EXQUEUE | Exploring Literary Theory

On Slavoj Zizek, from The Sublime Object of Ideology

Posted in Literary Theory and Comparative Literature by Stella Tran on 05/22/2009

Zizek is a post-Marxist theoretician who, like Rubin, recognizes the authority of Marxist analysis, but yet also notices some of the shortcomings of the philosophy. Marx is interested in ideology, but his interests are concentrated on the hidden truths that lie behind ideology, and fail to explore another aspect of ideology, the form it takes place in. This material form of ideology is Zizek’s interest.

From Althusser, we are aware human individuals are the subjects of ideology, but in discussing the object of ideology, Zizek means the concrete nature of ideology itself. In terms of Saussure, the study of the object of ideology is essentially a study of the “signifier’s mechanism,” (p. 312) where form is a mode that communicates the ‘secrets’ of ideology to the manifestation of itself, the ideology. Zizek uses the three-part structure of Freud’s analysis of dreams to illustrate his point: the ‘unconscious desire’ is expressed in the actual dream (the ‘manifest dream-text’) which eventually leads to ‘latent thoughts’ that are related to the unconscious desire. In ideology, the real life activity that takes place within an ideology is an expression of the secrets of the ideology. Furthermore, Zizek also notes that in a political-economic ideology, commodity itself continues to remain fetishized, despite the knowledge of an existence of a greater truth behind the ideology, and the question is, why is that so?

The importance of discerning the constitution of ideology in order to answer this question stems from Zizek’s conjecture that the abstract element of ideology is ultimately rooted in actions. For instance, movement in objects was an occurring event before physics was able to describe it, and so too ideology already exists in daily living before it becomes an abstract object of contemplation.

Ideology is not false in and of itself; it exists by consensual “false consciousness” (p. 319) by its subjects in their lifetime. Zizek accounts for the “false” status of consciousness with implicit “social symptoms” (p. 316) that exist in ideologies, inevitable contradictions that create an imbalance in ideology yet do not hold power to encourage subjects to overturn ideology.

Moreover, in the age of reason following Marx and Freud, Zizek observes a new form of ideology occurring which he calls cynicism. Cynicism recognizes that there is concealed content behind ideology, but yet makes no effort to break out of that ideology, and instead creates new reasons – a second ideology – “to retain the mask.” (p. 319)

Cynicism reveals an unexplainable need individuals have for ideology in order to maintain the daily functioning of things. Individuals are “fetishists in practice, not theory.” (p. 320) For example, in economy people are aware that money is only an embodiment of wealth, but choose to use it anyway. This is what Zizek calls an ‘ideological fantasy,’ a double illusion, the first illusion being the ideology subjects live in, and the second illusion found ignoring the fact of illusions that exist in real life, such as money.

Because individuals choose to overlook the existence of ideology, they become merely tools, “the consciousness of [their] ideological dream,” the dream being the ideology individuals embrace in their lives. (p. 324) Ideology gains its power and authority this way, and one indication of its complete domination over consciousness is found in its confrontation with its ‘social symptoms:’ the subject simply converts the symptom into an argument favouring his own ideology.

Aside from reinforcing evidence of an interdependent need between ideology and its subjects, Zizek suggests that within ideology’s many forms, such as commodity fetishism, ideology’s ability to sustain itself lies mainly in the fact that individuals need their ideologies in order to avoid some unknown, deeper truth. This deeper truth, however, this “traumatic, real kernel,” (p. 323) Zizek chooses not to investigate.

Texts of Reference
Rivkin, Julie, and Michael Ryan, Eds. Literary Theory: an Anthology. Blackwell Publishers, Inc. Great Britain, 1998.

Advertisement

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Stella said, on 05/07/2009 at 8:57 PM

    Might not use the word \”shortcomings\” now. Omission or lack of coverage is not by default a fault. Mr. Marx is only one man, after all. Can\’t expect him to do everything for us.

  2. aworldcome said, on 07/19/2010 at 12:50 PM

    very concise. I am reading mythology, madness and laughter at the moment.
    This ‘real kernal’ I believe might be ontological genesis, on which subject Zizek is subordinate to Badiou a la ‘being and event’. Thanks for the summary.


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 )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.