Paul Preciado's controversial 2019 lecture at the École de la Cause Freudienne annual conference, published in a definitive translation for the first time.
November 2019, Paul Preciado was invited to speak in front of 3,500 psychoanalysts at the École de la Cause Freudienne's annual conference in Paris. Standing in front of the profession for whom he is a “mentally ill person” suffering from “gender dysphoria,” Preciado draws inspiration in his lecture from Kafka's “Report to an Academy,” in which a monkey tells an assembly of scientists that human subjectivity is a cage comparable to one made of metal bars.
Speaking from his own “mutant” cage, Preciado does not so much criticize the homophobia and transphobia of the founders of psychoanalysis as demonstrate the discipline's complicity with the ideology of sexual difference dating back to the colonial era—an ideology which is today rendered obsolete by technological advances allowing us to alter our bodies and procreate differently. Preciado calls for a radical transformation of psychological and psychoanalytic discourse and practices, arguing for a new epistemology capable of allowing for a multiplicity of living bodies without reducing the body to its sole heterosexual reproductive capability, and without legitimizing hetero-patriarchal and colonial violence.
Causing a veritable outcry among the assembly, Preciado was heckled and booed and unable to finish. The lecture, filmed on smartphones, was published online, where fragments were transcribed, translated, and published with no regard for exactitude. With this volume, Can the Monster Speak? is published in a definitive translation for the first time.
0 有用 chaosmori 2024-10-17 04:21:06 美国
补
1 有用 Unmensch 2024-12-26 01:29:17 美国
感慨,保罗对精神分析的异性恋父权男性中心的憎恨太深太深,但他未意识到精分在美国的临床诊断/认识论范式规范是一条从法国理论被引进的非常独特的路线,而且你不能不思考社会的再封建化e.g. 请思考:封建主义如果被理解为“使生产者与生产资料相分离”的过程,商品、劳动力和技术都具备着可替代性,那么仅仅是呼吁”心理分析家们尽快认识论转变”是否还是局限于一种意大利工人主义的认识论中呢?我觉得如果大数据的大他者所... 感慨,保罗对精神分析的异性恋父权男性中心的憎恨太深太深,但他未意识到精分在美国的临床诊断/认识论范式规范是一条从法国理论被引进的非常独特的路线,而且你不能不思考社会的再封建化e.g. 请思考:封建主义如果被理解为“使生产者与生产资料相分离”的过程,商品、劳动力和技术都具备着可替代性,那么仅仅是呼吁”心理分析家们尽快认识论转变”是否还是局限于一种意大利工人主义的认识论中呢?我觉得如果大数据的大他者所行使的隐性统治(你看看油管打赏的许多trans博主和大数据算法的集中进行抽取组合和获利的用户主义,他们在选举期间和湾区恐跨妈妈的鲜明对比,这其间只有先验算法隔离和数字剥夺,并没有什么哈贝马斯的社会空间。我们有理由说,资本主义确实 “倒退了”…)。 (展开)
1 有用 momo 2023-07-08 22:45:24 广东
没说啥。主要就是情绪到位了,其他也就这样
0 有用 EH 2025-09-29 14:50:16 美国
有心的英文译名,以怪物之姿逆转斯皮瓦克的“不能“。依旧没有回答那个最核心的问题,甚至在回答之前,由作者构想的新型知识体系都无从问出:如果对于性别二元的荒谬我们已经达成共识,如果对于器官的建构性我们已然谙熟于心,“跨“这一举措的合理性究竟何在?再赋义的政治潜能为什么偏偏在这个问题前消隐?
0 有用 Sternenknabe 2025-01-27 14:40:28 美国
It was not a case of choosing freedom but of creating it. I was looking for a door, an exit, a way out. 作为演讲稿,易读性和感染力都是上乘。尽管我希望看见更多,但如果精分人们的upper limit就在那了,恐怕这本书也就是唯一能对他们说的了。