while the subject o f desire is g r o u n d e d in the
c o n s t i t u t i v e lack ( i t ex-sists i n s o f a r as it is i n s e a r c h o f t h e m i s s i n g O b j e c t -
C a u s e ) , t h e s u b j e c t o f d r i v e is g r o u n d e d i n a c o n s t i t u t i v e surplus - t h a t is
t o say, in t h e e x c e s s i v e p r e s e n c e o f s o m e T h i n g t h a t is i n h e r e n t l y ' i m p o s s
i b l e ' a n d s h o u l d n o t b e h e r e , in o u r p r e s e n t reality - the T h i n g w h i c h , o f
c o u r s e , is u l t i m a t e l y the subject itself. T h e standard heterosexual 'fatal
attraction' s c e n e is t h a t o f m a l e d e s i r e c a p t i v a t e d a n d f a s c i n a t e d b y a
d e a d l y jouissance feminine, a w o m a n is d e s u b j e c t i v i z e d , c a u g h t i n t h e self-
e n c l o s e d cycle o f a c e p h a l o u s drive, i g n o r a n t o f the fascination she exerts
o n m a n , a n d it is p r e c i s e l y t h i s s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t i g n o r a n c e w h i c h m a k e s h e r
i r r e s i s t i b l e ; t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c m y t h i c a l e x a m p l e o f t h i s s c e n e , o f c o u r s e , is
t h a t o f U l y s s e s c a p t i v a t e d by t h e S i r e n s ' s o n g , t h i s p u r e jouis-sense. What
happens, however, when the W o m a n - T h i n g herself b e c o m e s subjectivized?
T h i s , p e r h a p s , is t h e m o s t m y s t e r i o u s l i b i d i n a l i n v e r s i o n o f all: t h e m o m e n t
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 desire transfixed by the
7
irresistible l o o k o f the W o m a n - T h i n g . W hen desire 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 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 ,
t h e s u b j e c t disengages 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 Evil T h i n g . I n 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 Lisa, inconspicuous
among much 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 is brought the
head of John the Baptist. Bernardino Luini (1480-1532), 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 painting
is d o m i n a t e d 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 partial o b j e c t (a strict e q u i v a l e n t to t h e 'bloody head here'
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 Realphilosophie). Her
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 fixed on some
unspecified distant point - n o w that s h e has g o t what s h e was asking
for, the finally 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 ,
r e n d e r e d i n d i f f e r e n t . . . . P e r h a p s t h i s p a i n t i n g is t h e c l o s e s t o n e c a n get
to t h e d e p i c t i o n o f the unique m o m e n t o f the e m e r g e n c e o f the subject
o f drive.
Notes
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
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.
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 positive-
empirical 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
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 philosophy-
is 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
T
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.
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', La Cause freudienne 3 4 , Paris 1 9 9 6 ,
pp. 7 - 1 8 .
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 , T h e Subversion o f the Subject a n d the Dialectics o f Desire', in
Ecrits: A Selection.
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
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
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 people
(the pacifying Ego Ideal, the point o f ideal identification and the
ferocious superego, the agent o f cruel prohibition; the symbolic function
o f t o t e m a n d t h e h o r r o r o f t a b o o ) , a r e united in one and the same person.
( T h e p r e v i o u s s e p a r a t e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e two f u n c t i o n s a c c o u n t s f o r
the apparent stupidity' o f some aborigines who thought that the true
f a t h e r o f a c h i l d is a s t o n e o r a n a n i m a l o r a s p i r i t : t h e a b o r i g i n e s w e r e
w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h e m o t h e r was i n s e m i n a t e d b y t h e 'real' father; they
m e r e l y s e p a r a t e d t h e r e a l f a t h e r f r o m its s y m b o l i c f u n c t i o n . ) T h e a m b i g u
o u s rivalry with t h e f a t h e r figure, w h i c h e m e r g e d with t h e U n i f i c a t i o n o f
t h e two f u n c t i o n s i n t h e b o u r g e o i s n u c l e a r f a m i l y , c r e a t e d t h e p s y c h i c
c o n d i t i o n s for m o d e r n Western dynamic creative individualism; at the
same time, however, it s o w e d the seeds o f the subsequent 'crisis o f
O e d i p u s ' ( o r , m o r e g e n e r a l l y , with r e g a r d t o figures o f a u t h o r i t y as s u c h ,
2
o f t h e 'crisis o f investiture' that e r u p t e d in t h e late n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y ) :
s y m b o l i c a u t h o r i t y was m o r e a n d m o r e s m e a r e d b y t h e m a r k . Q f obscenity
a n d t h u s , as it w e r e , u n d e r m i n e d f r o m w i t h i n . L a c a n ' s p o i n t , Q f c o u r s e , is
t h a t t h i s i d e n t i t y is t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e O e d i p u s c o m p l e x : it c a n 'function
n o r m a l l y ' a n d a c c o m p l i s h its j o b o f t h e c h i l d ' s i n t e g r a t i o n i n t o t h e s o c i o -
s y m b o l i c o r d e r o n l y i n so far as t h i s i d e n t i t y r e m a i n s c o n c e a l e d - the
m o m e n t it is p o s i t e d as s u c h , t h e figure o f paternal authority potentially
t u r n s i n t o a n o b s c e n e jouisseur ( t h e G e r m a n w o r d is Luripr) in whom
i m p o t e n c e a n d e x c e s s i v e r a g e c o i n c i d e , a ' h u m i l i a t e d l a t h e r ' c a u g h t in
i m a g i n a r y rivalry with h i s s o n .
H e r e we h a v e t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a s e o f a p r o p e r l y h i s t o r i c a l d i a l e c t i c :
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 only
historical m o m e n t which allows f o r a n insight into universality 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
3
entire preceding 'normal' history.
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 as t h e elementary form o f 'socialization', o f the
subject's integration into the symbolic order, and the standard socio-
psychological topoi o n how modernity is c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y individualist
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 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 into
which they were b o r n , but can - in p r i n c i p l e , at least - move 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). T h i s is why, on the level o f mythical narrative,
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' ( i n Totem and Taboo
[ T&T]) - 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 realization
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 (the dead
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 much-decried
'decline o f Oedipus' ( 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
the return of figures which function according to the logic of the
'primordial father', from 'totalitarian' political L e a d e r s to the paternal
s e x u a l h a r a s s e r - why? W h e n t h e ' 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 a
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. 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, precisely, consists the c r u c i a l shift from
O e d i p u s t o T&T: 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 we all did it, a n d
this universally s h a r e d c r i m e g r o u n d e 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
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: 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
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
5
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 , ' 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
0
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 . ' 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
7
founding 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
1 < j
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 " 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
D e
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 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 and Monotheism
[MafM], in w h i c h w e a r e also d e a l i n g with two p a t e r n a l figures; this
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&T- h e r e , t h e two figures
are not the pre-symbolic o b s c e n e / n o n - c a s t r a t e d father-Jouissartce and the
(dead) father qua the bearer o f symbolic authority (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 the
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 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, MofM reverses the m a t r i x o f TcfT yet again: the father
who is ' b e t r a y e d ' and 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 obscene
p r i m o r d i a l Father-Jouissance 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
symbolic authority, the figure which personifies the unified rational
s t r u c t u r e o f t h e u n i v e r s e [logos]. 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
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 . 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 tk>d o f P h i l o s o p h e r s
w i t
(God qua the universal structure o f logos, identified h the rational
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. in contrast to the primordial father endowed
w i t h a knowledge o f jouissance, the f u n d a m e n t a l feature o f this u n c o m p r o
m i s i n g G o d is t h a t H e says ' N o ! ' t o jouissance — t h i s is a G o d p o s s e s s e d b y
J
ferocious ignorance {'laferoce ignorance 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 and
s e c r e t ways o f jouissance \ 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 harmony between the big O t h e r (the symbolic order) and
jouissance, 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 by s o m e 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 ('I a m
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, 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 ordinary
people are horrified when they e n c o u n t e r a person whose 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 'pan-
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 universal
l o g i c a l s y s t e m is i n i t s e l f impotent - it is a s y s t e m o f p u r e potentialities and,
as s u c h , i n n e e d o f d i e s u p p l e m e n t a r y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' a c t o f p u r e W i l l i n o r d e r
t o actualize itself.
T h i s G o d is t h e G o d w h o speaks to His f o l l o w e r s / s o n s , to His ' p e o p l e ' -
t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f voice is c r u c i a l h e r e . A s L a c a n p u t it i n h i s u n p u b l i s h e d
S e m i n a r o n Anxiety (from 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 ) , the voice (the actual 'speech act')
b r i n g s a b o u t t h e passage a I'acte o f t h e s i g n i f y i n g n e t w o r k , its ' s y m b o l i c
e f f i c i e n c y ' . T h i s v o i c e is i n h e r e n t l y m e a n i n g l e s s - n o n s e n s i c a l , e v e n ; it is
just a negative gesture which gives e x p r e s s i o n t o G o d ' s m a l i c i o u s and
v e n g e f u l a n g e r ( a l l m e a n i n g is a l r e a d y t h e r e i n t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r w h i c h
s t r u c t u r e s o u r u n i v e r s e ) , b u t it is p r e c i s e l y as s u c h t h a t it a c t u a l i z e s t h e
1 0
p u r e l y s t r u c t u r a l m e a n i n g , t r a n s f o r m i n g it i n t o a n e x p e r i e n c e o f S e n s e .
T h i s , o f c o u r s e , is a n o t h e r way o f s a y i n g t h a t t h r o u g h this u t t e r i n g o f t h e
V o i c e w h i c h m a n i f e s t s H i s W i l l , G o d subjectivizes Himself. T h e old Egyptian
M o s e s b e t r a y e d a n d k i l l e d b y h i s p e o p l e was t h e a l l - i n c l u s i v e O n e o f logos,
the rational substantial structure o f the universe, the 'writing' accessible
to those w h o know h o w to r e a d the ' G r e a t B o o k o f N a t u r e ' , n o t yet the
all-exclusive O n e o f subjectivity w h o i m p o s e s His u n c o n d i t i o n a l Will on
H i s c r e a t i o n . A n d , a g a i n , t h e c r u c i a l p o i n t n o t t o b e m i s s e d is t h a t t h i s
G o d , a l t h o u g h a l o g i c a l , ' c a p r i c i o u s ' , v e n g e f u l , ' i r r a t i o n a l ' , is not t h e p r e -
s y m b o l i c ' p r i m o r d i a l ' Father-Jouissance but, o n the contrary, the a g e n t o f
p r o h i b i t i o n c a r r i e d b y a ' f e r o c i o u s i g n o r a n c e ' o f t h e ways o f jouissance.
T h e p a r a d o x o n e h a s t o b e a r i n m i n d h e r e is t h a t t h i s G o d o f g r o u n d l e s s
W i l l i n g a n d f e r o c i o u s ' i r r a t i o n a l ' r a g e is t h e G o d w h o , b y m e a n s o f H i s
Prohibition, accomplishes the destruction o f the old sexualized Wisdom,
and thus o p e n s up the space for the de-sexualized 'abstract' knowledge o f
m o d e r n s c i e n c e : t h e r e is ' o b j e c t i v e ' s c i e n t i f i c k n o w l e d g e ( i n t h e modern,
post-Cartesian sense o f the t e r m ) only i f the universe o f scientific knowl
e d g e i t s e l f is s u p p l e m e n t e d and s u s t a i n e d by t h i s e x c e s s i v e ' i r r a t i o n a l '
figure o f the 'real father'. In short, Descartes's 'voluntarism' (see his
i n f a m o u s s t a t e m e n t that 2 + 2 would b e 5 if such were G o d ' s Will - there
a r e n o e t e r n a l t r u t h s d i r e c t l y c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w i t h D i v i n e N a t u r e ) is t h e
necessary obverse o f m o d e r n scientific knowledge. P r e m o d e r n Aristotelian
a n d m e d i e v a l k n o w l e d g e was n o t y e t ' o b j e c t i v e ' r a t i o n a l s c i e n t i f i c k n o w l
e d g e p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e it l a c k e d t h i s e x c e s s i v e e l e m e n t o f G o d qua the
subjectivity o f p u r e ' i r r a t i o n a l ' Willing: in Aristotle, ' G o d ' directly e q u a l s
His own eternal rational Nature; H e 'is' n o t h i n g b u t the logical O r d e r o f
T h i n g s . T h e f u r t h e r p a r a d o x is t h a t t h i s ' i r r a t i o n a l ' G o d as t h e p r o h i b i t o r y
paternal figure also o p e n s up the space for the entire d e v e l o p m e n t of
m o d e r n i t y , u p t o t h e d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t n o t i o n t h a t o u r s e x u a l i d e n t i t y is a
c o n t i n g e n t s o c i o - s y m b o l i c f o r m a t i o n : t h e m o m e n t this p r o h i b i t o r y figure
32U THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
r e c e d e s , we a r e b a c k i n t o t h e J u n g i a n n e o - o b s c u r a n t i s t n o t i o n o f the
m a s c u l i n e a n d f e m i n i n e e t e r n a l a r c h e t y p e s w h i c h thrives today.
T h i s p a r a d o x is c r u c i a l i f w e a r e n o t t o m i s u n d e r s t a n d c o m p l e t e l y t h e
gap that separates the p r o p e r authority o f the symbolic L a w / P r o h i b i d o n
from mere 'regulation by rules': t h e d o m a i n o f s y m b o l i c r u l e s , i f i t is
actually to count as s u c h , has to b e grounded in some tautological
a u t h o r i t y beyond rules, w h i c h says ' I t is s o b e c a u s e I say it is s o ! ' . " I n s h o r t ,
b e y o n d d i v i n e R e a s o n t h e r e is t h e a b y s s o f G o d ' s W i l l , o f H i s c o n t i n g e n t
Decision which sustains even the Eternal Trutiis. Above and beyond
o p e n i n g u p t h e space for m o d e r n reflexive f r e e d o m , this s a m e g a p also
o p e n s up the s p a c e for m o d e r n tragedy. I n political t e r m s , the d i f f e r e n c e
between classical tragedy a n d m o d e r n t r a g e d y is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
12
( t r a d i t i o n a l ) tyranny a n d ( m o d e r n ) terror.' T h e t r a d i t i o n a l hero s a c r i f i c e s
h i m s e l f for the C a u s e ; h e resists t h e p r e s s u r e o f t h e T y r a n t a n d a c c o m
p l i s h e s h i s D u t y , c o s t w h a t it m a y ; as s u c h , h e is a p p r e c i a t e d , h i s s a c r i f i c e
confers on h i m a sublime aura, h i s a c t is i n s c r i b e d i n t h e r e g i s t e r o f
T r a d i t i o n as a n e x a m p l e t o b e f o l l o w e d . W e e n t e r t h e d o m a i n o f m o d e r n
tragedy when t h e very l o g i c o f s a c r i f i c e f o r t h e T h i n g c o m p e l s u s to
s a c r i f i c e t h i s T h i n g itself; t h e r e i n lies t h e p r e d i c a m e n t o f P a u l C l a u d e l ' s
S y g n c , w h o is c o m p e l l e d to b e t r a y h e r f a i t h in o r d e r t o p r o v e h e r a b s o l u t e
f i d e l i t y t o G o d . S y g n e d o e s n o t s a c r i f i c e h e r e m p i r i c a l life f o r w h a t m a t t e r s
t o h e r m o r e t h a n h e r l i f e , s h e s a c r i f i c e s p r e c i s e l y t h a t w h i c h is ' i n her
m o r e t h a n h e r s e l f , a n d t h u s survives as a m e r e s h e l l o f h e r f o r m e r s e l f ,
d e p r i v e d o f h e r agalma — w e t h e r e b y e n t e r t h e d o m a i n o f t h e monstrosity of
heroism, when our fidelity t o t h e Cause c o m p e l s us to transgress the
t h r e s h o l d o f o u r ' h u m a n i t y ' . Is it n o t p r o o f o f t h e h i g h e s t , m o s t a b s o l u t e
f a i t h t h a t , f o r t h e l o v e o f G o d , I a m r e a d y t o l o s e , to e x p o s e t o e t e r n a l
d a m n a t i o n , m y e t e r n a l S o u l itself? I t is e a s y t o s a c r i f i c e o n e ' s life w i t h t h e
c e r t a i n t y o f t h e r e b y r e d e e m i n g o n e ' s e t e r n a l S o u l - h o w m u c h w o r s e is i t
to sacrifice o n e ' s very soul for G o d !
P e r h a p s t h e u l t i m a t e h i s t o r i c a l i l l u s t r a t i o n o f this p r e d i c a m e n t - o f t h e
g a p w h i c h s e p a r a t e s t h e h e r o (his r e s i s t a n c e to tyranny) f r o m t h e victim
o f t e r r o r - is p r o v i d e d b y t h e S t a l i n i s t v i c t i m : t h i s v i c t i m is n o t s o m e o n e
who finally learns that Communism was an ideological mirage, and
becomes aware o f the positivity o f a s i m p l e ethical life outside the
ideological Cause - the Stalinist victim c a n n o t retreat into a simple ethical
life, since h e has already forsaken it f o r his C o m m u n i s t Cause. This
p r e d i c a m e n t a c c o u n t s for t h e i m p r e s s i o n that a l t h o u g h the fate o f the
v i c t i m s o f t h e g r e a t S t a l i n i s t s h o w trials ( f r o m B u k h a r i n t o S l a n s k y ) was
h o r r i b l e b e y o n d d e s c r i p t i o n , t h e p r o p e r l y t r a g i c d i m e n s i o n is m i s s i n g -
t h a t is, t h e y w e r e 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 the ethical Cause qua real from Cause in its
symbolic dimension ( 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
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 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 the
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 is to betray
what this very faith 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, f o r t h e f a c t t h a t t h e two c a n n e v e r
be 'synchronized'. O n e c a n also see in w h a t p r e c i s e sense perversion
e n a c t s the disavowal o f castration: the f u n d a m e n t a l illusion o f the p e r v e r t
is t h a t h e p o s s e s s e s a ( s y m b o l i c ) k n o w l e d g e t h a t e n a b l e s h i m t o r e g u l a t e
h i s a c c e s s t o puissance - t h a t is, t o p u t i t i n m o r e c o n t e m p o r a r y t e r m s , t h e
p e r v e r t ' s d r e a m is t o t r a n s f o r m s e x u a l activity i n t o a n i n s t r u m e n t a l p u r p o s e -
o r i e n t a t e d activity t h a t c a n b e p r o j e c t e d a n d e x e c u t e d a c c o r d i n g to a well-
defined plan. So when, today, o n e speaks o f the decline o f paternal
a u t h o r i t y , it is this f a t h e r , t h e f a t h e r o f t h e u n c o m p r o m i s i n g ' N o ! ' , w h o is
effectively in retreat; in t h e a b s e n c e o f his p r o h i b i t o r y ' N o ! ' , n e w f o r m s o f
t h e p h a n t a s m i c h a r m o n y b e t w e e n t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r a n d puissance can
thrive again - this r e t u r n to the substantial n o t i o n o f Reason-as-Life at t h e
e x p e n s e o f t h e p r o h i b i t o r y ' r e a l f a t h e r ' is w h a t t h e s o - c a l l e d N e w A g e
' h o l i s t i c ' a t t i t u d e is u l t i m a t e l y a b o u t ( t h e E a r t h o r m a c r o c o s m i t s e l f as a
1 4
living e n t i t y ) . W h a t t h e s e d e a d l o c k s i n d i c a t e is t h a t t o d a y , i n a s e n s e ,
' t h e b i g O t h e r n o l o n g e r e x i s t s ' - b u t i n tuhat s e n s e ? O n e s h o u l d b e v e r y
s p e c i f i c a b o u t w h a t t h i s n o n e x i s t e n c e a c t u a l l y a m o u n t s t o . I n a way, it is
t h e s a m e w i t h t h e b i g O t h e r as it is with G o d a c c o r d i n g t o L a c a n ( i t is n o t
t h a t G o d is d e a d t o d a y ; G o d was d e a d f r o m t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g , o n l y H e
d i d n ' t k n o w i t . . . ) : it never existed in the first place, t h a t is, t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e
o f t h e b i g O t h e r is u l t i m a t e l y e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e b i g O t h e r is
t h e symbolic o r d e r , t h e o r d e r o f s y m b o l i c fictions w h i c h o p e r a t e o n a l e v e l
different f r o m that o f d i r e c t m a t e r i a l causality. (In this sense, t h e o n l y
s u b j e c t f o r w h o m t h e b i g O t h e r does e x i s t is t h e p s y c h o t i c , t h e o n e w h o
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, t h e way t h i s
fiction 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 the ultimate goodness of mankind in s p i t e o f t h e
horrors perpetrated 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 an
assertion o f belief (in the essential g o o d n e s s o f m a n k i n d ; in the 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
meta-physical g e s t u r e : i n t h i s r e f u s a l t o a c c e p t t h e R e a l i n its i d i o c y , t o
1 3
d i s a v o w it a n d t o s e a r c h f o r A n o t h e r W o r l d b e h i n d i t .
1 6
I n his r e a d i n g o f F r e u d ' s article o n fetishism, P a u l - L a u r e n t A s s o u n
s u g g e s t s t h a t s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t w o d i f f e r e n t a p p r o a c h e s
to the g a p b e t w e e n w h a t my eyes tell m e a n d the s y m b o l i c fiction - to the
g a p that s e p a r a t e s the visible f r o m t h e invisible. W h e n a small b o y sees a
n a k e d girl, h e c h o o s e s n o t to believe his eyes ( a n d a c c e p t t h e fact t h a t
girls a r e different); he continues to believe the 'word', the symbolic
fiction, w h i c h l e d h i m t o e x p e c t a p e n i s i n t h e g i r l as w e l l , s o h e d i s a v o w s
h i s i m m e d i a t e p e r c e p t i o n , i n t e r p r e t s i t as a s u p e r f i c i a l l u r e , a n d s t a r t s t o
s e a r c h , to f o r m h y p o t h e s e s that w o u l d a c c o u n t for this g a p (girls have a
smaller, a l m o s t i n v i s i b l e p e n i s ; t h e i r p e n i s will g r o w l a t e r ; it was cut
o f f . . .) - in s h o r t , t h e boy's disavowal p r o p e l s h i m in t h e d i r e c t i o n o f a
' s p o n t a n e o u s metaphysician', a believer in A n o t h e r W o r l d b e n e a t h the
visible facts. T h e girl, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , 'believes h e r eyes', s h e a c c e p t s t h e
f a c t t h a t s h e d o e s n o t p o s s e s s ' i t ' , s o a d i f f e r e n t s e t o f o p t i o n s is o p e n e d
to h e r , f r o m t h e n o t o r i o u s 'penis envy' a n d t h e s e a r c h f o r substitutes (a
child, etc.) to the cynical attitude o f a fundamental distrust towards the
s y m b o l i c o r d e r ( w h a t i f m a l e p h a l l i c p o w e r is a m e r e s e m b l a n c e ? ) .
In the history o f philosophy, there are three great a n e c d o t a l e x a m p l e s
o f 'believe my words, n o t your eyes': D i o g e n e s the Cynic, w h o refuted the
E l e a t i c t h e s i s t h a t t h e r e is n o m o v e m e n t b y s i m p l y t a k i n g a w a l k , and
t h e n , as H e g e l e m p h a s i z e s , b e a t h i s p u p i l w h o a p p l a u d e d t h e M a s t e r -
t h a t is, b e l i e v e d h i s e y e s m o r e t h a n t h e w o r d s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n (Dio
g e n e s ' p o i n t was t h a t s u c h a d i r e c t r e f e r e n c e t o e x p e r i e n c e , t o ' w h a t y o u r
e y e s t e l l y o u ' , d o e s n o t c o u n t i n p h i l o s o p h y - t h e t a s k o f p h i l o s o p h y is t o
d e m o n s t r a t e , by m e a n s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n , t h e truth o r u n t r u t h o f w h a t we
s e e ) ; the medieval story o f scholastic m o n k s w h o discussed h o w many
teeth a d o n k e y has, a n d were t h e n s h o c k e d at t h e p r o p o s a l by a y o u n g e r
m e m b e r o f t h e i r g r o u p t h a t t h e y s h o u l d s i m p l y g o t o a stall o u t s i d e t h e i r
house and count; finally, t h e story o f H e g e l insisting that t h e r e are only
eight planets a r o u n d the S u n even after the discovery o f the ninth.
T o d a y , with the n e w digitalized t e c h n o l o g i e s e n a b l i n g perfectly f a k e d
documentary images, not to mention Virtual Reality, the injunction
' B e l i e v e m y w o r d s ( a r g u m e n t a t i o n ) , n o t t h e f a s c i n a t i o n o f y o u r e y e s ! ' is
more pertinent t h a n e v e r . T h a t is t o say, t h e l o g i c o f ' W h o m d o you
b e l i e v e , y o u r e y e s o r m y w o r d s ? ' - t h a t is, o f ' I k n o w v e r y w e l l , b u t none
t h e less . . . [ I b e l i e v e ] ' - c a n f u n c t i o n i n two d i f f e r e n t ways, t h a t o f t h e
s y m b o l i c fiction a n d t h a t o f t h e i m a g i n a r y simulacrum. In the case o f the
efficient symbolic fiction o f the j u d g e w e a r i n g his insignia, T k n o w very
w e l l t h a t t h i s p e r s o n is a c o r r u p t w e a k l i n g , b u t I n o n e t h e less t r e a t h i m
as i f [ I b e l i e v e t h a t ] t h e s y m b o l i c b i g O t h e r s p e a k s t h r o u g h h i m ' : I d i s a v o w
w h a t m y eyes tell m e , a n d c h o o s e to b e l i e v e t h e s y m b o l i c fiction. In the
c a s e o f t h e s i m u l a c r u m o f virtual reality, o n t h e c o n t r a r y , T k n o w very well
t h a t w h a t I s e e is a n i l l u s i o n g e n e r a t e d b y d i g i t a l m a c h i n e r y , b u t I n o n e
t h e l e s s a g r e e t o i m m e r s e m y s e l f i n it, t o b e h a v e as i f I b e l i e v e i t ' - h e r e , I
disavow w h a t m y ( s y m b o l i c ) k n o w l e d g e tells m e , a n d c h o o s e to b e l i e v e m y
eyes only.
In the history o f m o d e r n philosophy, the logic o f ' W h o m do you
b e l i e v e , y o u r e y e s o r m y w o r d s ? ' f o u n d its s t r o n g e s t e x p r e s s i o n i n M a l e -
b r a n c h e ' s o c c a s i o n a l i s m : n o t o n l y is t h e r e n o s e n s i b l e p r o o f f o r o c c a s i o n
a l i s m ' s c e n t r a l t e n e t ( a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h G o d is t h e o n l y c a u s a l a g e n t ) ,
t h i s t e n e t is e v e n d i r e c t l y c o n t r a r y t o all s e n s i b l e e x p e r i e n c e , w h i c h l e a d s
us t o b e l i e v e t h a t e x t e r n a l o b j e c t s a c t d i r e c d y o n our senses, causing
sensations in o u r m i n d . W h e n M a l e b r a n c h e thus endeavours to c o n v i n c e
his r e a d e r s to b e l i e v e his words, n o t t h e i r eyes, t h e c e n t r a l e n i g m a h e h a s
t o e x p l a i n is: xuhy d i d G o d c r e a t e t h e u n i v e r s e i n s u c h a way t h a t w e ,
m o r t a l h u m a n s , n e c e s s a r i l y fall p r e y t o t h e i l l u s i o n t h a t s e n s i b l e o b j e c t s
a c t d i r e c t l y o n o u r s e n s e s ? H i s e x p l a n a t i o n is m o r a l : i f w e w e r e to b e a b l e
to perceive the true state o f things directly, we w o u l d love G o d invincibly,
t h r o u g h i n s t i n c t , n o t o n a c c o u n t o f o u r f r e e will a n d rational insight
g a i n e d t h r o u g h l i b e r a t i o n f r o m t h e t y r a n n y o f o u r s e n s e s ; t h a t is, t h e r e
w o u l d b e n o p l a c e f o r o u r m o r a l activity, f o r o u r s t r u g g l e t o u n d o the
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the Fall a n d regain the lost G o o d n e s s . T h u s M a l e b r a n c h e
delineates the contours o f the philosophical position which explains
m a n ' s e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l l i m i t a t i o n ( t h e f a c t t h a t m a n ' s k n o w l e d g e is l i m i t e d
to p h e n o m e n a , that the true state o f things is o u t o f his r e a c h ) by
r e f e r e n c e to m o r a l g r o u n d s : o n l y a b e i n g m a r k e d by s u c h a n e p i s t e m o l o g
i c a l l i m i t a t i o n c a n b e a m o r a l b e i n g , t h a t is, c a n a c q u i r e G o o d n e s s as t h e
result o f free decision and i n n e r struggle against temptation. T h i s attitude
(later adopted by Kant) runs directly against the standard Platonic
equation o f Knowledge and Goodness (evil is t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f o u r
i g n o r a n c e , t h a t is t o say, o n e c a n n o t k n o w t h e t r u t h a n d c o n t i n u e t o b e
b a d , s i n c e t h e m o r e we k n o w , the c l o s e r we a r e to b e i n g g o o d ) : a c e r t a i n
r a d i c a l i g n o r a n c e is t h e p o s i t i v e c o n d i t i o n o f o u r b e i n g m o r a l .
S o w h a t is s y m b o l i c e f f i c i e n c y ? W e all k n o w t h e o l d , w o r n - o u t j o k e a b o u t
t h e m a d m a n w h o t h o u g h t h e was a g r a i n o f c o r n ; a f t e r finally b e i n g c u r e d
and sent h o m e , he returned i m m e d i a t e l y to t h e m e n t a l institution and
e x p l a i n e d his p a n i c to the d o c t o r : T m e t a h e n o n t h e r o a d , a n d I was
a f r a i d it w o u l d e a t m e ! ' T o t h e d o c t o r ' s s u r p r i s e d e x c l a m a t i o n ' B u t w h a t s
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 answered: 'Yes, /
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?' . . . 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 lower-
level 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 -
m a t i v e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f s t a t i n g it a r e t o e n s u e . U l t i m a t e l y t h i s ' i t ' , o f
course, can b e e m b o d i e d in the gaze o f the absolute big O t h e r , God
H i m s e l f . T h a t is t o say: d o w e n o t e n c o u n t e r e x a c t l y t h e s a m e p r o b l e m as
that o f t h e u n f o r t u n a t e o l d lady with t h o s e C a t h o l i c s w h o d o n o t practise
d i r e c t c o n t r a c e p t i o n b u t h a v e i n t e r c o u r s e o n l y o n days w i t h n o o v u l a t i o n ?
W h o m d o t h e y c h e a t i n t h i s way? A s i f G o d c a n n o t r e a d t h e i r thoughts
a n d k n o w t h a t t h e y r e a l l y w a n t t o h a v e s e x f o r t h e m e r e p l e a s u r e o f it,
with no offspring in mind? The Church has always been extremely
s e n s i t i v e a b o u t t h i s g a p b e t w e e n m e r e e x i s t e n c e a n d its p r o p e r inscrip
tion/registration: children who died before being christened were not
allowed to b e buried properly o n c o n s e c r a t e d g r o u n d , since they were not
yet properly inscribed into the c o m m u n i t y o f believers. 'Symbolic effi
c i e n c y ' thus c o n c e r n s the p o i n t at which, w h e n the O t h e r o f the symbolic
institution c o n f r o n t s m e with the c h o i c e o f ' W h o m d o you believe, my
word or your eyes?', I choose the Other's word without hesitation,
1 7
dismissing the factual testimony o f my eyes.
T h e notion o f the blockbuster provides an e x c e l l e n t e x a m p l e o f the
r e d o u b l i n g o f t h e o r d e r o f p o s i t i v e b e i n g in t h e o r d e r o f n a m i n g , t h a t is,
o f t h e s y m b o l i c i n s c r i p t i o n i n t h e b i g O t h e r . F i r s t , t h e t e r m f u n c t i o n e d as
a d i r e c t d e s c r i p t i o n o f a f i l m w h i c h e a r n e d a l o t o f m o n e y ; t h e n it s t a r t e d
t o b e u s e d t o d e s c r i b e a f i l m m a d e as a b i g p r o d u c t i o n , w i t h t h e p r o s p e c t
o f a h u g e publicity c a m p a i g n a n d b i g box-office r e c e i p t s - such a film, o f
c o u r s e , c a n l a t e r a c t u a l l y fail a t t h e b o x o f f i c e . S o , w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e two
Postmans, t h e I t a l i a n / / Postino a n d t h e f a i l u r e w i t h K e v i n C o s t n e r , it is
quite consistent to designate The Postman as a failed blockbuster, while //
Postino is n o t a b l o c k b u s t e r , a l t h o u g h i t e a r n e d a l o t m o r e m o n e y than
The Postman. T h i s gap can, o f c o u r s e , also g e n e r a t e r a t h e r droll conse
q u e n c e s . I n t h e Y u g o s l a v i a o f t h e 1 9 7 0 s t h e s u b t i t l e s , as a r u l e , undertran-
slated t h e v u l g a r e x p r e s s i o n s t h a t a b o u n d i n t h e H o l l y w o o d f i l m s o f t h e
p e r i o d - say, w h e n a c h a r a c t e r o n s c r e e n says ' F u c k y o u u p y o u r a s s ! ' , t h e
subtitle in S l o v e n e read: ' G o to the Devil!' o r s o m e d i i n g similarly m o d e r
a t e . I n t h e l a t e 1 9 8 0 s , h o w e v e r , w h e n all c e n s o r s h i p b a r r i e r s c a m e d o w n
in Yugoslavia, while H o l l y w o o d b e c a m e slightly m o r e restrained (perhaps
u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f R e a g a n - e r a M o r a l Majority p r e s s u r e s ) , the transla
t o r s , as i f t o t a k e r e v e n g e f o r t h e l o n g y e a r s o f r e p r e s s i o n , s t a r t e d to
overtranslate the vulgar expressions - say, w h e n a character on screen
uttered a simple ' G o to hell!', the subtitle read: 'Screw your m o t h e r down
h e r throat!', o r s o m e t h i n g similar. . . .
T o p u t it in p h i l o s o p h i c a l t e r m s : s y m b o l i c i n s c r i p t i o n m e a n s t h a t the
very In-itself, t h e way a t h i n g a c t u a l l y is, is a l r e a d y there f o r us, the
observers. T a k e the two dead 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 1 9 6 0 s , was n o longer
r e q u i r e d to b e a n o b l e figure: 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 honesty o f the President no longer matters, the system has
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 at w h i c h t h e system restructures its r u l e s i n o r d e r to
accommodate 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 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
portrayal o f Communists); none the less, ' t h e s y s t e m ' s u r v i v e d intact:

nothing really c h a n g e d . H e r e c a p i t a l i s m is m u c h more 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 - this p a r a d o x i t s e l f is t o b e taken quite
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 the key e l e m e n t o f the efficiency of an
ideological statement. 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 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 for the
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 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 who, in cyberspace, participates in a virtual
c o m m u n i t y in w h i c h he adopts the screen persona of a promiscuous
w o m a n ; h i s s t a n c e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t o f T k n o w v e r y w e l l I a m r e a l l y j u s t a
shy, m o d e s t guy, so why shouldn't I briefly indulge in posing as a
promiscuous woman, doing things I could never do in real life?' —
however, are things really so simple a n d straightforward? W h a t i f this
m a n ' s real-life p e r s o n a ( t h e S e l f h e a d o p t s , t h e way h e b e h a v e s i n h i s
a c t u a l s o c i a l i n t e r a c d o n ) is a k i n d o f s e c o n d a r y ' d e f e n c e - f o r m a d o n ' , an
i d e n t i t y h e a d o p t s as a m a s k i n o r d e r t o ' r e p r e s s ' o r k e e p a t b a y h i s t r u e
' i n n e r S e l f , t h e h a r d c o r e o f his p h a n t a s m i c identity, w h i c h lies in b e i n g
a p r o m i s c u o u s w o m a n , a n d for w h i c h h e c a n find an o u t l e t o n l y in his
private d a y d r e a m i n g o r in a n o n y m o u s virtual c o m m u n i t y s e x u a l g a m e s ?
I n Seminar XI, L a c a n m e n t i o n s t h e o l d C h i n e s e p a r a d o x o f T c h u a n g - T z e ,
w h o a w a k e n s a f t e r d r e a m i n g t h a t h e is a b u t t e r f l y , a n d t h e n a s k s h i m s e l f :
' H o w d o I k n o w I a m n o t a b u t t e r f l y w h o is n o w d r e a m i n g t h a t h e is a
m a n ? ' D o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d f o r o u r shy v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t y m e m b e r : is
h e n o t i n f a c t a p r o m i s c u o u s w o m a n d r e a m i n g t h a t s h e is a n inhibited
man?
T h e t e m p t a t i o n t o b e a v o i d e d h e r e is t h e e a s y ' p o s t m o d e r n ' c o n c l u s i o n
that we d o n o t possess a n y u l t i m a t e fixed socio-symbolic identity, but are
drifting, m o r e o r less freely, a m o n g a n i n c o n s i s t e n t m u l t i t u d e o f Selves,
e a c h o f t h e m displaying a partial aspect o f m y personality, without any
unifying a g e n t g u a r a n t e e i n g t h e u l t i m a t e c o n s i s t e n c y o f this 'pandemon
i u m ' . T h e L a c a n i a n h y p o t h e s i s o f t h e b i g O t h e r i n v o l v e s t h e c l a i m t h a t all
t h e s e d i f f e r e n t partial i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s a r e n o t e q u i v a l e n t in t h e i r s y m b o l i c
s t a t u s : t h e r e is o n e l e v e l a t w h i c h s y m b o l i c e f f i c i e n c y s e t s i n , a l e v e l w h i c h
d e t e r m i n e s m y s o c i o - s y m b o l i c p o s i t i o n . T h i s l e v e l is n o t t h a t o f ' r e a l i t y ' as
o p p o s e d t o t h e p l a y o f m y i m a g i n a t i o n - L a c a n ' s p o i n t is n o t t h a t , b e h i n d
t h e m u l t i p l i c i t y o f p h a n t a s m i c i d e n t i t i e s , t h e r e is a h a r d c o r e o f s o m e ' r e a l
S e l f ; we a r e d e a l i n g with a symbolic fiction, but a fiction which, for
c o n t i n g e n t reasons that have nothing to d o with its i n h e r e n t nature,
p o s s e s s e s p e r f o r m a t i v e p o w e r - is s o c i a l l y o p e r a t i v e , s t r u c t u r e s t h e s o c i o -
s y m b o l i c reality i n w h i c h I p a r t i c i p a t e . T h e status o f t h e s a m e person,
inclusive o f h i s / h e r very 'real' features, c a n a p p e a r in a n entirely different
light the m o m e n t the modality o f h i s / h e r relationship to the big O t h e r
changes.
S o t h e p r o b l e m t o d a y is n o t t h a t s u b j e c t s a r e m o r e d i s p e r s e d t h a n t h e y
w e r e b e f o r e , i n t h e a l l e g e d g o o d o l d days o f t h e s e l f - i d e n t i c a l E g o ; t h e
fact that 'the big O t h e r n o l o n g e r exists' implies, rather, that the symbolic
fiction w h i c h c o n f e r s a p e r f o r m a t i v e status o n o n e level o f m y identity,
determining which o f m y a c t s will d i s p l a y 'symbolic efficiency', is no
l o n g e r fully o p e r a t i v e . P e r h a p s t h e s u p r e m e e x a m p l e o f t h i s shift is p r o -
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 by
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 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 'from
n o t h i n g ' , is p o s s i b l e . (Creatio 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 to
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 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 p s e u d o - s c i e n c e with the mystery o f
Christ's alleged t o m b a n d / o r progeny ( 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 descendants
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 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
1 8
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 ' . This 'true message'
a l l e g e d l y l i e s in p r o m o t i n g 'the path o f self-determination, as distinct
1
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
i n n e r j o u r n e y , n o t f r o m a n a c t o f p a r d o n c o m i n g f r o m o u t s i d e ; t h a t is,
' R e s u r r e c t i o n ' is t o b e u n d e r s t o o d as t h e i n n e r r e n e w a l / r e b i r t h o f t h e
s o u l o n its j o u r n e y o f s e l f - p u r i f i c a t i o n . A l t h o u g h the advocates o f this
' r e t u r n o f / i n t h e R e a l ' p r o m o t e t h e i r d i s c o v e r y as t h e u n e a r t h i n g o f t h e
h e r e t i c a n d s u b v e r s i v e s e c r e t l o n g r e p r e s s e d by t h e C h u r c h as I n s t i t u t i o n ,
o n e c o u l d c o u n t e r this c l a i m with t h e q u e s t i o n : w h a t i f this very u n e a r t h
i n g o f t h e ' S e c r e t ' is i n t h e s e r v i c e o f ' u n d o i n g ' , o f g e t t i n g r i d o f t h e t r u l y
t r a u m a t i c , s u b v e r s i v e c o r e o f C h r i s t i a n t e a c h i n g , t h e skandalon o f Resurrec
t i o n a n d t h e r e t r o a c t i v e f o r g i v e n e s s o f s i n s - t h a t is, t h e u n i q u e c h a r a c t e r
o f the Event o f Resurrection?
These reversals signal that today, the big O t h e r ' s n o n e x i s t e n c e has
a t t a i n e d a m u c h m o r e r a d i c a l d i m e n s i o n : w h a t is i n c r e a s i n g l y u n d e r m i n e d
is p r e c i s e l y t h e s y m b o l i c tmsl w h i c h p e r s i s t s a g a i n s t all s c e p t i c a l data.
P e r h a p s t h e m o s t e y e - c a t c h i n g f a c e t o f this n e w s t a t u s o f t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e
o f t h e b i g O t h e r is t h e s p r o u t i n g o f ' c o m m i t t e e s ' d e s t i n e d t o d e c i d e u p o n
t h e so-called ethical d i l e m m a s which c r o p up w h e n t e c h n o l o g i c a l devel
20
o p m e n t s ever-increasingly affect o u r life-world: not only cyberspace but
a l s o d o m a i n s as d i v e r s e as m e d i c i n e a n d b i o g e n e t i c s o n t h e o n e hand,
a n d the rules o f sexual c o n d u c t a n d the p r o t e c t i o n o f h u m a n rights o n
t h e o t h e r , c o n f r o n t us w i t h t h e n e e d t o i n v e n t t h e b a s i c r u l e s o f p r o p e r
e t h i c a l c o n d u c t , s i n c e we l a c k any f o r m o f big O t h e r , a n y s y m b o l i c p o i n t
o f r e f e r e n c e t h a t w o u l d s e r v e as a s a f e a n d u n p r o b l e m a t i c m o r a l a n c h o r .
I n all t h e s e d o m a i n s , t h e differend s e e m s t o b e i r r e d u c i b l e - t h a t is t o
say, s o o n e r o r l a t e r w e f i n d o u r s e l v e s i n a g r e y z o n e w h o s e m i s t c a n n o t b e
dispelled by t h e application of some single universal rule. Here we
e n c o u n t e r a kind o f c o u n t e r p o i n t to the 'uncertainty principle' o f quan
t u m p h y s i c s ; t h e r e is, f o r e x a m p l e , a s t r u c t u r a l d i f f i c u l t y i n determining
w h e t h e r s o m e c o m m e n t was a c t u a l l y a c a s e o f s e x u a l h a r a s s m e n t o r o n e
of racist h a t e speech. Confronted with such a dubious statement, a
'politically c o r r e c t ' radical a priori tends to believe the c o m p l a i n i n g victim
( i f t h e v i c t i m e x p e r i e n c e d i t as h a r a s s m e n t , t h e n h a r a s s m e n t i t w a s . . . ) ,
while a d i e h a r d orthodox liberal tends to believe the accused (if he
s i n c e r e l y d i d n o t m e a n i t as h a r a s s m e n t , t h e n h e s h o u l d b e a c q u i t t e d . . . ) .
T h e p o i n t , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h i s u n d e c i d a b i l i t y is s t r u c t u r a l a n d u n a v o i d
a b l e , s i n c e it is t h e b i g O t h e r ( t h e s y m b o l i c n e t w o r k i n w h i c h v i c t i m a n d
offender are both e m b e d d e d ) which ultimately 'decides' on meaning, a n d
t h e o r d e r o f t h e b i g O t h e r is, by d e f i n i t i o n , o p e n ; n o b o d y c a n d o m i n a t e
a n d r e g u l a t e its e f f e c t s .
T h a t is t h e p r o b l e m w i t h r e p l a c i n g a g g r e s s i v e w i t h ' p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t '
e x p r e s s i o n s : w h e n o n e r e p l a c e s ' s h o r t - s i g h t e d ' with 'visually c h a l l e n g e d ' ,
o n e c a n n e v e r b e s u r e t h a t t h i s r e p l a c e m e n t i t s e l f will n o t g e n e r a t e n e w
e f f e c t s o f p a t r o n i z i n g a n d / o r i r o n i c o f f e n s i v e n e s s , all t h e m o r e h u m i l i a t
i n g i n a s m u c h as i t is m a s k e d as b e n e v o l e n c e . T h e m i s t a k e o f t h i s ' p o l i t i
c a l l y c o r r e c t ' s t r a t e g y is t h a t it u n d e r e s t i m a t e s the resistance o f the
l a n g u a g e we a c t u a l l y s p e a k to t h e conscious regulation o f its effects,
especially effects that involve p o w e r r e l a t i o n s . S o to resolve t h e d e a d l o c k ,
o n e c o n v e n e s a c o m m i t t e e t o f o r m u l a t e , i n a n u l t i m a t e l y a r b i t r a r y way,
the precise rules o f conduct. . . . I t is t h e same with medicine and
b i o g e n e t i c s (at what p o i n t d o e s an a c c e p t a b l e a n d even desirable g e n e t i c
e x p e r i m e n t o r i n t e r v e n t i o n t u r n i n t o u n a c c e p t a b l e m a n i p u l a t i o n ? ) , in t h e
application o f universal h u m a n rights (at what p o i n t d o e s the p r o t e c t i o n
o f the victim's rights turn i n t o an imposition o f W e s t e r n v a l u e s ? ) , in
sexual mores ( w h a t is t h e p r o p e r , non-patriarchal procedure o f seduc
t i o n ? ) , n o t t o m e n t i o n t h e o b v i o u s c a s e o f c y b e r s p a c e ( w h a t is t h e s t a t u s
o f sexual h a r a s s m e n t in a virtual c o m m u n i t y ? H o w d o e s o n e distinguish
h e r e between 'mere words' and 'deeds'?). T h e work o f these committees
is c a u g h t i n a s y m p t o m a l v i c i o u s c y c l e : o n the one h a n d , t h e y try t o
l e g i t i m a t e t h e i r d e c i s i o n s by r e f e r e n c e t o t h e m o s t a d v a n c e d scientific
k n o w l e d g e ( w h i c h , in t h e case o f a b o r t i o n , tells us t h a t a f o e t u s d o e s n o t
y e t p o s s e s s s e l f - a w a r e n e s s a n d e x p e r i e n c e p a i n ; w h i c h , in t h e c a s e o f a
m o r t a l l y ill p e r s o n , d e f i n e s t h e t h r e s h o l d b e y o n d w h i c h e u t h a n a s i a is t h e
only meaningful s o l u t i o n ) ; o n the o t h e r h a n d , they have to evoke s o m e
non-scientific ethical criterion in o r d e r to direct a n d posit a limitation to
i n h e r e n t scientific drive.
T h e k e y p o i n t h e r e is n o t t o c o n f u s e t h i s n e e d t o i n v e n t s p e c i f i c r u l e s
w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d n e e d o f phronesis - t h a t is, w i t h t h e i n s i g h t , f o r m u l a t e d
by Aristotle, into how direct application o f universal n o r m s to c o n c r e t e
s i t u a t i o n s is n o t p o s s i b l e - t h e r e is always a n e e d to t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e
'twist' given to the universal norm by t h e specific situation. In this
standard case, we d o have at o u r disposal s o m e universally accepted
' s a c r e d ' T e x t w h i c h p r o v i d e s t h e h o r i z o n o f o u r c h o i c e s (say, t h e B i b l e i n
the Christian t r a d i t i o n ) , so t h a t the problem o f 'interpretation' is t o
reactualize the T e x t o f tradition in e a c h new situation, to discover h o w
t h i s T e x t still ' s p e a k s t o u s ' - t o d a y , it is p r e c i s e l y t h i s u n i v e r s a l l y a c c e p t e d
p o i n t o f r e f e r e n c e w h i c h is m i s s i n g , s o t h a t w e a r e t h r o w n i n t o a p r o c e s s
of radically open and unending symbolic (re) negotiation and
(re)invention without even the semblance o f some preceding set o f
p r e s u p p o s e d n o r m s . O r - to p u t it in H e g e l e s e - w h e n I s p e a k a b o u t the
'rules to b e followed', I already p r e s u p p o s e a reflected attitude o f strate
gically a d a p t i n g m y s e l f to a situation by i m p o s i n g c e r t a i n rules o n m y s e l f
( a n d o t h e r s ) - w h a t g e t s l o s t i n a d o p t i n g s u c h a n a t t i t u d e is w h a t H e g e l
c a l l e d s o c i a l Substance, t h e ' o b j e c t i v e S p i r i t ' as t h e t r u e S u b s t a n c e o f m y
b e i n g w h i c h is a l w a y s - a l r e a d y t h e r e as t h e g r o u n d o n w h i c h individuals
t h r i v e , a l t h o u g h i t is k e p t alive o n l y t h r o u g h t h e i n c e s s a n t a c t i v i t y o f t h o s e
individuals. S o w h e n t h e p r o p o n e n t s o f virtual c o m m u n i t y e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y
describe the c h a l l e n g e that cyberspace poses to o u r capacity for ethical
i n v e n t i o n , f o r t e s t i n g n e w r u l e s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n all a s p e c t s o f v i r t u a l
c o m m u n i t y l i f e , w e s h o u l d always b e a r i n m i n d t h a t t h e s e (re)invented
r u l e s supplant the lack of a fundamental Law /Prohibition: they e n d e a v o u r to
provide the viable frame o f i n t e r a c t i o n for narcissistic post-Oedipal sub
jects. I t is as i f t h e lack o f the big O t h e r is s u p p l a n t e d by 'ethical
c o m m i t t e e s ' as s o m a n y s u b s t i t u t e 'small big Others' on to which the
subject transposes his responsibility a n d from w h i c h h e e x p e c t s to receive
a f o r m u l a t h a t will r e s o l v e h i s d e a d l o c k .
I t is c r u c i a l t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h i s d e c l i n e o f t h e s y m b o l i c p a t e r n a l
authority and the standard O e d i p a l gap that forever separates the real
p e r s o n o f t h e f a t h e r f r o m its s y m b o l i c p l a c e / f u n c t i o n - t h e f a c t t h a t t h e
r e a l f a t h e r always t u r n s o u t t o b e a n i m p o s t o r , u n a b l e a c t u a l l y t o live u p
t o h i s s y m b o l i c m a n d a t e . A s is w e l l k n o w n , t h e r e lies t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e
h y s t e r i c : t h e c e n t r a l f i g u r e o f h i s u n i v e r s e is t h e ' h u m i l i a t e d f a t h e r ' , that
is, h e is o b s e s s e d w i t h t h e s i g n s o f t h e r e a l f a t h e r ' s w e a k n e s s a n d failure,
a n d criticizes h i m incessantly for n o t living u p to his s y m b o l i c m a n d a t e -
b e n e a t h the hysteric's rebellion a n d c h a l l e n g e to paternal authority t h e r e
is t h u s a h i d d e n c a l l f o r a r e n e w e d p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y , f o r a f a t h e r who
would really b e a 'true father' and adequately embody his symbolic
m a n d a t e . T o d a y , h o w e v e r , i t is t h e v e r y s y m b o l i c f u n c t i o n o f t h e father
w h i c h is i n c r e a s i n g l y u n d e r m i n e d - t h a t is, w h i c h is l o s i n g its p e r f o r m a t i v e
e f f i c i e n c y ; f o r t h a t r e a s o n , a f a t h e r is n o l o n g e r p e r c e i v e d as o n e ' s Ego
Ideal, t h e ( m o r e o r less failed, i n a d e q u a t e ) b e a r e r o f s y m b o l i c authority,
b u t as o n e ' s ideal ego, i m a g i n a r y c o m p e t i t o r - w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t s u b j e c t s
n e v e r really ' g r o w u p ' , t h a t we a r e d e a l i n g t o d a y with individuals in t h e i r
thirties and forties who remain, in terms o f their psychic economy,
2 1
' i m m a t u r e ' adolescents c o m p e t i n g with their fathers.
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' is t h e focus o f the recently popular theory o f the 'risk
2 2
society'. 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
are global warming, the h o l e in the o z o n e layer, m a d cow disease, the

danger o f using nuclear power plants as the source o f energy, the
unforeseen 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 that
the i n c r e a s e d use o f chemicals in o u r food and 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 threats
are so-called 'manufactured risks': they result from human 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 longer possible to elude the
responsibility by letting nature itself find a way t o r e - e s t a b l i s h t h e 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 our
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 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' technological and scientific endeav
our t o c o n t r o l t h e i r lives a n d increase their productivity. Perhaps the
supreme e x a m p l e o f the dialectical reversal by m e a n s o f which a new
scientific insight, instead o f simply magnifying our 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 an
individual's c o m p l e t e genetic inheritance, but even manipulate 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
a n d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ? W h a t will b e t h e u n f o r e s e e n c o n s e q u e n c e s o f m e d d l i n g
with g e n e s ? )
T h i s c o n j u n c t i o n o f low probability a n d high c o n s e q u e n c e m a k e s the
s t a n d a r d Aristotelian strategy o f avoiding b o t h e x t r e m e s virtually imposs
i b l e : it is as i f it is i m p o s s i b l e t o d a y t o a s s u m e a m o d e r a t e r a t i o n a l p o s i t i o n
between scaremongering (ecologists who depict an i m p e n d i n g universal
catastrophe) and covering u p (downplaying the dangers). T h e downplay
i n g s t r a t e g y c a n always e m p h a s i z e t h e f a c t t h a t s c a r e m o n g e r i n g a t b e s t
t a k e s as c e r t a i n c o n c l u s i o n s w h i c h a r e n o t fully g r o u n d e d in scientific
o b s e r v a t i o n s ; w h i l e t h e s c a r e m o n g e r i n g s t r a t e g y , o f c o u r s e , is fully j u s t i f i e d
i n r e t o r t i n g t h a t o n c e i t is p o s s i b l e t o p r e d i c t t h e c a t a s t r o p h e w i t h full
c e r t a i n t y , it will b e , b y d e f i n i t i o n , a l r e a d y t o o l a t e . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t
t h e r e is n o o b j e c t i v e s c i e n t i f i c o r o t h e r way t o a c q u i r e c e r t a i n t y about
e x i s t e n c e a n d e x t e n t : it is n o t s i m p l y a m a t t e r o f e x p l o i t a t i v e c o r p o r a t i o n s
o r g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s d o w n p l a y i n g t h e d a n g e r s - t h e r e is i n f a c t n o way
to establish t h e e x t e n t o f t h e risk with certainty; scientists a n d s p e c u l a t o r s
t h e m s e l v e s are u n a b l e to provide the final answer; we are bombarded
d a i l y b y n e w d i s c o v e r i e s w h i c h r e v e r s e p r e v i o u s c o m m o n views. W h a t i f it
t u r n s o u t t h a t fat r e a l l y p r e v e n t s c a n c e r ? W h a t i f g l o b a l w a r m i n g is a c t u a l l y
t h e result o f a n a t u r a l cycle, a n d we s h o u l d p u m p e v e n m o r e carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere?
T h e r e is a p r i o r i n o p r o p e r m e a s u r e between the 'excess' o f scare
mongering and the indecisive procrastination o f ' D o n ' t let's p a n i c , we
d o n ' t yet have conclusive results'. F o r e x a m p l e , a p r o p o s o f global warm
i n g , t h e l o g i c o f ' l e t us a v o i d b o t h e x t r e m e s , t h e c a r e l e s s f u r t h e r e m i s s i o n
o f c a r b o n d i o x i d e as w e l l as t h e q u i c k s h u t t i n g - d o w n o f thousands of
2 3
factories, and proceed gradually' is c l e a r l y m e a n i n g l e s s . ' Again, this
i m p e n e t r a b i l i t y is n o t s i m p l y a m a t t e r o f ' c o m p l e x i t y ' , b u t o f r e f l e x i v i t y :
t h e n e w o p a q u e n e s s a n d i m p e n e t r a b i l i t y ( t h e r a d i c a l u n c e r t a i n t y as t o t h e
u l t i m a t e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f o u r a c t i o n s ) is n o t d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t w e a r e
puppets in the h a n d s o f s o m e t r a n s c e n d e n t global P o w e r (Fate, Historical
N e c e s s i t y , t h e M a r k e t ) ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t is d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t ' n o b o d y
is i n c h a r g e ' , t h a t there is no such power, n o ' O t h e r o f t h e O t h e r ' pulling
t h e s t r i n g s - o p a q u e n e s s is g r o u n d e d i n t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t t o d a y ' s s o c i e t y
is t h o r o u g h l y ' r e f l e x i v e ' , t h a t t h e r e is n o N a t u r e o r T r a d i t i o n p r o v i d i n g a
firm f o u n d a t i o n o n w h i c h o n e c a n r e l y , t h a t e v e n o u r i n n e r m o s t i m p e t u s e s
( s e x u a l o r i e n t a t i o n , e t c . ) a r e m o r e a n d m o r e e x p e r i e n c e d as s o m e t h i n g
to b e c h o s e n . H o w to f e e d a n d e d u c a t e a c h i l d , h o w to p r o c e e d in s e x u a l
seduction, h o w a n d what to eat, h o w to r e l a x a n d a m u s e o n e s e l f - all
t h e s e s p h e r e s a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y ' c o l o n i z e d ' b y r e f l e x i v i t y , t h a t is, e x p e r i -
e n c e d as s o m e t h i n g t o b e l e a r n e d a n d d e c i d e d u p o n . Is n o t t h e u l t i m a t e
e x a m p l e o f r e f l e x i v i t y i n t o d a y ' s a r t t h e c r u c i a l r o l e o f t h e curator} His role
is n o t l i m i t e d t o m e r e s e l e c t i o n - t h r o u g h h i s s e l e c t i o n , h e (re)defmes
w h a t a r t is t o d a y . T h a t is t o say: t o d a y ' s a r t e x h i b i t i o n s d i s p l a y o b j e c t s
w h i c h , at least f o r t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a p p r o a c h , h a v e n o t h i n g to d o with art,
u p to h u m a n e x c r e m e n t a n d d e a d a n i m a l s - s o w h y is t h i s t o b e p e r c e i v e d
as art? Because what we see is the curator's choice. W h e n we visit a n e x h i b i t i o n
today, we are thus n o t directly o b s e r v i n g works o f art - w h a t we are
o b s e r v i n g is t h e c u r a t o r ' s n o t i o n o f w h a t a r t is; i n s h o r t , t h e u l t i m a t e a r t i s t
is n o t t h e p r o d u c e r b u t t h e c u r a t o r , his activity o f s e l e c t i o n .
The ultimate deadlock o f the risk s o c i e t y lies in the gap between
knowledge and decision, between the chain o f reasons and the act which
resolves the d i l e m m a (in L a c a n e s e : b e t w e e n S 2 a n d S , ) : t h e r e is n o one
w h o 'really knows' the global o u t c o m e - o n t h e level o f positive knowl
e d g e , t h e s i t u a t i o n is r a d i c a l l y ' i n d e c i d a b l e ' ; b u t w e n o n e t h e l e s s have to
decide. O f c o u r s e , t h i s g a p was t h e r e all t h e t i m e : w h e n a n a c t o f d e c i s i o n
g r o u n d s i t s e l f i n a c h a i n o f r e a s o n s , it always r e t r o a c t i v e l y ' c o l o u r s ' t h e s e
r e a s o n s s o t h a t tiiey s u p p o r t t h i s d e c i s i o n — j u s t t h i n k o f t h e b e l i e v e r w h o
is w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h e r e a s o n s f o r h i s b e l i e f a r e c o m p r e h e n s i b l e o n l y t o
t h o s e w h o have already d e c i d e d to b e l i e v e . . . . W h a t we e n c o u n t e r in t h e
c o n t e m p o r a r y risk s o c i e t y , h o w e v e r , is s o m e t h i n g m u c h m o r e r a d i c a l : t h e
o p p o s i t e o f t h e s t a n d a r d f o r c e d c h o i c e a b o u t w h i c h L a c a n s p e a k s , t h a t is,
o f a s i t u a t i o n in w h i c h I a m f r e e t o c h o o s e o n c o n d i t i o n t h a t I m a k e the
r i g h t c h o i c e , s o t h a t t h e o n l y t h i n g left f o r m e t o d o is to a c c o m p l i s h t h e
empty gesture o f pretending to a c c o m p l i s h freely what is i n a n y c a s e
4
imposed on me.- I n t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y risk society, we a r e d e a l i n g with
s o m e t h i n g e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t : t h e c h o i c e is r e a l l y ' f r e e ' a n d is, f o r t h i s v e r y
r e a s o n , e x p e r i e n c e d as e v e n m o r e f r u s t r a t i n g - we find ourselves c o n
s t a n t l y i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f h a v i n g t o d e c i d e a b o u t m a t t e r s t h a t will f u n d a
m e n t a l l y a f f e c t o u r lives, b u t w i t h o u t a p r o p e r f o u n d a t i o n i n k n o w l e d g e .
W T i a t U l r i c h B e c k c a l l s t h e ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t ' is t h u s , w i t h regard
t o t h i s c r u c i a l p o i n t , t h e e x a c t r e v e r s a l o f t h e a i m o f t h e 'first E n l i g h t e n
m e n t ' : to bring a b o u t a society in which f u n d a m e n t a l decisions would lose
t h e i r ' i r r a t i o n a l ' c h a r a c t e r a n d b e c o m e fully g r o u n d e d in g o o d reasons
(in a c o r r e c t insight i n t o the state o f t h i n g s ) : the ' s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t '
i m p o s e s o n e a c h o f us the b u r d e n o f m a k i n g crucial decisions which
m a y a f f e c t o u r v e r y survival w i t h o u t a n y p r o p e r f o u n d a t i o n in K n o w l e d g e
— all t h e e x p e r t g o v e r n m e n t p a n e l s a n d e t h i c a l c o m m i t t e e s , a n d s o o n ,
a r e t h e r e t o c o n c e a l this r a d i c a l o p e n n e s s and uncertainty. Again, far
f r o m b e i n g e x p e r i e n c e d as l i b e r a t i n g , t h i s c o m p u l s i o n to d e c i d e f r e e l y is
e x p e r i e n c e d as a n a n x i e t y - p r o v o k i n g o b s c e n e g a m b l e , a k i n d o f i r o n i c
reversal o f predestination: I a m h e l d a c c o u n t a b l e for decisions which I
was f o r c e d to m a k e without proper knowledge o f the situation. The
f r e e d o m o f d e c i s i o n e n j o y e d b y t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e ' r i s k s o c i e t y ' is n o t t h e
f r e e d o m o f s o m e o n e w h o c a n freely c h o o s e his destiny, b u t the anxiety-
provoking freedom o f s o m e o n e w h o is c o n s t a n t l y c o m p e l l e d t o make
d e c i s i o n s w i t h o u t b e i n g a w a r e o f t h e i r c o n s e q u e n c e s . T h e r e is n o guaran
tee that the democratic politicization o f crucial decisions, the active
involvement of thousands of concerned individuals, will necessarily
i m p r o v e the quality a n d a c c u r a c y o f decisions, a n d thus effectively lessen
t h e risks - h e r e o n e is t e m p t e d t o e v o k e t h e a n s w e r o f a d e v o u t C a t h o l i c
t o t h e a t h e i s t l i b e r a l c r i t i c i s m t h a t t h e y , C a t h o l i c s , a r e s o s t u p i d as t o
believe in t h e infallibility o f the P o p e : ' W e C a t h o l i c s at least b e l i e v e in t h e
i n f a l l i b i l i t y o f one a n d o n l y o n e p e r s o n ; d o e s n o t d e m o c r a c y r e l y o n a
m u c h m o r e risky n o t i o n t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e p e o p l e , m i l l i o n s o f t h e m ,
are infallible?'
T h e s u b j e c t thus finds h i m s e l f in a K a f k a e s q u e situation o f b e i n g guilty
o f n o t even knowing what (if anything) h e is g u i l t y o f : I a m forever
haunted b y t h e p r o s p e c t t h a t I h a v e a l r e a d y m a d e d e c i s i o n s w h i c h will
e n d a n g e r m e a n d e v e r y o n e I l o v e , b u t I will l e a r n t h e t r u t h o n l y - i f e v e r
- w h e n i t is a l r e a d y t o o l a t e . H e r e l e t u s r e c a l l t h e figure o f F o r r e s t G u m p ,
that perfect 'vanishing mediator', t h e very o p p o s i t e o f t h e M a s t e r (the
o n e w h o s y m b o l i c a l l y r e g i s t e r s a n e v e n t b y n o m i n a t i n g it, b y i n s c r i b i n g i t
i n t o t h e b i g O t h e r ) : G u m p is p r e s e n t e d as t h e i n n o c e n t b y s t a n d e r w h o ,
simply by d o i n g what h e does, u n k n o w i n g l y sets in m o t i o n a shift o f
h i s t o r i c p r o p o r t i o n s . W h e n h e visits B e r l i n t o p l a y f o o t b a l l , a n d inadver
tently throws the ball a c r o s s t h e wall, h e t h e r e b y starts the p r o c e s s w h i c h
b r i n g s d o w n t h e wall; w h e n h e visits W a s h i n g t o n a n d is g i v e n a r o o m i n
the W a t e r g a t e c o m p l e x , h e notices s o m e strange things going o n in the
r o o m s across t h e yard in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e n i g h t , calls t h e g u a r d , a n d sets
i n m o t i o n t h e e v e n t s w h i c h c u l m i n a t e d i n N i x o n ' s d o w n f a l l - is t h i s n o t
t h e ultimate m e t a p h o r for the situation at w h i c h t h e p r o p o n e n t s o f the
n o t i o n o f 'risk society' aim, a situation in w h i c h we are f o r c e d to m a k e
moves whose ultimate effects are b e y o n d o u r grasp?
I n w h a t p r e c i s e way d o e s t h e n o t i o n o f t h e ' r i s k s o c i e t y ' i n v o l v e the
n o n e x i s t e n c e o f the big O t h e r ? T h e m o s t obvious p o i n t would b e the fact
- e m p h a s i z e d a g a i n a n d a g a i n b y B e c k a n d G i d d e n s - t h a t t o d a y w e live
in a society which comes after Nature and Tradition: in our active
e n g a g e m e n t with t h e w o r l d a r o u n d us, we c a n n o l o n g e r rely e i t h e r o n
N a t u r e as t h e p e r m a n e n t f o u n d a t i o n a n d r e s o u r c e o f o u r activity ( t h e r e
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 capitalist modernization, repeatedly described by
Marx ( 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 unforeseen
and unintended 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
ordinated by t h e infamous 'invisible h a n d o f the market', the basic
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 particular
interests, a n d the ultimate result o f this c l a s h a n d 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
t h e r e i n s a n d t a k i n g c a r e o f e v e r y t h i n g . T h e r e was a c t u a l l y a p e r v e r s e k i n d
o f l i b e r a t i o n in this possibility o f shifting the b u r d e n o f responsibility o n
to the O t h e r . In h e r report o n a voyage through post-Communist P o l a n d ,
the country o f h e r youth, Eva Hoffman relates how the infamous desolate
g r e y n e s s o f t h e s o c i a l i s t e n v i r o n s , with d e p r e s s i n g c o n c r e t e b u i l d i n g s o n
b r o a d streets without posters o r n e o n lights, l o o k e d different, even m o r e
oppressive, in 1 9 9 0 :
I know this grayness; I even used to love it, as part o f the m o o d and w e a t h e r
with which o n e grew up h e r e , and which sank into the b o n e s with a c o m f o r t i n g
m e l a n c h o l y . Why, then, d o e s it s e e m so m u c h m o r e desolate than before? I
guess I ' m looking at it with different a n t e n n a e , without t h e protective filters o f
the system, which was the justification, the explanation for so m u c h : even for
the gray. I n d e e d , the drabness was partly T h e i r doing, a matter not only o f
e c o n o m i c s but o f deliberate puritanism . . . now this n e i g h b o u r h o o d is j u s t what
25
it is, bareness stripped o f s i g n i f i c a n c e .
W h a t we h a v e h e r e is t h e p e r v e r s e l y l i b e r a t i n g a s p e c t o f a l i e n a t i o n in
actually existing Socialism: r e a l i t y was n o t really 'ours' (the ordinary
p e o p l e ' s ) , it b e l o n g e d t o T h e m ( t h e P a r t y nomenklatura); its g r e y n e s s b o r e
w i t n e s s t o T h e i r o p p r e s s i v e r u l e a n d , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h i s m a d e it much
e a s i e r t o e n d u r e life; j o k e s c o u l d b e t o l d a b o u t e v e r y d a y t r o u b l e s , a b o u t
t h e lack o f ordinary objects like s o a p a n d toilet p a p e r - a l t h o u g h we
suffered the material c o n s e q u e n c e s o f these troubles, the j o k e s w e r e at
T h e i r e x p e n s e , we t o l d t h e m f r o m an e x e m p t , l i b e r a t e d p o s i t i o n . Now,
with T h e m o u t o f p o w e r , we are s u d d e n l y a n d violently c o m p e l l e d to
7
assume t h i s d r a b g r e y n e s s : it is n o l o n g e r T h e i r s , it is o u r s . . . . W h a t
happens today, with t h e 'postmodern' risk s o c i e t y , is t h a t t h e r e is no
'Invisible H a n d ' w h o s e m e c h a n i s m , b l i n d as it m a y be, somehow re
establishes the balance; no Other Scene in which the accounts are
properly kept, n o fictional O t h e r P l a c e in w h i c h , f r o m t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f
t h e L a s t J u d g e m e n t , o u r a c t s will b e p r o p e r l y l o c a t e d a n d a c c o u n t e d f o r .
N o t o n l y d o w e n o t k n o w w h a t o u r a c t s will i n f a c t a m o u n t t o , t h e r e is
e v e n n o g l o b a l m e c h a n i s m r e g u l a t i n g o u r i n t e r a c t i o n s - this is w h a t the
properly 'postmodern' n o n e x i s t e n c e o f the big O t h e r means. Foucault
s p o k e o f t h e ' s t r a t e g i e s w i t h o u t s u b j e c t ' t h a t P o w e r u s e s i n its r e p r o d u c
tion - h e r e we have a l m o s t t h e e x a c t o p p o s i t e : s u b j e c t s c a u g h t in the
u n p r e d i c t a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e i r acts, but n o g l o b a l strategy d o m i n a t
i n g a n d r e g u l a t i n g t h e i r i n t e r p l a y . I n d i v i d u a l s w h o a r e still c a u g h t i n t h e
traditional modernist paradigm are desperately looking for another
agency which one c o u l d legitimately elevate into the position of the
S u b j e c t S u p p o s e d to K n o w , a n d w h i c h w o u l d s o m e h o w g u a r a n t e e our
c h o i c e : e t h i c a l c o m m i t t e e s , t h e s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y itself, government
authority, up to the p a r a n o i a c big O t h e r , the s e c r e t invisible M a s t e r o f
conspiracy theories.
S o w h a t is w r o n g w i t h t h e t h e o r y o f t h e r i s k s o c i e t y ? D o e s it n o t fullv
e n d o r s e t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e b i g O t h e r , a n d d r a w all e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l
c o n s e q u e n c e s f r o m t h i s ? T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t , p a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h i s t h e o r y is
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t o o s p e c i f i c a n d t o o g e n e r a l : w i t h a l l its e m p h a s i s o n h o w
t h e ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i z a t i o n ' f o r c e s us to t r a n s f o r m old n o t i o n s o f h u m a n
a g e n c y , s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , a n d s o o n , u p t o t h e m o s t i n t i m a t e ways o f
r e l a t i n g to o u r s e x u a l identity, the t h e o r y o f the risk society n e v e r t h e l e s s
u n d e r e s t i m a t e s t h e i m p a c t o f t h e e m e r g i n g n e w societal l o g i c o n t h e very
fundamental status o f subjectivity; o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , in c o n c e i v i n g o f
r i s k a n d m a n u f a c t u r e d u n c e r t a i n t y as a u n i v e r s a l f e a t u r e o f c o n t e m p o r a r y
life, this t h e o r y o b f u s c a t e s t h e c o n c r e t e s o c i o e c o n o m i c r o o t s o f t h e s e risks.
And it is m y c o n t e n t i o n that psychoanalysis a n d M a r x i s m , as a rule
d i s m i s s e d b y t h e o r i s t s o f t h e r i s k s o c i e t y as o u t d a t e d e x p r e s s i o n s o f t h e
first-wave m o d e r n i z a t i o n (the fight o f the rational agency to bring the
i m p e n e t r a b l e U n c o n s c i o u s to light; the idea o f a self-transparent society
c o n t r o l l e d by t h e ' c o m m o n i n t e l l e c t ' ) , c a n c o n t r i b u t e to a c r i t i c a l clarifi
c a t i o n o f t h e s e two p o i n t s .
T h e Unbehagen in t h e R i s k S o c i e t y
P s y c h o a n a l y s i s is n e i t h e r a t h e o r y w h i c h b e m o a n s t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f
t h e o l d m o d e s o f traditional stability a n d wisdom, l o c a t i n g in t h e m the
c a u s e o f m o d e r n n e u r o s e s a n d c o m p e l l i n g us to discover o u r r o o t s in o l d
archaic wisdom or profound self-knowledge (the J u n g i a n version), n o r
j u s t a n o t h e r version o f reflexive m o d e r n k n o w l e d g e t e a c h i n g us h o w to
penetrate a n d m a s t e r t h e i n n e r m o s t s e c r e t s o f o u r p s y c h i c life - what
p s y c h o a n a l y s i s f o c u s e s o n , its p r o p e r o b j e c t , c o n s i s t s , r a t h e r , i n t h e u n e x
pected c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the disintegration o f traditional structures that
r e g u l a t e d l i b i d i n a l life. W h y d o e s t h e d e c l i n e o f p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y and
fixed social a n d g e n d e r roles g e n e r a t e new anxieties, instead o f o p e n i n g
up a B r a v e N e w W'otid o f individuals e n g a g e d in t h e creative ' c a r e o f t h e
Self a n d enjoying the perpetual process o f shifting a n d reshaping their
f l u i d m u l t i p l e i d e n t i t i e s ? W h a t p s y c h o a n a l y s i s c a n d o is t o f o c u s o n the
Unbehagen i n t h e risk s o c i e t y : o n t h e n e w a n x i e t i e s g e n e r a t e d b y t h e r i s k
s o c i e t y , w h i c h c a n n o t b e s i m p l y d i s m i s s e d as t h e r e s u l t o f t h e t e n s i o n o r
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 m o d e o f subjectivity:
their subject remains the modern 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
c o n s e r v a t i v e p a t r i a r c h a l r e i n s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e ( w e a k hys
terical w o m e n versus m e n w h o s e W o r d s h o u l d again b e c o m e t h e i r B o n d ) ,
b u t t h a t t h e way i n w h i c h t h i s v e r y e x p l i c i t e m p h a s i s o n p r o m i s e s t o b e
k e p t is a l r e a d y p a r t o f a h y s t e r i c a l e c o n o m y - a t r u s t w h i c h h a s t o b e
r e a s s e r t e d i n t h i s p u b l i c r i t u a l i z e d way, as i t w e r e , u n d e r m i n e s its o w n
credentials.
T h e inability o f risk s o c i e t y t h e o r y t o t a k e all t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f g l o b a l
r e f l e x i v i z a t i o n i n t o a c c o u n t is c l e a r l y d i s c e r n i b l e i n its t r e a t m e n t o f t h e
f a m i l y . T h i s t h e o r y is r i g h t t o e m p h a s i z e h o w t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
p a r e n t s a n d c h i l d r e n i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f a m i l y was t h e l a s t b a s t i o n o f l e g a l
s l a v e r y in o u r W e s t e r n s o c i e t i e s : a l a r g e s t r a t u m o f s o c i e t y - m i n o r s - w e r e
d e n i e d full r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a n d a u t o n o m y , a n d r e t a i n e d i n a slave s t a t u s
w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r p a r e n t s ( w h o c o n t r o l l e d t h e i r lives a n d w e r e r e s p o n
sible for their acts). W i t h reflexive m o d e r n i z a t i o n , c h i l d r e n themselves
a r e t r e a t e d as r e s p o n s i b l e s u b j e c t s w i t h f r e e d o m o f c h o i c e (in divorce
procedures, they are allowed to influence the decision o n which o f the
two p a r e n t s t h e y will live w i t h ; t h e y c a n s t a r t a c o u r t p r o c e d u r e against
their parents i f they feel that their h u m a n rights have b e e n violated; e t c . )
- in short, parenthood is n o l o n g e r a natural-substantial notion, but
b e c o m e s i n a way p o l i t i c i z e d ; it t u r n s i n t o a n o t h e r d o m a i n o f r e f l e x i v e
choice. However, is n o t the obverse o f this reflexivization o f family
r e l a t i o n s , i n w h i c h t h e f a m i l y l o s e s its c h a r a c t e r o f i m m e d i a t e - s u b s t a n t i a l
entity whose members are not autonomous subjects, the progressive
'familialization' of public professional life itself? I n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h w e r e sup
p o s e d t o f u n c t i o n as a n a n t i d o t e t o t h e f a m i l y s t a r t t o f u n c t i o n as s u r r o g a t e
families, allowing us s o m e h o w to p r o l o n g o u r family d e p e n d e n c e and
immaturity: schools - even universities - increasingly assume therapeutic
functions; corporations provide a new family h o m e , and so o n . The
standard situation in which, after the p e r i o d o f e d u c a t i o n a n d depend
ency, I a m allowed to e n t e r the adult universe o f maturity a n d responsi
b i l i t y is t h u s d o u b l y t u r n e d a r o u n d : as a c h i l d I a m a l r e a d y r e c o g n i z e d as
a mature r e s p o n s i b l e b e i n g ; a n d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , m y c h i l d h o o d is p r o
l o n g e d i n d e f i n i t e l y , t h a t is, I a m n e v e r r e a l l y c o m p e l l e d t o ' g r o w up',
s i n c e a l l t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h f o l l o w t h e f a m i l y f u n c t i o n as ersatz f a m i l i e s ,
providing caring s u r r o u n d i n g s for my Narcissistic endeavours. . . .
I n o r d e r t o g r a s p a l l t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h i s shift, o n e w o u l d h a v e t o
r e t u r n t o H e g e l ' s t r i a d o f f a m i l y , civil s o c i e t y ( f r e e i n t e r a c t i o n o f i n d i v i d
u a l s w h o e n j o y t h e i r r e f l e x i v e f r e e d o m ) a n d S t a t e : H e g e l ' s c o n s t r u c t i o n is
b a s e d o n the distinction b e t w e e n the private s p h e r e o f family a n d the
p u b l i c s p h e r e o f civil s o c i e t y , a d i s t i n c t i o n w h i c h is v a n i s h i n g t o d a y , i n s o
f a r as f a m i l y life i t s e l f b e c o m e s p o l i t i c i z e d , is t u r n i n g i n t o p a r t o f t h e
public domain; on the other hand, public professional life becomes
'familialized', t h a t is, s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t e in it as m e m b e r s o f a large
f a m i l y , n o t as r e s p o n s i b l e ' m a t u r e ' i n d i v i d u a l s . S o t h e p r o b l e m h e r e is n o t
p a t r i a r c h a l a u t h o r i t y a n d t h e e m a n c i p a t o r y s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t it, as most
f e m i n i s t s c o n t i n u e t o c l a i m ; t h e p r o b l e m , r a t h e r , is t h e n e w f o r m s o f
dependency that arise f r o m the very decline o f patriarchal symbolic
authority. It was M a x H o r k h e i m e r , in his study o n a u t h o r i t y a n d family in
the 1930s, who drew attention to t h e a m b i g u o u s c o n s e q u e n c e s o f the
gradual disintegration o f p a t e r n a l authority in m o d e r n capitalist society:
far from b e i n g simply the e l e m e n t a r y cell a n d g e n e r a t o r o f authoritarian
p e r s o n a l i t i e s , t h e m o d e r n n u c l e a r f a m i l y was s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e s t r u c t u r e
that generated the 'autonomous' critical subject a b l e to c o n f r o n t the
predominant social o r d e r o n a c c o u n t o f h i s / h e r ethical convictions, so
that the i m m e d i a t e result o f the disintegration o f p a t e r n a l a u t h o r i t y is
also t h e rise o f w h a t s o c i o l o g i s t s call t h e conformist 'other-orientated'
21
p e r s o n a l i t y . ' T o d a y , with t h e shift towards t h e narcissistic p e r s o n a l i t y , this
p r o c e s s is e v e n s t r o n g e r , a n d h a s e n t e r e d a n e w p h a s e .
W i t h r e g a r d t o t h e ' p o s t m o d e r n ' c o n s t e l l a t i o n ( o r to w h a t t h e theorists
o f t h e risk s o c i e t y call reflexive m o d e r n i z a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e s e c o n d
modernity a n d / o r the s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t - perhaps their overinsistent
e m p h a s i s o n h o w t h e y a r e o p p o s e d t o p o s t m o d e r n i s m is t o b e r e a d as a
2 7
disavowal o f t h e i r u n a c k n o w l e d g e d p r o x i m i t y to i t ) , in w h i c h p a t r i a r c h y
is fatally u n d e r m i n e d , s o t h a t t h e s u b j e c t e x p e r i e n c e s h i m s e l f as freed
from any traditional constraints, lacking any internalized symbolic Prohi
bition, bent on e x p e r i m e n t i n g with h i s life a n d on p u r s u i n g his life-
project, a n d so on, we have t h e r e f o r e to raise the m o m e n t o u s question o f
the disavowed 'passionate a t t a c h m e n t s ' which support the n e w reflexive
freedom o f the subject delivered from the constraints o f Nature and/or
Tradition: what if the disintegration o f the public ('patriarchal') symbolic
a u t h o r i t y is p a i d f o r ( o r c o u n t e r b a l a n c e d ) b y a n e v e n s t r o n g e r d i s a v o w e d
' p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t ' t o s u b j e c t i o n , as - a m o n g o t h e r p h e n o m e n a - t h e
growth o f sado-maso lesbian couples where the relationship between the
two w o m e n follows t h e strict a n d severely e n a c t e d M a s t e r / S l a v e m a t r i x
s e e m s t o i n d i c a t e : t h e o n e w h o g i v e s t h e o r d e r s is t h e ' t o p ' , t h e o n e w h o
o b e y s is t h e ' b o t t o m ' , a n d i n o r d e r t o b e c o m e t h e ' t o p ' o n e h a s t o g o
t h r o u g h a n a r d u o u s p r o c e s s o f a p p r e n t i c e s h i p . W h i l e it is w r o n g t o r e a d
t h i s ' t o p / b o t t o m ' d u a l i t y as a s i g n o f d i r e c t ' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e ( m a l e )
a g g r e s s o r ' , it is n o l e s s w r o n g t o p e r c e i v e i t as a p a r o d i c i m i t a t i o n o f
patriarchal relations of domination; we are dealing, rather, with the
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 ' to
some extreme form o f stricdy regulated domination and submission
becomes the secret transgressive source o f libidinal satisfaction, 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 the reversal o f the
'repressive' regulation o f desire into the desire for regulation - this
'masochistic' reflexive turn, through which the repressive 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: the
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. Traditional psycho-
a n a l y s i s still r e l i e d o n a s u b s t a n t i a l n o t i o n o f t h e U n c o n s c i o u s as t h e n o n -
reflected 'dark continent', the impenetrable 'decentred' Substance o f the
s u b j e c t ' s b e i n g to b e a r d u o u s l y p e n e t r a t e d , r e f l e c t e d , m e d i a t e d , by inter
pretation. Today, however, the formations o f the Unconscious (from
d r e a m s to hysterical s y m p t o m s ) have definitely lost t h e i r i n n o c e n c e : t h e
'free a s s o c i a t i o n s ' o f a typical e d u c a t e d a n a l y s a n d consist for t h e m o s t p a r t
o f attempts to provide a psychoanalytic explanation o f their disturbances,
s o t h a t o n e is q u i t e j u s t i f i e d i n s a y i n g t h a t w e h a v e n o t o n l y J u n g i a n ,
Kleinian, Lacanian . . . interpretations o f the symptoms, but symptoms
w h i c h a r e t h e m s e l v e s J u n g i a n , K l e i n i a n , L a c a n i a n . . . , t h a t is, w h o s e
reality involves implicit r e f e r e n c e to s o m e psychoanalytic theory. The
unfortunate result o f this g l o b a l r e f l e x i v i z a t i o n o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (every
t h i n g b e c o m e s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e U n c o n s c i o u s i n t e r p r e t s i t s e l f . . . ) is, o f
c o u r s e , that the analyst's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n l o s e s its p e r f o r m a t i v e 'symbolic
e f f i c i e n c y ' a n d l e a v e s t h e s y m p t o m i n t a c t i n its i d i o t i c jouissance. In o t h e r
w o r d s , w h a t h a p p e n s i n p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t r e a t m e n t is s i m i l a r t o t h e p a r a d o x
( a l r e a d y n o t e d ) o f a n e o - N a z i s k i n h e a d w h o , w h e n r e a l l y p r e s s e d t o give
t h e r e a s o n s for his v i o l e n c e , s u d d e n l y starts to talk like s o c i a l w o r k e r s ,
sociologists and social psychologists, q u o t i n g diminished social mobility,
rising insecurity, the disintegration o f paternal authority, lack o f m a t e r n a l
l o v e i n h i s e a r l y c h i l d h o o d - w h e n t h e b i g O t h e r qua t h e s u b s t a n c e o f o u r
s o c i a l b e i n g d i s i n t e g r a t e s , t h e u n i t y o f p r a c t i c e a n d its i n h e r e n t r e f l e c t i o n
d i s i n t e g r a t e s i n t o r a w v i o l e n c e a n d its i m p o t e n t , i n e f f i c i e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
T h i s i m p o t e n c e o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is a l s o o n e o f t h e n e c e s s a r y o b v e r s e s
o f t h e u n i v e r s a l i z e d r e f l e x i v i t y h a i l e d b y r i s k s o c i e t y t h e o r i s t s : it is as i f o u r
r e f l e x i v e p o w e r c a n f l o u r i s h o n l y i n s o f a r as it d r a w s its s t r e n g t h from
and relies o n some minimal 'pre-reflexive' substantial support which
e l u d e s its g r a s p , s o t h a t its u n i v e r s a l i z a t i o n is p a i d f o r by its i n e f f i c i e n c y ,
t h a t is, by t h e p a r a d o x i c a l r e - e m e r g e n c e o f t h e b r u t e R e a l o f ' i r r a t i o n a l '
violence, i m p e r m e a b l e a n d insensitive to reflexive interpretation. A n d the
tragedy is t h a t , faced with this d e a d l o c k o f the inefficiency o f their
interpretative interventions, even some psychoanalysts who otherwise
resist the obvious false solution o f a b a n d o n i n g the d o m a i n o f p s y c h o a n a l
ysis p r o p e r and taking refuge in biochemistry or body training are
t e m p t e d t o t a k e t h e d i r e c t way o f t h e R e a l : t h e y e m p h a s i z e t h a t s i n c e t h e
U n c o n s c i o u s is a l r e a d y its o w n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , all t h e p s y c h o a n a l y s t c a n d o
is act - s o , i n s t e a d o f t h e p a t i e n t a c t i n g (say, p r o d u c i n g actes mancfues) and
t h e analyst i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e p a t i e n t ' s acts, we g e t a p a t i e n t interpreting
a n d his analyst i n t r o d u c i n g a c u t i n t o this flow o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n with a n
2 8
a c t (say, o f c l o s i n g t h e s e s s i o n ) .
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 modernity
remained an unfinished project. In contrast, A d o r n o a n d 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 E c o n o m y , Stupid!
As for the socioeconomic relations of domination that go with the

'postmodern' 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 to the
' 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 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 bureaucratic
empire, dwelling o n 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
secretaries and 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
3 0
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 . 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
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 ) :
31
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 . 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 are
asleep, e m e r g e from their hiding-place a n d accomplish their work (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 persists
t h r o u g h R i c h a r d W a g n e r ' s Rhinegold, ( 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,
i t is t h e b i g O t h e r , t h e s y m b o l i c I n s t i t u t i o n , w h i c h a c t s t h r o u g h h i m : r e c a l l
o u r previous example o f a j u d g e , who may be a miserable a n d corrupt
p e r s o n , b u t the m o m e n t h e puts o n his r o b e a n d o t h e r insignia, his words
a r e t h e w o r d s o f t h e L a w itself. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e ' i n v i s i b l e ' M a s t e r
(whose paradigmatic c a s e is t h e and-Semitic figure o f the 'Jew' who,
i n v i s i b l e t o t h e p u b l i c e y e , p u l l s t h e s t r i n g s o f s o c i a l l i f e ) is a k i n d o f
u n c a n n y d o u b l e o f p u b l i c authority: h e h a s to act in s h a d o w , irradiating a
3 2
phantom-like, spectral o m n i p o t e n c e .
T h i s , t h e n , is t h e c o n c l u s i o n t o b e d r a w n f r o m t h e B i l l G a t e s i c o n : h o w
the disintegration o f the patriarchal symbolic authority, o f the Name-of-
t h e - F a t h e r , gives r i s e t o a n e w figure o f t h e M a s t e r w h o is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y
o u r c o m m o n peer, o u r fellow-creature, o u r imaginary d o u b l e , and - for
this very reason - p h a n t a s m i c a l l y e n d o w e d w i t h a n o t h e r d i m e n s i o n o f t h e
Evil G e n i u s . I n L a c a n i a n t e r m s : t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e E g o I d e a l , o f t h e
f e a t u r e o f s y m b o l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - t h a t is, t h e r e d u c t i o n o f t h e M a s t e r to
a n i m a g i n a r y i d e a l - n e c e s s a r i l y g i v e s r i s e t o its m o n s t r o u s o b v e r s e , t o t h e
superego figure o f t h e o m n i p o t e n t Evil G e n i u s w h o c o n t r o l s o u r lives. I n
this figure, t h e i m a g i n a r y ( s e m b l a n c e ) a n d t h e real ( o f p a r a n o i a ) overlap,
owing to the suspension o f the p r o p e r symbolic efficiency.
T h e p o i n t o f i n s i s t i n g t h a t w e a r e d e a l i n g w i t h B i l l G a t e s as a n i c o n is
t h a t i t w o u l d b e m y s t i f y i n g t o e l e v a t e t h e ' r e a l ' G a t e s i n t o a k i n d o f Evil
Genius who masterminds a p l o t t o a c h i e v e g l o b a l c o n t r o l o v e r us all.
H e r e , m o r e t h a n e v e r , i t is c r u c i a l t o r e m e m b e r t h e l e s s o n o f t h e M a r x i s t
dialectic o f fetishization: the 'reification' o f relations b e t w e e n people (the
fact that they assume the form o f p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l 'relations between
t h i n g s ' ) is always r e d o u b l e d b y t h e a p p a r e n d y o p p o s i t e p r o c e s s - b y t h e
false ' p e r s o n a l i z a t i o n ' ( ' p s y c h o l o g i z a t i o n ' ) o f what are in fact objective
s o c i a l p r o c e s s e s . I t was i n t h e 1 9 3 0 s t h a t t h e first g e n e r a t i o n o f F r a n k f u r t
S c h o o l t h e o r e t i c i a n s d r e w a t t e n t i o n to h o w - at t h e very m o m e n t when
g l o b a l m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s s t a r t e d t o e x e r t t h e i r full d o m i n a t i o n , m a k i n g t h e
individual p r o d u c e r ' s success o r failure d e p e n d e n t o n m a r k e t cycles totally
o u t his o f c o n t r o l - t h e n o t i o n o f a c h a r i s m a t i c ' b u s i n e s s g e n i u s ' r e a s s e r t e d
itself in 'spontaneous capitalist ideology', attributing the success o r failure
o f a b u s i n e s s m a n t o s o m e m y s t e r i o u s je ne sais quoi w h i c h h e p o s s e s s e s . "
A n d d o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d even m o r e today, w h e n t h e a b s t r a c t i o n ot
m a r k e t r e l a t i o n s t h a t r u n o u r lives is b r o u g h t t o a n e x t r e m e ? T h e b o o k
m a r k e t is o v e r f l o w i n g w i t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l m a n u a l s a d v i s i n g us o n h o w t o
s u c c e e d , h o w t o o u t d o o u r p a r t n e r o r c o m p e t i t o r - in s h o r t , m a k i n g o u r
success d e p e n d e n t o n our proper 'attitude'.
S o , i n a way, o n e is t e m p t e d to reverse M a r x ' s f a m o u s formula: in
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 'relations between things' tend to

assume the phantasmagorical 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 individual
can achieve such disproportionate power?' A p h e n o m e n o n 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 public democratic
debate and control, then generating the spectre of unforeseen cata
s t r o p h i c l o n g - t e r m c o n s e q u e n c e s . H o w e v e r , is n o t t h i s k i n d o f risk r o o t e d
i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l o g i c o f m a r k e t a n d p r o f i t a b i l i t y is d r i v i n g p r i v a t e l y
o w n e d c o r p o r a t i o n s to pursue their c o u r s e a n d use scientific a n d t e c h n o
logical innovations ( o r simply e x p a n d their p r o d u c t i o n ) without actually
t a k i n g a c c o u n t o f t h e l o n g - t e r m e f f e c t s o f s u c h activity o n t h e environ
m e n t , as w e l l as t h e h e a l t h o f h u m a n k i n d itself?
T h u s - d e s p i t e all t h e t a l k a b o u t a ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ' w h i c h c o m p e l s
us to leave t h e o l d i d e o l o g i c a l d i l e m m a s o f Left a n d R i g h t , o f capitalism
v e r s u s s o c i a l i s m , a n d s o o n , b e h i n d - is n o t t h e c o n c l u s i o n t o b e d r a w n
that in the p r e s e n t global situation, in which private c o r p o r a t i o n s outside
p u b l i c p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o l a r e m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s w h i c h c a n a f f e c t us a l l , e v e n
u p t o o u r c h a n c e s o f survival, t h e o n l y s o l u t i o n l i e s i n a k i n d o f d i r e c t
socialization o f t h e p r o d u c t i v e p r o c e s s - in m o v i n g towards a society in
which global decisions about the fundamental orientation o f how to
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 groups
concerned themselves (through 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 imposes itself today m o r e and more as the
'neutral' Real a c c e p t e d b y all p a r t i e s and, as s u c h , more and more
3 4
depoliticized.
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 threatened
pit closures legitimized in terms 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 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 .
The Full Monty, 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
Lights - 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
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 working-
c 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 the
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 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 the oldest among them, their ex-foreman, is
informed, just prior to their show, that he has got a new j o b , he
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 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
Brassed 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 the 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
drawing us, has any well-defined 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 .
S o t h e r e a r e two a t t i t u d e s : e i t h e r t o d a y ' s L e f t n o s t a l g i c a l l y e n g a g e s i n
t h e r i t u a l i s t i c i n c a n t a t i o n o f o l d f o r m u l a s , b e it t h o s e o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y
C o m m u n i s m o r those o f welfare state r e f o r m i s t Social D e m o c r a c y , dismiss
i n g all talk o f n e w p o s t m o d e r n s o c i e t y as e m p t y f a s h i o n a b l e p r a t t l e that
obfuscates the harsh reality o f today's capitalism; o r it accepts global
c a p i t a l i s m as ' t h e o n l y g a m e i n t o w n ' , a n d f o l l o w s t h e d o u b l e t a c t i c s o f
p r o m i s i n g t h e e m p l o y e e s t h a t t h e m a x i m u m p o s s i b l e w e l f a r e s t a t e will b e
maintained, a n d the employers that the rules o f the (global capitalist)
g a m e will b e fully r e s p e c t e d and the employees' 'irrational' demands
f i r m l y c e n s o r e d . S o , i n t o d a y ' s leftist p o l i t i c s , w e s e e m i n e f f e c t to be
r e d u c e d to the c h o i c e between the 'solid' o r t h o d o x attitude o f proudly,
o u t o f p r i n c i p l e , sticking to t h e o l d ( C o m m u n i s t o r S o c i a l D e m o c r a t i c )
t u n e , a l t h o u g h w e k n o w its t i m e h a s p a s s e d , a n d t h e N e w L a b o u r ' r a d i c a l
c e n t r e ' a t t i t u d e o f g o i n g t h e 'full M o n t y ' i n s t r i p p i n g , g e t t i n g r i d of, t h e
last vestiges o f p r o p e r leftist d i s c o u r s e . . . . P a r a d o x i c a l l y , t h e ultimate
victim o f the demise o f R e a l l y E x i s t i n g S o c i a l i s m was thus its great
historical o p p o n e n t throughout most of our century, reformist Social
D e m o c r a c y itself.
T h e b i g n e w s o f t o d a y ' s p o s t - p o l i t i c a l a g e o f t h e ' e n d o f i d e o l o g y ' is
t h u s t h e r a d i c a l d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e s p h e r e o f t h e e c o n o m y : t h e way
t h e economy f u n c t i o n s ( t h e n e e d t o c u t s o c i a l w e l f a r e , e t c . ) is a c c e p t e d as
a s i m p l e i n s i g h t i n t o t h e o b j e c t i v e s t a t e o f t h i n g s . H o w e v e r , as l o n g as t h i s
fundamental d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m i c s p h e r e is a c c e p t e d , all t h e
t a l k a b o u t a c t i v e c i t i z e n s h i p , a b o u t p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n l e a d i n g to respon
s i b l e c o l l e c t i v e d e c i s i o n s , a n d so o n , will r e m a i n l i m i t e d t o t h e 'cultural'
i s s u e s o f r e l i g i o u s , s e x u a l , e t h n i c a n d o t h e r way-of-life d i f f e r e n c e s , w i t h o u t
actually e n c r o a c h i n g u p o n t h e level at w h i c h l o n g - t e r m decisions that
a f f e c t us all a r e m a d e . I n s h o r t , t h e o n l y way e f f e c t i v e l y t o b r i n g a b o u t a
s o c i e t y i n w h i c h risky l o n g - t e r m d e c i s i o n s w o u l d e n s u e f r o m p u b l i c d e b a t e
i n v o l v i n g all c o n c e r n e d is s o m e k i n d o f r a d i c a l l i m i t a t i o n o f C a p i t a l ' s
f r e e d o m , the subordination o f the process o f p r o d u c t i o n to social c o n t r o l
- t h e r a d i c a l repoliticization of the economy. T h a t is t o say: i f t h e problem
with today's post-politics ('administration o f social affairs') is t h a t it
increasingly undermines the possibility o f a p r o p e r political act, this
undermining is d i r e c d y d u e t o t h e d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f e c o n o m i c s , t o t h e
c o m m o n a c c e p t a n c e o f C a p i t a l a n d m a r k e t m e c h a n i s m s as n e u t r a l t o o l s /
p r o c e d u r e s to b e e x p l o i t e d .
W e c a n n o w see why today's post-politics c a n n o t attain the properly
p o l i t i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f u n i v e r s a l i t y : b e c a u s e it s i l e n t l y p r e c l u d e s t h e s p h e r e
o f e c o n o m y from politicization. T h e domain o f global capitalist market
r e l a t i o n s is t h e O t h e r S c e n e o f t h e s o - c a l l e d r e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f civil s o c i e t y
advocated by the partisans o f 'identity politics' a n d other postmodern
f o r m s o f p o l i t i c i z a t i o n : all t h e t a l k a b o u t n e w f o r m s o f p o l i t i c s bursting
o u t all o v e r , f o c u s e d on particular issues (gay rights, ecology, ethnic
m i n o r i t i e s . . . ) , all this i n c e s s a n t a c t i v i t y o f f l u i d , s h i f t i n g i d e n t i t i e s , o f
b u i l d i n g m u l t i p l e ad hoc c o a l i t i o n s , a n d s o o n , h a s s o m e t h i n g inauthentic
a b o u t it, a n d u l t i m a t e l y r e s e m b l e s t h e o b s e s s i o n a l n e u r o t i c w h o t a l k s all
t h e t i m e a n d is o t h e r w i s e f r a n t i c a l l y a c t i v e p r e c i s e l y i n o r d e r t o ensure
t h a t s o m e t h i n g - w h a t really matters — will not b e d i s t u r b e d , t h a t it will
3 5
remain immobilized. So, instead o f celebrating the new freedoms and
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s b r o u g h t a b o u t by t h e ' s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ' , i t is m u c h more
crucial to focus o n what remains the same in this g l o b a l fluidity and
r e f l e x i v i t y , o n w h a t s e r v e s as t h e v e r y m o t o r o f t h i s f l u i d i t y : t h e i n e x o r a b l e
l o g i c o f C a p i t a l . T h e s p e c t r a l p r e s e n c e o f C a p i t a l is t h e f i g u r e o f t h e b i g
O t h e r w h i c h n o t o n l y r e m a i n s o p e r a t i v e w h e n all t h e t r a d i t i o n a l embodi
m e n t s o f t h e s y m b o l i c b i g O t h e r disintegrate, b u t e v e n directly c a u s e s this
d i s i n t e g r a t i o n : far f r o m b e i n g c o n f r o n t e d with t h e abyss o f t h e i r freedom
- t h a t is, l a d e n w i t h t h e b u r d e n o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t c a n n o t b e a l l e v i a t e d
b y t h e h e l p i n g h a n d o f T r a d i t i o n o r N a t u r e - t o d a y ' s s u b j e c t is p e r h a p s
m o r e t h a n ever c a u g h t in a n i n e x o r a b l e c o m p u l s i o n t h a t effectively r u n s
his life.
T h e i r o n y o f h i s t o r y is t h a t , in t h e E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n ex-Communist
c o u n t r i e s , t h e ' r e f o r m e d ' C o m m u n i s t s w e r e t h e first t o l e a r n t h i s l e s s o n .
W h y did m a n y o f t h e m r e t u r n to p o w e r via f r e e e l e c t i o n s in t h e mid
1 9 9 0 s ? T h i s v e r y r e t u r n o f f e r s t h e u l t i m a t e p r o o f t h a t t h e s e s t a t e s h a v e in
f a c t e n t e r e d c a p i t a l i s m . T h a t is t o say: w h a t d o e x - C o m m u n i s t s s t a n d f o r
today? D u e to t h e i r privileged links with t h e newly e m e r g i n g capitalists
( m o s d y m e m b e r s o f t h e o l d nomenklatura 'privatizing' the c o m p a n i e s they
o n c e r a n ) , t h e y a r e first a n d f o r e m o s t t h e p a r t y o f b i g C a p i t a l ; further
m o r e , t o e r a s e t h e t r a c e s o f t h e i r b r i e f b u t n o n e t h e less r a t h e r traumatic
e x p e r i e n c e w i t h p o l i t i c a l l y a c t i v e civil s o c i e t y , t h e y as a r u l e f e r o c i o u s l y
advocate a quick deideologization, a retreat from a c t i v e civil society
e n g a g e m e n t i n t o p a s s i v e , a p o l i t i c a l c o n s u m e r i s m - t h e v e r y two f e a t u r e s
which characterize c o n t e m p o r a r y capitalism. S o dissidents are astonished
t o d i s c o v e r t h a t t h e y p l a y e d t h e r o l e o f ' v a n i s h i n g m e d i a t o r s ' o n t h e way
f r o m s o c i a l i s m t o c a p i t a l i s m , i n w h i c h t h e s a m e c l a s s as b e f o r e r u l e s u n d e r
a n e w g u i s e . I t is t h e r e f o r e w r o n g t o c l a i m t h a t t h e e x - C o m m u n i s t s ' r e t u r n
to p o w e r shows h o w p e o p l e a r e d i s a p p o i n t e d by capitalism a n d l o n g for
t h e o l d s o c i a l i s t s e c u r i t y - i n a k i n d o f H e g e l i a n ' n e g a t i o n o f n e g a t i o n ' , it
is o n l y w i t h the ex-Communists' return to power that socialism was
e f f e c t i v e l y n e g a t e d - t h a t is t o say, w h a t t h e p o l i t i c a l a n a l y s t s ( m i s ) p e r c e i v e
as ' d i s a p p o i n t m e n t w i t h c a p i t a l i s m ' is i n f a c t d i s a p p o i n t m e n t with the
e t h i c o - p o l i t i c a l e n t h u s i a s m f o r w h i c h t h e r e is n o p l a c e i n ' n o r m a l ' c a p i t a l
3
ism. '' W e should thus reassert the old Marxist critique o f 'reifkation':
today, e m p h a s i z i n g the depoliticized 'objective' e c o n o m i c logic against
allegedly 'outdated' forms o f ideological passions is the predominant
i d e o l o g i c a l f o r m , s i n c e i d e o l o g y is always s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l , t h a t is, it always
defines itself through a distance towards an Other dismissed and
3 7
d e n o u n c e d as ' i d e o l o g i c a l ' . F o r t h a t p r e c i s e r e a s o n - b e c a u s e the depolit
icized economy is the disavoiued 'fundamental fantasy' of postmodern politics — a
p r o p e r l y p o l i t i c a l act w o u l d n e c e s s a r i l y e n t a i l t h e r e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e
e c o n o m y : w i t h i n a g i v e n s i t u a t i o n , a g e s t u r e c o u n t s as a n act o n l y i n s o f a r
as i t d i s t u r b s ( ' t r a v e r s e s ' ) its f u n d a m e n t a l fantasy.
I n s o f a r as t o d a y ' s m o d e r a t e L e f t , f r o m B l a i r t o C l i n t o n , fully a c c e p t s
t h i s d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n , we a r e w i t n e s s i n g a s t r a n g e r e v e r s a l o f r o l e s : t h e o n l y
serious political f o r c e which c o n t i n u e s to question the u n r e s t r a i n e d rule
o f t h e m a r k e t is t h e p o p u l i s t e x t r e m e R i g h t ( B u c h a n a n i n t h e U S A ; L e
P e n in F r a n c e ) . W h e n W a l l S t r e e t r e a c t e d n e g a t i v e l y t o a fall in the
u n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e , t h e o n l y o n e t o m a k e t h e o b v i o u s p o i n t t h a t w h a t is
g o o d f o r C a p i t a l is o b v i o u s l y n o t w h a t is g o o d f o r t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e
population was B u c h a n a n . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e o l d w i s d o m according to
w h i c h t h e e x t r e m e R i g h t o p e n l y says w h a t t h e m o d e r a t e Right secretly
t h i n k s , b u t d o e s n ' t d a r e say i n p u b l i c ( t h e o p e n a s s e r t i o n o f r a c i s m , o f t h e
n e e d for strong authority and the cultural h e g e m o n y o f 'Western values',
e t c . ) , we a r e t h e r e f o r e approaching a situation in w h i c h the extreme
R i g h t o p e n l y says w h a t t h e m o d e r a t e Left s e c r e t l y t h i n k s , b u t d o e s n ' t d a r e
say i n p u b l i c ( t h e n e c e s s i t y t o c u r b t h e f r e e d o m o f C a p i t a l ) .
O n e s h o u l d a l s o n o t f o r g e t t h a t t o d a y ' s r i g h t i s t survivalist m i l i t i a s o f t e n
l o o k like a c a r i c a t u r i z e d v e r s i o n o f t h e e x t r e m e m i l i t a n t leftist splinter
groups o f the 1960s: in both cases we are d e a l i n g with radical anti-
institutional logic - t h a t is, t h e u l t i m a t e e n e m y is t h e r e p r e s s i v e State
apparatus (the F B I , the Army, the judicial system) which threatens the
g r o u p ' s v e r y survival, a n d t h e g r o u p is o r g a n i z e d as a t i g h t disciplined
b o d y in o r d e r to b e a b l e to w i t h s t a n d this p r e s s u r e . T h e e x a c t c o u n t e r
p o i n t t o this is a L e f t i s t l i k e P i e r r e B o u r d i e u , w h o d e f e n d s t h e i d e a o f a
u n i f i e d E u r o p e as a s t r o n g ' s o c i a l s t a t e ' , g u a r a n t e e i n g the m i n i m u m of
social rights and welfare against the onslaught o f globalization: it is
difficult to abstain f r o m irony when one sees a radical Leftist raising
barriers against the corrosive global power o f Capital, so fervently cel
e b r a t e d b y M a r x . S o , a g a i n , it is as i f t h e r o l e s a r e r e v e r s e d t o d a y : L e f t i s t s
s u p p o r t a s t r o n g S t a t e as t h e l a s t g u a r a n t e e o f s o c i a l a n d civil l i b e r t i e s
a g a i n s t C a p i t a l ; w h i l e R i g h t i s t s d e m o n i z e t h e S t a t e a n d its a p p a r a t u s e s as
the ultimate terrorist m a c h i n e .
O f course, one should fully a c k n o w l e d g e the tremendous liberating
impact o f the postmodern politicization o f domains which were hitherto
c o n s i d e r e d apolitical (feminism, gay a n d lesbian politics, ecology, e t h n i c
a n d o t h e r so-called m i n o r i t y i s s u e s ) : t h e fact that t h e s e issues n o t o n l y
b e c a m e p e r c e i v e d as i n h e r e n t l y p o l i t i c a l b u t also gave b i r t h to n e w f o r m s
o f political subjectivization thoroughly r e s h a p e d o u r entire political a n d
cultural landscape. S o t h e p o i n t is n o t to play d o w n this tremendous
a d v a n c e in f a v o u r o f t h e r e t u r n t o s o m e n e w v e r s i o n o f s o - c a l l e d e c o n o m i c
e s s e n t i a l i s m ; t h e p o i n t is, r a t h e r , t h a t t h e d e p o l i t i c i z a t i o n o f t h e e c o n o m y
g e n e r a t e s t h e p o p u l i s t N e w R i g h t w i t h its M o r a l M a j o r i t y i d e o l o g y , w h i c h
today is the main obstacle to the realization o f the very (feminist,
e c o l o g i c a l . . .) d e m a n d s o n w h i c h p o s t m o d e r n f o r m s o f p o l i t i c a l subjectiv
ization focus. In short, I a m pleading for a 'return to the primacy o f the
e c o n o m y ' n o t to t h e d e t r i m e n t o f t h e issues raised by p o s t m o d e r n forms
o f politicization, b u t p r e c i s e l y in o r d e r to c r e a t e t h e c o n d i t i o n s f o r the
m o r e effective realization o f feminist, e c o l o g i c a l , a n d so on, d e m a n d s .
A further indicator o f the necessity for some kind o f politicization o f
t h e e c o n o m y is t h e o v e r t l y ' i r r a t i o n a l ' p r o s p e c t o f c o n c e n t r a t i n g quasi-
m o n o p o l i s t i c p o w e r in the h a n d s o f a single individual or corporation,
like R u p e r t M u r d o c h o r Bill Gates. I f the n e x t d e c a d e brings the unifica
tion o f the multitude of communicative media in a single apparatus
reuniting the features o f interactive computer, T V , video- a n d audio-
p h o n e , \ i d e o a n d C D p l a y e r , a n d i f M i c r o s o f t a c t u a l l y s u c c e e d s in b e c o m
ing the quasi-monopolistic owner of this new universal medium,
c o n t r o l l i n g n o t o n l y t h e l a n g u a g e u s e d i n it b u t a l s o t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f its
application, t h e n we obviously a p p r o a c h the absurd situation in which a
s i n g l e a g e n t , e x e m p t f r o m p u b l i c c o n t r o l , will i n e f f e c t d o m i n a t e t h e b a s i c
c o m m u n i c a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e o f o u r lives a n d will t h u s , i n a way, b e s t r o n g e r
than any government. This o p e n s up the prospect o f paranoiac scenarios:
s i n c e t h e d i g i t a l l a n g u a g e w e s h a l l a l l u s e will n o n e t h e l e s s b e m a n - m a d e ,
c o n s t r u c t e d b y p r o g r a m m e r s , is it n o t p o s s i b l e t o i m a g i n e t h e c o r p o r a t i o n
that owns it installing in it s o m e s p e c i a l s e c r e t p r o g r a m i n g r e d i e n t w h i c h
will e n a b l e i t t o c o n t r o l u s , o r a v i r u s w h i c h t h e c o r p o r a t i o n c a n t r i g g e r ,
a n d thus bring o u r c o m m u n i c a t i o n to a halt? W h e n b i o g e n e t i c c o r p o r a
tions assert their ownership o f o u r g e n e s t h r o u g h patenting them, they
a l s o give r i s e t o a s i m i l a r p a r a d o x o f o w n i n g t h e i n n e r m o s t p a r t s o f o u r
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
1 8
hitherto'? 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 the economy of scarcity in the
sphere of information, and thus to contain within the frame o f private
property and market relations the demon it has unleashed (say, by-
inventing ever new modes o f preventing the free copying of 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 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
authoritarian 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 this
phantasmic combination the 'Asiatic m o d e of capitalist production'.
A g a i n s t t h e s e f e a r s , o n e s h o u l d e m p h a s i z e t h a t C h i n a will, s o o n e r o r l a t e r ,
pay t h e p r i c e f o r t h e u n b r i d l e d d e v e l o p m e n t o f capitalism in n e w f o r m s
of social unrest and instability: t h e 'winning formula' of combining
c a p i t a l i s m w i t h t h e A s i a t i c ' c l o s e d ' e t h i c a l c o m m u n i t y l i f e - w o r l d is d o o m e d
to e x p l o d e . Now, m o r e than ever, o n e should reassert M a r x ' s o l d f o r m u l a
that the limit o f capitalism is C a p i t a l itself: the danger to Western
capitalism c o m e s n o t from outside, from the Chinese or some other
m o n s t e r b e a t i n g u s a t o u r o w n g a m e w h i l e d e p r i v i n g us o f W e s t e r n l i b e r a l
i n d i v i d u a l i s m , b u t f r o m t h e i n h e r e n t l i m i t o f its o w n p r o c e s s o f c o l o n i z i n g
ever new (not only g e o g r a p h i c but also cultural, psychic, etc.) domains,
o f e r o d i n g t h e last r e s i s t a n t s p h e r e s o f n o n - r e f l e c t e d substantial being,
w h i c h h a s t o e n d i n s o m e k i n d o f i m p l o s i o n , w h e n C a p i t a l will n o l o n g e r
have any substantial c o n t e n t outside itself to feed on.™ O n e s h o u l d take
M a r x ' s m e t a p h o r o f C a p i t a l as a v a m p i r e - l i k e e n t i t y l i t e r a l l y : it n e e d s s o m e
k i n d o f pre-rcflexive ' n a t u r a l productivity' (talents in d i f f e r e n t d o m a i n s o f
a r t , i n v e n t o r s i n s c i e n c e , e t c . ) i n o r d e r t o f e e d o n its o w n b l o o d , a n d t h u s
t o r e p r o d u c e i t s e l f - w h e n t h e c i r c l e c l o s e s itself, w h e n r e f l e x i v i t y b e c o m e s
t h o r o u g h l y u n i v e r s a l , t h e w h o l e s y s t e m is t h r e a t e n e d .
A n o t h e r s i g n w h i c h p o i n t s i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n is h o w , i n t h e s p h e r e o f
w h a t A d o r n o a n d H o r k h e i m e r c a l l e d Kulturindustrie, the desubstantializa-
tion a n d / o r reflexivity o f the p r o d u c t i o n process has r e a c h e d a level that
t h r e a t e n s d i e w h o l e s y s t e m w i t h g l o b a l i m p l o s i o n . E v e n i n h i g h art, the
r e c e n t f a s h i o n f o r e x h i b i t i o n s i n w h i c h ' e v e r y t h i n g is p e r m i t t e d ' a n d c a n
p a s s as a n a r t o b j e c t , u p t o m u t i l a t e d a n i m a l b o d i e s , b e t r a y s t h i s d e s p e r a t e
n e e d o f c u l t u r a l C a p i t a l t o c o l o n i z e a n d i n c l u d e i n its c i r c u i t e v e n the
m o s t e x t r e m e a n d p a t h o l o g i c a l strata o f h u m a n subjectivity. P a r a d o x i c a l l y
- and not without irony - t h e first m u s i c a l t r e n d w h i c h was i n a way
' f a b r i c a t e d ' , e x p l o i t e d f o r a s h o r t t i m e a n d very s o o n f o r g o t t e n , s i n c e it
l a c k e d t h e m u s i c a l s u b s t a n c e t o survive a n d a t t a i n t h e s t a t u s o f ' c l a s s i c s '
l i k e t h e e a r l y r o c k o f t h e B e a d e s a n d R o l l i n g S t o n e s , was n o n e o t h e r t h a n
punk, which simultaneously marked the strongest intrusion o f violent
working-class p r o t e s t i n t o m a i n s t r e a m p o p c u l t u r e - in a k i n d o f m o c k i n g
version o f the H e g e l i a n infinite j u d g e m e n t , in which opposites directly
c o i n c i d e , the raw e n e r g y o f social p r o t e s t c o i n c i d e d with t h e n e w level o f
c o m m e r c i a l p r e f a b r i c a t i o n w h i c h , as it w e r e , c r e a t e s t h e o b j e c t i t sells o u t
of itself, w i t h no need for some 'natural talent' to emerge and be
s u b s e q u e n t l y e x p l o i t e d , like B a r o n M u n c h h a u s e n saving h i m s e l f f r o m t h e
s w a m p b y p u l l i n g h i m s e l f u p b y his o w n h a i r s . . . .
D o w e n o t e n c o u n t e r t h e s a m e l o g i c i n p o l i t i c s , w h e r e t h e p o i n t is l e s s
a n d less t o f o l l o w a c o h e r e n t g l o b a l p r o g r a m m e but, rather, to try t o
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 the
4 0
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 ? Theorists
are less a n d less involved in substantial theoretical work, restraining
themselves to writing short 'interventions' which 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 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
from the 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 freedom and responsibility
4 2
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 .
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 longer a phenomenon c o n f i n e d to the private 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 to private life
3b0 THE TICKLISH 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 the capitalist m a r k e t economy) and too particular (not taking into
a c c o u n t t h e way t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e b i g O t h e r a f f e c t s t h e s t a t u s o f
s u b j e c t i v i t y ) - c o n v e r g e : i t is t h e v e r y ' s p e c i f i c ' l o g i c o f r e f l e x i v e c o m m o -
d i f i c a l i o n o f i n t i m a t e s p h e r e s w h i c h , i n t h e way it a f f e c t s s u b j e c t i v i t y ,
4 3
u n d e r m i n e s the standard figure o f the m o d e r n free a u t o n o m o u s s u b j e c t .
O n e should therefore reject the narrative o f the process that leads from
the patriarchal Oedipal order to postmodern (or second modernity)
m u l t i p l e c o n t i n g e n t i d e n t i t i e s : w h a t this narrative o b l i t e r a t e s a r e t h e n e w
f o r m s o f d o m i n a t i o n g e n e r a t e d b y t h e ' d e c l i n e o f O e d i p u s ' itself; f o r t h i s
r e a s o n , t h o s e w h o c o n t i n u e to l o c a t e t h e e n e m y in O e d i p u s a r e o b l i g e d
to insist o n h o w p o s t m o d e r n i t y r e m a i n s an u n f i n i s h e d p r o j e c t , o n how
O e d i p a l p a t r i a r c h y c o n t i n u e s t o l e a d its s u b t e r r a n e a n life a n d p r e v e n t s us
from realizing the full potential of postmodern self-fashioning indi
viduality. T h i s p r o p e r l y hysterical e n d e a v o u r to b r e a k with t h e Oedipal
past m i s l o c a t e s the d a n g e r : it lies n o t in t h e r e m a i n d e r s o f t h e past, b u t
in the o b s c e n e n e e d for d o m i n a t i o n a n d s u b j e c t i o n e n g e n d e r e d by t h e
new 'post-Oedipal' forms o f subjectivity themselves. In o t h e r words, today
we a r e witnessing a shift n o less r a d i c a l t h a n t h e shift f r o m the pre-
m o d e r n patriarchal o r d e r direcdy legitimized by the sexualized c o s m o l o g y
( M a s c u l i n e a n d F e m i n i n e as t h e t w o c o s m i c p r i n c i p l e s ) t o t h e modern
patriarchal o r d e r that i n t r o d u c e d the abstract-universal notion o f m a n ;
as is always t h e c a s e w i t h s u c h r u p t u r e s , o n e s h o u l d b e v e r y c a r e f u l t o
avoid t h e trap o f m e a s u r i n g the new standards against the old - such
b l i n d n e s s leads e i t h e r to c a t a s t r o p h i c visions o f total d i s i n t e g r a t i o n (the
vision o f the emerging s o c i e t y as that o f proto-psychotic narcissists
l a c k i n g any n o t i o n o f trust a n d o b l i g a t i o n ) o r t o a n o less false c e l e
bration o f the new post-Oedipal s u b j e c t i v i t y t h a t fails t o a c c o u n t for
the new forms o f domination emerging from postmodern subjectivity
itself.
What psychoanalysis e n a b l e s us to d o is t o f o c u s o n this o b s c e n e ,
disavowed ' s u p p l e m e n t ' o f the reflexive s u b j e c t freed from the constraints
o f N a t u r e a n d T r a d i t i o n : as L a c a n p u t it, t h e s u b j e c t o f p s y c h o a n a l y s i s is
n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e s u b j e c t o f m o d e r n s c i e n c e . L e t us b e g i n w i t h t h e s o -
4 4
called "culture o f c o m p l a i n t ' , w i t h its u n d e r l y i n g l o g i c o f ressentiment far
from cheerfully assuming the n o n e x i s t e n c e o f the big O t h e r , the subject
b l a m e s t h e O t h e r f o r its f a i l u r e a n d / o r i m p o t e n c e , as i f the Other is guilty
of the fact that it doesn't exist, t h a t is, as i f i m p o t e n c e is n o e x c u s e - t h e b i g
O t h e r is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e v e r y f a c t t h a t i t w a s n ' t a b l e t o d o anything:
t h e m o r e t h e s u b j e c t ' s s t r u c t u r e is ' n a r c i s s i s t i c ' , d i e m o r e h e puts the
b l a m e o n t h e b i g O t h e r , a n d tims a s s e r t s h i s d e p e n d e n c e o n it. T h e b a s i c
f e a t u r e o f t h e ' c u l t u r e o f c o m p l a i n t ' is a c a l l , a d d r e s s e d t o t h e b i g O t h e r ,
to intervene and put things right (to c o m p e n s a t e the d a m a g e d sexual o r
e t h n i c m i n o r i t y , e t c . ) - h o w , e x a c t l y , t h i s is t o b e d o n e is a g a i n a m a t t e r
for various ethico-legal ' c o m m i t t e e s ' .
T h e s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e o f t h e ' c u l t u r e o f c o m p l a i n t ' is its l e g a l i s t i c twist,
the e n d e a v o u r to translate the c o m p l a i n t into the legal obligation o f the
Other (usually t h e State) to indemnify me - for what? F o r the very
unfathomable surplus-enjoyment I a m d e p r i v e d of, w h o s e l a c k m a k e s me
f e e l u n d e r p r i v i l e g e d . Is n o t t h e ' c u l t u r e o f c o m p l a i n t ' t h e r e f o r e today's
version o f hysteria, o f the hysterical impossible d e m a n d addressed to the
O t h e r , a d e m a n d t h a t a c t u a l l y wants to be rejected, s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t g r o u n d s
h i s / h e r e x i s t e n c e i n h i s / h e r c o m p l a i n t : ' I a m in s o f a r as I m a k e the
O t h e r r e s p o n s i b l e for a n d / o r guilty o f m y misery'? I n s t e a d of u n d e r m i n
ing the position o f the O t h e r , the complaining underprivileged address
t h e m s e l v e s t o it: b y t r a n s l a t i n g t h e i r d e m a n d i n t o t h e t e r m s o f l e g a l i s t i c
c o m p l a i n t , t h e y confirm the Other in its position in the very gesture of attaching
it. T h e r e is a n i n s u r m o u n t a b l e g a p b e t w e e n t h i s l o g i c o f c o m p l a i n t a n d
t h e t m e ' r a d i c a l ' ( ' r e v o l u t i o n a r y ' ) a c t w h i c h , i n s t e a d o f c o m p l a i n i n g to
t h e O t h e r a n d e x p e c t i n g it t o a c t - t h a t is, d i s p l a c i n g d i e n e e d t o a c t o n
4
t o it - s u s p e n d s t h e e x i s t i n g l e g a l f r a m e a n d accomplishes the act itself '
Consequently, this 'culture of complaint' is c o r r e l a t i v e t o sado-maso
p r a c t i c e s o f s e l f - m u t i l a t i o n : t h e y f o r m t h e two o p p o s e d b u t complemen
tary a s p e c t s o f t h e d i s t u r b e d relationship towards the Law, relating to
e a c h o t h e r as d o h y s t e r i a a n d p e r v e r s i o n . T h e s a d o - m a s o p r a c t i c e acts out
the phantasmic scenarios ( o f humiliation, rape, v i c t i m i z a t i o n . . .) which
traumatize the hysterical subject. W h a t m a k e s t h i s p a s s a g e f r o m h y s t e r i a t o
p e r v e r s i o n p o s s i b l e is t h e c h a n g e i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n L a w a n d
jouissance. for the h y s t e r i c a l s u b j e c t , t h e L a w is still t h e agency which
p r o h i b i t s a c c e s s t o jouissance (so h e can only fantasize a b o u t the o b s c e n e
jouissance h i d d e n b e n e a t h the figure o f the L a w ) ; while for the pervert,
t h e L a w e m a n a t e s f r o m t h e v e r y f i g u r e t h a t e m b o d i e s jouissance (so h e c a n
directly assume the r o l e o f this o b s c e n e O t h e r as t h e instrument of
jouissance)
T h e p a r a d o x i c a l result o f t h e m u t a t i o n in the n o n e x i s t e n c e o f t h e b i g
Other - o f the growing collapse o f symbolic efficiency - is t h u s the
p r o l i f e r a d o n o f d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n s o f a big Other that actually exists, in the
Real, n o t m e r e l y as a s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n . T h e b e l i e f i n t h e b i g O t h e r w h i c h
e x i s t s i n t h e R e a l is, o f c o u r s e , t h e m o s t s u c c i n c t d e f i n i t i o n o f p a r a n o i a ;
f o r this r e a s o n , two f e a t u r e s w h i c h c h a r a c t e r i z e today's i d e o l o g i c a l s t a n c e
- c y n i c a l d i s t a n c e a n d full r e l i a n c e o n p a r a n o i a c f a n t a s y - a r e s t r i c t l y c o -
d e p e n d e n t : the t y p i c a l s u b j e c t t o d a y is t h e o n e w h o , w h i l e displaying
cynical distrust o f any public ideology, indulges without restraint in
p a r a n o i a c fantasies a b o u t conspiracies, threats, a n d excessive forms o f
e n j o y m e n t o f the O t h e r . T h e distrust o f the big O t h e r (the order o f
s y m b o l i c f i c t i o n s ) , t h e s u b j e c t ' s refusal to 'take it seriously', relies o n t h e
b e l i e f t h a t t h e r e is a n ' O t h e r o f t h e O t h e r ' , t h a t a s e c r e t , i n v i s i b l e a n d all-
powerful a g e n t actually 'pulls the strings' a n d runs the show: b e h i n d the
v i s i b l e , p u b l i c P o w e r t h e r e is a n o t h e r o b s c e n e , i n v i s i b l e p o w e r structure.
T h i s o t h e r , h i d d e n a g e n t acts t h e p a r t o f t h e ' O t h e r o f t h e O t h e r ' in t h e
Lacanian sense, the part o f the meta-guarantee o f the consistency o f the
big O t h e r (the symbolic order that regulates social life).
It is h e r e t h a t w e s h o i d d l o o k f o r t h e r o o t s o f t h e r e c e n t i m p a s s e o f
n a r r a t i v i z a t i o n , t h a t is, o f t h e t h e m e o f t h e ' e n d o f g r e a t n a r r a t i v e s ' : i n
o u r e r a , w h e n - i n p o l i t i c s a n d i d e o l o g y as w e l l as i n l i t e r a t u r e a n d c i n e m a
- global, all-encompassing narratives ('the struggle o f liberal d e m o c r a c y
with t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m ' , e t c . ) n o l o n g e r s e e m p o s s i b l e , t h e o n l y way t o a c h i e v e
a k i n d o f g l o b a l ' c o g n i t i v e m a p p i n g ' is t h r o u g h t h e p a r a n o i a c n a r r a t i v e o f
a ' c o n s p i r a c y t h e o r y ' . I t is all t o o s i m p l i s t i c t o d i s m i s s c o n s p i r a c y n a r r a t i v e s
as t h e p a r a n o i a c p r o t o - F a s c i s t r e a c t i o n o f t h e i n f a m o u s ' m i d d l e classes'
which feel t h r e a t e n e d by the p r o c e s s o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n : they function,
rather, as a k i n d of floating signifier which can be appropriated by
different political options, e n a b l i n g t h e m to obtain a m i n i m a l cognitive
m a p p i n g - n o t only by right-wing p o p u l i s m a n d f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , b u t also
4 7
b y t h e l i b e r a l c e n t r e ( t h e ' m y s t e r y ' o f K e n n e d y ' s a s s a s s i n a t i o n ) a n d left-
wing o r i e n t a t i o n s (recall the old o b s e s s i o n o f t h e A m e r i c a n Left with t h e
n o t i o n t h a t s o m e m y s t e r i o u s g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c y is e x p e r i m e n t i n g with
n e r v e g a s e s w h i c h w o u l d give t h e m t h e p o w e r t o r e g u l a t e t h e b e h a v i o u r
4 8
o f the p o p u l a t i o n ) .
A n o t h e r v e r s i o n o f t h e O t h e r ' s r e t u r n i n t h e R e a l is d i s c e r n i b l e i n t h e
guise o f the New Age J u n g i a n resexualization o f the universe ( ' m e n are
from Mars, w o m e n are from Venus'): according to t h i s , t h e r e is an
underlying, deeply a n c h o r e d archetypal identity which provides a kind o f
safe h a v e n i n t h e f l u r r y o f c o n t e m p o r a r y c o n f u s i o n o f r o l e s a n d i d e n t i t i e s ;
from this p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e ultimate origin 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 male-
rational-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 as t h e agent o f
symbolic authority - that is, t h e e m b o d i m e n t o f a symbolic fiction -
' 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 - an
obstinacy comparable to F r e u d ' s no less o b s t i n a t e insistence on the
murder of the 'primordial father' as a real event in 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 from the m o t h e r ) - on the contrary, anxiety
emerges when ( 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
4 W
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. . . .
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
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 formula
tion o f Kant's radically new c o n c e p t i o n o f the m o r a l Law:
. . . 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
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
5
punishment. "
T h e K a n t i a n L a w is t h u s n o t m e r e l y a n e m p t y f o r m a p p l i e d t o a r a n d o m
e m p i r i c a l c o n t e n t in o r d e r to a s c e r t a i n i f this c o n t e n t m e e t s t h e c r i t e r i a
o f e t h i c a l a d e q u a c y - t h e e m p t y f o r m o f t h e L a w , r a t h e r , f u n c t i o n s as t h e
promise o f an absent content ( n e v e r ) t o c o m e . T h i s f o r m is n o t the
neutral-universal m o u l d o f t h e plurality o f different e m p i r i c a l c o n t e n t s ; it
bears witness to the persisting uncertainty a b o u t the c o n t e n t o f our acts -
we never know i f the d e t e r m i n a t e c o n t e n t that a c c o u n t s for t h e specificity
o f o u r a c t s is t h e r i g h t o n e , t h a t is, i f w e h a v e a c t u a l l y a c t e d i n a c c o r d a n c e
with t h e L a w a n d have n o t b e e n g u i d e d by s o m e h i d d e n pathological
motives. K a n t thus a n n o u n c e s the n o t i o n o f Law which culminates in
Kafka a n d the e x p e r i e n c e o f m o d e r n political 'totalitarianism': since, in
t h e c a s e o f t h e L a w , its Dass-Sein ( t h e f a c t o f t h e L a w ) p r e c e d e s its Was-
Sein ( w h a t t h i s L a w i s ) , t h e s u b j e c t finds h i m s e l f i n a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h ,
a l t h o u g h h e k n o w s t h e r e is a L a w , h e n e v e r k n o w s ( a n d a p r i o r i cannot
k n o w ) what t h i s L a w is — a g a p f o r e v e r s e p a r a t e s the L a w f r o m its p o s i t i v e
i n c a r n a t i o n s . T h e s u b j e c t is t h u s a p r i o r i , in h i s v e r y e x i s t e n c e , g u i l t y :
guilty w i t h o u t knowing what he is g u i l t y o f ( a n d g u i l t y f o r t h a t very
5 1
r e a s o n ) , i n f r i n g i n g t h e law w i t h o u t k n o w i n g its e x a c t r e g u l a t i o n s . . . .
W h a t w e h a v e h e r e , f o r t h e first t i m e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f p h i l o s o p h y , is t h e
assertion o f the L a w as unconscious: the experience o f Form without
c o n t e n t is always t h e i n d e x o f a r e p r e s s e d c o n t e n t - t h e m o r e i n t e n s e l y
t h e s u b j e c t sticks to t h e e m p t y f o r m , t h e m o r e t r a u m a t i c t h e repressed
content becomes.
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
o f a d e t e r m i n a t e s e t o f p o s i t i v e u n i v e r s a l n o r m s - r e n d e r s all t h e more
s e n s i b l e t h e u n b e a r a b l e p r e s s u r e o f t h e m o r a l L a w qua t h e p u r e empty
i n j u n c t i o n t o d o o n e ' s D u t y . S o , f r o m t h e L a c a n i a n p e r s p e c d v e , it is h e r e
that we e n c o u n t e r t h e crucial distinction b e t w e e n rules to b e invented
and their underlying Law/Prohibidon: only when t h e L a w qua s e t o f
p o s i t i v e u n i v e r s a l s y m b o l i c n o r m s fails t o a p p e a r - d o w e e n c o u n t e r the
L a w a t its m o s t r a d i c a l , t h e L a w i n its a s p e c t o f t h e R e a l o f a n uncondi
tional i n j u n c t i o n . T h e p a r a d o x to b e e m p h a s i z e d h e r e lies in t h e precise
n a t u r e o f t h e P r o h i b i t i o n e n t a i l e d b y t h e m o r a l L a w : at its m o s t f u n d a m e n
tal, t h i s P r o h i b i t i o n is n o t t h e p r o h i b i t i o n t o a c c o m p l i s h s o m e p o s i t i v e a c t
that would violate the Law, b u t the self-referential p r o h i b i t i o n to confuse
the 'impossible' L a w with any positive symbolic prescription and/or
p r o h i b i t i o n , t h a t is, t o c l a i m f o r a n y p o s i t i v e s e t o f n o r m s t h e s t a t u s o f the
l a w - u l t i m a t e l y , t h e P r o h i b i t i o n m e a n s t h a t the place of the Lazu itself must
remain empty.
T o p u t it i n c l a s s i c F r e u d i a n t e r m s : i n F o u c a u l t , w e g e t a s e t o f r u l e s
regulating the 'care o f the S e l f in his 'use o f pleasures' (in short, a
reasonable application o f the 'pleasure p r i n c i p l e ' ) ; while in Kant, the
(re)invention o f rules follows an injunction which comes from the
'beyond o f the pleasure principle'. O f course, the F o u c a u l d i a n / D e l e u z i a n
a n s w e r t o t h i s w o u l d b e t h a t K a n t is u l t i m a t e l y t h e v i c t i m o f a p e r s p e c t i v e
illusion which leads him to (mis)perceive the radical i m m a n e n c e of
ethical n o r m s ( t h e fact that t h e s u b j e c t has to i n v e n t t h e n o r m s r e g u l a t i n g
his c o n d u c t a u t o n o m o u s l y , at his own e x p e n s e a n d o n his own responsi
bility, w i t h n o b i g O t h e r t o t a k e t h e b l a m e f o r i t ) as its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : as
a radical t r a n s c e n d e n c e , presupposing the existence o f an inscrutable
t r a n s c e n d e n t O t h e r w h i c h t e r r o r i z e s u s w i t h its u n c o n d i t i o n a l i n j u n c t i o n ,
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y p r o h i b i t i n g us a c c e s s t o it - we a r e u n d e r a c o m p u l s i o n to
d o o u r Duty, b u t f o r e v e r p r e v e n t e d f r o m clearly k n o w i n g w h a t this D u t y
is. . . . T h e F r e u d i a n a n s w e r is t h a t s u c h a s o l u t i o n ( t h e t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e
big Other's inscrutable Call o f Duty into immanence) relies o n the
disavowal of the Unconscious: t h e f a c t w h i c h u s u a l l y g o e s u n n o t i c e d is t h a t
F o u c a u l t ' s r e j e c t i o n o f t h e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c a c c o u n t o f sexuality also involves
a thorough rejection o f the F r e u d i a n U n c o n s c i o u s . I f we read Kant in
psychoanalytic terms, the gap b e t w e e n self-invented rules and their under
l y i n g L a w is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e g a p b e t w e e n ( c o n s c i o u s l y p r e c o n s c i o u s )
r u l e s we f o l l o w a n d t h e L a w qua u n c o n s c i o u s : t h e b a s i c l e s s o n o f p s y c h o
a n a l y s i s is t h a t t h e U n c o n s c i o u s is, at its m o s t r a d i c a l , n o t t h e w e a l t h o f
i l l i c i t ' r e p r e s s e d ' d e s i r e s b u t the fundamental Law itself.
S o even in t h e case o f a narcissistic s u b j e c t d e d i c a t e d to t h e ' c a r e o f t h e
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 indiffer
e n c e towards intense sexual pleasure c o n t r a s t s starkly with the official
ideology of our postmodern 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 prospect o f
getting old, dedicated 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 the
'repressive' network o f social prohibitions, is t h e ultimate enemy of
intense sexual experiences. T h e Utopia o f a new 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
5 2
- 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 ' : far f r o m hindering
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 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 .
5 1
As D a r i a n L e a d e r has p o i n t e d o u t , t h e f a c t t h a t , i n X Files, so many things
happen '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 us, e t c . ) 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 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 one
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 imaginary
ideals ( o f social success, o f bodily fitness . . . ) ; on the other, the lack o f
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 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, 'super-
egoization' of the imaginary 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
Prohibition; 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 innermost
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 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 ethic'. Therein lies t h e unbearable paradox of this
postmodern ' 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 superego injunction o f a postmodern corporation 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 - 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
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 the
wound to our body, since the phallus itself qua signifier is s u c h a
prosthesis, empowering its bearer at the price of some traumatic
mutilation.
H e r e it is c r u c i a l t o m a i n t a i n t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e p h a l l u s as
signified ( t h e ' m e a n i n g o f t h e p h a l l u s ' ) a n d t h e p h a l l i c signifier. t h e p h a l l i c
s i g n i f i e d is t h e p a r t o f puissance integrated into the paternal symbolic
order ( p h a l l u s as t h e s y m b o l o f virility, p e n e t r a t i n g p o w e r , t h e f o r c e o f
f e r t i l i t y a n d i n s e m i n a t i o n , e t c . ) ; w h i l e t h e p h a l l u s as s i g n i f i e r s t a n d s f o r
t h e p r i c e t h e m a l e s u b j e c t h a s t o p a y i f h e is t o a s s u m e t h e ' m e a n i n g o f
t h e p h a l l u s ' , its s i g n i f i e d . L a c a n s p e c i f i e s t h i s ' m e a n i n g o f t h e p h a l l u s ' as
the 'imaginary' n u m b e r (the square r o o t o f — 1 ) , an ' i m p o s s i b l e ' n u m b e r
w h o s e v a l u e c a n n e v e r b e p o s i t i v i z e d , b u t w h i c h n o n e t h e less ' f u n c t i o n s ' :
we e n c o u n t e r ' t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e p h a l l u s ' w h e n , a p r o p o s o f s o m e n o t i o n ,
w e e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y f e e l t h a t ' t h i s is it, t h e r e a l t h i n g , t h e t r u e m e a n i n g ' ,
a l t h o u g h w e a r e n e v e r a b l e t o e x p l a i n what, p r e c i s e l y , t h i s m e a n i n g is. S a y ,
i n a p o l i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e , t h e M a s t e r - S i g n i f i e r ( O u r N a t i o n ) is t h i s k i n d o f
e m p t y signifier w h i c h stands for t h e i m p o s s i b l e fullness o f m e a n i n g , that
is, its m e a n i n g is ' i m a g i n a r y ' i n t h e s e n s e t h a t its c o n t e n t is i m p o s s i b l e t o
p o s i t i v i z e - w h e n y o u a s k a m e m b e r o f t h e N a t i o n to d e f i n e i n w h a t t h e
i d e n t i t y o f h i s N a t i o n c o n s i s t s , h i s u l t i m a t e a n s w e r will always b e : ' I c a n ' t
say, y o u m u s t f e e l it, i t ' s it, w h a t o u r lives a r e r e a l l y a b o u t ' . . . .
S o w h y is it n e c e s s a r y , i n o u r postmodern age, for the 'wound of
c a s t r a t i o n ' to i n s c r i b e i t s e l f a g a i n i n t o t h e b o d y , as a w o u n d i n its v e r y
flesh? In the g o o d o l d times o f m o d e r n subjectivity, an individual h a d n o
n e e d to sacrifice p a r t o f his flesh (circumcision, a ritualized initiatory
o r d e a l o f risking o n e ' s life, t a t t o o i n g . . .) in o r d e r to g a i n s y m b o l i c status:
t h e s a c r i f i c e was p u r e l y s y m b o l i c , t h a t is, a s y m b o l i c a c t o f r e n u n c i a t i o n o f
5 4
all p o s i t i v e s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t e n t . T h i s r e n u n c i a t i o n displays t h e p r e c i s e
structure o f t h e 'loss o f a loss' t h a t d e f i n e s t h e m o d e r n tragedy. Yanez,a.
r e c e n t S e r b film, d e a l s w i t h t h e f a t e o f a n o f f i c e r i n t h e Y u g o s l a v A r m y o f
S l o v e n e e t h n i c o r i g i n , m a r r i e d to a M a c e d o n i a n w o m a n , c a u g h t in the
turmoils o f the disintegration o f Yugoslavia: when the conflict erupts
between Slovenia proclaiming i n d e p e n d e n c e and the Yugoslav Army,
which e n d e a v o u r e d to k e e p S l o v e n i a within Yugoslavia, t h e officer sacri
f i c e s h i s p a r t i c u l a r ( S l o v e n e ) e t h n i c r o o t s , t h a t is, t h e v e r y s u b s t a n c e o f
his b e i n g , for fidelity to the universal Cause (Yugoslav u n i t y ) , o n l y to
d i s c o v e r l a t e r t h a t t h e s a d r e a l i t y o f this u n i v e r s a l C a u s e , f o r w h i c h he
sacrificed everything that mattered to him m o s t , is t h e corrupt and
deprived S e r b i a o f the nationalist r e g i m e o f S l o b o d a n Milosevic - so, at
t h e e n d , we see t h e h e r o a l o n e a n d d r u n k , totally at a loss. . . .
A s i m i l a r d o u b l e m o v e m e n t o f r e n u n c i a t i o n - o f first s a c r i f i c i n g e v e r y
t h i n g , t h e very s u b s t a n c e o f o u r b e i n g , f o r s o m e universal C a u s e , a n d t h e n
b e i n g c o m p e l l e d to c o n f r o n t t h e v a c u o u s n e s s o f this C a u s e itself - is
5
c o n s t i t u t i v e o f m o d e r n subjectivity."' T o d a y , h o w e v e r , t h i s d o u b l e m o v e
ment o f renunciation seems n o l o n g e r to b e operative, since subjects
increasingly stick to their particular substantial identity, unwilling to
sacrifice it f o r some universal Cause (this is w h a t so-called 'identity
p o l i t i e s ' , as w e l l as t h e s e a r c h f o r e t h n i c ' r o o t s ' , a r e a b o u t ) - s o is t h i s w h y
the cut o f symbolic castration h a d again to b e inscribed o n to the body,
i n t h e g u i s e o f s o m e h o r r i f y i n g m u t i l a t i o n as t h e p r i c e o f t h e s u b j e c t ' s
symbolic e m p o w e r m e n t ?
C r u c i a l h e r e is t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l ( p r e m o d e r n ) cut
5 6
in the body (circumcision, etc.) a n d the p o s t m o d e r n c u t : although the
two m a y b e s u p e r f i c i a l l y a l i k e - t h a t is, a l t h o u g h t h e p o s t m o d e r n c u t m a y
l o o k like t h e ' r e t u r n to p r e m o d e r n procedures o f marking the body' -
t h e i r i n h e r e n t l i b i d i n a l e c o n o m i e s a r e o p p o s e d - as w i t h p o s t m o d e r n i s m ,
which m a y l o o k like the r e t u r n o f t h e p r e m o d e r n a r c h a i c f o r m s , b u t in
reality t h e s e f o r m s a r e a l r e a d y ' m e d i a t e d ' , c o l o n i z e d by m o d e r n i t y , so t h a t
postmodernism signals the m o m e n t w h e n m o d e r n i t y n o l o n g e r has to
fight traditional forms, b u t c a n use t h e m directly - today's astrologist o r
f u n d a m e n t a l i s t p r e a c h e r , i n h i s v e r y m o d e o f activity, is a l r e a d y marked
b y m o d e r n i t y . O n e o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n s o f m o d e r n i t y is t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f
the 'natural' naked body w i t h i n the symbolic space: nudism and other
f o r m s o f t h e c e l e b r a t i o n o f n a k e d n e s s - n o t as p a r t o f s e c r e t i n i t i a t o r ) '
transgressive rituals (as i n p r e m o d e r n pagan s o c i e t i e s ) , b u t as finding
pleasure in asserting the ' i n n o c e n t ' beauty o f o n e ' s natural body - are
5 7
distinctly m o d e r n phenomena.
H e r e o n e has to r e p e a t t h e g e s t u r e a c c o m p l i s h e d by H e g e l a p r o p o s o f
t h e s u d d e n r i s e o f n a t u r e as t h e t o p o s i n s e v e n t e e n t h - c e n t u r y a r t : p r e c i s e l y
because the Spirit has r e t u r n e d t o i t s e l f , t h a t is, is a b l e t o g r a s p itself
directly a n d no longer needs nature as t h e medium o f its s y m b o l i c
e x p r e s s i o n , n a t u r e b e c o m e s p e r c e p t i b l e i n its i n n o c e n c e , as it is i n i t s e l f ,
as a beautiful object of contemplation, not as a s y m b o l o f spiritual
struggle; along the same lines, w h e n the m o d e r n subject 'internalizes'
s y m b o l i c castration i n t o t h e 'loss o f a loss', t h e b o d y n o l o n g e r h a s to b e a r
t h e b u r d e n o f c a s t r a t i o n a n d is t h u s r e d e e m e d , f r e e t o b e c e l e b r a t e d as
an object o f pleasure and beauty. This appearance o f the unmutilated
n a k e d b o d y is s t r i c t l y c o r r e l a t i v e t o t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f t h e disciplinary
p r o c e d u r e s d e s c r i b e d in detail by M i c h e l F o u c a u l t : with t h e a d v e n t o f
modernity, when the body is n o longer marked, inscribed upon, it
b e c o m e s t h e o b j e c t o f s t r i c t d i s c i p l i n a r y r e g u l a t i o n s d e s t i n e d t o m a k e it
fit.
W e c a n thus distinguish four stages in the logic o f the ' c u t in the body'.
First, in p r e - J u d a e a n p a g a n tribal s o c i e t i e s , 'I a m m a r k e d , t h e r e f o r e I a m ' ,
t h a t is, t h e c u t i n m y b o d y ( t a t t o o , e t c . ) s t a n d s f o r m y i n s c r i p t i o n i n t o t h e
s o c i o - s y m b o l i c s p a c e - o u t s i d e it I a m n o t h i n g , m o r e l i k e a n a n i m a l t h a n
a m e m b e r o f a h u m a n society. T h e n c o m e s the Jewish logic o f circumci
s i o n , ' a c u t t o e n d all c u t s ' , t h a t is, t h e e x c e p t i o n a l / n e g a t i v e c u t s t r i c t l y
correlative to the p r o h i b i t i o n o f the p a g a n multitude o f cuts: 'You shall
n o t m a k e any gashes in your flesh for the d e a d o r tattoo any m a r k s u p o n
5 8
you: I a m the L O R D ' ( L e v i t i c u s 19: 2 8 ) . Finally, with Christianity, this
e x c e p t i o n a l c u t is itself ' i n t e r n a l i z e d ' , t h e r e a r e n o c u t s . W h e r e , t h e n , l i e s
the difference between the p r e m o d e r n 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 ' c u t i n t h e b o d y is t o
s e r v e n o t as t h e m a r k o f symbolic castration but, rather, as its e x a c t
opposite: to designate 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 flesh': 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
mode o f submission 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 ( w h a t was
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 as its e x p r e s s i o n - as i n
postmodern 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 styles
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 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, the same as t h a t o f the old rules regulating the
'patriarchal' 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 of enunciation
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 '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 again the adoption of a past procedure is
'transubstantiated' and s e r v e s as t h e means o f expression o f its very
opposite, o f 'postmodern' reflexive freedom.''"
T h i s b r i n g s u s t o w h a t o n e is t e m p t e d t o c a l l t h e a n t i n o m y o f p o s t m o d
e r n individuality: t h e i n j u n c t i o n to ' b e y o u r s e l f , to d i s r e g a r d t h e p r e s s u r e
o f your surroundings a n d a c h i e v e s e l f - r e a l i z a t i o n b y fully a s s e r t i n g y o u r
u n i q u e creative potential, stumbles s o o n e r or later u p o n the paradox that
i f y o u a r e c o m p l e t e l y i s o l a t e d f r o m y o u r s u r r o u n d i n g s , y o u a r e left w i t h
n o t h i n g whatsoever, with a void o f i d i o c y p u r e a n d s i m p l e . T h e i n h e r e n t
obverse o f ' B e your true S e l f ! ' is t h e r e f o r e t h e i n j u n c t i o n t o c u l t i v a t e
p e r m a n e n t r e f a s h i o n i n g , i n a c c o r d a n c e with t h e p o s t m o d e r n p o s t u l a t e o f
t h e subject's indefinite plasticity . . . in short, e x t r e m e individualization
reverts to its o p p o s i t e , l e a d i n g to t h e u l t i m a t e i d e n t i t y crisis: s u b j e c t s
e x p e r i e n c e t h e m s e l v e s as r a d i c a l l y u n s u r e , w i t h n o ' p r o p e r f a c e ' , c h a n g i n g
f r o m o n e i m p o s e d m a s k t o a n o t h e r , s i n c e w h a t is b e h i n d t h e m a s k is
u l t i m a t e l y nothing, a h o r r i f y i n g v o i d t h e y a r e f r a n t i c a l l y t r y i n g t o fill in
with t h e i r c o m p u l s i v e activity o r b y s h i f t i n g b e t w e e n more and more
idiosyncratic hobbies o r ways o f d r e s s i n g , meant to a c c e n t u a t e their
individual identity. H e r e we c a n see h o w e x t r e m e individualization (the
e n d e a v o u r to b e true to o n e ' s S e l f o u t s i d e i m p o s e d fixed socio-symbolic
roles) tends to overlap with its o p p o s i t e , w i t h the uncanny, anxiety-
p r o v o k i n g f e e l i n g o f t h e l o s s o f o n e ' s i d e n t i t y - is t h i s n o t t h e ultimate
confirmation o f L a c a n ' s insight into how o n e can achieve a m i n i m u m o f
identity a n d ' b e o n e s e l f o n l y by a c c e p t i n g t h e f u n d a m e n t a l a l i e n a t i o n in
the symbolic network?
T h e p a r a d o x i c a l r e s u l t o f o u t - a n d - o u t n a r c i s s i s t i c h e d o n i s m is t h u s t h a t
e n j o y m e n t i t s e l f is i n c r e a s i n g l y e x t e r n a l i z e d : i n t h e t h o r o u g h r e f l e x i v i t y o f
o u r lives, a n y d i r e c t a p p e a l t o o u r e x p e r i e n c e is i n v a l i d a t e d - t h a t is t o
say, I n o l o n g e r t r u s t m y o w n d i r e c t e x p e r i e n c e , b u t e x p e c t t h e O t h e r t o
tell m e h o w 1 r e a l l y f e e l , as i n t h e anecdote about the conversation
b e t w e e n two b e h a v i o u r i s t s : ' T e l l m e h o w I f e e l t o d a y . ' ' G o o d - w h a t a b o u t
m e ? ' M o r e precisely, this d i r e c t e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f my i n n e r m o s t e x p e r i
e n c e is m u c h m o r e u n c a n n y t h a n t h e u s u a l b e h a v i o u r i s t r e d u c t i o n : the
p o i n t is n o t s i m p l y t h a t w h a t c o u n t s is t h e w a y I b e h a v e i n o b s e r v a b l e
e x t e r n a l reality, n o t m y i n n e r feelings; in c o n t r a s t to t h e behaviourist
r e d u c t i o n o f i n n e r s e l f - e x p e r i e n c e , I d o r e t a i n m y f e e l i n g s , b u t these feelings
themselves are externalized. T h e ultimate paradox o f individuation, however,
is t h a t t h i s c o m p l e t e d e p e n d e n c e o n o t h e r s - I a m w h a t I a m o n l y t h r o u g h
m y relations with others (see the postmodern o b s e s s i o n with quality
'relationships') - g e n e r a t e s the opposite effect o f drug d e p e n d e n c e , in
which I a m d e p e n d e n t not o n a n o t h e r subject but on a drug that directly
p r o v i d e s e x c e s s i v e jouissance. Is n o t t h e d u s t o f h e r o i n o r c r a c k t h e u l t i m a t e
figure o f surplus-enjoyment: an object o n which I am hooked, which
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 as t h e a n t i n o m y b e t w e e n the
simulacruvi ( o f the masks I wear, o f the r o l e s I play i n t h e game of
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 ( 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 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
accepted the fundamental 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 ,
a n u n c a n n y ' a c e p h a l o u s ' s u b j e c t t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e a c t t a k e s p l a c e as t h a t
w h i c h is ' i n h i m m o r e t h a n h i m s e l f . T h e a c t t h u s d e s i g n a t e s t h e l e v e l a t
which the fundamental divisions a n d d i s p l a c e m e n t s usually associated
with t h e ' L a c a n i a n s u b j e c t ' ( t h e split b e t w e e n the s u b j e c t o f t h e e n u n c i a
tion a n d the subject o f the e n u n c i a t e d / s t a t e m e n t ; the subject's 'decentre-
ment' with regard to the symbolic big O t h e r ; etc.) are momentarily
s u s p e n d e d - i n t h e a c t , t h e s u b j e c t , as L a c a n p u t s it, posits himself as his
own cause, a n d is n o l o n g e r d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e d e c e n t r e d o b j e c t - c a u s e .
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 finitude: w h a t is s o d i f f i c u l t
to a c c e p t is n o t the fact that the true 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 ad infinitum i n K a n t is p r e c i s e l y w h a t t a k e s p l a c e
every time an authentic act is a c c o m p l i s h e d . Kant's mistake was to
p r e s u p p o s e t h a t t h e r e is a n a c t o n l y in s o f a r as it is a d e q u a t e l y ' s u b j e c t i v -
i z e d ' , t h a t is, a c c o m p l i s h e d w i t h a p u r e W i l l ( a W i l l f r e e o f a n y ' p a t h o l o g i
c a l ' m o t i v a t i o n s ) ; a n d , s i n c e o n e c a n n e v e r b e s u r e t h a t w h a t I d i d was i n
fact p r o m p t e d b y t h e m o r a l L a w as its s o l e m o t i v e (i.e. since t h e r e is
always a l u r k i n g s u s p i c i o n t h a t I a c c o m p l i s h e d a m o r a l a c t i n o r d e r t o f i n d
pleasure in the esteem o f my peers, etc.), the moral act turns into
s o m e t h i n g w h i c h in fact n e v e r h a p p e n s ( t h e r e are n o saints o n this e a r t h ) ,
but can only be posited as t h e final point o f an infinite asymptotic
a p p r o a c h o f d i e p u r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s o u l - f o r t h a t r e a s o n , t h a t is, i n o r d e r
n o n e t h e less to g u a r a n t e e t h e u l t i m a t e possibility o f t h e act, K a n t h a d to
p r o p o s e h i s p o s t u l a t e o f t h e i m m o r t a l i t y o f t h e s o u l ( w h i c h , as c a n be
s h o w n , e f f e c t i v e l y a m o u n t s t o its v e r y o p p o s i t e , t o t h e S a d e i a n f a n t a s y o f
6
t h e i m m o r t a l i t y o f t h e body ^) - o n l y i n s u c h a way c a n o n e h o p e t h a t a f t e r
e n d l e s s a p p r o x i m a t i o n , o n e will r e a c h t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g a b l e t o a c c o m
plish a true moral act.
T h e p o i n t o f L a c a n ' s c r i t i c i s m is t h u s t h a t a n a u t h e n t i c a c t d o e s not- as
K a n t a s s u m e s o n m i s l e a d i n g s e l f - e v i d e n c e - p r e s u p p o s e its a g e n t ' o n t h e
l e v e l o f t h e a c t ' ( w i t h h i s will p u r i f i e d o f a l l p a t h o l o g i c a l m o t i v a t i o n s , e t c . )
- i t is n o t o n l y p o s s i b l e , e v e n i n e v i t a b l e , t h a t t h e a g e n t is not ' o n t h e l e v e l
o f its a c t ' , t h a t h e h i m s e l f is u n p l e a s a n t l y s u r p r i s e d b y t h e ' c r a z y t h i n g h e
h a s j u s t d o n e ' , a n d u n a b l e fully t o c o m e t o t e r m s w i t h it. T h i s , i n c i d e n t a l l y ,
is t h e u s u a l s t r u c t u r e o f h e r o i c a c t s : s o m e b o d y w h o , f o r a l o n g t i m e , h a s
led an opportunistic life of manoeuvring and c o m p r o m i s e s , all o f a
s u d d e n , i n e x p l i c a b l y e v e n t o h i m s e l f , r e s o l v e s t o s t a n d f i r m , c o s t w h a t it
may - t h i s , p r e c i s e l y , was h o w G i o r d a n o B r u n o , a f t e r a l o n g h i s t o r y o f
r a t h e r cowardly attacks a n d retreats, u n e x p e c t e d l y d e c i d e d to stick to his
views. T h e p a r a d o x o f t h e a c t t h u s lies i n t h e f a c t t h a t a l t h o u g h it is n o t
' i n t e n t i o n a l ' i n t h e u s u a l s e n s e o f t h e t e r m o f c o n s c i o u s l y w i l l i n g it, i t is
n e v e r t h e l e s s a c c e p t e d as s o m e t h i n g f o r w h i c h its a g e n t is fully r e s p o n s i b l e
- T c a n n o t d o o t h e r w i s e , y e t I a m n o n e t h e l e s s fully f r e e i n d o i n g i t . '
C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h i s L a c a n i a n n o t i o n o f a c t a l s o e n a b l e s us t o b r e a k w i t h
the deconstructionist ethics o f the irreducible finitude, o f h o w o u r situ
a t i o n is always t h a t o f a d i s p l a c e d b e i n g c a u g h t i n a c o n s t i t u t i v e l a c k , s o
t h a t all we c a n d o is h e r o i c a l l y a s s u m e t h i s l a c k , t h e f a c t t h a t o u r s i t u a t i o n
1 2
is t h a t o f b e i n g t h r o w n i n t o a n i m p e n e t r a b l e finite c o n t e x t ; ' t h e c o r o l l a r y
o f t h i s e t h i c s , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e s o u r c e o f t o t a l i t a r i a n and
other catastrophes is m a n ' s presumption that he can overcome this
condition o f finitude, lack a n d d i s p l a c e m e n t , a n d 'act like G o d ' , in a total
transparency, o v e r c o m i n g his constitutive division. L a c a n ' s answer to this
is t h a t a b s o l u t e / u n c o n d i t i o n a l a c t s d o o c c u r , b u t n o t in t h e (idealist)
guise o f a self-transparent g e s t u r e p e r f o r m e d by a s u b j e c t with a p u r e Will
who fully intends them - they occur, on the contrary, as a totally
u n p r e d i c t a b l e tuche, a m i r a c u l o u s e v e n t w h i c h s h a t t e r s o u r lives. T o p u t i t
i n s o m e w h a t p a t h e t i c t e r m s , t h i s is h o w t h e ' d i v i n e ' d i m e n s i o n is p r e s e n t
i n o u r lives, a n d t h e d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s o f e t h i c a l b e t r a y a l r e l a t e p r e c i s e l y
t o t h e d i f f e r e n t ways o f b e t r a y i n g t h e a c t - e v e n t : t h e t r u e s o u r c e o f E v i l is
n o t a finite m o r t a l m a n w h o acts like G o d , b u t a m a n who d e n i e s that
divine miracles o c c u r a n d r e d u c e s h i m s e l f to j u s t a n o t h e r finite mortal
being.
O n e s h o u l d r e r e a d L a c a n ' s m a t r i x o f t h e f o u r d i s c o u r s e s as t h e three
0 3
m o d e s o f c o m i n g to t e r m s with the t r a u m a o f t h e (analyst's) a c t ; to these
three strategies o f disavowal o f the act, o n e should add the fourth,
p r o p e r l y psychotic o n e : since a n a u t h e n t i c act involves t h e c h o i c e o f t h e
W o r s e , s i n c e i t is b y d e f i n i t i o n catastrophic (for the existing discursive
u n i v e r s e ) , let us t h e n directly provoke a catastrophe and t h e a c t will
s o m e h o w o c c u r . . . ( t h e r e i n lies t h e d e s p e r a t e 'terrorist' a c t o f trying to
'sober' the masses lulled into ideological sleep, from the R A F in the
G e r m a n y o f the early 1 9 7 0 s to t h e U n a b o m b e r ) . W h i l e this temptation
m u s t , o f c o u r s e , b e r e s i s t e d , o n e s h o u l d n o less firmly r e s i s t t h e o p p o s i t e
temptation o f the different modalities o f dissociating the act from its
inherent 'catastrophic' consequences.
I n s o f a r as t h e p o l i t i c a l a c t par excellence is a r e v o l u t i o n , two opposing
strategies arise h e r e : o n e c a n e n d e a v o u r to separate the n o b l e I d e a o f the
R e v o l u t i o n f r o m its a b o m i n a b l e r e a l i t y ( r e c a l l K a n t ' s c e l e b r a t i o n o f t h e
s u b l i m e f e e l i n g t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n e v o k e d in t h e e n l i g h t e n e d p u b l i c
all o v e r E u r o p e , w h i c h g o e s h a n d i n h a n d w i t h u t t e r d i s d a i n f o r t h e r e a l i t y
o f the revolutionary events t h e m s e l v e s ) , o r o n e can idealize the a u t h e n t i c
r e v o l u t i o n a r y a c t itself, a n d b e m o a n its r e g r e t t a b l e b u t u n a v o i d a b l e later
betrayal (recall t h e nostalgia o f Trotskyite a n d o t h e r radical Leftists for
the e a r l y days o f the R e v o l u t i o n , with workers' councils popping up
'spontaneously' everywhere, against the Thermidor, that is, t h e later
ossification o f the R e v o l u t i o n i n t o a new h i e r a r c h i c a l state structure).
A g a i n s t all t h e s e t e m p t a t i o n s , o n e s h o u l d i n s i s t o n t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l need
t o e n d o r s e t h e a c t fully i n all its c o n s e q u e n c e s . F i d e l i t y is n o t fidelity to
t h e p r i n c i p l e s b e t r a y e d by t h e c o n t i n g e n t facticity o f t h e i r a c t u a l i z a t i o n ,
but fidelity to the consequences e n t a i l e d b y t h e full a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e
(revolutionary) principles. Within the h o r i z o n o f what p r e c e d e s the act,
t h e a c t always a n d b y d e f i n i t i o n a p p e a r s as a c h a n g e ' f r o m B a d t o W o r s e '
( t h e u s u a l c r i t i c i s m o f c o n s e r v a t i v e s a g a i n s t r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s : y e s , t h e situ
a t i o n is b a d , b u t y o u r s o l u t i o n is e v e n w o r s e . . . ) . T h e p r o p e r h e r o i s m o f
t h e a c t is fully t o a s s u m e t h i s W o r s e .
Beyond the G o o d
T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e r e is n o n e t h e less s o m e t h i n g i n h e r e n t l y 'terroristic'
i n e v e r y a u t h e n t i c a c t , i n its g e s t u r e o f t h o r o u g h l y r e d e f i n i n g t h e ' r u l e s o f
t h e g a m e ' , i n c l u s i v e o f t h e v e r y b a s i c s e l f - i d e n t i t y o f its p e r p e t r a t o r - a
p r o p e r political act u n l e a s h e s t h e f o r c e o f negativity that shatters t h e very
foundations o f our being. So, when a L e f t i s t is a c c u s e d o f l a y i n g the
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 n o t guilty ( ' O u r 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 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
( A
left b e h i n d . 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 figures in
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 human 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
5
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 ! ' * '
0
I n h i s f a m o u s s h o r t p l a y Mauser (1970 ''), H e i n e r Midler endeavoured
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 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
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 fidelity to the Revolution but, rather, that o f
willingly a c c e p t i n g t h e role 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 disappear, no trace o f it m u s t be left, his
annihilation must be total — t h e y o u n g c o m r a d e 'must disappear, and
1 7
totally'. ' 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
1
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 self
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 The
Measure 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, 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
p r e c i p i c e t h e y will t h r o w h i m i n t o - t h a t is, t h e y a r e p r e c i s e l y e f f e c t i n g h i s
total o b l i t e r a t i o n , t h e d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f his d i s a p p e a r a n c e itself. . . .
S o is t h e r e a t h i r d way b e t w e e n h u m a n i s t h y s t e r i c a l s h i r k i n g t h e a c t a n d
t h e p e r v e r s e o v e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with t h e act, o r a r e we c a u g h t in t h e vicious
cycle o f v i o l e n c e in w h i c h t h e very r e v o l u t i o n a r y a t t e m p t to b r e a k radically
w i t h t h e p a s t r e p r o d u c e s its w o r s t f e a t u r e s ? T h e r e i n l i e s M i d l e r ' s d i s p l a c e
m e n t with regard to B r e c h t : t h e revolutionary act o f self-obliteration
p r e a c h e d by B r e c h t d o e s n ' t w o r k ; t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y n e g a t i o n o f t h e p a s t
gets c a u g h t in t h e l o o p o f r e p e a t i n g what it n e g a t e s , s o t h a t history
a p p e a r s to b e d o m i n a t e d by a d e a d l y c o m p u l s i o n to r e p e a t . T h e t h i r d way
a d v o c a t e d b y t h e P a r t y C h o r u s i n Mauser involves a n i c e p a r a d o x : y o u c a n
maintain a distance towards your act o f revolutionary violence (killing the
e n e m i e s o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n ) i n s o f a r as y o u c o n c e i v e o f y o u r s e l f as t h e
i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e b i g O t h e r , t h a t is, i n s o f a r as y o u i d e n t i f y y o u r s e l f a s
the o n e t h r o u g h w h o m the big O t h e r itself - History - directly acts. T h i s
opposition between direct overidentification (in which the violent act
t u r n s i n t o t h e ( s e l f - ) d e s t r u c t i v e o r g y as a n e n d - i n - i t s e l f ) a n d identifying
o n e s e l f as t h e i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e b i g O t h e r o f H i s t o r y ( i n w h i c h t h e v i o l e n t
a c t l o o k s l i k e t h e m e a n s o f c r e a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s in w h i c h s u c h a c t s will n o
l o n g e r b e n e c e s s a r y ) , far from b e i n g exhaustive, designates precisely the
two ways o f e s c h e w i n g t h e p r o p e r d i m e n s i o n o f t h e e t h i c a l a c t . W h i l e t h e
a c t s h o u l d n o t b e c o n f u s e d w i t h t h e (self-) d e s t r u c t i v e o r g y as a n end-in-
itself, it is a n ' e n d - i n - i t s e l f i n t h e s e n s e t h a t i t is d e p r i v e d o f a n y g u a r a n t e e
i n t h e b i g O t h e r ( a n a c t is, b y d e f i n i t i o n , ' a u t h o r i z e d o n l y b y i t s e l f , i t
precludes any self-instrumentalization, any justification t h r o u g h r e f e r e n c e
t o s o m e f i g u r e o f t h e b i g O t h e r ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , i f t h e r e is a l e s s o n t o be.
l e a r n e d f r o m p s y c h o a n a l y s i s , it is t h a t d i r e c t o v e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a n d self-
instrumentalization ultimately coincide: perverse self-instrumentalization
( p o s i t i n g o n e s e l f as t h e i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e b i g O t h e r ) n e c e s s a r i l y b e c o m e s
v i o l e n c e as a n e n d - i n - i t s e l f - t o p u t it i n H e g e l i a n t e r m s , t h e ' t r u t h ' o f t h e
p e r v e r t ' s c l a i m t h a t h e is a c c o m p l i s h i n g his a c t s as t h e i n s t r u m e n t o f t h e
b i g O t h e r is its e x a c t o p p o s i t e : h e is s t a g i n g t h e fiction o f the big O t h e r
in o r d e r t o c o n c e a l t h e jouissance h e derives from the destructive orgy o f
his a c t s .
S o w h e r e is Evil t o d a y ? T h e p r e d o m i n a n t i d e o l o g i c a l s p a c e p r o v i d e s two
o p p o s e d answers, the fundamentalist o n e a n d t h e liberal o n e . A c c o r d i n g
to t h e first a n s w e r , C l i n t o n is S a t a n (as s o m e o n e r e c e n t l y c l a i m e d a t a
CNN round table) - n o t o v e r t l y evil, b u t s u b d y c o r r o d i n g o u r moral
s t a n d a r d s as i r r e l e v a n t : w h a t d o e s it m a t t e r i f o n e l i e s , c o m m i t s p e r j u r y ,
o b s t r u c t s j u s t i c e , as l o n g as t h e e c o n o m y is b o o m i n g . . .? F r o m this
p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e t r u e m o r a l c a t a s t r o p h e is n o t a d i r e c t o u t b u r s t o f c r u e l
v i o l e n c e b u t t h e subtle loss o f m o r a l a n c h o r s in a n affluent consumerist
s o c i e t y w h e r e t h i n g s j u s t r u n s m o o t h l y - t h e h o r r o r o f Evil is t h a t it d o e s
n o t l o o k h o r r i b l e a t a l l , t h a t it l u l l s us i n t o a m e a n i n g l e s s life o f p l e a s u r e s .
I n s h o r t , f o r a c o n s e r v a t i v e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t , C l i n t o n is i n a way w o r s e t h a n
H i t l e r , b e c a u s e H i t i e r ( N a z i s m ) was a n Evil d i r e c t l y e x p e r i e n c e d as s u c h
a n d p r o v o k i n g m o r a l o u t r a g e , while with C l i n t o n ' s sleaze we are drawn
i n t o m o r a l l a s s i t u d e w i t h o u t e v e n b e i n g a w a r e o f it. . . .
Although this a t t i t u d e may appear utterly foreign to a lefdst liberal
s t a n c e , is it n o t t r u e t h a t , as I h a v e a l r e a d y n o t e d , e v e n t o d a y ' s leftist
l i b e r a l s e x p e r i e n c e a s t r a n g e r e l i e f a t f i g u r e s l i k e B u c h a n a n in t h e U S A o r
L e P e n in F r a n c e : h e r e , a t l e a s t , w e h a v e s o m e o n e w h o o p e n l y b r e a k s t h e
liberal consensus stalemate and, by passionately advocating a repulsive
s t a n c e , e n a b l e s u s t o e n g a g e i n a n a u t h e n t i c p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e (it is e a s y t o
d i s c e r n i n t h i s s t a n c e t h e r e p e t i t i o n o f t h e o l d leftist s t a n c e a p r o p o s o f
Hitler's takeover: for the G e r m a n C o m m u n i s t Party, Nazis w e r e better
than the bourgeois parliamentary r e g i m e or even the Social Democrats,
b e c a u s e with t h e m , at l e a s t w e k n e w w h e r e w e s t o o d , t h a t is, t h e y f o r c e d
t h e w o r k i n g c l a s s t o g e t r i d o f t h e last p a r l i a m e n t a r y l i b e r a l i l l u s i o n and
a c c e p t class s t r u g g l e as t h e u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y ) . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s p o s i t i o n ,
the liberal version locates the figure o f Evil i n t h e G o o d itself in its
fundamentalist, f a n a t i c a l a s p e c t : Evil is t h e a t d t u d e o f a fundamentalist
w h o e n d e a v o u r s t o e x t i r p a t e , p r o h i b i t , c e n s o r , a n d so o n , all attitudes a n d
p r a c t i c e s t h a t d o n o t fit h i s f r a m e o f G o o d n e s s a n d T r u t h .
T h e s e two o p p o s e d v e r s i o n s c a n s o m e t i m e s also b e u s e d to condemn
t h e s a m e e v e n t as ' e v i l ' - recall the case o f Mary Kay L e t o u r n e a u , the
thirty-six-year-old s c h o o l t e a c h e r i m p r i s o n e d for a passionate love affair
with h e r f o u r t e e n - y e a r - o l d p u p i l , o n e o f t h e g r e a t r e c e n t love stories in
w h i c h s e x is still l i n k e d t o a u t h e n t i c s o c i a l t r a n s g r e s s i o n : t h i s a f f a i r w a s
c o n d e m n e d by Moral Majority fundamentalists (as a n o b s c e n e i l l e g i t i m a t e
affair) as well as b y p o l i t i c a l l y c o r r e c t l i b e r a l s (as a c a s e o f c h i l d s e x u a l
molestation).
T h e o l d a n d o f t e n - q u o t e d H e g e l i a n m o t t o t h a t Evil is i n t h e e y e o f t h e
b e h o l d e r , t h a t it lies in t h e p o i n t o f view w h i c h o b s e r v e s Evil all around,
has thus found a d o u b l e c o n f i r m a t i o n t o d a y : e a c h o f t h e two opposed
stances, liberal a n d c o n s e r v a t i v e , u l t i m a t e l y d e f i n e s Evil as a reflected
c a t e g o r y , as d i e g a z e t h a t w r o n g l y p r o j e c t s / p e r c e i v e s Evil i n its o p p o n e n t .
Is n o t Evil f o r t o d a y ' s m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s t t o l e r a n t l i b e r a l s t h e v e r y r i g h t e o u s
c o n s e r v a t i v e g a z e t h a t p e r c e i v e s m o r a l c o r r u p t i o n all a r o u n d ? Is n o t Evil
for M o r a l Majority conservatives this very multiculturalist t o l e r a n c e w h i c h ,
a p r i o r i , c o n d e m n s e v e r y p a s s i o n a t e t a k i n g s i d e s a n d e n g a g e d s t r u g g l e as
e x c l u s i v e a n d p o t e n t i a l l y t o t a l i t a r i a n ? A g a i n , it is t h e act t h a t e n a b l e s us t o
c u t t h e G o r d i a n k n o t o f this m u t u a l i n t e r w e a v i n g o f G o o d a n d Evil, o f
E v i l r e f l e c t i v e l y r e s i d i n g i n t h e v e r y e y e o f t h e b e h o l d e r w h o p e r c e i v e s it.
A s l o n g as we d e f i n e e t h i c s i n t e r m s o f t h e G o o d , t h i s G o r d i a n k n o t is o u r
fate, and, if we want to b e 'radical', we e n d up s o o n e r o r later in s o m e
d e l u s i v e , f a l s e l y R o m a n t i c f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h r a d i c a l o r d i a b o l i c a l Evil - the
o n l y way o u t is t o e n f o r c e a disjunction between the Good and the domain of
8
the ethical act.'' A s L a c a n p u t it, a n e t h i c a l a c t p r o p e r b y d e f i n i t i o n i n v o l v e s
a move 'beyond the G o o d ' - n o t ' b e y o n d G o o d a n d Evil', but simply
beyond the G o o d .
T h e f a c t t h a t a c t s a r e still p o s s i b l e t o d a y is d e m o n s t r a t e d b y t h e c a s e o f
M a r y Kay L e t o u r n e a u . I n o r d e r to d i s c e r n t h e t r u e c o n t o u r s o f M a r y Kay's
a c t , o n e s h o u l d l o c a t e it w i t h i n t h e g l o b a l c o - o r d i n a t e s t h a t d e t e r m i n e the
fate o f sexual love. T o d a y , t h e o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n reflexivization a n d n e w
i m m e d i a c y is t h a t b e t w e e n s e x u a l i t y u n d e r t h e r e g i m e o f s c i e n c e a n d N e w
A g e spontaneity. B o t h terms ultimately l e a d to the e n d o f sexuality proper,
o f s e x u a l p a s s i o n . T h e first o p t i o n - d i r e c t s c i e n t i f i c - m e d i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n
i n t o s e x u a l i t y - is b e s t e x e m p l i f i e d b y t h e n o t o r i o u s V i a g r a , t h e p o t e n c y
pill that p r o m i s e s to restore t h e capacity o f m a l e e r e c t i o n in a purely
b i o c h e m i c a l way, b y p a s s i n g all p r o b l e m s w i t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n h i b i t i o n s .
W h a t will b e t h e p s y c h i c e f f e c t s o f V i a g r a i f it a c t u a l l y fulfils its p r o m i s e ?
T o t h o s e w h o c l a i m that f e m i n i s m u n l e a s h e d a t h r e a t to m a s c u l i n i t y
( m e n ' s s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e was s e r i o u s l y u n d e r m i n e d by b e i n g u n d e r a t t a c k
all t h e t i m e f r o m e m a n c i p a t e d w o m e n w h o w a n t e d t o b e l i b e r a t e d from
patriarchal d o m i n a t i o n , a n d retain the initiative in sexual c o n t a c t , and
simultaneously d e m a n d e d full s e x u a l s a t i s f a c t i o n f r o m their male part
n e r s ) V i a g r a o p e n s u p a n e a s y way o u t o f t h i s s t r e s s f u l p r e d i c a m e n t : men
n o l o n g e r h a v e t o w o r r y ; t h e y k n o w t h e y will b e a b l e t o p e r f o r m properly.
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , f e m i n i s t s c a n c l a i m t h a t V i a g r a finally d e p r i v e s m a l e
p o t e n c y o f its m y s t i q u e , a n d t h u s i n e f f e c t m a k e s m e n e q u a l t o w o m e n . . .
h o w e v e r , t h e l e a s t o n e c a n say a g a i n s t t h i s s e c o n d a r g u m e n t is t h a t i t
s i m p l i f i e s t h e way m a l e p o t e n c y a c t u a l l y f u n c t i o n s : w h a t a c t u a l l y c o n f e r s a
m y t h i c a l s t a t u s o n it is t h e t h r e a t o f i m p o t e n c e . I n t h e m a l e s e x u a l p s y c h i c
e c o n o m y , the e v e r - p r e s e n t s h a d o w o f i m p o t e n c e , t h e t h r e a t that, in the
n e x t s e x u a l e n c o u n t e r , m y p e n i s will r e f u s e t o e r e c t is c r u c i a l t o t h e v e r y
d e f i n i t i o n o f w h a t m a l e p o t e n c y is.
Let m e recall h e r e my own description o f the paradox o f erection:
erection depends entirely o n m e , o n my m i n d (as t h e j o k e g o e s : ' W h a t
is t h e l i g h t e s t o b j e c t i n t h e w o r l d ? T h e p e n i s , b e c a u s e ii. is t h e o n l y o n e
t h a t c a n b e r a i s e d b y a m e r e t h o u g h t ! ' ) , y e t it is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h a t o v e r
w h i c h I ultimately have n o c o n t r o l ( i f I a m n o t in t h e r i g h t m o o d , no
a m o u n t o f w i l l p o w e r will a c h i e v e it - t h a t is why, f o r S t A u g u s t i n e , t h e f a c t
t h a t e r e c t i o n e s c a p e s t h e c o n t r o l o f m y will is t h e D i v i n e p u n i s h m e n t for
m a n ' s a r r o g a n c e a n d p r e s u m p t i o n , f o r his d e s i r e to b e c o m e m a s t e r o f t h e
u n i v e r s e . . . ) . T o p u t it i n t h e t e r m s o f t h e A d o r n i a n c r i t i q u e o f c o m m o d -
ification and r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n : e r e c t i o n is o n e o f t h e l a s t r e m a i n d e r s of
authentic spontaneity, something that c a n n o t b e thoroughly mastered
through rational-instrumental procedures. This minimal gap - the fact
t h a t it is n e v e r d i r e c t l y ' m e ' , m y S e l f , w h o c a n f r e e l y d e c i d e o n e r e c d o n -
is c r u c i a l : a s e x u a l l y p o t e n t m a n e l i c i t s a c e r t a i n a t t r a c t i o n a n d e n v y n o t
b e c a u s e h e c a n d o it a t will, b u t b e c a u s e t h a t u n f a t h o m a b l e X w h i c h -
although beyond conscious control - decides on erection presents no
problem for him.
T h e crucial point h e r e is t o d i s t i n g u i s h between penis (the erectile
o r g a n itself) a n d phallus ( t h e signifier o f p o t e n c y , o f s y m b o l i c authority,
o f the - symbolic, not biological - dimension that confers authority and/
o r p o t e n c y ) o n m e . J u s t a s (as w e h a v e n o t e d ) a judge, who may be a
w o r t h l e s s i n d i v i d u a l in h i m s e l f , e x e r t s a u t h o r i t y t h e m o m e n t h e p u t s o n
t h e insignia that c o n f e r his legal authority o n him, the m o m e n t h e no
l o n g e r s i m p l y s p e a k s o n l y f o r h i m s e l f , s i n c e it is t h e L a w i t s e l f t h a t s p e a k s
through him, the individual male's potency functions as a s i g n that
a n o t h e r s y m b o l i c d i m e n s i o n is a c t i v e t h r o u g h h i m : t h e 'phallus' desig
nates the symbolic support which confers o n my penis the dimension o f
p r o p e r p o t e n c y . B e c a u s e o f this distinction, for L a c a n , ' c a s t r a t i o n a n x i e t y '
has n o t h i n g to d o with t h e fear o f losing o n e ' s p e n i s : what m a k e s us
a n x i o u s , r a t h e r , is t h e t h r e a t t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e p h a l l i c s i g n i f i e r will
b e r e v e a l e d as a f r a u d . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , V i a g r a is t h e u l t i m a t e a g e n t o f
castration: if a m a n swallows the pill, his p e n i s functions, but he is
d e p r i v e d o f t h e p h a l l i c d i m e n s i o n o f s y m b o l i c p o t e n c y - t h e m a n w h o is
a b l e t o c o p u l a t e t h a n k s t o V i a g r a is a m a n w i t h a p e n i s b u t w i t h o u t a
phallus.
S o c a n we really i m a g i n e h o w c h a n g i n g e r e c t i o n i n t o s o m e t h i n g that
can be achieved through a direct medical-mechanical intervention (by
t a k i n g a p i l l ) will a f f e c t s e x u a l e c o n o m y ? T o p u t i t i n s o m e w h a t m a l e -
c h a u v i n i s t t e r m s : w h a t will r e m a i n o f a w o m a n ' s n o t i o n o f b e i n g p r o p e r l y
attractive to a m a n , o f effectively a r o u s i n g him? Furthermore, is not
e r e c t i o n o r its a b s e n c e a k i n d o f s i g n a l w h i c h l e t s u s k n o w w h a t o u r t r u e
p s y c h i c a t t i t u d e is: t u r n i n g e r e c t i o n i n t o a m e c h a n i c a l l y a c h i e v a b l e s t a t e is
s o m e h o w s i m i l a r to b e i n g d e p r i v e d o f t h e c a p a c i t y t o f e e l p a i n - h o w will
a m a l e s u b j e c t g e t t o k n o w w h a t h i s t r u e a t t i t u d e is? I n w h a t f o r m s will h i s
dissatisfaction or resistance find an o u d e t , when it is d e p r i v e d o f t h e
simple sign o f i m p o t e n c e ? T h e s t a n d a r d designation o f a sexually vora
c i o u s m a n is t h a t w h e n l u s t t a k e s o v e r h e t h i n k s n o t w i t h h i s h e a d but
with his p e n i s - what happens, however, when his h e a d takes over
c o m p l e t e l y ? W i l l n o t a c c e s s t o t h e d i m e n s i o n u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as t h a t o f
' e m o t i o n a l i n t e l l i g e n c e ' b e further, a n d p e r h a p s decisively, h i n d e r e d ? It
is e a s y t o c e l e b r a t e t h e f a c t t h a t w e will n o l o n g e r h a v e t o b a t t i e w i t h o u r
p s y c h o l o g i c a l t r a u m a s , t h a t h i d d e n f e a r s a n d i n h i b i t i o n s will n o l o n g e r b e
able to i m p e d e o u r sexual capacity; however, these h i d d e n fears and
i n h i b i t i o n s will, f o r t h a t v e r y r e a s o n , n o t d i s a p p e a r - t h e y will p e r s i s t o n
what F r e u d called the ' O t h e r S c e n e ' , b e i n g deprived merely o f their main
o u t l e t , w a i t i n g to e x p l o d e i n w h a t will p r o b a b l y b e a m u c h m o r e v i o l e n t
and ( s e l f - ) d e s t r u c t i v e way. U l t i m a t e l y , t h i s t u r n i n g o f erection into a
m e c h a n i c a l p r o c e d u r e will s i m p l y desexualize the act o f copulation.
A t t h e o p p o s i t e e n d o f t h e s p e c t r u m , N e w A g e w i s d o m s e e m s to offer a
way o u t o f this p r e d i c a m e n t - h o w e v e r , w h a t d o e s i t a c t u a l l y o f f e r us? L e t
m e t u r n t o its u l t i m a t e p o p u l a r v e r s i o n , J a m e s R e d f i e l d ' s m e g a - b e s t s e l l e r
The Celestine Prophecy. A c c o r d i n g t o The Celestine Prophecy, t h e first 'new
i n s i g h t ' t h a t will o p e n t h e p a t h t o h u m a n i t y ' s ' s p i r i t u a l a w a k e n i n g ' is t h e
awareness that there are n o c o n t i n g e n t encounters: since our psychic
e n e r g y participates in t h e E n e r g y o f t h e universe, w h i c h secretly d e t e r
m i n e s t h e c o u r s e o f t h i n g s , c o n t i n g e n t e x t e r n a l e n c o u n t e r s always c a r r y a
message addressed t o u s , t o o u r c o n c r e t e s i t u a t i o n ; t h e y o c c u r as an
a n s w e r to o u r n e e d s a n d q u e s t i o n s (for e x a m p l e , i f I a m b o t h e r e d by a
certain problem and then something unexpected happens - a long-
f o r g o t t e n f r i e n d visits m e ; s o m e t h i n g g o e s w r o n g a t w o r k - t h i s a c c i d e n t
certainly contains a message relevant to my p r o b l e m ) . W e thus find
ourselves in a universe in which everything has a m e a n i n g , in a proto-
psychotic universe in which this meaning is d i s c e r n i b l e in the very
c o n t i n g e n c y o f t h e R e a l , a n d w h a t is o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t a r e t h e c o n s e
q u e n c e s o f all t h i s f o r i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y . A c c o r d i n g t o The Celestine Prophecy,
we a r e c a u g h t t o d a y i n a false c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h o u r f e l l o w h u m a n b e i n g s ,
s e e k i n g in t h e m w h a t w e l a c k , p r o j e c t i n g i n t o t h e m o u r f a n t a s i e s o f t h i s
l a c k , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e m ; a n d s i n c e u l t i m a t e h a r m o n y is i m p o s s i b l e , s i n c e
t h e o t h e r n e v e r p r o v i d e s w h a t w e a r e l o o k i n g f o r , t e n s i o n is i r r e d u c i b l e .
A f t e r s p i r i t u a l r e n e w a l , h o w e v e r , w e s h a l l l e a r n t o find, in ourselves w h a t w e
w e r e s e e k i n g in vain in o t h e r s ( o n e ' s m a l e o r f e m a l e c o m p l e m e n t ) : e a c h
h u m a n b e i n g will b e c o m e a P l a t o n i c c o m p l e t e b e i n g , d e l i v e r e d o f e x c l u
sive d e p e n d e n c e o n a n o t h e r ( l e a d e r o r love p a r t n e r ) , delivered o f the
n e e d t o d r a w e n e r g y f r o m h i m / h e r . W h e n a truly f r e e s u b j e c t e n t e r s a
p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h a n o t h e r h u m a n b e i n g , h e is t h u s b e y o n d a p a s s i o n a t e
a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e o t h e r : h i s p a r t n e r is f o r h i m o n l y a v e h i c l e f o r s o m e
m e s s a g e ; h e e n d e a v o u r s to d i s c e r n in t h e o t h e r m e s s a g e s t h a t are r e l e v a n t
to his own inner evolution and growth. . . . H e r e we encounter the
necessary obverse o f New Age spiritualist elevation: the end of the
p a s s i o n a t e a t t a c h m e n t to t h e O t h e r , t h e e m e r g e n c e o f a self-sufficient e g o
t o w h o m h i s O t h e r - p a r t n e r is n o l o n g e r a s u b j e c t , m e r e l y t h e b e a r e r o f a
message c o n c e r n i n g himself.
I n psychoanalysis, we also e n c o u n t e r t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e b e a r e r o f a
m e s s a g e : t h e s u b j e c t is u n a w a r e t h a t h e e m b o d i e s s o m e m e s s a g e , as i n
s o m e d e t e c t i v e n o v e l s w h e r e s o m e o n e ' s life is t h r e a t e n e d all o f a s u d d e n ,
a m y s t e r i o u s a g e n t t r i e s t o kill h i m - o b v i o u s l y t h e s u b j e c t k n o w s s o m e
thing h e s h o u l d n ' t have known, partakes in s o m e p r o h i b i t e d knowledge
(say, t h e s e c r e t w h i c h c o u l d p u t a t o p M a f i a figure in p r i s o n ) ; t h e key
p o i n t h e r e is t h a t , the subject is completely unaware what this knowledge is, h e
knows only that he knows s o m e t h i n g h e shouldn't know. . . . This position,
h o w e v e r , is t h e v e r y o p p o s i t e o f t h e N e w A g e i d e o l o g y p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e
O t h e r as t h e b e a r e r o f s o m e m e s s a g e w h i c h is r e l e v a n t t o m e : i n p s y c h o
a n a l y s i s , t h e s u b j e c t is n o t t h e (potential) reader but the bearer o f a
m e s s a g e a d d r e s s e d to t h e O t h e r a n d t h e r e f o r e , in p r i n c i p l e , i n a c c e s s i b l e
to the subject himself.
Back to R e d f i e l d : m y p o i n t is t h a t the allegedly highest insight o f
spiritual w i s d o m overlaps with o u r m o s t c o m m o n everyday e x p e r i e n c e . I f
we take Redfield's description o f the ideal state o f spiritual maturity
literally, it a l r e a d y h o l d s f o r late capitalist c o m m e r c i a l i z e d everyday inter
p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , in w h i c h passions p r o p e r d i s a p p e a r , in w h i c h the
O t h e r is n o l o n g e r a n u n f a t h o m a b l e a b y s s c o n c e a l i n g a n d announcing
t h a t w h i c h is ' i n m e m o r e t h a n m y s e l f , b u t t h e b e a r e r o f m e s s a g e s f o r t h e
s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t c o n s u m e r i s t s u b j e c t . N e w A g e r s a r e n o t g i v i n g us e v e n an
i d e a l s p i r i t u a l s u p p l e m e n t t o c o m m e r c i a l i z e d e v e r y d a y life; t h e y a r e g i v i n g
u s t h e s p i r i t u a l i z e d / m y s t i f i e d v e r s i o n o f t h i s c o m m e r c i a l i z e d e v e r y d a y life
itself. . . .
W h a t , t h e n , is t h e way o u t o f t h i s p r e d i c a m e n t ? A r e w e c o n d e m n e d to
the rather depressing oscillation between scientific objectivization and
New Age wisdom, between Viagra and The Celestine Prophecy? That there
still is a way o u t is d e m o n s t r a t e d b y t h e c a s e o f M a r y K a y . T h e r i d i c u l e o f
d e f i n i n g t h i s u n i q u e p a s s i o n a t e l o v e a f f a i r as t h e c a s e o f a w o m a n raping
a n u n d e r a g e b o y c a n n o t fail t o s t r i k e t h e e y e ; n o n e t h e less, p r a c t i c a l l y n o
o n e d a r e d to d e f e n d t h e e t h i c a l d i g n i t y o f h e r a c t i n p u b l i c ; two p a t t e r n s
of 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 ( o n e is t e m p t e d to
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 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 - among others - Paul
69
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 The Hostage, a version
o f je sais bien, mais quand 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
s o u l ) , y e t s h e d i d it. ( D o e s n o t t h e s a m e h o l d a l s o f o r t h e noir h e r o , w h o
is n o t s i m p l y d u p e d b y t h e femme fatak, b u t fully a w a r e t h a t h i s l i a i s o n w i t h
h e r will e n d in t o t a l c a t a s t r o p h e , t h a t s h e will b e t r a y h i m - nevertheless
h e g o e s a h e a d a n d c o m m i t s h i m s e l f to h e r ? ) T h e fact that this f o r m u l a o f
Sygne c o i n c i d e s with the formula o f cynicism should n o t d e c e i v e us:
Sygne's act stands for the radical opposite o f cynicism. W e are thus
d e a l i n g h e r e with t h e s t r u c t u r e o f H e g e l i a n speculative j u d g e m e n t : with
the statement which c a n b e r e a d i n two o p p o s i t e ways, as t h e lowest
c y n i c i s m ( ' I k n o w t h a t w h a t I a m a b o u t t o d o is t h e l o w e s t d e p r a v i t y , but
what t h e hell, w h o c a r e s , I'll j u s t d o i t . . . ' ) a n d t h e h i g h e s t tragic split ('I
a m fully a w a r e o f t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n s e q u e n c e s o f w h a t I a m a b o u t t o
d o , b u t I c a n ' t h e l p it, it's m y u n c o n d i t i o n a l d u t y t o d o it, s o I ' l l g o o n
with i t . . . ' ) .
A r e c e n t G e r m a n p o s t e r f o r D a v i d o f f c i g a r e t t e s deftly m a n i p u l a t e s t h i s
g a p b e t w e e n k n o w l e d g e a n d act - this s u s p e n s i o n o f k n o w l e d g e in the act,
t h i s ' I ' l l d o it, a l t h o u g h I ' m w e l l a w a r e o f t h e c a t a s t r o p h i c c o n s e q u e n c e s
o f m y a c t ' - in o r d e r to c o u n t e r a c t t h e e f f e c t o f t h e o b l i g a t o r y w a r n i n g at
t h e b o t t o m o f every cigarette a d v e r t i s e m e n t (a variation o n the theme
' S m o k i n g may b e dangerous for your h e a l t h ' ) : the image o f an experi
e n c e d m a n s m o k i n g is a c c o m p a n i e d b y t h e w o r d s ' T h e M o r e Y o u K n o w ' ,
s u g g e s t i n g the c o n c l u s i o n : i f you are truly d a r i n g , then the m o r e you
know a b o u t the dangers o f smoking, the m o r e you should demonstrate
y o u r d e f i a n c e b y t a k i n g t h e risk a n d c o n t i n u i n g t o s m o k e - t h a t is, b y
r e f u s i n g t o give u p s m o k i n g f o r r e a s o n s c o n c e r n i n g c a r e f o r y o u r own
survival. . . . T h i s a d v e r t i s e m e n t is t h e l o g i c a l c o u n t e r p a r t t o t h e o b s e s s i o n
with h e a l t h a n d longevity that c h a r a c t e r i z e s today's narcissistic individual.
A n d d o e s n o t this f o r m u l a o f t h e tragic split also p e r f e c t l y e x p r e s s M a r y
Kay's p r e d i c a m e n t ?
T h i s , t h e n , is t h e s a d r e a l i t y o f o u r l a t e c a p i t a l i s t t o l e r a n t l i b e r a l s o c i e t y :
t h e v e r y c a p a c i t y t o act is b r u t a l l y m e d i c a l i z e d , t r e a t e d as a m a n i c o u t b u r s t
w i t h i n t h e p a t t e r n o f ' b i p o l a r d i s o r d e r ' , a n d as s u c h t o b e s u b m i t t e d to
b i o c h e m i c a l t r e a t m e n t - d o we n o t e n c o u n t e r h e r e o u r own, W e s t e r n ,
liberal-democratic counterpart to t h e old Soviet attempts to diagnose
d i s s i d e n c e as a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r (the practice centred on the infamous
Scherbsky Institute in Moscow)? No wonder, then, that part of the
s e n t e n c e was t h a t M a r y K a y h a s t o u n d e r g o therapy ( t h e lawyer even
e x p l a i n e d h e r s e c o n d t r a n s g r e s s i o n - b e i n g f o u n d with h e r l o v e r in a c a r
in t h e m i d d l e of the n i g h t after h e r r e l e a s e , w h i c h l e d to h e r o u t r a g e o u s
s e n t e n c e o f o v e r s i x y e a r s i n p r i s o n - as r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t i n t h e
5S» THE TICKLISH SUBJECT
days i m m e d i a t e l y p r e c e d i n g 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 so-
c 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 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 the
opposite ' L o l i t a ' c a s e o f a thirty-four-year-old male teacher who 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 same
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 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 .
So our 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 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 is
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, 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
properly ex-timate: imposed from the 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
71
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 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 these 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, 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 death d r i v e o f e n j o y m e n t is t o
e m b r a c e the death d r i v e i n its d i s r u p t i v e 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 o f the 'totalitarian' Master. 'Du
darfst! / Y o u m a y ! ' , t h e logo on a brand o f fat-free meat products in
Germany, provides the most succinct formula o f how the '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
us a firm a n c h o r by providing 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 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
so-called 'authoritarian personality' structure: the individual w h o finds
satisfaction in compulsively obeying authority, repressing 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 M a s t e r is the
a g e n c y that suspends (moral) punishment - t h a t is t o say, h i s s e c r e t
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 You may! is n o t
s o m e b a s i c You mustn'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
unconditionally respected (Respect the autonomy and dignity o f your
neighbour! Do not e n c r o a c h violently u p o n his/her 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 fighting 'totalitarian
ism' with a reference to s o m e firm set o f e t h n i c a l standards whose
abandonment is s u p p o s e d 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 '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 themselves
give r e i n to the unconstrained realization o f their murderous impulses.
So - o n c e m o r e , a n d for the last time - 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 1
may. is a n o t h e r , even m o r e radical You may. , a Scilicet ('You are allowed
to . . .' - 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 ) no
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 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:
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 .
19. Ibid., p. 4 2 8 .
2 0 . See Jacques-Alain Miller a n d E r i c L a u r e n t , ' L ' A u t r e qui n'existe pas et ses c o m i t e s
d'ethique', in La Cause freudienne. 3 5 ( 1 9 9 7 ) , Paris, p p . 7 - 2 0 .
2 1 . Paul V e r h a e g h e (see his unpublished p a p e r T h e Collapse o f t h e F a t h e r F u n c t i o n a n d
its Effects on G e n d e r Roles') drew attention t o a n o t h e r interesting feature o f this suspension
o f p a t e r n a l symbolic authority: in so far as p a t e r n a l authority is the 'relay' that enables the
subject's entry into t h e symbolic universe, is not today's r e g r e s s i o n ' from l a n g u a g e to m o d e s
o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n that c o m b i n e l a n g u a g e with o t h e r types o f signs (say, t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f
writing with iconic signs: when we deal with a c o m p u t e r , instead o f writing o r d e r s , we
increasingly o p e r a t e by m e r e l y clicking t h e m o u s e on to the a p p r o p r i a t e iconic sign) also a n
i n d e x o f t h e suspension o f p a t e r n a l authority?
2 2 . See Ulrich B e c k ' s classic Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, L o n d o n : Sage 1 9 9 2 ; a n d
A n t h o n y Giddens's, The Consequences ojModernity, C a m b r i d g e : Polity Press 1 9 9 0 . F o r a p o p u l a r
o v e m e w o f this theory, see The Politics of the Risk Society, e d . J a n e Franklin, O x f o r d : Polity
Press 1 9 9 8 .
2 3 . F o r this very reason, the anxiety g e n e r a t e d by the risk society is that o f a s u p e r e g o :
what c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e s u p e r e g o is precisely t h e a b s e n c e o f ' p r o p e r m e a s u r e ' - o n e obeys its
c o m m a n d s n o t e n o u g h a n d / o r t o o m u c h ; w h a t e v e r o n e does, t h e result is w r o n g a n d o n e is
guilty. T h e p r o b l e m with t h e s u p e r e g o is that its c o m m a n d c a n never be translated into a
positive rule to be followed: the O t h e r issuing the injunction d e m a n d s s o m e t h i n g from us,
but we a r e never in a position t o guess what, exactly, this d e m a n d is. . . .
24. W h a t is an e m p t y gesture? T h e r e is tension in Slovenia between the P r i m e Minister
a n d the President o f the republic: the latter, a l t h o u g h t h e constitution r e d u c e s his r o l e to
p r o t o c o l functions, wants to play a l a r g e r r o l e with effective power. So when, recently, it was
c l e a r that the Slovene representative at the m e e t i n g o f E u r o p e a n leaders o r g a n i z e d by
J a c q u e s C h i r a c would be t h e P r i m e Minister, journalists were told t h a t the P r e s i d e n t wrote
C h i r a c a letter e x p l a i n i n g that since, unfortunately, he was unable to be at t h e summit, t h e
P r i m e Minister would take his place. . . . This is t h e e m p t y g e s t u r e at its purest: a l t h o u g h it
was c l e a r that the P r i m e Minister should g o to F r a n c e to r e p r e s e n t Slovenia, t h e President
acted as if the fact that the P r i m e Minister went was not 'natural', but resulted from his - the
President's - decision not to g o a n d , instead, let the P r i m e Minister take his place. This is
t h e way to turn defeat i n t o victory - to t r a n s f o r m into the result o f o n e ' s free decision ( t o
withdraw) the fact that o n e c a n n o t g o in any case.
2 5 . Eva H o f f m a n , Exit Into History, L o n d o n : M i n e r v a 1 9 9 3 .
26. See Max H o r k h e i m e r , 'Authority a n d t h e Family', in Critical Theory, New York:
Continuum 1995.
27. This, o f c o u r s e , in n o way entails that the difference between the t h e o r y o f p o s t m o d
ernism a n d t h e t h e o r y o f t h e s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y is merely n o m i n a l , a n o t h e r n a m e for the
s a m e p h e n o m e n o n ; what we a r e dealing with h e r e , r a t h e r , is t h e i n h e r e n t split between two
fundamentally i n c o m p a t i b l e notions o f p o s t m o d e r n i t y t h a t a r e operative today, on t h e o n e
hand, t h e idea that p o s t m o d e r n i t y brings t o an e n d t h e logic o f m o d e r n i t y , deploying all its
potential ( F r e d r i c J a m e s o n ' s version - n o w o n d e r m a n y o f his d e t e r m i n a t i o n s o f p o s t m o d e r n
ity c o i n c i d e with those o f the s e c o n d m o d e r n i t y ) ; o n the o t h e r , the idea that p o s t m o d e r n i t y
negates the basic feature o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n (rational reflexivity) in favour o f s o m e new form
o f i m m e d i a c y ( t h e New A g e holistic attitude o r s o m e o t h e r version o f t h e 'post-Cartesian
p a r a d i g m ' ) . Within this c o n t e x t , it is interesting how r e c e n t discussions o n globalization
again b r o u g h t into focus t h e t o p i c o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n in its different aspects (globalized
reflexivity, the dissolution o f the last traditional social links . . . ) : we a r e b e c o m i n g increas
ingly aware that 'postmodernism' was just an endeavour to come to terms with accelerated moderniza
tion. D o not the turbulent events in all s p h e r e s o f life, from e c o n o m i c a n d cultural
'globalization' to t h e reflexivization o f t h e most i n t i m a t e d o m a i n s , d e m o n s t r a t e how we still
have to learn to c o p e with the real shock o f m o d e r n i z a t i o n ?
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

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
2
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
2
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 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-nation-
state 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
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-powerless-
underprivileged; 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
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 Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, New York: N o r t o n
1 9 7 7 , p. 2 7 6 .
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 self-
mutilation 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 internalized-
spiritualized 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 'post-
secular' 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 .
6 5 . B e r t o l t B r e c h t , ' T h e M e a s u r e T a k e n ' , in The Jewish Wife and Other Short Plays, New
York: Grove Press 1 9 6 5 , p. 9 7 .
6 6 . See H e i n e r Miiller, 'Mauser', in Revolutionsstu/ke, Stuttgart: R e c l a m 1 9 9 5 .
67. B r e c h t , ' T h e M e a s u r e T a k e n ' , p. 1 0 6 .
6 8 . This disjunction between G o o d a n d the ethical act also allows us to resolve t h e
following impasse: if we a c c e p t t h e n o t i o n o f 'diabolical Evil' (Evil elevated to t h e status o f
t h e Kantian ethical duly, that is, a c c o m p l i s h e d for t h e sake o f principle, not for anv
pathological p r o f i t ) , to what e x t e n t , then, does this parallel with the G o o d hold? C a n t h e r e
also be a 'voice o f Evil C o n s c i o u s n e s s ' r e n d e r i n g us guilty w h e n we did n o t d o o u r dutv to
radical Evil? C a n we also feel guilty for not a c c o m p l i s h i n g a h o r r i b l e c r i m e ? T h e p r o b l e m
disappears the m o m e n t we c u t t h e link between the ethical d o m a i n p r o p e r a n d t h e
p r o b l e m a t i c o f G o o d ( a n d Evil as its s h a d o w - s u p p l e m e n t ) .
6 9 . F o r a close r e a d i n g o f Claudel's The Hostage, see C h a p t e r 2 o f Zizek, The Indivisible
Remainder.
7 0 . A detailed c o m p a r a t i v e analysis o f the case of Mary Kay with Nabokov's Lolita (if I
may be e x c u s e d for c o m p a r i n g a 'real-life' case with a fictional o n e ) immediately helps us to
pinpoint this difference: in Lolita (a story which is also, even m o r e than it was when t h e
novel was first published, u n a c c e p t a b l e in out politically c o r r e c t times - r e m e m b e r the
p r o b l e m s with the A m e r i c a n distribution o f the latest c i n e m a v e r s i o n ) , H u m b e r t H u m b e r t
discerns in Lolita a 'nymphet', a girl between nine a n d f o u r t e e n who is potentially a w o m a n :
t h e appeal o f a n y m p h e t resides in t h e very indefiniteness o f h e r form - she resembles a
y o u n g boy m u c h m o r e than a m a t u r e w o m a n . So while Mary Kay, t h e w o m a n , t r e a t e d h e r
y o u n g lover as a grown-up p a r t n e r , in the Lolita case she is for H u m b e r t H u m b e r t a
m a s t u r b a t o r y fantasy, the p r o d u c t o f his solipsistic i m a g i n a t i o n - as H u m b e r t puts it in the
novel: ' W h a t I had madly possessed was not she, b u t m y own c r e a t i o n , a n o t h e r , fanciful
Lolita. . . . ' As a result, t h e i r relationship is teasing-exploitalive, cruel on b o t h sides ( s h e is a
cruel child towards him; he r e d u c e s h e r to t h e a b u s e d o b j e c t o f his m a s t u r b a t o r y solipsistic
i m a g i n a t i o n ) , in c o n t r a s t to the s i n c e r e passion between Mary Kay a n d h e r young lover.
7 1 . A n o t h e r n i c e feature o f t h e film is that, in its d e n o u e m e n t , it avoids the s t a n d a r d
cliche a b o u t 'the real p e r s o n b e h i n d t h e mask': a l t h o u g h , a t t h e e n d , the h e r o throws t h e
mask back into t h e sea, he is able to d o so precisely in so far as h e i n c o r p o r a t e s i n t o his
actual b e h a v i o u r e l e m e n t s o f what he was d o i n g when h e was u n d e r its spell. T h e r e i n lies
o u r growing m a t u r e ' : n o t in simply discarding masks, b u t in a c c e p t i n g their symbolic
efficiency 'on trust' - in a c o u r t o f law, when a j u d g e puts o n his m a s k (his official insignia),
we in effect treat him as if he is u n d e r the spell o f t h e symbolic Institution o f Law which now
speaks t h r o u g h him. . . . However, it would be w r o n g to c o n c l u d e from this that t h e mask is
just a m o r e 'primitive' version o f symbolic efficiency, o f t h e hold e x e r t e d u p o n us by symbolic
authority: it is crucial to m a i n t a i n a distinction between t h e p r o p e r symbolic authority which
o p e r a t e s on a strictly ' m e t a p h o r i c ' level a n d t h e o b s c e n e ' t o t e m i c ' literality o f t h e mask. N o
w o n d e r the h e r o , when he is wearing the mask, often assumes an animal's face: in t h e
p h a n t a s m i c s p a c e o f c a r t o o n s , animals ( T o m , J e r r y , e t c . ) a r e p e r c e i v e d precisely as h u m a n s
wearing a n i m a l masks a n d / o r c l o t h i n g (take t h e s t a n d a r d s c e n e in which an animal's skin is
s c r a t c h e d , a n d what a p p e a r s b e n e a t h it is o r d i n a r y human skin).
T o p a r a p h r a s e Levi-Strauss, what The Mask p r e s e n t s us with is thus in effect a case o f
'totemism today', o f t h e p h a n t a s m i c efficiency o f t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l mask which is i n o p e r a
tive in today's public social space: when the h e r o c o n f r o n t s the psychologist who wrote a
bestseller o n masks, t h e psychologist calmly answers the h e r o ' s questions to t h e effect that
we all wear masks only in the m e t a p h o r i c m e a n i n g o f the t e r m ; in o n e o f the crucial scenes
o f the film, which then follows, t h e h e r o tries to c o n v i n c e him that in his case t h e mask
really is a magical object - when he puts the mask on, however, it r e m a i n s a d e a d p i e c e o f
carved wood; the magrcal effect fails to o c c u r , so that the h e r o is r e d u c e d to imitating, in a
ridiculous way, t h e wild gestures he is able to p e r f o r m gracefully when he is u n d e r t h e mask's
spell. . . .
Index
Absolute Power (h\m) 3 2 8 differences with L a c a n 3, 1 5 9 - 6 4

Adorno, Theodor fidelity to the Truth-Event 164,
break with H a b e r m a s 347 166-7
Dialectic of Enlightenment (with ideology a n d the T r u t h - E v e n t 1 4 1 - 5
H o r k h e i m e r ) 10, 4 6 , 3 5 9 i n f l u e n c e o f Althusser 1 2 8
Negative Dialectics 8 9 is the gap the subject? 1 5 8 - 9
Philosophy of the New Music 2 5 0 Master/Hysteric/University 1 6 4 - 5
sphere o f Kulturindustrie 3 5 8 return to the S u b s t a n c e 2 0 9
violin versus piano 1 0 1 - 2 St Paul and psychoanalysis 1 5 3 - 4
Althusser, Louis 3, 1 5 8 - 9 subjectivity 1 8 2 - 4
ideological interpellation 1 4 1 , 145, transformation o f Truth-Event into
258, 260 universal 1 5 7 - 8
i n f l u e n c e on others 1 2 7 - 8 , 2 3 2 undecidability o f the Event
overdetermination 102 135-41
Antigone ( S o p h o c l e s ) 2 6 3 - 4 Balibar, E t i e n n e 3, 2 0 1
Arendt, H a n n a h 191 a n d Althusser 127
Aristotle anti-Habermasian H a b e r m a s i a n
DeAnima 2 4 172-3
phronesis 3 3 3 civility 173
Assoun, Paul-Laurent 3 2 4 egaliberte 1 8 8 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 3 , 2 3 2 - 3
S t Augustine 3 8 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 d i n t e r , R o b e r t 134 B a r t o k , B e l a 102
B a d i o u , Alain B e c k , Ulrich 4, 3 3 7 , 3 3 8
A m e r i c a a n d R o m a n E m p i r e 211 B e e t h o v e n , Ludwig van 1 0 2
anti-communitarian c o m m u n i t a r i a n being and Time ( H e i d e g g e r ) 10, 21
172 closure/openness 2 2 - 4
Being and Truth-Event 1 2 8 - 3 5 , dualities 1 5 - 1 8
237-8 H u s s e d ' s criticism 6 3 - 4
beyond the G o o d 161 B e n j a m i n , Walter
Christianity a n d psychoanalysis revolution as repetition 2 0
145-51 revolutionary gaze 8 9
402 INDEX
B e n j a m i n , Walter (cont.) Claudel, Paul 3 2 0

' T h e s e s on the Philosophy o f The Hostage 3 8 6 - 7
History' 137 Clinton, Bill 1 9 9 , 3 2 9
Blair, T o n y 198 as Satan 3 8 0 - 8 1
B l i x e n , Karen 2 8 7 C o e n brothers
Blood Simple (film) 111 Blood Simple 111
Blue Velvet (film) 2 9 9 Coldness and Cruelty ( D e l e u z e ) 3 6 4 - 5
B o s c h , H i e r o n y m u s 3 5 , 4 9 - 5 0 , 52 Collins, Michael 3 1 6 - 1 7
Bossuet, J a c q u e s B e n i g n e 118 Critique of Judgement ( K a n t ) 4 0
B o u r d i e u , Pierre 3 5 5 schematizes R e a s o n 6 1 - 2
B r a h a m s , J o h a n n e s 102 Critique of Practical Reason ( K a n t ) 2 5
Brassed Off ( h i m ) 3 0 2 , 3 5 1 - 2 Critique of Pure Reason ( K a n t ) 31
Brazil (film) 155 anti-metaphysical potential 4 6 - 5 0
B r e c h t , Bertolt 2 3 6 The Crying Game (film) 2 7 1
The Measure Taken 3 7 8 - 8 0
Brown, Wendy
Daly, Glyn
States of Injurs 7 1 - 2
'Ideology and its P a r a d o x e s ' 3 6 4
Bruno, Giordano 3 7 6
DeAnima (Aristotle) 2 4
B u c h a n a n , Patrick 2 1 0 , 2 1 5 , 2 2 1 , 3 5 5 ,
D e Gaulle, Charles 2 2 6
381
de M a n , Paul
Butler, J u d i t h 3
Kant's materialism 6 4
on decision 19
de V a l c r a , E a m o n 3 1 6 - 1 7
H e g e l and Foucault 2 5 3
D e l e u z e , Gilles 7 3 , 2 5 0
m e l a n c h o l y m e c h a n i s m and
Coldness and Cruelty 3 6 4 - 5
homosexuality 2 6 9 - 7 3 , 2 7 9
deterritorialization 2 0 9
passionate a t t a c h m e n t s 2 6 5 - 9 , 2 8 2 ,
masochism 2 8 0
288-9
D e n g X i a o p i n g 199
q u e e r struggle 2 2 5
Derrida, J a c q u e s 1 5 8 - 9
resistance 2 6 0 - 6 4
A b r a h a m ' s sacrifice 3 2 1 - 2
sexual difference 2 7 4 - 5
Descartes's withdrawal-into-self 3 4
subjectivity and sexuality 2 5 7 - 9
on H e i d e g g e r 9 - 1 0
ontology versus heauntology 2 3 8
Cabaret (film) 139 p u r e notion o f gift 5 6
Capital ( M a r x ) On the Spirit 9
negation o f negation 7 2 - 3 Descartes, R e n e
Carpenter, J o h n Reply to Six Objections 116
They Live 5 3 - 4 the spectre o f the Cartesian subject
Cassirer, Ernst 27 1-2
Castoriadis, Cornelius universality o f cogito 100
Kant, H e i d e g g e r a n d the abyss o f voluntarism 3 1 9
imagination 2 3 - 4 withdrawal-into-self 3 4
The Celestine Prophecy (Redfield) 3 8 4 - 5 Dialectic of Enlightenment ( A d o r n o and
Class Struggles in France ( M a r x ) 2 1 7 H o r k h e i m e r ) 10, 4 6 , 3 5 9
INDEX 403
Diana, Princess o f Wales 3 2 8 hysteria 2 4 9

D i o g e n e s the Cynic 3 2 4 monstrous otherness 5 2 - 3
Discipline and Punish ( F o u c a u l t ) 2 5 2 Moses and Monotheism 1 6 2 , 3 1 7 - 1 8
Dostoevsky, Fyodor 1 5 0 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
Doyle, A r t h u r C o n a n 5 6 m u r d e r o f the primordial father 3 6 3
Dune (film) 5 6 , 7 7 - 8 , 2 9 9 Oedipus complex 3 1 3 - 1 8
Duns Scotus, J o h a n n e s 3 1 8 pleasure principle 3 6 6
psychic reality 2 7 4
Eastwood, Clint 2 6 6 sexualization 2 8 2 - 3
The Ego and the Id ( F r e u d ) 2 8 9 ' t h r e e wishes' fairy tales 3 0 2
Eighteenth Brumaire ( M a r x ) Totem and Taboo 162, 3 1 5 - 1 7
creation o f history 8 8 Unconscious 2 4 7 - 8
Eisenstein, Sergei 3 3 From Atlantis to the Sphinx (Wilson)
The Elephant Man (film) 5 7 70-71
Eraserhead (film) 5 3 The Full Monty (film) 3 5 1 - 2
F i c h t e , J o h a n n Gottlieb Gates, Bill 3 5 6

subjectivity/zlnitos 4 4 - 5 Little B r o t h e r / E v i l Genius icon
Fields, W.C. 7 4 347-50
The Forbidden Planet (film) 3 0 1 Giddens, A n t h o n y 3 - 4 , 3 3 8
Fosse, B o b Gilliam, T e r r y
Cabaret 139 Brazil 155
Foucault, M i c h e l Goebbels, Joseph 207
disciplinary p r o c e d u r e 371 Goldwyn, S a m u e l 110
Discipline and Punish 2 5 2 G o r b a c h e v , Mikhail 3 2 9
The History of Madness 2 5 7 Gray, J o h n
The History of Sexuality 2 5 2 - 4 Men are from Mars, Women are from
point o f r e f e r e n c e 1 7 4 Venus 2 7 2
potential o f perversions 2 4 7 Greene, Graham
resistance to power 2 6 2 The Potting Shed 1 4 2 - 3
sexuality and power 2 5 1 - 4 Gulag Archipelago (Solzhenitsyn) 2 2 9
strategies without subject 3 4 0 Gymnasialreden ( H e g e l ) 104
use o f pleasures 3 6 6
Frank, A n n e 3 2 3 H a b e r m a s , J u r g e n 8 1 , 1 7 1 , 172
Freud, Sigmund break with A d o r n o and H o r k h e i m e r
analysis o f Sr.hreber 3 5 347
death drive 3 6 , 6 5 - 6 , 1 6 3 , 2 9 4 H e i d e g g e r ' s subjectivity 10
Destiny/drive 3 0 3 H a m m e t t , Dashiell
dream-thoughts and u n c o n s c i o u s The Maltese Falcon 2 0 5 - 6
desires 185 Havel, Vaclav 2 0 5
The Ego and the Id 2 8 9 H e g e l , G e o r g W. F.
first and s e c o n d nature 82 abstract universality 118
helplessness o f the infant 2 8 8 accepts Kant's acosmos 6 0 - 6 1
404 INDEX
H e g e l , G e o r g W . F. (cont.) Hegemony and Socialist Strategy ( L a c l a u

c o n c r e t e universality 9 8 - 1 0 3 , 2 0 1 - 2 a n d Mouffe) 1 2 8
criticism o f Kant's B e y o n d 8 4 - 6 H e i d e g g e r , Martin 1 4 3
curtain over the i n n e r world 3 0 2 analysis o f s c h e m a t i s m 6 1 - 2
d e t e r m i n a t e negation 177 analytic o f Dasein 5 2
eight planets 3 2 4 Being and Time 10, 1 5 - 1 8
epistemology versus ontology 5 5 - 6 being-towards-death 163
evil 150 c l o s u r e / o p e n n e s s o f Being and Time
family 3 4 3 22-4
f r e e d o m as c o n c e i v e d necessity 4 3 - 4 c o n t i n g e n c y o f o f world-experience
Gymnasialreden 1 0 4 65-6
including the form in the c o n t e n t decision a n d c h o i c e 16, 1 8 - 2 0
113 e n g a g e m e n t with Fascism 1 1 - 2 1
Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion An Introduction to Metaphysics 13, 4 8
106 Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics
Lectures on the Philosophy of the World 2 2 - 8 , 29, 31, 46
37 the M o n s t r o u s 4 6 - 5 0
Logic 9 6 relation to p o s t m o d e r n t h o u g h t
lord and b o n d s m a n 2 5 7 - 8 9-11
negation o f negation 7 2 - 7 subjectivity 1, 2 - 3 , 6 2
night o f the world 2, 2 9 - 3 0 , 3 3 - 5 , totalitarianism and subjectivity 10
55 H e l l m a n , Lillian 2 2 2
phallic m e t a p h o r 9 2 H e n r i c h , D i e t e r 10
Phenomenology of Spirit 3 0 - 3 1 , 7 6 , History and Class Consciousness ( L u k a c s )
8 4 - 6 , 96 137
politics 2 3 3 - 4 , 2 3 8 - 9 The History of Madness ( F o u c a u l t )
power a n d resistance 2 5 5 257
q u a d r u p l e logic 7 9 - 8 2 The History of Sexuality ( F o u c a u l t )
r e c o m m e n d e d by L e n i n 149 252-4
relationships between logic a n d H i t c h c o c k , Alfred
metaphysics 8 2 - 6 Vertigo 2 8 6 , 3 0 0
secondary identification 9 0 Hitler, A d o l f 3 8 1 - 2
secrets o f the Egyptians 2 8 4 - 5 Hobbes, Thomas 114
S e l f as S u b s t a n c e 2 3 1 Hoffman, Eva 3 4 0
sexuality 8 3 - 4 , 2 5 3 Hoffmann, E.T.A. 51
stubborn a t t a c h m e n t 1 0 3 - 8 H o r k h e i m e r , Max
subjectivity 7 8 , 1 0 3 b r e a k with H a b e r m a s 3 4 7
substance a n d subject 7 6 , 7 9 , 8 6 - 9 0 c o n s e q u e n c e s o f family structure 3 4 4
Suprasensible's face 196 Dialectic of Enlightenment (with
symbolic expression 371 A d o r n o ) 10, 4 6 , 3 5 9
System der Sittlichkeit 9 4 - 5 s p h e r e o f Kulturindustrie 3 5 8
totalitarianism 192 Hosle, Vittorio 8 2 , 8 6 - 7
universality-in-becoming 9 0 - 9 8 The Hostage ( C l a u d e l ) 3 8 6 - 7
INDEX 405
Husserl, E d m u n d n a t u r e a n d culture 3 6 - 7
criticism o f Being and Time 6 3 - 4 non-traditional metaphysics 1 6 3
notion o f imagination 2 8 - 3 3
I Love Lucy (television) 7 7 - 8 n o u m e n a l and p h e n o m e n a l 1 9 8
'Ideology a n d its P a r a d o x e s ' (Daly) 3 6 4 political Ideals to c o m e 2 3 8 - 9
The Immortal Story (film) 2 8 7 the Real 2 7 6 - 7
An Introduction to Metaphysics schematizes R e a s o n 6 1 - 2
(Heidegger) 13, 49 s e c o n d E n l i g h t e n m e n t praises 3 5 9
self-consciousness 3 0 4
struggle o f ethical acts 3 7 5 - 6
J a m e s o n , F r e d r i c 1 7 1 , 185
subjectivity 4 4 - 6
true Leftists 1 9 - 2 0
J e s u s Christ transcendental principle o f publicity
M a l e b r a n c h e ' s view o f G r a c e 1 1 6 - 1 9 235
modern reinterpretations 3 3 1 - 2 transcendental schematism 175
Truth-Event 1 3 0 , 142, 146 violence o f imagination 4 1 - 3
J o r d a n , Neil Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics
The Crying Game 2 7 1 (Heidegger) 2 2 - 8 , 29,
J u n g , Carl G. 2 7 0 , 2 7 1 31, 46
Kennedy, J o h n F. 2 2 9
Kierkegaard, S 0 r e n 1 1 5 , 1 4 1 - 2
Kafka, Franz
Christianity on side o f modernity
' S i l e n c e o f the S i r e n s ' 3 0 5
211-12 '
The Trial 7 8
sickness unto death 2 9 2 - 3
Kaganovich, L a z a r Moiseyevich 1 9 4
two facets o f duty 321
Kant, I m m a n u e l
K i n g j r , Martin L u t h e r 2 0 3
abstract universality 9 1
Kipling, Rudyard 2 3 6
anti-cosmos 4 6 - 5 0 , 1 5 8
Kris, Ernst 1 0 8 - 9
and B a d i o u 1 6 5 - 7
Critique of Judgement 4 0
Critique of Practical Reason 2 5 Lacan, Jacques
Critique of Pure Reason 31 aims and goals o f drives 8 2
evil 2 alienation a n d identity 3 7 3 - 5
the F r e n c h Revolution 1 3 9 - 4 0 a n a m o r p h i c distortion and reality
fundamental fantasy 5 9 - 6 1 78-9
H e g e l ' s criticism o f a B e y o n d 8 4 - 6 authentic acts 3 7 5 - 6
H e i d e g g e r a n d abyss o f imagination the big O t h e r 87, 2 8 8 , 3 1 4 - 1 5 , 3 3 0
22-8 butterfly dreams 3 3 0
including the form in the c o n t e n t death drive 1 6 0 - 6 1 , 2 9 1 , 2 9 3 - 4 , 3 9 0
113 desire and fantasy 2 9 5 - 9
materialism a n d idealism 3 7 - 8 differences with B a d i o u 3, 1 5 9 - 6 4
metaphysical notion o f the world drives 1 6 0 - 6 1 , 2 8 3 - 4 , 2 8 7 - 8 , 2 9 1 ,
64-6 2 9 3 - 4 , 304, 390
moral Law 4 0 - 4 1 , 4 4 , 4 6 , 2 7 9 - 8 0 , Evil 3 8 2
364-6 fantasy and reality 51
406 INDEX
L a c a n , J a c q u e s (cont.) Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (with

forms o f sexual practice 2 4 9 Mouffe) 1 2 8
the four discourses 3 7 6 - 7 i n f l u e n c e o f Althusser 128
fundamental fantasy and symbolic logic o f equivalence 178
identification 2 6 5 - 9 Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory
and H e g e l 7 6 128
Interpellation/subjectivization radical d e m o c r a c y 1 7 4
258-9 readability 179
' L a derision de la s p h e r e ' 3 0 1 - 2 sexual difference 2 7 2
lamella 1 5 4 - 5 , 1 6 3 subjectivity 1 8 2 - 4
logic o f the signifier 81 Lafargue, Paul
masochism 2 8 1 - 2 Right to Laziness 2 5 2
Master-Signifier 114, 1 5 4 , 159 Lang, Fritz
matrix o f the four discourses 191 Metropolis 3 4 8
monstrous o t h e r n e s s 5 2 - 3 L a p l a n c h e , Jean 2 8 2 , 2 8 4 , 2 8 7
nearness o f object-cause o f desire Lasch, C h r i s t o p h e r 221
363-4 L e Pen, J e a n - M a r i e 2 1 0 , 2 1 5 , 3 5 5 , 381
negative m a g n i t u d e 1 0 7 - 8 L e a d e r , Darian 109, 2 1 7 , 3 6 7 - 8
no sexual relationship 2 8 5 - 6 Lectures on the Philosophy of the World
normality o f a m o d e 35 ( H e g e l ) 37
Oedipus complex 2 8 9 - 9 0 , 3 1 3 - 1 4 Lefort, Claude 192
paternal Law 3 6 7 L e n i n , Vladimir Ilych
perversion versus hysteria 2 4 7 - 8 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
the phallus 3 6 9 - 7 0 , 3 8 3 materialism and idealism 3 7 - 8
the Real 1 6 6 - 7 , 2 7 6 - 7 r e c o m m e n d s H e g e l 149
rebels against philosophy 2 5 0 - 5 1 L e t o u r n e a u , Mary Kay 3 8 1 , 3 8 2 ,
rebirth 2 1 2 385-8
resistance and Butler's criticism Levinson, Barry
261-4 Sphere 301
sexual difference 2 7 3 - 9 Lewinsky, M o n i c a 3 2 9
space between two deaths 146, 1 5 2 - 5 Lincoln, Abraham 5 6
St Paul 149, 1 5 2 - 4 Llosa, Mario Vargas
subject and subjectivization 1 5 9 - 6 0 hooligans 2 0 5
subject's life-world 6 2 Logic ( H e g e l ) 9 6
surplus-enjoyment 105, 106 q u a d r u p l e logic. 7 9 - 8 2
symbolic castration 3 2 2 Lost Highway (film) 2 9 9 - 3 0 0
Truth-Event 162 Luini, B e r n a r d i n o
use o f H e i d e g g e r 1 0 - 1 1 Salome is brought the head of John the
the voice 3 1 9 Baptist 3 0 5
Laclau, E r n e s t o 1 0 0 - 1 0 1 , 1 5 8 , 1 7 2 - 3 Lukacs, G e o r g
gap between Universal and History and Class Consciousness
Particular 1 7 9 - 8 0 137
Hegelian d e t e r m i n a t e negation 177 L u t h e r , Martin 157
INDEX 407
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 McCarthy, J o s e p h 3 2 3
Eraser head 5 3 M e a d , Margaret 7 2 , 2 5 2
Lost Highway 2 9 9 - 3 0 0 The Measure Taken ( B r e c h t ) 3 7 8 - 8 0
pre-ontological p h e n o m e n a a n d Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus
reality 5 6 (Gray) 2 7 2
Twin Peaks 5 6 Metropolis (film) 3 4 8
Lyotard, J e a n - F r a n c o i s 1 7 1 , 172 Miller, Jacques-Alain
sexual difference 2 9 4 - 5
Milosevic, S l o b o d a n 3 3 9 , 3 7 0
M a l e b r a n c h e , Nicolas 100, 3 2 5
Molotov, Vyacheslav Mikhailovich 1 9 4
Grace 1 1 6 - 1 9
Moore, Dr Julie 386
Malinowski, Bronislaw 72, 2 5 2
Morrell, Lady O t t o l i n e 5 4
The Maltese Falcon ( H a m n i e t t ) 2 0 5 - 6
Moses and Monotheism ( F r e u d ) 1 6 2 ,
Mao Zedong 219
317-18
Marx, Groucho 323
M a r x , Karl Mouffe, Charual
Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (with
Capital as vampire 3 5 8
L a c l a u ) 128
Class Struggles in France 2 1 7
Mozart, Wolfgang A m a d e u s 1 0 1 - 2
dismissed by Russell 142
Muller, H e i n e r
Eighteenth Brumaire and creation o f
Mauser 3 7 8 - 8 0
history 8 8
equivalence 231
the e x c e p t i o n is the rule 1 0 3 Negative Dialectics ( A d o r n o ) 8 9
exploitation and h u m a n rights The Net (film) 3 6 4
179-82 Nietzsche, Friedrich
Fascism as an o u t c o m e o f capitalism criticism o f W a g n e r 10
12 On the Genealogy of Morals 107, 108
fetishization 3 4 9 a n d St Paul 1 5 0
H e g e l as essential r e a d i n g 1 4 9 traditional, m o d e r n and p o s t m o d e r n
ideological abstraction 2 7 6 readings 171
living contradiction o f t h e proletariat Will 109 "
225
masculine abstract universality 1 0 0 On the Genealogy of Morals ( N i e t z s c h e )
meta-politics 190, 1 9 1 - 2 107, 108
negation o f negation 7 2 - 3 On the Spirit ( D e r r i d a ) 9
proletariat and working class 137
religious narrative 4 7 St Paul 3 3 1
and the sociologists 2 7 7 - 8 Christianity and psychoanalysis
superseding the market 3 3 9
145-51
from theory to revolution 174
link between Law a n d desire 1 5 2 - 4
universalism 2 2 6
Truth-Event 1 4 2 , 1 4 3
workers as commodity 157
universalism 2 2 6
408 INDEX
Pharaoh (film) 2 6 7 Reve, Karel van h e t 9 9

Phenomenology of Spirit ( H e g e l ) 3 0 - 3 1 , Rhinegold ( W a g n e r ) 3 4 8
76, 8 4 - 6 Right to Laziness (Lafargue) 2 5 2
phallic m e t a p h o r 9 2 - 3 The River with No Bridge ( S u m i i ) 1 8 9
stubborn attachment 103 Rogozinski, J a c o b 3 7 , 4 0 , 4 3 , 4 8
totalitarianism 1 9 2 b e y o n d the abyss 6 1
understanding 9 6 Russell, B e r t r a n d 1 4 2
Philosophical Notebooks ( L e n i n ) 1 4 9 declaration to Lady O t t o l i n e 5 4
Philosophy of the New Music ( A d o r n o ) Russell, Charles
250 The Mask 3 8 9 - 9 0
P i c c o n e , Paul 2 2 1
Pippin, R o b e r t 2 9 0
Sade, Marquis de 3 5 9
Plato
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 ,
e t e r n a l Ideas 2 7 , 1 3 3
127
Supreme Good 48
Divine E x i s t e n c e a n d G r o u n d 8 7 - 8
Timaeus 5 4
Ground o f Existence 55
P o e , E d g a r Allan 155
night o f t h e S e l f 3 4
Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory
p u r e Willing 3 1 8 - 1 9
(Laclau) 128
S c h m i t t , Carl 1 1 3 - 1 6
P o p p e r , Karl 9 9
Schoenberg, Arnold 250
IlPostino (film) 3 2 7
S c h r e b e r , Daniel Paul 1 1 6
The Postman (film) 3 2 7
S c h u m a n n , R o b e r t 102
The Potting Shed ( G r e e n e ) 1 4 2 - 3
Carnival 51
Schurmann, Reiner 9
R a n c i e r e , J a c q u e s 3, 1 5 8 ' S i l e n c e o f t h e S i r e n s ' (Kafka) 3 0 5
a n d Althusser 1 2 7 - 8 S k i n n e r , Q u e n t i n 181
anti-Lyotardian Lyotardian 1 7 2 Sleeping with the Enemy (film) 1 1 1 - 1 2
gap between d e m o c r a c y a n d Solaris (film) 3 0 1
economic exploitation 195 Solzhenitsyn, A l e x a n d e r
mesentente 2 3 4 Gulag trilogy 2 2 9
police structure 2 3 0 , 2 3 2 - 3 , 2 3 5 , Sophocles
237-8 Antigone 2 6 3 - 4
politics 1 8 7 - 8 , 2 0 7 Sphere (film) 3 0 1 - 2
post-politics 2 0 1 , 2 4 8 Stalin, J o s e p h 1 3 2
rebellion o f proletarian masses 1 7 3 repression 2 2 7
totalitarianism 192 show trials 3 2 0 - 2 1
universality 2 2 8 terrors 3 7 8
Rather, Dan 207 totalitarianism 1 9 3 - 4
R a w l s . J o h n 171 States of Injury ( B r o w n ) 7 1 - 2
Redfield, J a m e s Stravinksy, I g o r 2 5 0
The Celestine Prophecy 3 8 4 - 5 Sumii, S u e
Regnault, F r a n c o i s 2 5 0 The River with No Bridge 189
Reply to Six Objections ( D e s c a r t e s ) 1 1 6 System der Sittlichkeit ( H e g e l ) 9 4 - 5
INDEX 409
Tarkovsky, Andrei Vertigo (film) 2 8 6 - 7 , 3 0 0

Solaris 3 0 1
Taylor, Charles 8 7 - 8 , 171
W a g n e r , R i c h a r d 10, 2 9 1 - 2
Teresa, Mother 328 Rhinegold 3 4 8
' T h e s e s on the Philosophy o f History' Watch on the Rhine (film) 2 2 2 - 3
( B e n j a m i n ) 137 Welles, O r s o n
They Live (dim) 53-4 The Immortal Story 2 8 7
Timaeus (Plato) 5 4 Wilcox, Fred
Totem and Taboo ( F r e u d ) 162 The Forbidden Planet 3 0 1
Oedipus complex 3 1 5 - 1 7 Wilson, Colin
The Trial (Kafka) 7 8 From Atlantis to the Sphinx 7 0 - 7 1
Twin Peaks (television) 5 6 Winfrey, O p r a h 3 8 6 , 3 8 8
Under Fire (film) 2 2 2 Yanez (film) 3 7 0

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

(Wo Es War) Slavoj Zizek-The Ticklish Subject - The Absent Centre of Political Ontology-Verso (2000) PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

(Wo Es War) Slavoj Zizek-The Ticklish Subject - The Absent Centre of Political Ontology-Verso (2000) PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

T h e Ticklish

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

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

T y p e s e t by SetSystems L t d , Saffron W a l d e n , Essex

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

In the same series:

Part I T h e 'Night o f the World' 7

1 The Deadlock of Transcendental Imagination, or, Martin Heidegger

2 The Hegelian Ticklish Subject 70

P a r t II T h e Split Universality 125

3 The Politics of Truth, or, Alain Badiou as a Reader of St Paul 127

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?

Enter the Subject - W h y Are Ruling Ideas Not the Ideas o f

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 F r o m S u b j e c t i o n to Subjective Destitution 245

5 Passionate (Dis)Attachments, or, Judith Butler as a Reader of Freud 247

- 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 -

6 Whither Oedipus? 313

T h e T h r e e Fathers - T h e Demise o f Symbolic Efficiency - T h e

. . . 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

This book thus endeavours to reassert the Cartesian subject, whose

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

In h e r careful editing o f m y manuscripts for Verso, Gillian B e a u m o n t

of the argumentation, false a t t r i b u t i o n s a n d r e f e r e n c e s that display my

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

The Deadlock of Transcendental

One o f the enigmatic features o f 'progressive' postmodernist thought,

I believe in the force and the necessity (and t h e r e f o r e in a certain irreversibility)

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 ontolog-

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

L e t us t a k e as o u r starting point Nietzsche's critique o f Wagner: this

mobilization' (but, significantly, never in Communism, which always

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 indicates

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

•' 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

the conservative o n practically everything except the essential, except a

'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

W h y D i d Being and Time R e m a i n Unfinished?

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 ' that

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

transcendental freedom and/or spontaneity i t s e l f is t h u s i n a sense

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

receptivity that characterizes h u m a n finitude: if the subject were to

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

t h e m e r e operation o f the imagination - a blind but indispensable function o f

T h e first thing which must be given to us in o r d e r to achieve the a priori

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

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

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

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

H e r e , H e g e l praises 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

* omable root o f all s u b j e c t i v e activity, as a 'spontaneous' capacity to

j s 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 to i m p o s e o n the sensuous

T h e Passage through Madness

H e g e l e x p l i c i t l y p o s i t s t h i s ' n i g h t o f t h e w o r l d ' as p r e - o n t o l o g i c a l : the

H e r e we m u s t b e c a r e f u l n o t t o m i s s t h e way H e g e l ' s b r e a k w i t h the

The k e y p o i n t is t h u s t h a t t h e p a s s a g e f r o m ' n a t u r e ' t o ' c u l t u r e ' is n o t

It is discipline which prevents man from being t u r n e d aside by his animal