Slavoj Žižek is almost without doubt the most well-known living philosopher. He made his debut in the English-speaking world with his 1989 book The Sublime Object of Ideology, in which he gave an account of political ideology through an innovative interpretation of the notion of a fetish in both Marx and Freud - arguing that both notions essentially come to the same thing.
In the 25 years since this book, Žižek has become an incredibly prolific writer and speaker. He has become especially known for being an eccentrically engaging speaker. He speaks with heavy Slovenian accent, a noticeable lisp, and frenetic gestures, explaining recondite philosophical material through a dizzying array of pop culture examples and politically incorrect jokes.
Among the works that launched his early career were a series of brilliant philosophically informed books and essays on film, including, most prominently, highly influential works on film noir and the films of Alfred Hitchcock.
In our companion essay for Lost Highway - The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime: On David Lynch's Lost Highway - Žižek deploys psychoanalytic notions to interpret the film's relationship to film noir, and to draw connections between his reading of the film and contemporary cultural phenomena.
For a preview of the themes of the essay (and a taste of Žižek's singular speaking presence), please watch the following 5-minute excerpt from a feature-length film on Žižek's interpretations of film - The Pervert's Guide to Cinema - about Lost Highway:
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNancy: Explain the notion of an 'inherent transgression" as explained by Žižek. How does he use the notion to interpret the rhetoric of production code films (e.g. "Casablanca")? Specifically, how can the structure of inherent transgression in film, according to Žižek, function to reinforce the very values or norms being transgressed? What do you think is interesting in this aspect of the rhetoric of production code films?
ReplyDeleteIn his article, what Zizek means by inherent transgression defines a cultural practice in a way. These are practices in everyday modern society that are considered to be out of the norm and prohibited in the lives of any civilized community of people; some include sex, death, abuse, violence, etc. Zizek mentions Oswald Ducrot elaborated on this idea of inherent transgression saying “we are not responsible for it, while the responsibility for the surmise of a statement rests entirely on the reader’s (or spectator’s) shoulders.” In the film Casablanca Zizek compares the scene where there is a three and a half second switch of scenes then immediately shows the first scene again. This shift of imagery is what Zizek mentions may lay beneath the definition of inherent transgression. Within those three e and a half seconds, viewers are imposed to think whatever they feel is happening. Some may think that the couple because they were previously shown to be embracing each other, may have had sex with those three and a half seconds representing a longer period of time. On the other hand, some viewers may perceive it as a moment where the camera is simply showing a different image and the couple is shown again conversing over the same topic they left off on. As Zizek states it that the “superego injunction” by the author to the viewers or readers by saying the text or film is clean and that it was not them who put out any dirty ideas, is what we can infer to be the main idea surrounding the concept of inherent transgression. As long as the ideas viewers or readers infer do not clash with the entire plot and lead them into thinking something completely different, inherent transgression works properly in this way. Inherent transgression can then help to reinforce by making appearances matter and having the viewers or readers have their multiple fantasies, nevertheless filtering which will be integrated into the “public domain of the symbolic Law, of the big Other.” He symbolic Law is interested in only keeping you to think what you want within the boundaries of not clashing with the public domain and sustaining its initial incentive of personal views. I think it’s interesting that this idea Zizek came up with is one many of us can relate to but never really thought of it as something we could relate to others by. Personally, I find myself often times thinking of some events that are bound to happen or could have happened in scenes where the current situation is interrupted by a sudden shift of scenes and imagery.
DeleteJohn: Please explain Jacques-Alain Miller's notion of a 'feminine act' as discussed by Žižek. How might someone, according to Žižek, read the post-noir femme fatale as accomplishing this kind of act? Why, though, does Žižek think this interpretation is flawed?
ReplyDeleteJacques-Alain Miller defined “a true woman” as one who takes everything that a man holds dear away from him. Žižek proposes that post-noir femme fatale accomplishes this act not by playing the traditional role of a femme fatale by seducing and manipulating the male protagonist but rather by openly and brutally acknowledging her sexual desires and acting upon them because in doing so, they would be taking away the masculine fantasy of an insatiable woman who desires abuse. By openly and willingly desire men sexually, they not only, take away the masculine role in sexuality, but also destroy the fantasy that female sexuality must be conquered and earned. This neo-femme fatale understands the role of manipulation that men use in order to sexually obtain women, but instead of distancing themselves from it and creating the notion of the “forbidden fruit”; they turn it around and begin to manipulate men by giving themselves willingly and directly; thereby, removing the fantasy. This, according to Žižek, is the ultimate form of subversion: the hunter has become the hunted. The new femme fatale archetype now objectifies men into sexual objects created for their pleasure. The very notion of masculinity as the sexual conquers and femininity as objects of sexual pleasure is being completely overturned and redefined so that women begin to embody this critical aspect of masculine identity. However, Žižek also believes this interpretation is flawed because, according to the neo-femme fatale archetype, this type of femme fatale must directly and willingly destroy the fantasized idea of men but the transparency of this new archetype, creates a different fantasy: the disbelief in absolutes. Faced with this new femme fatale, men begin to have a different fantasy, a fantasy in which an insatiable and sadistic woman has a sliver of “goodness”. It is believed that there must exist some sort of decency or benevolence in the seemingly malicious femme fatale which then, in turn, does not take away from the original male fantasy: “an absolutely corrupted woman who fully knows and wills what she is doing”. In short, although the transparency of the neo-femme fatale attempts to destroy the image of “unattainable” woman by being lustful and sadistic, a notion that a person cannot be completely one dimensional exists, this in turn, keeps the fantasy from become a reality.
DeleteYe Rim: In what sense does Žižek think that "Lost Highway" is a 'metacommentary' on the relationship between the classic noir and post-noir femmes fatales? Please use examples from the film (his or your own) to illustrate your explanation.
ReplyDeleteDavid Lynch, in "Lost Highway (1998)," by delinating an eclectic meta-commentary between modern and postmodern tropes of femme fatales, effectively deconstructs the New Age or psychoanalytic reduction of the two as coincidences or polar opposites. The director, by juxtaposing two different versions of the world, rather claims that inherently transgressve "social reality (Zizek, 7)" and fatal, "fantasmic support (5)" are merely "the choice... between bad and worse (17)." To explain, the "inherently transgressi[ve] (9)" fantasy, which appears to be an outright subversion of the Lacanian "socio-symbolic Law (4)," essentially confirms and reinforces the reality and its patriarchal syste by "brutally realizing it (15)."
DeleteAccording to Zizek, a primal example of such moebius' strip wth no alternative outlet is the scene when Alice aloofly whisphers, "You'll never have me! (Lynch, Lost Highway)" and strands Fred/Pete devastated on a desert. The scholar identifies the particular moment as the juncture in which Pete lapses into Fred's langid appearance and impotence, for Renee/Alice, regardless of the protagonist's fantasy, remains an Achilles' tendon that triggers the voyeur's helpless impotence. Thus, the megalomaniac exit from "the life of impotence and distrust (Zizek, 17)" further strengthens and re-estabishes the reality in a cruder form; a "horror of the nightmarish noir universe of [Dick Laurent/Eddy's] perverse sex, [Renee/Alice's] betrayal and [Fred/Pete/The Mystery Man's] murder (17)" that eventually drives the deranged protagonist back to his impotence-the insecurity from which causing Fred's execution.
In my opinion, the fantasy world as an exacerbated mimesis with no real escape from the hars reality is also embodied by the sustained presence of Andy, a supposed friend of Renee, throughout the film. To explain, Andy, although peripheral in his direct contribution to the plot, functions as a small pebble in Christopher Nolan's 2010 film "Inception." It is his omniprescence that creates a dramatic irony, for the extradiegetic viewers perceive Andy as a signal that Pete is Fred's merely nonexistent alter ego; the fact which the delirious protagonist has no clue of. Thus, Pete robs and murders Andy wihout rational justfications, only to escalate the shattering of his fantasy world. Andy's body transforms into "one of Lynch's grotesquely immobilized corpses (17)," recalling Fred's shudder at the Renee's tattered corpse recorded in an unknown video tape. The murder, furthermore, does not help Fred/Pete fully possess his/their femme fatale (s), succumbing the protagonist once again to his anxiety and insecurity that had engulfed Fred's sanity.
Jeongmin: Which, according to Žižek, are the three most important scenes in "Lost Highway"? Why does he think this, and how does he interpret them?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the fourth part of the text, “The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime”, Žižek claims that Mr. Eddy’s violent rage at another driver that displeases him, Fred’s conversation with the Mystery Man at Andy’s party, and Alice’s confrontation of the pornographic shot of herself are the three most important scenes in “Lost Highway”. He claims so because, according to him, each of these three figures—Mr. Eddy, Mystery Man and Alice, “defines one of the three personalities to whom the hero [Fred/Pete] relates: Dick Laurant as the excessive/obscene superego father, Mystery Man as timeless/spaceless synchronous Knowledge, Alice as the fantasy-screen of excessive enjoyment” (22). All in all, Žižek thinks that (the combination of) these three scenes show(s) Lynch’s universe of the “ridiculous sublime” (25). The following are the brief explanation of his interpretation of the three scenes, in relation to the three personalities the hero relates.
DeleteFirst is the scene where Mr. Eddy (Dick Laurant) rages violently at another driver who overtakes him unfairly, shouting at him to “learn the fucking rules”. Žižek’s interpretation of this scene is that although one is easy to be deceived because of Mr. Eddy’s almost ridiculous hyperactive, life-enjoying characteristic, it is crucial to recognize that he is trying to keep the order, in other words, the minimum “socio-symbolic” (22) law. This, I think, somewhat links back to Janey Place’s argument that the film noirs reflect male’s want and need to control others (usually females), in order not to feel relatively impotent and powerless. In that sense, Mr. Eddy somehow relates to the repressed desire of Fred: a deep internal urge accumulated inside his psyche to fathom and control Renee.
Second is the scene where Fred talks with the Mystery Man at Andy’s party. At the party, the Mystery Man says that he is at Fred’s house now as well, and that they have met before because Fred invited him into the house. Although this scene seems supernatural at first glance, when psychoanalytically interpreted, it is not exactly that. According to Žižek, he is the spaceless and timeless“fundamental fantasy” or the “fantasmatic figure of a pure and wholly natural medium-observer, a blank screen which objectively registers Fred’s unacknowledged fantasmatic urges” (23). In other words, to Fred, his own subjectivity does not have the access to one’s fundamental fantasy, but the fantasmatic figure has a direct access to it, being able to “see” him. Žižek sees this as an ultimate horror.
The third scene is where Alice confronts her “interface fantasmatic double” (24) in the pornographic video played in the central hall of Andy’s house. According to Žižek, this imagery produces the effect that “This is not Alice” (24), to borrow his expression. To put it differently, she is the ultimate image of fantasy dreamed by the male protagonist, enjoying the sexual pleasure in pain. Remember that Fred originally killed Renee largely because of his inability to control or fathom her sexuality, disaffection or want. On the other hand, here, Alice, who aggressively expresses her sexuality and what she wants, sees the performed double in the screen, which is the double of the double (of Renee).
All in all, these three scenes reflect the three personalities the male protagonist, mixed with confusion, powerlessness, desire and fantasy.
Christine: One of the hallmarks of David Lynch's films is the portrayal of horrific violence in a manner that is so over-the-top that it provokes laughter. How does Žižek criticize certain 'psychologically realistic' portrayals of violence, and why does he think that 'unrealistic' portrayals (e.g. in "Life is Beautiful") are sometimes more illuminating? How might we apply this to the portrayal of violence in "Lost Highway"?
ReplyDeleteAlthough in "Life is Beautiful" the father tries to make a game out of the horrors that him and his son have to endure, it's more realistic in the way that he is trying to make something bearable for his son. He acts as a sort of shield to the trauma for him. This is more realistic because psychologically people need to maintain a 'protective appearance' and create a sort of fiction to make things easier. It seems unrealistic on the surface however it is a more realistic portrayal of inner emotions that people experience. Realistic portrayals of violence do not show, as much, these inner workings of the psyche.
DeleteIn Lost Highway the violence is over exaggerated in many ways. When Mr. Eddie is tailgated instead of flipping the man a bird or shouting, he violently attacks and threatens him. Alice/Renee's infidelity is taken to an extreme of sexually violent and intense pornography. And the murder of Fred's wife, as well as Andy, have extreme gore elements. This hyper-intensified sort of violence does a better job of expressing the feelings of the characters, primarily Fred. Renee isn't merely cheating on him, she's having violent intercourse with strangers that people all can watch. He isn't just jealous an enraged at his wife, he (perhaps wishes to) tear her to pieces. And while Mr. Eddie/Dick Laurent works in one part as an obstacle, he may also represent the repressed feelings that Fred has at parts, with his outbursts and threats.
Many of these emotions when acted 'realistically' are repressed, however the way that most people think about their emotions are usually very extreme. For example, if someone is angry they may go to the extreme of "I want to kill them", even if what happened is actually very small. Human emotions tend to be extremes, so the intensified and 'unrealistic' versions of violence really are more 'realistic' of what's happening psychologically.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDaisy: How does Žižek understand the way that transgression tends to be portrayed in post-code films (e.g. "The Bridges of Madison County" and "As Good As It Gets")? How is it different from the portrayal of transgression in production code films, according to him? And why does he think that there are problems with both ways in which transgression is portrayed?
ReplyDeleteDuring the previous centuries there were many changes in the production code that greatly affected the Hollywood cinematography and its genre. In his essay The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime: On David Lynch's Lost Highway Žižek seems to be concerned about the portrayal of transgression in both production code and post-code eras. He talks about the plot of the “The Bridges of Madison County” in which transgression leads to positive consequences: female character's 4-day-long affair saves her marriage due to the pleasant memories that keep her going. Therefore transgression is presented as something inherent in this situation, as if without the bad there would not be good. Then Žižek moves on to describing transgression in „As Good As It Gets“ where the main character seems to be racist but is forgiven for it due to him turning out to be a good person at the end. So Žižek criticizes how lightly post production code movies accept transgression and seem to justify it by further positive change in the character's personality or actions. On the other hand there is production code that Žižek criticizes for strong censorship. He talks about how prohibition of sexual content on the contrary sparks sexualization of innocent things such as a girl walking, eating etc - everything is shown to appear sexual. All in all Žižek seems to be not support how production code made the movies seem repressed and still portrayed transgression indirectly while post-production movies seem to be too lenient on the topics and seem to take subjects such as sexuality, racism, sexism etc too lightly.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete