[FRIAM] Natures_Queer_Performativity_the_authori.pdf

[jon zingale]

"Psychoanalysis has much to say about boundary, object, and identity."

Admittedly, I am biased against psychoanalysis[♄] but if you would
kindly hum a few bars showing how you can see psychoanalytic methods
used to clarify ideas of boundary, object, and identity in the examples
brought up by Barad, well I am open to being swayed. What kinds of objects
does psychoanalysis produce? What are their qualities?

[♄] Following Deleuze and Guattari, I am critical in a few ways:
  1. Descriptions of desire as a lack seem, well, lacking. Rooting
  desire in a theatrical schema where an Oedipal tragedy unfolds before
  the subject and outside of the control of the subject presents an agency
  -free theory. I much prefer models of desire emphasizing the creativity
  inherent in the _production_ of desire.

  2. Freud (as the prototype of the psychoanalyst) misses the point of
  little Hans' dream by projecting on the dream his own constellation of
  archetypes and meanings rather than guiding Hans[!] through a proper
  *discovery* as one might in Daseinsanalysis or Schizoanalysis. It is
  another thing altogether to have the patient _construct_ their own
  constellation, relations between the events and objects they produce.

  3. Psychoanalysis appears to have, as its final goal, the outcome where
  the patient resigns themselves to fixed relations within an Oedipal
  trilogy, exchanging hope regarding all other possibilities in favor of
  repeating the infinite Oedipal play. Psychoanalysis in this way appears
  deeply committed to an eschatological worldview, death through
  fixity all the way down.

  4. Psychoanalysis appears to run into the same kinds of issues that
  Barad's work attempts to address. To my mind, this is most clear in
  the theories of Carl Jung or Joseph Campbell. There, in an effort to
  arrive at archetypical universals we are handed a theory with no
  obvious next step. What in those theories account for the possibility
  or production of new archetypes?

  [!] Even weirder in this case because Freud's interactions were not
  even with Hans but with Hans' father.



--
Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/