As a form of power, subjection is paradoxical. To be dominated by a power external to oneself is a familiar and agonizing form power takes. To find, however, that what "one" is, one's very formation as a subject, is dependent upon that very power is quite another. If, following Foucault, we understand power as "forming" the subject as well, it provides the very condition of its existence and the trajectory of its desire. Power is not simply what we depend on for our existence but that which forms reflexivity as well. Drawing upon Hegel, Nietzsche, Freud, Foucault, and Althusser, this challenging and lucid work offers a theory of subject formation that illuminates as ambivalent the psychic effects of social power. If we take Hegel and Nietzsche seriously, then the "inner life" of consciousness and, indeed, of conscience, not only is fabricated by power, but becomes one of the ways in which power is anchored in subjectivity. The author considers the way in which psychic life is generated by the social operation of power, and how that social operation of power is concealed and fortified by the psyche that it produces. Power is no longer understood to be "internalized" by an existing subject, but the subject is spawned as an ambivalent effect of power, one that is staged through the operation of conscience. To claim that power fabricates the psyche is also to claim that there is a fictional and fabricated quality to the psyche. The figure of a psyche that "turns against itself" is crucial to this study, and offers an alternative to describing power as "internalized." Although most readers of Foucault eschew psychoanalytic theory, and most thinkers of the psyche eschew Foucault, the author seeks to theorize this ambivalent relation between the social and the psychic as one of the most dynamic and difficult effects of power. This work combines social theory, philosophy, and psychoanalysis in novel ways, offering a more sustained analysis of the theory of subject formation implicit in such other works of the author as "Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex" "and" Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity."
0 有用 Constantius 2021-10-07 03:56:02
Historicism or psychoanalytic transcendentalism? That’s a question.
1 有用 郁弗 2018-04-11 03:48:53
没读福柯直接jump到Judith有点晕,需要补课。幸好弗洛伊德前几周补过了。
1 有用 Emanuelle 2011-06-17 20:42:50
关于主体的探讨,“我”的哲学,理论中的最爱。好深好喜欢
5 有用 秋江暝泊 2013-10-21 02:02:48
没看过黑格尔、弗洛伊德、阿尔都塞、Humanities的那部分福柯,直接上Judith Butler简直是个杯具。。。各位大Com Lit的小伙伴们怎么看?
1 有用 🦦 2019-11-12 12:17:28
课上读的,之后重读一下
0 有用 Ιάννης Ξενάκης 2024-05-31 17:15:30 广东
初中生水平
0 有用 一颗柠檬水儿 2024-03-17 17:00:51 湖北
巴特勒对于黑格尔、弗洛伊德、拉康、阿尔杜塞、福柯等人有关主体化的理论的再梳理与整合,否定了稳定的“身份”在本体论意义上存在的可能性,阅读gender trouble的必备前置读物
0 有用 Constantius 2021-10-07 03:56:02
Historicism or psychoanalytic transcendentalism? That’s a question.
1 有用 明海 🐾 2021-03-26 16:55:56
我们如何理解人们对于个人与国家相关联的自我如此执迷,虽然这种执迷明明在强调司法律令?巴特勒没有用集体无意识去解释这件事,权力之外并没有一种无意识在塑造主体。相反,她指明个人对可能会伤害自己的讯唤(identify)是十分执迷的,因为权力的无意识就是同时具有创伤性、创造性和宠述性。——which why刘禾会用主权的想象去推动现代主体的论述,“现代主体的心灵中,主权想象的痕迹往往是以权力的无意识方式... 我们如何理解人们对于个人与国家相关联的自我如此执迷,虽然这种执迷明明在强调司法律令?巴特勒没有用集体无意识去解释这件事,权力之外并没有一种无意识在塑造主体。相反,她指明个人对可能会伤害自己的讯唤(identify)是十分执迷的,因为权力的无意识就是同时具有创伤性、创造性和宠述性。——which why刘禾会用主权的想象去推动现代主体的论述,“现代主体的心灵中,主权想象的痕迹往往是以权力的无意识方式运作的”,例如紫禁城变成了故宫博物馆,1949年后的文艺大会,以及当下作为资本全球化的商品的“国货”。 (展开)
0 有用 w 2021-02-19 15:30:28
2021年2月19日重读