What's wrong with Lacan? I stopped reading Zizek to read theory and history, and I'm familiar enough with Ziz to really agree with a lot of Rockhill's criticisms, but I still dont know much about Lacan and I dont think I ever aspired to read ecrits. Honestly some of the stuff that I picked up from Zizek that wasn't directly contradicted by further study is still rattling around in my brain, and I know that some of those ideas were (Ziz claimed) gleaned from Lacan.
Do you know of any more specific critiques? I agree with the concept of what you're saying, and I'm somewhat familiar with some Marxist critiques of psychoanalysis, but I'd rather spend some time with the problem rather than just read your comment, instantly forget about it, and continue trying to frame certain phenomena with flawed premises.
I appreciate the detailed response. I guess I'll just try and take an inventory of any concepts that I might have carried over from my Zizek days and make sure I don't put them forward in organizing or base my work in them in any way. I've been kind of doing that anyway, the Rockhill article really shook my faith in Z, but I had assumed that even if Z had twisted the source material, the source material was itself pretty legit. I guess I'll try to find other critiques. Thanks.
deleted by creator
What's wrong with Lacan? I stopped reading Zizek to read theory and history, and I'm familiar enough with Ziz to really agree with a lot of Rockhill's criticisms, but I still dont know much about Lacan and I dont think I ever aspired to read ecrits. Honestly some of the stuff that I picked up from Zizek that wasn't directly contradicted by further study is still rattling around in my brain, and I know that some of those ideas were (Ziz claimed) gleaned from Lacan.
deleted by creator
Do you know of any more specific critiques? I agree with the concept of what you're saying, and I'm somewhat familiar with some Marxist critiques of psychoanalysis, but I'd rather spend some time with the problem rather than just read your comment, instantly forget about it, and continue trying to frame certain phenomena with flawed premises.
deleted by creator
I appreciate the detailed response. I guess I'll just try and take an inventory of any concepts that I might have carried over from my Zizek days and make sure I don't put them forward in organizing or base my work in them in any way. I've been kind of doing that anyway, the Rockhill article really shook my faith in Z, but I had assumed that even if Z had twisted the source material, the source material was itself pretty legit. I guess I'll try to find other critiques. Thanks.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator