When you "participate" in the "desire of the other" (aka - fantasy), it is usually an obscene sexual thing... it presupposes that the "other's desire" or interest in me is "sexual". This, I believe, forms the underlying basis for "intimacy"... although in the case of the military, there is most certainly a "violent" aggressive component... a "sadistic" desire to hurt, torture, and kill. This is Thanatos, as opposed to Eros.
... to the extent that we want to "kill" (or neutralize through participation) the all powerful Father/authority figure/Other and thereby "become" the Father/authority figure/Other.
...in other words, if we "participate" we castrate ourselves symbolically and place ourselves in the position of NEVER being able to actually fullfill OUR desires (for we have accepted the Other's desires for our own).
...in other words, if we "participate" we castrate ourselves symbolically and place ourselves in the position of NEVER being able to actually fullfill OUR desires (for we have accepted the Other's desires for our own). ------
Exactly. It's a total abandonment of self and it creates a terrible desire for self-destruction
If the tactic does not achieve it's end... and doesn't get recognized... yep!
This desire for the other’s desire is not a simple matter of mutual desire such as that experienced in erotic love, but a more all-encompassing demand for total recognition; the infant wants not some part (however large) of the other’s desire, but all of it – he or she wants to be the be-all and end-all of the other’s desire. The impossibility of such a total identification is what keeps subjectivity moving from object to object in its quest for an object that will represent and capture the other’s desire and by possession of which the individual can absorb and utterly subjugate the other’s desire.
It wasn't a post for me. It was a post for Sue Hanes over at Geeez. She was going through a spell... trying to work it out.... and I was trying to "help" in my usually unhelpful way.
Okay, so maybe the last post wasn't all about talented little kids. ;)
ReplyDeleteIntimacy... SuperEgo... shared Obscenity.
ReplyDeleteRight-brain identifications. Che voui?
erratum "vuoi"
ReplyDeleteAs if I thought for even a minute it was about the kids. Lol
ReplyDelete;-)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the shared obscenity?
ReplyDeleteDid you watch the video? the role of the "drill sgt"? the chants?
ReplyDeleteZizek's "dirty joke" obsession?
ReplyDeleteReading that paper reinforced my preference for Jung.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to apply without examples and a personal frame of reference.
But, I see why Lacan says that the fantasy of the subject is the desire of the other.
Ah. Didn't watch the video. I'll watch it later.
ReplyDeleteI so did not want to see that scene again. :(
ReplyDeleteI get it.
When you "participate" in the "desire of the other" (aka - fantasy), it is usually an obscene sexual thing... it presupposes that the "other's desire" or interest in me is "sexual". This, I believe, forms the underlying basis for "intimacy"... although in the case of the military, there is most certainly a "violent" aggressive component... a "sadistic" desire to hurt, torture, and kill. This is Thanatos, as opposed to Eros.
ReplyDeleteI think that participating in the fantasy is Thanatos. Never mind military.
ReplyDeleteI agree!
ReplyDelete... to the extent that we want to "kill" (or neutralize through participation) the all powerful Father/authority figure/Other and thereby "become" the Father/authority figure/Other.
ReplyDeletecuz He/She/the Other is the Law, the "Lynchian Mystery Man" which forms the symbolic space around which our "ideology" organizes our desires
ReplyDelete...in other words, if we "participate" we castrate ourselves symbolically and place ourselves in the position of NEVER being able to actually fullfill OUR desires (for we have accepted the Other's desires for our own).
ReplyDeleteMore on the Lynchian "Mystery Man" of SuperEgo...
ReplyDelete...who "represses" incestuous and cannibalistic desires and "organized" the coordinates of our symbolic "reality".
ReplyDelete...in other words, if we "participate" we castrate ourselves symbolically and place ourselves in the position of NEVER being able to actually fullfill OUR desires (for we have accepted the Other's desires for our own).
ReplyDelete------
Exactly. It's a total abandonment of self and it creates a terrible desire for self-destruction
If the tactic does not achieve it's end... and doesn't get recognized... yep!
ReplyDeleteThis desire for the other’s desire is not a simple matter of mutual desire such as that experienced in erotic love, but a more all-encompassing demand for total recognition; the infant wants not some part (however large) of the other’s desire, but all of it – he or she wants to be the be-all and end-all of the other’s desire. The impossibility of such a total identification is what keeps subjectivity moving from object to object in its quest for an object that will represent and capture the other’s desire and by possession of which the individual can absorb and utterly subjugate the other’s desire.
a melancholia preceeding "mourning".
ReplyDeleteFj, what had you so melancholic in Dec 2011?
ReplyDeleteDon't lie. :p
Back to fantasy. It's all very toxic.
ReplyDeleteI honestly don't think there is a healthy form of fantasy, especially online.
Lies upon lies, to ourselves and one another. But it's the lies to oneself that are the worst. Self-abandonment. Death....
Your post about mealancholia was disturbing.
Fj, what had you so melancholic in Dec 2011?
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't a post for me. It was a post for Sue Hanes over at Geeez. She was going through a spell... trying to work it out.... and I was trying to "help" in my usually unhelpful way.
Now for an act of "symbolic" Hari Kiri! ;)
ReplyDelete:P
ReplyDelete