Adrian Johnston

May 15, 2008

It just came to my attention that Johnston has a new book about Zizek. I’ve read a few of Johnston’s papers, and they were pretty good. Like Zupancic, he was a student of Zizek’s…

“Revulsion is not without its subject: Kant, Lacan, Žižek and the Symptom of Subjectivity”

“There is Truth, and then there are truths—or, Slavoj Žižek as a Reader of Alain Badiou”

“The Cynic’s Fetish: Slavoj Žižek and the Dynamics of Belief

“From the Spectacular Act to the Vanishing Act: Badiou, Žižek, and the Politics of Lacanian Theory”

If you’re going to read any of these, read the last one. ….It’s the only one of these I’ve read actually. So I guess that’s not much of an endorsement. I just mean that it was interesting because he talks quite abit about Lacan’s version of the Act….

And for those of us who haven’t read each other’s papers…

IJZS Graduate Student Special Issue

Advertisements

4 Responses to “Adrian Johnston”

  1. sonnyburnett said

    No way! I never knew you guys had papers out there on that site (a site that I knew of, but never really looked at – I so resist reading off the screen, call me old fashioned).

    But I’ll certainly find a way to print them off & give them a study at some point.

    Thanks for the heads up.

  2. dystopier said

    I’m kind of ashamed of mine in some ways, so I don’t mind if you avoid it.

  3. sonnyburnett said

    I feel that way about everything I ever wrote – that is, given enough time for it to properly age & disintegrate (which these days doesn’t seem to take all that long).

    I think that sentiment is probably what drives us (Zizekians) to keep on keeping on.

  4. battleofthegiants said

    I just read “Revulsion is not without its subject” and I need someone else to read it too. It seems to me that Johnston’s aligning the Cogito with the fundamental fantasy and the Gaze: I.e. it’s a response to the impossibility of knowing your own birth by way of visualizing your yourself there to witness the event. I had always thought of the Cogito as the Real, but Johnston seems be arguing that’s it’s one more way to avoid it (which makes more sense to me, now that I am beginning to see the difference)…

    That is, saying “I do not exist” is not to be inundated by the Real, but a defence against it…

    Someone else look at it too and tell me if I’m totally off base.

    G

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: