March 5, 2008

I think I need it explained to me again what would make Parallax  a ‘Feminine book’ and Ticklish a ‘Masculine’ one. It seems to me that the act is ‘feminine’ either way – i.e. based on a non-all exclusion; related to the hysteric (but the hysteric is not necessarily female…).

Once you guys fill me out on that, it would be interesting to look at the examples at the end of each of the books: Mary Kay Letourneau – a woman (Ticklish) and Bartleby – a man (Parallax). I’ve just read the end of Ticklish and Mary K stands, for Z, as the example that the Act is still possible.

She was a school teacher who had an affair with a 12 year old student. I think he’s following Badiou here, saying what she did is an ‘Event’ (Act) in a particular sphere – sexual love. What’s a little weird here is that the dead lock he describes as Mary Kay having broken is between male impotence and desexualized sex. I guess the question is if Mary Kay was in the ‘masculine’ position…or is it?

On similar note, I don’t know if you guys know anything about this, but somewhere in Ticklish (I think Chapter 4) he says that there is an Act proper to each level (Symbolic, Real, Imaginary) but that the one he’s talking about is Symbolic. What would the other two look like? Would they be considered an ‘Act’ proper? Would they help shed light on the symbolic Act?



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: