The Pervert's Guide to Ideology (2012) - Slavoj Žižek
This talk, structured as a video essay, uses clips from cinema to analyze how ideology operates, not as a distorting lens imposed from outside but as the spontaneous structure of our enjoyment and social reality. Žižek moves through a series of film readings (They Live, The Sound of Music, A Clockwork Orange, Taxi Driver, Jaws, Titanic, The Dark Knight, Brazil, Brief Encounter, and others) to demonstrate how ideology works through obscene supplements, fantasies, the logic of the couple, and the function of the big Other. The talk culminates in a critique of consumerism, a reinterpretation of Christianity as a radically atheist gesture, and a call for emancipatory politics that demands what appears impossible.
The ideas in it 25
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
Stories he reaches for 14
Works invoked 22
People invoked 28
What it argues
Dialectical moves 11
Claims 28
Quotes 20
“i already am eating. from the trash can all the time. the name of this trash can is ideology.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology as inescapable medium of experience
“the tragedy of our predicament when we are within ideology is that when we think that we escape it, into our dreams at that point we are within ideology.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology penetrates even the unconscious
“ideology is not simply imposed on ourselves. ideology is our spontaneous... relationship to our social world. we in a way enjoy our ideology.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology as enjoyment
“to step out of ideology. it hurts, it's a painful experience. you must force yourself to do it.”Slavoj Žižek · the violence of ideological liberation
“the extreme violence of liberation. you must be forced to be free.”Slavoj Žižek · the coercive structure of emancipation
“enjoyment is not simply enjoyment in pleasure. it's precisely enjoyment in disturbed pleasure. even enjoyment in pain.”Slavoj Žižek · jouissance vs. pleasure
“every ideology has to work. it's never just meaning. it always has to also work as an empty container open to all possible meanings.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology as empty signifier
“fantasies are not just a private matter of individuals. fantasies are the central stuff our ideologies are made of.”Slavoj Žižek · fantasy as the substance of ideology
“it is precisely if there IS God that everything is permitted, to those who perceive themselves as direct instruments of the divine will.”Slavoj Žižek · inversion of the Dostoevskian formula
“the only way really to be an atheist is to go through christianity. christianity is much more atheist than the usual atheism.”Slavoj Žižek · Christianity as radical atheism
“the message of christianity is here radically atheist. it's death of christ is not any kind of redemption... it's simply the disintegration of the god which guarantees the meaning of our lives.”Slavoj Žižek · crucifixion as collapse of the big Other
“we are responsible for our dreams. our dreams stage our desires and our desires are not objective facts. we created them, we sustain them, we are responsible for them.”Slavoj Žižek · responsibility for one's desires
“the first step to freedom is not just to change reality to fit your dreams. it's to change the way you dream.”Slavoj Žižek · emancipation begins in transformation of desire
“how come it is easier for us to imagine the end of all life on earth, an asteroid hitting the planet, than a modest change in our economic order?”Slavoj Žižek · ideological closure of political imagination
“perhaps the time has come to set our possibilities straight and to become realists by way of demanding what appears as impossible in the economic domain.”Slavoj Žižek · emancipatory politics as demanding the impossible
“every revolution... redeems also the past. failed revolutions, all the ghosts as it were the living dead of the past revolution which are roaming around unsatisfied will finally find their home in the new freedom.”Slavoj Žižek · revolution as redemption of past failures
“every effective political, ideological symbol or symptom has to rely on this dimension of petrified enjoyment. of the frozen grimace of an excessive pleasure in pain.”Slavoj Žižek · petrified enjoyment as the basis of ideological power
“capitalism is all the time in crisis. this is precisely why it appears almost indestructible. crisis is not its obstacle, it is what pushes it forwards.”Slavoj Žižek · capitalist crisis as self-reproduction
“i may be freezing. to death. but you will never get rid of me. all the ice in the world. cannot kill a true idea.”Slavoj Žižek · the persistence of the emancipatory idea
“hysteria is much more subversive than perversion. the pervert has no uncertainties, while the hysterical position of doubt is extremely productive.”Slavoj Žižek · hysteria as productive questioning
Transcript 213 turns
i'm giving you a choice. either put on these glasses. or start eating that trash can.
i already am eating. from the trash can all the time. the name of this trash can is ideology. the material force of ideology makes me... not she what i'm effectively eating. it's not only our reality which enslaves us. the tragedy. of our predicament when we are within ideology is that when we think that we escape it, into our dreams at that point we are within ideology. they leave from 19. 88. ich... definitely one of the forgotten masterpieces of the hollywood left. it tells the story of john. now, doc. nada of course in spanish means nothing, a pure subject deprived of all substantial content, a homeless worker in la who drifting around. one day enters into an abandoned church. and finds there a strange box full of sunglasses. and when she put one of them on. walking along. the la streets. he discovered something weird. the dish gl function like critique of ideology. glisch they. allow you to see the real message beneath. all the propaganda, publicity, glits, posters and so on. you see a large publicity board telling you have your holiday of a lifetime and when you put the glasses on, you see just on the white background a gray inscription. we live, so we are told, in a post-ideological society. we are interpolated. that is to say, addressed by social authority. not as subjects who should do their duty. sacrifice themselves. but subjects of pleasures. realize your true potential. be yourself. lead a satisfying life. when you put the glasses on. you she dictatorship in. democracy. it's the invisible order which sustains your apparent freedom. the explanation for the existence of this strange ideology glis is the standard story of the invasion of the body snatchers. humanity is already under the control of aliens.
hey, buddy. you're going pay for that or what? look, buddy. i don't want no house today. either pay for it or put it back.
according to our... common sense. we think that ideology is something blurring, confusing our straight view. ideology should be. glasses which distort our view and the critique of ideology should be the opposite. like you take off the glasses so that you can finally see the way things really are. this precisely, and here the pessimism of the film of belief is well justified, this precisely is the ultimate illusion. ideology is not simply imposed on ourselves. ideology is our spontaneous... relationship 2. our social world, how we perceive its meaning and so on and so on. we in a way enjoy our ideology. all right. to step out of ideology. it hurts, it's a painful experience. you must force yourself to do it. this is rendered in a wonderful way with a further scene in the film where john nada tries to force his best friend. john armitage to also put the glasses on.
i don't want to fight you. come on. i don't want to fight you. stop us! no!!
and it's the weirdest scene in the film. the fight takes eight, nine minutes. it may appear irrational because why does this guy... reject so violently to put the glasses on. it is as if he is well aware that spontaneously he lives in a lie that the glasses will make him see the truth but that this truth can be painful, can shatter many of your uh illusions. this is a paradox we have to accept.
oh glasses! what!
the extreme violence of liberation. you must be forced to be free. if you trust simply your spontaneous sense of well-being or whatever, you will never get free. block! freedom! hch! the basic insight of psychoanalysis is to distinguish between. enjoyment. and simple. pleasures. they are not the same. enjoyment. ich precisely enjoyment in disturbed pleasure. even enjoyment in pain. and this excessive factor. disturbs the apparently simple relationship between. duty and pleasures. this is also a space where ideology up to and especially religious ideology. operate. this brings me to maybe my favorite example. the great. classical hollywood film. the sound. of music. we all know. it's the story of. an nun. who is? two. alive with too much. energy ultimately sexual energy to be constrained to the role of a nun.
oh. oh, reverend mother, i'm so sorry. i just couldn't help myself. the gates were open and the hills were beckoning. and before i.
i haven't summoned you here for apologies.
oh please mother, do let me ask for forgiveness. one, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, three, step together. now.
so, mother superior sends her to the von trepp family where she takes care of the children.
under. we, we'll have to practice.
do allow me,. and at the same time, of course, falls in love with the baron. fon trepp. and maria gets too disturbed by it. cannot control it. returns to the convent.
oh there were times when we would look at each other. oh mother, i could hardly breathe. did you let him see how you felt? if i did, i didn't know it. that's what's been torturing me. i was there on god's errand.
no wonder that in old communist yugoslavia, where i saw this film for the first time. exactly! this scene, or more precisely, the song which follows this strange hedonist, if you want, advice from the mother superior. go back, seduce the guy, follow this path, do not betray your desire. namely. the song which begins with climb every mountain. the song which is an almost embarrassing display and affirmation of desire. this three minutes. where. censored.
climb every mountain. s. high and low. oh. we. mm. every part.
i think the censor was a very intelligent man. she knew. as probably an atheist communist. where? the power of attraction of catholic religion. ris.
till you find your dream. a dream.
if you read intelligent catholic propagandists and if you really try to discern what deal are they offering you, it's not to prohibit, in this case, sexual pleasures. it's a much more cynical contract, as it were, between the church. as an institution and the believer traveled with in this case, sexual desires. it is this hidden, obscene permission that you get. you are covered by the divine big otherer. you can do whatever you want. enjoy. a dream that will need this obscene contract does not belong to christianity as such. it belongs to catholic church. as an institution. it is the logic of institution. et. beautifulish. this is. again, a key to the functioning of ideology. not only the explicit message. renounce, suffer and so on but the true hidden message. pretend to renounce and you can. get it on. might. psychoanalytic friends are telling me that typically today, patients who come. to the. anal to resolve their problems. feel guilty, not. because of excessive... pleasures. not because they indulged in pleasures which go against their sense of duty or morality or whatsoever. on the contrary, they feel guilty for not. enjoying enough for not being able to enjoy. oh my god. one is thirsty in the desert and what to drink? go. the perfect commodity. why? it was already marx who long ago emphasized that a commodity is never just a simple object. that we buy and consume. a commodity isn't. object full of. theological, even metaphysical. nice fish. its presence always reflects an invisible transcendence. the classical publicity for coke. quite openly refresh. to this. absent invisible quality. coke is the real thing, or coke, that's it. what is that eat? the real fig. it's not just... another. positif. property of coke, something that can be described or pinpointed through chemical analysis is that mysterious something more the undescribable excess which is... the object cause of my desire. thank. in our postmodern, however we call them societies. we are obliged to enjoy. enjoyment becomes a kind of a weird, perverted duty. . . the paradox of coke is that. you are thirsty, you drink it, but as everyone knows, the more you drink it, the more thirsty you get. a desire. ich never simply... the desire for a certain thing it's always also a desire for desire itself a desire. to continue to desire, perhaps the ultimate horror. of a desire. ich. to be fully. filled in met so that i desire no longer. the ultimate melancholic experience is the experience of a loss of desire itself. it's not that. in some return to an a previous era of natural consumation where we got rid of this excess and were only consuming for actual needs like you were thirsty, you drank water and so on. we cannot return to that. the excess is with us forever. so let's have a drink of coke. it's getting warm. it's no longer the real coke, and that's the problem. you know, this passage from... sublime to excremental dimension. when it's cold properly served it has a certain attraction. all of a sudden this can change into shit. it's the elementary dialectics of commodities. we are not talking about objective... factual properties of a commodity. we are talking only here about that elusive surplus. kinder surprise egg. a quite astonishing commodity. the surprise of the. kinder surprise egg. ich dead. this excessive object. the cause of your desire is here materialized in the guise of an object. a plastic toy which fills in the inner void. of the chocolate egg. the whole delicate balance is between these two dimensions what you bought the chocolate egg and. the surplus probably made in some chinese gulac or whatever, the surplus that you get for free. i don't think that. the chocolate. frame. ich hier. just two. send you on a deeper voyage towards the inner treasure,, what plato calls the agalma. which makes you a worthy person, which makes a commodity. the desirable commodity, i think, is the other way around. we should aim at the higher goal. the gold in the middle of an object. precisely in order to be able to enjoy the surface. this is what this... the anti-metaphysical lesson. which is difficult to. accept. what does this? famous oath to joy stand for. it's usually perceived as a kind of an ode to humanity as such, to the brotherhood and freedom of all people. and what strikes the eye here is the universal adaptability of this well-known melody. it can be used by political movements which are totally opposed to each other. in nazi germany, it was widely used to celebrate great public events. in soviet union, beethoven was lionized and the ode to joy was performed almost as a kind of a communist song. in china, during the time of the great cultural revolution. when almost all western music was prohibited, the ninth symphony was accepted. it was allowed to play it as a piece of progressive bourgeois music. at the extreme. right. in south rhodesia before it became zimbabwe. it proclaimed independence to be able to postpone the abolishment of apartheid. there for those couple of years of independent south rhodesia. again, the melody of the oath to joy with changed lyrics of course was the anthem of the country.
v la república popular de democr.
opposite end. buen, abima el guzmzman, presidente gonzalo. the leader of sendero luminoso. the shining path. the extreme leftist guerrilla in peru. when he was asked by a journalist which piece of music is his favorite, he claimed again beethoven's 9 symphony. o to joy. when germies were still divided. and their team. was appearing together at olympics. when one of the germans won golden medal. again game, ode to joy was played instead of either east or west german national anthem. and even now, today, the to joy is the unofficial anthem of european union. so it's truly that. we can imagine a kind of a perverse scene of universal fraternity where osama bin laden is embracing president bush, saddam is embracing fidel castro, white racist is embracing mao zedong and all together they sing out to joy. it works. and. dich ichau. every ideology has to work. it's never just meaning. it always has to. also work as an empty container open to all possible meanings. it's you know that gut feeling that we feel. when we experience something pathetic and we say, oh my god, i'm so moved, there is something so deep. but you never know what this depth is. it's a void. now, of course, there is a catch here. the catch is that of course this neutrality of a frame is never as neutral as it appears. here, i think... the perspective of alex from the clockwork orange enters.
we were all feeling a bit shagged and fagged and fashed. it having been an evening of some small energy expenditure, oh my brothers. so we got rid of the auto and stopped off at the kva nightcap.
why is alex this ultimate? cynical. delinente. the hero of... clockwork orange, why is he so fascinated? overwhelmed. when he sees the lady singing beethoven's ode to joy.
it was like for a moment, oh my brothers, some great bird had flown into the milk. and i felt all the lanky little hairs on my plot. standing endwise. and the shivers crawling up like slow melanky lizards. and then down again. because i knew what she saying. it was a bit from the glorious ninth by ludwig van. yeah
whenever an ideological text says, all humanity unite in brotherhood, joy and so on, you should always ask, okay, okay, okay, but are these all, really all, or is someone excluded? i think alex, the delinquent from clockwork orange, identifies with this place of exclusion. and the great genius of beethoven is that he literally staged this exclusion. all of a sudden the whole tone changes into a kind of a carnealesque rhythm. it's no longer this sublime beauty.
excuse me, brother! i ordered this two weeks ago, can you see if it's arrived yet, please?
just a minute.
we hear this vulgar music precisely when alex enters a shopping arcade and we can see from his movements that now he feels at home. he's like fish in the water.
pardon me, ladies.
beethoven is not a cheap celebrator of the brotherhood of humanity and so on, we are one big happy family enjoying freedom, dignity and so on.
enjoying that, are you, my darling?
the first part, which is falsely celebrated today, you hear it in all official events, is clearly identified with beethethoven as ideology. and then the second part tells the true story of that which disturbs the official ideology and of the failure of the official ideology to constrain it, to tame it. this is why... beethoven was doing something which may appear difficult to do. he was already in a purely musical work practicing critique of ideology. if the classical ideology. function in the way designated by marx in his nice formula from capital volume 1, sie wissen nicht aber sie es, they don't know what they are doing, but they are nonetheless doing it, cynical ideology functions in the mode of i know very well what i'm doing, but i'm still nonetheless doing it. this paradoxical constellation is staged in a beautiful way. in the famous song officer krrapke, in bernstein's and song, they are never what they appear to be. cynical, brutal, delinquents. they always have a tiny private dream. this dream can be many things. it can even be something quite ordinary. let's take the english riots of august 2011. the standard liberal explanation really sounds like a repetition of officer krrapke song. we cannot just condemn these riots as delinquent vandalism. you have to see how these people live in practically ghettos, isolated communities, no proper family life, no proper education. they don't even have a prospect of a regular employment. but this is not enough. because man is not simply a product of objective circumstances.
it,.
we all have this margin of freedom. in deciding how we subjectivize these objective circumstances which of course determine us. how we. react to them by constructing our own universe. the conservative solution is we need more police, we need courts which pass severe judgments. i think this solution is too simple. if one listened closely to some of david cameron's statements, it looked as if, okay, they are beating people, burning houses, but the truly horrible thing is that they were taking objects without paying for them., the ultimate sin that we can imagine. in a very limited way. cameron was right. there was no ideological justification. it is the reaction of people who are totally caught into the predominant ideology but have no ways to realize what this ideology demands of them. so, it's a kind of a wild acting out. within this ideological space of consumerism. even if we are dealing with apparently totally non-ideological brutality, i just want to burn houses to get objects. it is the result of a very specific social and ideological constellation. where big ideology striving for justice, equality, etc. disintegrates. the only functioning ideology is pure consumerism and then no wonder what you get as a form of protest. every violent acting out is a sign that there is something you are not able to put into words. even the most brutal violence is the enacting of a certain. symbolic. deadlock. the great thing about the taxi driver. is dead. brings this brutal outburst of violence to its radical suicidal. they management. we are not dealing here with something which simply concerns the fragile. psychology. over... distorted person what trevis in taxi driver is it has something to do with ideology.
listen, you fuckers, you screwheads, here is a man who would not take it anymore.
who would not let listen you fuckers, you screwheads. here is a man who would not take it anymore. a man who stood up against the scum, the cuntunts, the dogs, the filth, the shit. here is someone who stood up.
in the taxi driver, travis, the hero, is bothered by the young prostitute played by jodie foster. what bothers him are, of course, as is always the case, precisely his fantasies, fantasies of her victimhood, of her hidden pleasures. and fantasies are not just a private matter of individuals. fantasies are the central stuff our ideologies are made of.
don't look at him.
fantasy is in psychoanalytic perspective fundamentally a lie. not a lie in the sense that it's just a fantasy but not a reality, but a lie in the sense that fantasy covers up a certain gap. inconsistency. when things are blurred, when we cannot really get to know things, fantasy provides an easy answer. the usual. mode of fantasy is to construct a scene, not a scene where i get what i desire, but a scene in which i imagine myself as desired by others. taxi driver is an unacknowledged remake of perhaps the greatest of john ford's westerns his late classique. the searchers. i take many. scouts. serano. in both films, the hero tries to save a young woman who is perceived as a victim of brutal abuse. in the searchers. the young natalie wood was kidnapped and lived for a couple of years as the wife of an indian chief. in taxi driver, the young jodie foster is controlled by a ruthless pimp.
you walk out with those fucking creeps and lowlifes and degenerates out on the street and you sell your little pussy for nothing, man. for some low-life pimp. stands in a hall. i'm square. you're the one that's square, man. i don't go screwing fuck with a bunch of killers and junkies the way you do.
the task is always to save the perceived vict frank. but what really drives this violence of the hero is a deep suspicion that the victim is not simply a victim, that the victim effectively in a perverted way enjoys or participates in what appears as her victimhood so that, to put it very simply, she doesn't want to be redeemed. she resists it. and this is the big problem, if i make an immediate jump to the political dimension, the big problem of american military interventions, especially so-called humanitarian interventions. from iraq to already vietnam, eh... half a century ago we try to help. them but what if they really did not want our help? the result of this debilitating deadlock can only be an outburst of violence. we do get towards the end of the film. travis exploding. you a, killing spree. killing. the pimps, all the people around the young girl. violence is never just abstract. violence. it's a kind of... brutal intervention in the real. to cover up a certain impotence concerning what we may call cognitive mapping you lack a clear. picture of what's going on. where are we? exactly the same holds for the terrifying outburst of violence.
font.
anders b breivik's murderous spree in oslo, exploding a bomb in front of the government building and then killing dozens of young members of the social democratic party in an island close to oslo.
on fait.
many commentators try to dismiss this as a clear case of personal insanity. but i think breik's manifesto is well worth reading. it is. palpably clear there. how? this violence that brik not only theorized about, but also enacted is a. reaction to the impenetrability and confusion of global capital. it's exactly like travis bickles. uh. killing spree at the end of the ti. driver. when he is there barely alive, he symbolically with his fingers points a gun at his own head. clear sign that all this violence was basically suicidal. she was on the right path in a way, travis in the taxi driver. you should have the outburst of violence, and you should direct it at yourself. but in a very specific way. at what in yourself? change you ties you to the ruling ideology.
i! rip it!! perfect.
in stepven... spielbergs, joss. a shark. starts to attack. people on the beach. what does this attack? mean. what does the shark stand? four. there were different, even mutually exclusive answers to this question. on the one hand, some critics claim that obviously the shark stands for the foreign threat to ordinary americans. the shark is a metaphor for either natural disaster, storms, or immigrants threatening united states citizens and so on. on the other hand, it's interesting to note that fidel castro, who loves the film, once said that for him it was obvious that joss is kind of a leftist, marxist film and that the shark is a metaphor for brutal big capital exploiting ordinary. americans. so weak is the right answer. i claim none of them and at the same time all of them. ordinary americans, as ordinary people in all countries, have a multitude of fears. we fear all kinds of things. we fear. maybe immigrants or people whom we perceive as lower than ourselves attacking us, robbing us. we fear people raping our children. we fear natural disasters, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis. we fear corrupted politicians, we fear big companies which can basically do with us whatever they want. the function. of the shark is to unite all these fears so that we can in a way trade all these fears for one fear alone. in this. way, our experience of reality gets much simpler. why am i mentioning this? because isn't it that? for example. the most extreme case of ideology may in the history of humanity. the nazi fascist antiemitism. work precisely in the same way. imagine an ordinary german. citizen in the late 20s, early 30s. his situation is in an abstract way the same as that of a small child. he's totally perplexed. social authority, symbolic order is telling him you are a german, worker, banker, whatever. but nothing functions. what does society want from him? why is everything going wrong? the way he perceives the situation is that newspapers lied to him, he lost his work. because of inflation he lost all his all his money in the bank, he his moral degradation and so on. so what's the meaning of this all? the original fascist dream is... to, of course, as a dream of every ideology, to have a cake and to eat it. as it was often pointed out, fascism is at its most elementary, a conservative revolution. revolution, economic development, modern industry, yes, but a revolution which would nonetheless maintain or even reassert a traditional hierarchical society. a society which is modern, efficient, but at the same time controlled by hierarchic values with no class or other antagonisms. now. they have a problem here. the fascists. but. antagonism. class struggle and other tensions. is something inherent to capitalism. modernization, industrialization, as we know from the history of capitalism, means disintegration of old, stable relations. it means social conflicts. instability is. the way capitalism functions. so how to solve this problem?. you need to generate an ideological... narratif. which explains how things went wrong in a society not as the result of the inherent tensions in the development of this society, but as the result of a foreign intruder. things were okay till juice penetrated our social body. the way to restore the health of our social body is to eliminate the truth. it's the same operation. esweet. the shark in josh. you have a multitude of fears and this multiplicity of fears confuses you like you simply don't know what's the meaning of all this confusion. and you replace this confused multitude with one clear figure. the jew and
everything becomes clear. the search for cuts in the social security provision to lone parent families in part spurred this report. the social security department fears that the accelerating budget for single mothers on benefits could reach nearly £5 billion by the end of the decade. but the issue of the lone parent has increasingly been seen as the heart of john major's back to basics crusade. remember, i think around
two, three decades ago when the prime minister of united kingdom was john major, there was a kind of ideological campaign to return to morality and so on and all the evils of society. where? embodied in the conservative narrative in the figure of eh. unemployed single mother like there is violence in our suburbs of course because single unemployed mothers cannot take care of their of their children, don't properly educate them and so on. we have... lack in our budget, not enough money of course because we have to support unwed single mothers and so on and so on. in an ideological edifice, you need some pseudo-concrete image like this to fixate your imagination. and then this image can mobilize us. imagine ideology as a kind of a... filter. a frame? so that if you look at the same ordinary reality through that frame. everything changes. in what sense? it's not that the frame actually adds anything. it's just that the frame opens the abyss of suspicion.
freilich wandeln sie ihr äußeres, wenn sie von der polnischen nstätte in die reiche welt hinausgelangen.
if we look at the anti-semitic image of the jew, it's crucial to notice how contradictory this figure of the jew is.
der relativitätsjude einstein. wer seinen deutschen hass hinter einer obskuren pseudowissenschaft versteckte. der jude kestenberg. betreute im preußischen kultusministerium die deutsche musik.
jews are at the same time extra-intellectual, like mathematicians, whatever. and vulgar.
auf deutsch gesagt, die jüdischen behausungen sind unsauber und verwahrlost.
not washing regularly.
der jüde schelin wurde bei seinem besuch in berlin von einer begeisterten menge begrüßt.
seducing innocent girls all the time and so on and so on.
es lässt sich nicht leugnen, ein teil des deutschen volkes applaudierte damals ahnungslos den zugewanderten juden. den todfreinden seiner rasse. wie war das möglich? natürlich wissen sich diese ghett-juden zunächst noch nicht richtig in den sauberen europäischen anzügen zu bewegen. etwas besser können es diese berliner juden. ihhrre väter und großväter. haben zwar auch noch im ghetto gelebt. aber davon merkt man nun äußerlich nichts mehr. hier in der zweiten und dritten generation. hat die assimilation ihren höhepunkt erreicht. in allen äußerlichkeiten versuchen sie, es dem gastvolk gleichzutun. und instinctlose per. lassen sie von dieser mimikry täuschen? b betrachten sie tatsächlich als ihresgleichen. darin liegt die ungeheure gefahr. denn auch diese assimilierten juden. bleiben immer fremdkörper im organismus ihres gastvolkes. so sehr sie ihn äußerlich ähnlich sehen mögen.
this is typical for racism. you try to imagine how the other enjoys all the secret orgies or whatever because in racism the other is not simply an enemy. usually it is also. invested with. some specific perverse enjoyment or in an inverted way, the other can be someone who tries to steal from us our enjoyment. to disturb, as we usually put it, our way of life. we should be here. very precise. not to fall into the usual trap of disqualifying all elements out of which the nazi ideological edifice is composed. to disqualify all them as proto-fascists. we should never forget that the large majority of these elements which we today associate we. fascism were taken from. the workers moved.
aye! i match tomato!
yeah. this idea of large. numbers of people marching together, this idea of strict bodily. discipline our duty. the nazis. directly took this over from social democracy. from the left. let me just take some other central concepts of the nazi worldview. the solidarity of the people. my god, there is nothing bad in this notion as such. the problem is solidarity to what kind of people? if by people you mean... volksgemeinschaft, the organic community of people, were then the enemy ich. automatically. the foreign intruder. in this case, we are in natism. the crucial thing is to locate ideology where it belongs. let's take a clear example. the well-known song tomorrow belongs to me from the film cabaret.
yeah. always hammer ivonne. the stag in the forest runs free.
some of my friends, after seeing the film bob fosis's cabaret, thought that after they heard this song, they finally understood what, at its deepest, as to its emotional impact, what fascism is. but i think this precisely is the mistake to be avoided. this song is a rather ordinary, popular song. incidentally, it was composed while they were shooting the movie by a jewish couple. nice irony. if you look not only at the music, at the way it is sung, but even at the words, awakening of a nation, tomorrow belongs to me, one can well imagine with a slight change of words, radically leftist communist song.
lots soon says always.
oh. !
ah.
i'm!
the german hard rock band rammstein. are often accused of flirting, playing with the nazi militaristic iconography. but if one observes closely their show, one can see very nicely what they are doing. exemplararily in one of their best-known songs, re reiche. the minimal elements. of the nazi ideology enacted by rammstein are something like pure elements of libidinal investment. enjoyment has to be, as it were, condensed in some minimal ticks, gestures which do not have any precise ideological meaning. what rstein does? is it liberates these elements from their nazi articulations. it allows us to enjoy them in their free ideological state. the way to fight nazism is to enjoy these elements. ridiculous as they may appear. by suspending the nazi horizon of meaning. this way. you undermine nxism from within. so how does nonetheless ideology do this? how dash it! articulate. pre-ideological elements. these elements can also be seen as a kind of a... bright. the way ideology pays us to seduce us into its edifice. these bribes can be purely libidinal bribes, all those sticks which are condensed enjoyment, or they can be explicit discursive elements like notions of solidarity, uh... of collective discipline struggle. for one's destiny and so on and so on. all this in itself are free floating elements which open themselves to. different ideological fields. lectern to. the high point of our consumerism. let me. they a drink. ste. some of it starbucks coffee. i'm. regularly. drinking it. i must admit it. but are we aware? death. when we buy a cappuccino from starbucks, we also buy quite a lot of ideology. which ideology? you know, when you enter a starbucks store, it's usually always displayed in some posters their message, which is, yes, our cappuccino is more expensive than others, but... and then comes the story. we give 1% of all our income to some guatemala children to keep them healthy, for the water supply, for some sahara farmers, or to save the forests, to enable organic growing on coffee, whatever, whatever. now, i admire the ingenuityiosity of this solution. in the old days, pure simple consumerism. you bought a product and then you felt bad. my god, i'm just a consumerist while people are starving in africa. so the idea was you had to do something to counteract your pure destructive consumerism. for example, i don't know, you contribute to charity and so on. what starbucks enables you is to be a consumerist? and. be a consumerist without any bad conscience because the price for the countermeasure for fighting consumerism is already included into the price of a commodity. like you pay a little bit more and you are not just a consumerist but you do also your duty towards environment, the poor starving people in africa and so on and so on. it's i think the ultimate form of consumerism. we should not simply oppose. a principled life dedicated to. duty and. enjoying our small. pleasures. let's take today's show. capitalism. we have. on the one hand. the demands of the circulation of the capital. which... push us towards profit making, expansion. exploitation and destruction of nature and on the other hand, ecological demands. let's think about our posterity and about our own survival let's take care of nature. and so on. in this opposition between ruthless pursuit of capitalist expansion. and ecological awareness. duty, a strange, perverted duty, of course. duty. is on the side of capitalism. es. perspicuous analysts. note that. capitalism has a strange religious structure. it is. propelled by this absolute demand. capital gestu. circulate, to reproduce itself, to expand, to multiply itself. and for this goal, anything can be sacrificed, up to our lives. up to nature and so on here we have a strange unconditional injunction and a true capitalist is a miser who is ready to sacrifice everything for this perverted duty. what we see here. in mojave desert, at this resting place for abandoned planes is the other side of capitalist dynamics. capitalism is all the time in crisis. this is precisely why it appears almost indestructible. crisis is not its obstacle, it is what pushes it forwards towards permanent self-revolutionizing, permanent extended self-reproduction. always new products, the other invisible side of it is waste. tremendous amount of waste. we shouldn't. react. to this heaps of waste by trying to somehow get rid of it. maybe. the first thing to do is to accept this waste. to accept. the there are. things out there which serve nothing. to break out of this eternal cycle of functioning. the german philosopher walter benjamin said something very deep. he said that. we experience history. what does it mean for us to be historical beings? not when we are engaged in things, when things move. only when we chi. this, again, rest, waste of culture being half retaken by nature, at that point we get an intuition of what history means. maybe this also accounts for the redemptive value of post-catastrophic movies. like i am legend and so on. we see the devastated human environment, half-empty factories, machines falling apart, half-empty stores. what we experience at this moment the psychoanalytic term for it would have been the inertia of the real, this mute presence beyond meaning. what moments like confronting planes here in mojave desert bring to us is maybe a chance for an authentic passive experience. maybe without this properly artistic moment of authentic passivity, nothing new can emerge. maybe something new only emerges through the failure. the suspension of proper functioning of the... existing network of our life work. where we are. maybe this is what we need. more than ever today. what does the wreck of the titanic stand for? we all know the standard reading. of the impact of the sinking of the titanic. not only. the film but the real accident. this sinking had such an impact. because it happened in a society at that point, still in all its glitch and glory. unaware of the decay that awaited it in the near future. the world wars and so on. but there is something in excess of this entire field of meanings, which is the very fascinating presence of the ruin of the titanic at the bottom of the ocean. when james cameron organized. a trip to the real wreck of titanic. he also made a similar remark. when the explorers approached the wreck. they had this almost metaphysical experience that they are approaching a forbidden territory in which the sacred and the obscene overlap.
yeah, roger that. okay, drop down and go into the first class gangway door. i want you guys work the d-de.
every effective political, ideological symbol or symptom. has to rely on this dimension of petrified enjoyment. of the frozen grimace of an excessive pleasure in pain. what am i doing here? in the middle of the ocean. alone in a boat. surrounded by frozen corpses. i'm in a machine from. james cameron's. titananic. which is... the supreme case of ideology in recent hollywood. white. because of the immanent tension. to the story of the film.
of. i just go with.
don we have at least three levels. first, there is what people ironically refer to as james cameron's hollywood. marxism. p this. ridiculous! fake sympathy with lower classes. up there, first class passengers, they are mostly all evil, egotistic. you you know i don't like that robes.
thank.
embodied in kate wishland's fiancé played by billy zane
do you say?
this whole narrative is sustained by a much more reactionary myth.
those guys's faces.
we should ask what role does the iceberg hitting the ship play in. the development of the love story.
the ship docks. i'm getting off with you.
this is crazy.
i know.
my claim is here a slightly cynical one. this would have been the true catastrophe. imagine how. maybe after two, three weeks of intense checks in new york. the love affair would somehow fade away.
as a paying customer. i expect to get what i want.
kate winchlet is. an upper cl. girl in psychological. distressed. confused her ego is in shack. and the function of leonardo dicaprio. the bed. the couch. is simply dead. he helps her too. ri. constitute her ego. lie down. her self-image. literally, he dro. cut tell me when it looks right. put your arm back the way it was. it's really a new version of one of the old favorite imperialist myths. the idea being that when the upper class people lose their vitality. they need a contact with lower classes. basically, ruthlessly. exploiting them. in a vampire-like way, as it were sucking from them the life energy. revitalize they can join their secluded upper class life.
my heart was pounding the whole time. it was the most erotic moment of my life. up until then.
the the sheep. hits the iceberg. not immediately after. sex. when the couple goes up to the open space and decide to stay together. yeah, look at this. you know. often in history. the event which may appear as a catastrophe. saves persons or an idea, elevating it into a myth. remember the intervention of the soviet army and other warsaw pact armies in 1968 in czechoslovakia. to strangle the so called. prague spring. the attempt of the czech democratic commun to introduce a more human-faced socialism. usually we perceive this brutal soviet intervention as something that destroyed. the brief dream of prague spring. i think it saved the dream. either czechoslovakia would have turned into an ordinary liberal capitalist state or at a certain point, which was usually the fate of reformist communists, the communist in power. would be obliged to set a certain limit. okay, you had your fun, your freedom. that's enough. now we again... define. the limit. again. the paradox is that precisely the soviet intervention saved the dream of the possibility of another communism and so on and so on. so here again, through the temporal catastrophe. we have a love story which... is as it were... redeemed in its idea, saved for eternity. we can ultimately read the catastrophe as a desperate maneuver to save the illusion of eternal love. we can see how ideology works effectively here. we have two superficial levels. all the fascination of the accident. then the last story but all this which is quite acceptable for our liberal progressive minds all this is just até. something too. lower our attention. threshold as it were to open us. up. to be ready to accept the true conserv. message. off. rich people having the right to revitalize themselves by ruthlessly appropriating the vitality. of the poor people.
there's nothing else sir.
there is a wonderful detail which tells everything. when kate winslet notices that leonardo dicaprio is dead. she, of course, starts to shout, i will never let go, i'll never let go, while at the same moment i'll never let go. she. pushes him off. he is what we may call ironically a vanishing mediator. this logic of the production of a couple. has a long history. hollywood. whatever the story is about, it may be about the end of the world an asteroid. threatening the very survival of humanity or a great war, whatever. as a rule we always have a couple who... link is threatened and who chau. through this ordeal. at the end. happily. gets together. this logic does not hold only for hollywood films.
j me. et himmlera. what a great start.
in the late 40s. in soviet union they produced arguably one of the most expensive films of all times, the fall of berlin. the chronicle of the second world war from the soviet standpoint. and it's incredible how closely this film also follows the logic of the production of a couple. the story begins just before the german attack on soviet union when a model worker who is in love with a local girl battis. too shy. to propose to her is called to moscow. to get a medal from comrade stalin. there stalin notices his confusion, distress, and stalin gives him some advice, which poetry to quote, and so on. this part unfortunately was lost. because in the background of this scene, there was barrier. a soviet politician who, after stalin's death, became a non-person. was shot as a traitor. but we know from the screenplay what was there. if stalin gives you a love advice, it has to succeed. so, the couple embraces.
a! you.
he carries her probably to make love. at that very moment, there is... the triumphant violent entrance of the obstacle. german planes come dropping bombs.
m! natasha! not! me.
the girl is taken prisoner.
it rab! i cre que que.
the boy, of course, joins the red army and we follow him through all the great battles. the idea being that in a deeper logic of the film, what these battles were about was really to recreate the couple. the boy has to get his girl. this is what happens at the end, but in a very strange way which reconfirms stalin's role as the supreme divine matchmaker. yeah. the scene itself, stalin immersing himself into a crowd of ordinary people, never happened. stalin was totally paranoid about flying. about taking planes. but nonetheless, when he saw this she, he cried.
daris! c'est vo ! m pr... élui pagadu. that germans skin fascism.
of course, he himself, as we know, wrote. the lines. when the couple encounters each other, the girl, first she stalin. then she turns around and, surprised, sees her lover for whom she was waiting all the time of the war. so it's only through the presence of stalin that the couple gets reunited.
you? i! natasha!
this is how ideology works. not the explicit ideology of the film, which we hear at the end, stalin saying now all the free people will enjoy peace and so on and so on. but precisely ideology at its more fundamental. this apparently totally subordinated motive. unimportant in itself. the story of a couple, this is what ich the key element which holds the entire film. together that small surplus element which attracts us, which... maintains our attention. this is how ideology works.
nice. thank you. cl. all. so that your action is beautiful.
and charlie. we usually think that military discipline is just a matter of mindlessly following orders, obeying the rules. you don't think you do what is your duty. it's not as simple as that. if we do this, we just become machines. there has to be something more. this more can have two basic forms. the first more benign form is an ironic distance. best epitomized by the well-known movie and tv series mesh. where the military doctors are involved in sexual escapades. make jokes all the time. some people took robert altman's movie marsh even as a kind of an anti-militaristic, satiric product. but it's not. we should always bear in mind that these soldiers with all their practical jokes, making fun of their superiors and so on, operated perfectly as soldiers. they did their duty. this one for you,. much more ominous is... a kind of op! supplement, dude. pure military discipline. in practically all movies about the us marines, the best known embodiment of this obscenity are marching trench. a mixture of nonsense.
!
and obscenity.
good.
this is not undermining, making fun of military discipline. it is its innermost constituent.
okay.
you take this. opim! supplement. away, and. military machine st! working.
well. no shit. what have we got here? a fucking comedian, private joker. i admire your honesty. hell, i like you. you can come over to my house and fuck my sister. really. you little scumb! i got your name! i got your ass! you will not laugh. you will not cry. you will learn by the numbers. i will teach you. now get up. get on your feet. you at best unfuck yourself or i will unscrew your head and shut down your neck! sir, yes sir! private joker, why did you join my beloved corps?
i think that the drill sergeant. the way it is. plate. in an. exemplary way in shley cububrick, full metal jacket. the drill sergeant he rather a tragic figure. i always like to imagine him as a person who, after his work, returns home, is quite decent and so on.
my this.
all his obscene shouting is just a show put on, not so much to impress ordinary soldiers whom he is training as to bribe them with bits of enjoyment.
esmer!
it's not just a question of these obscenities which sustains the military machinery. it's another more general rule which holds for military communities but. even more, i would say, for all. human communities, from the largest nations, ethnic groups up to small university departments and so on. you don't only have explicit rules. you always, in order to become part of a community, you need some implicit unwritten rules. which are never publicly recognized but are absolutely crucial as the point of the identification of a group. in the uk. everyone knows about the obscene unwritten rituals which regulate life in public schools.
thank thank you, finchley. i want to see your wips in my study after break bright. oh, how is india? enjoy it? jolly good. br.
i night just think about lindsay anderson's classic if. the public life is democratic, we have professors who interact with their pupils, nice atmosphere, teaching, friendship, spirit of cooperation. but then we all know what happens. beneath the shadowfish. older pupils torturing, sexually abusing the younger, this same mixture of obscenity and sadistic violence. and again, what is crucial here is we should not simply put all the blame or all the enjoyment on the older pupils.
like's, no, no,!
the victims even are part of this infernal cycle of obscenity. it is as if in order to really be a member of a community, you have to render your h. and i think that even... the abu graib scandal of american so impressed torturing and especially humiliating iraqi prisoners is to be read in this way. it's not simply we, the arrogant americans, are humiliating others. what iraqi soldiers experienced there was the staging of the obscene underside of the american military culture. in full metal jacket it's the character of joker. played by matthew modine. who is close to what we would call a normal soldier, a mesh type of soldier. she has a proper ironic distance. she proves at the end militarily the most efficient soldier. returning back to me. why then will i soon shoot myself? something went wrong there, but what? lock and! i did not just run amor. order! h!
this is my rifle! there are like it this one is mine!
but i got too directly identified with these obscene rituals, i lost the distance. i took them seriously.
animals!
if. you get too close to it if you over-identify with it, if you really immediately become the voice of this superere ego. it's shelf. destructive. you kill people around you. you end up. killing. yourself.
oh,. so you think... batman's made gotham a better place. new. that. you see, this is how crazy batman's made gotham. if you want order in gotham, batman must take off his mask and turn himself in. every day he doesn't, people will die. starting tonight. i'm a man of my word. who.
joke. i care. which is the lie he is opposing.
i'm going to need a cup of coffee. the good cop, bad cop routine.
not exactly. the truly disturbing thing about. the dark. knight. ish that it elevates. lie. into two. a general social principle into the principle of organization of our social political life as if our societies can remain stable. can function only if based on a lie as if telling the truth and this telling the truth is embodied in joker means distraction. disintegration of the social order.
never start with the head. the victim gets all fuzzy. he can't feel the neck.
towards the end, it is as if light functions as a hot potato. passing from one person's hand to another person's hand. first there is harvey dent. i. so take the batman into custody. the public prosecutor, who lies? claim claiming that he is the real person behind batman's mask, that he is batman. then we have g. honest policeman batman's friend, who? fakes stages his own death.
i'll see you later. five days. two of them cops. you can't sweep that.
at the end, batman himself. takes upon himself. the crimes, murders committed by harvey dent. the public prosecutor turned criminal. it's true here. in order to. maintained the trash of the public into the legal system. the idea is if the ordinary public were to learn how corrupted was or is the very core of our legal system then everything would have collapsed so we need a lie to maintain. order.
i hear. not the hero. we deserved to be the hero we needed. nothing less than a knight.
there is nothing new in this. this is an old conservative. wisdom. asserted long ago by philosophers from plato especially, and then immanuel kant, edmund burke and so on and so on. this idea that the truth is too strong that a politician should be a cynic who. although he knows what is true, tells to ordinary people what plato called a noble fable, a lie. uh... .
the united states knows that iraq has weapons of mass destruction. the uk knows. that. they have weapons of mass destruction. any country on the face of the earth with an active intelligence program. knows that iraq has weapons of mass destruction. which could be activated within 45 minutes, including against his own shia population.
this is his. and if he does not disarm, the united states of america will lead a coalition and disarm him in the name of peace.
let's be friends. we can have a state. public system of power. as legitimate as you want, submitted to critical press, democratic elections and so on and so on. apparently it just served. serves us. t! nonetheless, if you look closely into how even the most democratic state power functions. in order for it to display through authority and power niche authority. there has to be, as it were, between the lines. all the time this message of, yeah, yeah, yeah, we are legalized through elections, but basically we can do with you whatever we want. because that's what
what needs to happen. i guess sometimes. truth isn't good enough. sometimes people deserve more. sometimes people deserve.
have their faith. good morning. one of the great platatitude. which are popular today when we are confronted with. aktov. violence. ish to refer to. fyodor dostoevsky's. famous statement from brother skaramazov. if there is no god, then everything is. permitite. well. the first problem with this statement is that dostoyevsky, of course, never. made it. the first one who used this phrase s. allegedly made by dostoeevsky was jean-paul sartre in 43. but. the main point is that this. statement is simply wrong. even a brief look at our predicament today clearly tells us this.
tani. mawaki bin islam.
it is precisely. if there is god. that everything is permitted. to those who not only believe in god, but who perceive themselves as instruments, direct instruments of the divine will. if you posit or perceive or legitimize yourself as a direct instrument of the divine will, then of course, all narrow, petty. moral considerations disappear. how can you even think in such narrow terms when you are a direct instrument of god. this is how so-called religious fundamentalists work, but not only. them every form of so-called. totalitarianism works like debt. even if it is presented or if it presents itself as atheist. let's take stalinism. officially, stalinism was based on atheist marxist theories. but if we look closely at dick, subjective experience of a stalinist political agent. leader we see that it's not a position of an arrogant master who can do whatever he wants. it's on the contrary the position of a perfect servant. in the stalinist universe, there definitely is what in psychanalytic theory we call the big otherdder.
three. i. i out. thank. . what. that. i. i don't. thank you.
this big otherer in the stalinist universe has many names. the best known of them are the necessity of historical progress towards communism or simply... histoire. history itself is the big other. history is the necessary succession of historical stages. a communist experiences himself as simply an instrument whose function is to actualize a historical necessity. the people. the mythic people. whose instrument the totalitarian leader is. are never simply the actually existing individuals, groups of people and so on. it's some kind of imagined idealized point of reference which works even when. for example, in rebellions against the communist rule. like in hungary 56. when the large majority of actually resisting people. raise up is opposed to the regime. they can still say, no, these are just individuals, they are not the true people. when you are accused of, my god, how could you have been doing all these horrible things? you could have said, and this is the standard stalinist excuse, of course my heart bleeds for all the poor victims. i am not fully responsible for it, i was only acting on behalf of the big other.
i!
oh! as for myself, i like cats, small children, whatever. this is always part of the iconography of a stalinist leader. yeah. lenin in stalinism is always presented as someone who likes small children and cats. the implication being lenin had to order many killings and so on, but his heart was not there. this was his duty as instrument of historical progress and so on and so on. the way to undermine stalinism is not simply to make fun of the leader. this can be up to a point even tolerated. it is to undermine this very reference, mythic reference, which legitimizes the stalinist leader, the people. this is how. i read the by far. best work of milos, foreman, his early check. filams. black peter. the lips of a blonde and fireman's ball. where he mocks precisely the ordinary people. in their daily conformism, stupidity, egotistic lust and so on and so on.
é! there! troato. wait, oh, herr gott! i was. i.
it may appear that this is something very arrogant, but no, i think that this is the way to undermine the entire structure of the stalinist universe. to demonstrate not that leaders are not leaders. they are always ready to say, oh, but we are just ordinary people like you. no, that there is no mythic people which serves as the ultimate legitimization.
that's.
so what is the big other? this. basic element of every ideological edifice. it has two. quite contradictory aspects. on the one hand, of course, the big other is the secret order of things, like divine reason, fate, or whatever, which is controlling our destiny. but this is maybe the least interesting aspect of the big other. as the agency which guarantees meaning of what we are doing. much more interesting is the big otherer is the order of appearances. many things which are prohibited. are not simply prohibited, but they should not happen for the big other. a supreme example of this. agency of theik adar as the agency of appearance, ich. the pratink. busybody in david lynch's masterpiece. the brief. encounter at the very beginning of the film. the two lovers, celia johnson and trevor howard. arrange for their last meeting in a cafeteria of a small train station.
laura, what a lovely surprise.. my dear, i've been shopping till i'm dropping. my feet are nearly off, my throat's parched. i thought of having tea spindles, but i was terrified of losing the train. oh, dear! oh, this is dr. harvey. oh, how'd you do? would you be a perfect girl and get me my cup of tea? i really don't think i could drag my poor hob bones over to the counter.
why is this situation so interesting? because on the one hand, we cannot but experience this annoying lady as a brutal intruder.
there's your train.
yes, i know.
oh, aren't you coming with us?
i go in the opposite direction. my practice is in shley.
oh, i see.
i'm a general practitioner at the moment.
dr. hvey's going out to africa next week. oh, has really.
instead of the two lovers being allowed at least their final moments alone, they have to maintain the appearances that nothing is happening between them, that they are just acquaintances and so on and so on.
he'll have to run or he'll miss it. he's got to get right over to the other platform.
this precisely is the function of the big other. we need for our stability a figure of big other for whom we maintain appearances.
and i arrived at the station with exactly half a minute to spare. my dear, i flew.
but are things really as simple as that? the next scene, the scene of celia johnson totally desperate, she knows that she will never again see her lover.
yes, he's a nice creature. you you know him long? no, not very long. i hardly an amateur already. well, my dad. i've always had a passion for doctors.
then we hear the line of celia johnson's thought. i wish i could trust you.
i wish you were a wise, kind friend. instead of a gossiping acquaintance i've known casually for years and never particularly cared for.
what is the nature of this deadlock of celia johnson? she split between the two figures in the film of the big other. on the one hand, it's her husband. the ideal lener. back. it's out of question to confess to him.
great. de you afraid. there's so much that i want to say to you. you're the only one in the world with enough wisdom and gentleness to understand. wild horses wouldn't drag me away from england and home and all the things i'm used to. i mean, one has one's roots after all, hasn't one? oh yes, one has one's roots.
on the other hand, you have here this stupid person who is available as a confessor, but there is not even an elementary trust.
i wish you'd stop talking. i wish should stop prying and trying to find things out. i wish it were dead. no, i don't mean that. that was silly and unkind. but i wish you'd stop talking. my they're all ahead.
came out and she said the social life was quite quite horrid. provincial, you know, and very nouveau riche. oh darling, what's the matter dear? are you feeling ill again?
so that's the tragedy of our predicament. in order to fully exist as individuals, we need to the fiction of a big otherer there must be an agency which, as it were, registers our predicament an agency where the truth of ourselves will be inscribed. accept an agency to which to confess. but what if... there is no such agency. this was... the utmost despair of many women raped in the post-yugoslav war in bosnia in the early 90s. they survived their terrible predicament. and what kept them alive was the idea, i must survive to tell the truth. if when if they survived they made a terrible discovery. there is no one really to listen to them. either some totally ignorant bored social worker or some relative who usually made obscene insinuations like are you sure you were not even enjoying a little bit the rape and so on and so on. they discovered the truth of what? jacques laccon claims there is no big other. there may be a virtual bicader. to whom you cannot confess. there may be. eight. real other, but it's never... the virtual one.
we are. hello.
i think kafka was right. when he said that. for a modern, secular, non-religious man. bureaucracy, state bureaucracy is the only remaining contact with the dimension of the divine. it is in this scene from brazil. that we see the intimate link between bureaucracy and enjoyment. what the impenetrable omnipotence of bureaucracy harbors is divine enjoyment.
par terrorist the arrest victim. mr. yes no my name's larry, mr..
the intense rush of bureaucratic engagement. sherfs nothing.
i have.
d performance of its very purposelessness.
you like it,. yeah,.
that generates an intense enjoyment ready to reproduce itself forever.
expecting don't progress those between you and me, larry, this no no department tell records to get stuck. is's about to be upgraded and here we are. your very own number on your very own door. and behind that door, your very own office. congratulations, dz stroke-015. welcome to the team. no, cancel that. send two copies to five.
the obverse of this is a wonderful scene more towards the beginning of the film.
harry tuttle, heating engineer at your service.
the hero who has a problem in his apartment with plumbing tries to get the state agency to fix it.
are you from central services?
of course, two guys come, they just want forms to fill in, they do nothing. i called central services. and then the ultimate subversive figure comes. a kind of clandestine plumberer played by robert de niro.
just. of that business with the car. just a precaution, sir. yes,.
who tells him just tell me what is the problem and promises quickly to fix it. this, of course, is the ultimate offense to bureaucracy.
are you telling me that this is illegal? thanks.
we we're all in this together. in the ordinary theological universe, your duty is imposed onto you by god or society and another higher authority, and your responsibility is to do it. but in a radically atheistist universe. you are not only responsible for doing your duty. you are also responsible for deciding what is your view. there is always in our subjectivity, in the way we experience ourselves, a minimum of chisteria. hysteria is what? hysteria is the way we question our social symbolic identity.
you're sure it's god? you're sure it's not the devil?
i'm not sure.
i'm not sure if anything. if it's the devil, the devil can be cast out.
but what if it's gone?
you can't cast out god, can you? what is hysteria at its most elementary? it's a question addressed at the authority which defines my identity. it's why am i what you are telling me that i am? in psychoanalytic theory, hysteria is much more subversive than perverse. a pervert has no uncertainties, while again, the hysterical position is that of a doubt, which is an extremely productive position. all new inventions come from hysterical questioning. and the unique character of christianity is that it transposes this hysterical questioning onto god himself as a subject. who's that? who's following me? is that you? this is the ingenious idea of the last temptation of christ. oh! kazantakis's novel and scorsi's film, namely the idea that when jesus christ in his youth, he stole. that he is. not only the son of god, but basically god himself. he doesn't simply accept it. this ich. for. jesus christ, boy. traumatic news like, my god, why am i dead? am i really dead? how did we come to that unique point which i think makes christianity an exception? it all began with the book of job. as we all know, things turned out bet for joke. he loses everything. his house. his family, his possessions and so on. three friends visit him and each of them tries to justify job's misfortunes. the greatness of job is that he does not accept this deeper meaning. when, towards the end of the book of job. god himself appears. gotott gives right to joke. he says everything did the theological friends. bert telling. job, ich falsch. everything job was saying is true. no meaning in catastrophes. here we have the first step in the direction of delegitimizing. shuffering. stay with me. don't leave me.
i!
the contrast between judaism and christianity is the contrast between anxiety and love. the idea is that the jewish god. is the god of the abyss of the other's desire. terrible things happen. god is in charge, but we do not know what the big otherer god wants from us. what is the divine desire? to designate this traumatic experience laccon used the italian phrase chevo. what do you want? ich. terrifying question, but what do you want from me? the idea is that. judaism persists in this anxiety, like god remains this enigmatic, terrifying otherer. and then christianity resolved the tension through love. by sacrificing his son. god demonstrates that he loves us. so it's a kind of an imaginary, sentimental even resolution of a situation of radical anxiety.
i. i. she's. i.
.
oh. forgive. if this were to be the case, then christianity would have been kind of ideological reversal or pacification of the deep, much more shattering jewish insight. but i think one can read the christian gesture in a much more radical way. this is what the sequence of crucifixion in scorsese's film shows us. what dies on the cross is precisely this guarantee of the big other. the message of christianity is here radically atheist. it's death of christ is not any kind of redemption or commercial affair in the sense of christ suffers to pay for our sins, pay to whom, for what and so on. it's simply the disintegration of the god which guarantees... the meaning of our lives. and that's the meaning of that famous phrase, eli eli lama sabaktami. father, why have you forsaken?
bro! i you?
just before christ's death. we get what in psychoanalytic terms we call subjective destitution. stepping out. totally of the domain of symbolic. identification canceling or suspending the entire field of symbolic authority. the entire field of the big other. of course, we cannot know what god wants from us because there is no god. dishes. the jesus christ who says. among other things. i bring schw. not peace. if you don't hate your father, your mother, you are not my follower. of course, this doesn't mean... that you should actively hate or kill your parents. i think that family relations stand here for hierarchic social relations. the message of christ is... i'm dying, but my death itself is good news. it means you are alone, left to your freedom. be in the holy ghost. holy spirit, which is just the community of believers. it's wrong to think that the second coming will be that. christ as a figure will... return somehow. christ is already here when believers form an emancipatory collective. this is why i claim that the only way really to be an atheist is to go through christianity. christianity is much more atheist than the usual. eightism. which. can claim there is no god and so on, but nonetheless it retains a certain trust into the big other. this big other can be called natural necessity evolution or whatever. we humans are nonetheless reduced to a position within a harmonious whole of evolution, whatever. but the difficult thing to accept is again that there is no big other, no point of reference which guarantees meaning. we are in. john frankenheimer's... second. a neglected hollywood masterpiece from 1966, from the very heart of the hippie era, which preached unrestrained hedonism. realize your dreams, enjoy life fully. the film is the story of a late middle-aged businessman leading a grey, totally alienated life and then he decides at some point that he has enough of it. through one of his friends, he contacts a mysterious agency which offers him a deal. they will reorganize his life so that he will be reborn.
the cost. runs in the neighborhood of $30,000. i know this seems... rather high but in addition to the rather extensive. cosmetic renovation by way of plastic surgery for you. cps has to provide a fresh corpse that perfectly matches. your physical dimensions and medical specifications. cps. oh, cadaver procurement section.
they use some corpse, they changed it to look like his own body, they planted this corpse staged a pseudo accident so that police thinks he is dead. mr. wilson, you represent something of a milestone around here. and then... the agency organizes an alternate life. in a nice villa somewhere around la, they even organize a nice lady who conveniently stumbles upon him when he is taking a walk along the beach. he is thus reborn.
i'm no.
no longer as a boring businessman, but as a modernist painter. tony wilson. gold. tony. wilson. played by none other than rock hudson. so the woman, nora, his new love. tries to engage him in life, even takes him to some... wine orgy where people get drunk, dance, naked and so on. everything seems okay. but tony wilson... starts to miss his old life. more and more he is haunted by his b. finally, he breaks down. approaches again, the agency. telling them that he wants to return to his old life. the boss of this mysterious company, a kind of kindly cruel. hello son. super ego paternal figure. tells him the truth. he disappointed them by not being able to adapt himself to his new life.
you know, i sure hoped you'd make it. find your dream come true. i said i sure hope that you'd make it. find your dream come true. oh, you can call it wishful thinking, son. life is built on we. and you've got to just keep plugging away at them. can. give up. we can't let the mistakes. jeopardized the dream.
so what went wrong here? the problem was that his past in its material existence was erased. here's your transportation. surgery, sir. he lived in a totally new environment, new job. new friends and so on. what remained the same were his dreams. because when the company organized his rebirth, when the company provided new existence. for him. they simply followed his dreams. his dreams were wrong dreams. and this is quite a deep lesson for the theory of ideology. just remember. we've got to keep plugging away at the dream. the mistakes teach us how. it wasn't wasted. remember that. on the way to the operation hall, he discovers the horrible truth. he will not be reborn. but he will be used as a cadaver for another person who wants to be reborn. observe should draw a line of distinction within the very field of our dreams between those who are the right dreams pointing towards a dimension effectively beyond. our existing society and the wrong dreams the dreams which are just an idealized. consumerist reflection. mirror image of our society. we are not simply submitted to our dreams. they just come from some unfathomable depths and we can't do anything about it. this is the basic lesson of psychoanalysis and fiction cinema. we are responsible for our dreams. our dreams stage our desires and our desires are not objective facts. we created them, we sustain them, we are responsible. for them.
this is an area of ancient lake beds deposited 5 to 10 million years ago.
the scene of mess orgy in zabriskie point it's a nice metaphor of what went wrong. with the 1960s hippie revolution. it's crucial that zabriskie point was made in 1970. when the authentic revolutionary energy. of the 60s was already losing its strength. this orgy is somewhere between subversion of the existing social order and already... the full aestheticized reincorporation of these allegedly transgressive activities into the hegemonic ideology. although antonioni meant this as a kind of transcendence of the existing constraints, we can easily imagine this shot in some publicity campaign. the first step to freedom is not just to change reality to fit your dreams. it's to change the way you dream. and again, this hurts because all satisfactions we have come from our yeah
dr. the great supreme commander, jemin mao, issued a world-shaking call to us. you should pay attention to state affairs. and carry the great proletarian cultural revolution woo to the end.
one of the big problems of all great revolutionary movements of the 20th century. such as russia, cuba or china, is that they did change the social body but the egalitarian communist society was never realized. the dreams remained the old dreams. and they turned into the ultimate nightmare. now, what remains of the radical left? w for a magical event when the true revolutionary agent will finally awaken. while the depressing lesson of the last decades is that capitalism has been the true revolutionizing force, even as it serves only itself. how come it is easier for us to imagine the end of all life on earth, an asteroid hitting the planet, than a modest change in our economic order? perhaps the time has come to set our possibilities straight and to become realists by way of demanding what appears as impossible in the economic domain. the surprising explosion of occupy wall street protests. the mass mobilization in greece. the crouch on tahril square. they all bear witness to the hidden potential for a different future. there is no guarantee that this future will arrive. no train of history on which we simply have to take a ride. it depends on us. on our will. in... revolutionary upheavals some energy or rather some utopian dreams take place they explode and even if the actual result of a social upheaval is just commercialized everyday life v. excess of energy. what gets lost in the result? persiste. not in reality but as a dream haunting us, waiting to be redeemed. in this sense. whenever we are engaged in radical emancipatory politics, we should never forget. es walter benjamin. put it. almost a century ago. that. every revolution is not only if it is an authentic revolution. is not only directed towards the future, but it... redeems also, the pas. failed. revolutions, all the ghosts as if were the living dead of the past revolution which are roaming around unsatisfied will finally find their home. in the new freedom.
we saying. thank! it's. . i. ¡. i going. i. yeah. okay. . yeah. i'm. . i'm. let the. . .
i may be freezing. to death. but you will never get rid of me. all the ice in the world. cannot kill a true idea.