どうもご無沙汰です
じつはかなりの長期間、鬱状態が続き、ブログの更新どころではなかったのですが、どうにか復活したので更新します。更新していない間にもイヴェントはたくさんあって、とくにＲＷ関連のシムポジウム＠目白は、この類の企画としては類例のない成功でありました。末席を汚すことができて光栄でした。
来週の水曜からはオランダ遠征です。いちおうプログラムなどを：
Saturday 9 October
THE QUESTION OF THE POLITICAL IMAGINARY
10TH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM
OF THE JOURNAL (a) AND THE CALIFORNIA PSYCHOANALYTIC CIRCLE
The ordinary course of the 19th century is that, when a … man of power meets a man of feeling, he kills him, exiles him, imprisons him, or humiliates him such that the other has the foolishness to die of grief over it. (Stendhal, The Red and the Black)
What is a ‘subject' where politics is concerned, if the subject of the unconscious is shaped by its social and symbolic, not political and imaginary conflicts?
What is a ‘voice' in politics today? Does a vote still matter (etymologically a ‘wish,' ‘a vow', ‘a promise' or ‘a prayer'—a form of speech, therefore -- the vox populi). Or is whatever ‘talking heads' on television news shows or on right wing talk radio decide what wins the day?
If we re-read the ‘radical leftist' Marcuse today we find it hard to ignore how much his forceful critiques of ‘society' and ‘the state' still resonate – with political and economic conservatives. Indeed, Curtis' BBC documentary notes that conservative politicians like Ronald Reagan rose to power by using the very slogans of the Marcuse-inspired student rebellions of the 1960s (“Get the government off our backs!”) — rebellions that Reagan roundly condemned while stealing their rhetoric, thus having it both ways at once. When politics was seen as the art of exercising power , it was society's task to moderate that exercise. By not focusing on the specific social relations society forbids or what acts a state actively exercises control over, mid 20th century leftist thinkers may have unwittingly opened the door to the individual-oriented conservative politics evident today. The central question for this conference thus becomes “What is the promise the Imaginary holds for politics today?” Is there a dialectic to the Imaginary that might reveal a new or invaluable resource for democracy in such a dialectic? Can the Imaginary be understood differently by both psychoanalysis and political theory in the light of say Lacan's late work with the Imaginary, e.g., Le Sinthome ?
We would like papers that address Freud's and Lacan's attempts to get a purchase on Imaginary politics: what does it mean for the form and fate of the Subject? For Lacan at least there is a subject that is transindividual.
But we also encourage systematic investigation of the approaches taken by antagonists of Freud and psychoanalysis who were equally concerned with these questions, like Marcuse, who have much to say that illuminates today's trends.
If ‘society' has any meaning at all, if the social link constitutes constraints on individual enjoyment taken at the expense of the other and its desire, then Marcuse's own sustained attack on ‘society' bears re-examination. Especially in the light of Lacan's theories of social discourse, of the unconscious at work in it, and of Freud's broader works on civilization and its discontents.
SPEAKERS
One Dimensional Man and the Depth of his Therapy
Maya Mukamel
Tel Hai Academic College, Tel Aviv
The Death Drive of Revolution/Counter-Revolution: Rereading of Jeffrey Mehlman's Revolution and Repetition
Fuhito Endo
Professor, English, Seikei University, Tokyo
There is Nothing More Toxic than a Human Child. Pixar's Monsters Inc. as Social Fantasy
Lilian Munk Rösing
Lektor, Litteraturvidenskab og Moderne Kultur, Copenhagen University
Group Psychology and the Polyconstruction of the Ego
Lyat Friedman
Assistant Professor, Gender Studies and Philosophy, Bar-Ilan University,Tel Aviv
Television and ‘The Public Sphere': Of Absolutism
Daniel MacCannell
Researcher Institute for Irish and Scottish Studies, U niversity of Aberdeen
ということでして、初のオランダ行きです。小生、生来小心ゆえに、海外遠征の際は出発の１週間前に完全原稿を完成しないと不安で仕方がないタイプなのですが、今回は妙にこの種の海外遠征に慣れてしまったことと、鬱と、多忙ゆえに、来週の水曜に出発のところ、やっと金曜から英語原稿を書き出した始末。土曜の午前中には吉祥寺である業務があったのですが、その終了直後に研究室にこもり、その日の夕刻には一応3000 words程度の読み原稿を完成し、やっと安堵という具合。午前中の業務の間は「なんの因果で・・・」とわが身＠吉祥寺を嘆きながら、心ここにあらず、といった感じであったが、原稿がいちおう完成ということで精神の平衡も保つことができた。
ということでしばらく留守にします。
ちなみにこの遠征は去年の秋に吉祥寺でワークショップをやったJulietが声をかけてくれたのがきっかけです。彼女が基調講演をやるシムポジウムにも出ないかと誘われて、こんな期間の遠征になった次第。そちらのほうもご紹介します：
2010
Unless indicated otherwise all activities take place in:
Jan van Eyck Academie
Academieplein 1
6211 KM Maastricht
The Netherlands
Thursday 7, Friday 8 and Saturday 9 October
The Freudian Left Reconsidered
The emancipatory project of the Enlightenment based on reason and mutual understanding had to meet from its very beginning several critical questions and arguments. Looking backwards it is no surprise that the atrocities of the twentieth century fuelled this critical stance and lead to arguments that criticized the Enlightenment project as at its best naive, at its worst the cause of the horrors of (world) wars, totalitarianism, colonization, military and police control, and various forms of repression.
This made certain theoreticians turn to psychoanalysis in order to get a view on the limits of reason, to form an idea of its dark underside, to try and know how rationality becomes irrational, and to find elements for an alternative to the irrational rationality embodied by the trinity of Science, Technology and Capital.
With this conference we want to focus on the role psychoanalysis played and continues to play within critical analyses of Western, post-WW I society. Authors like Wilhelm Reich, Erich Fromm, Theodor W. Adorno, Norman O. Brown, Herbert Marcuse, (the early) Jean-Francois Lyotard, Klaus Theweleit,- Christopher Lasch and Alexander Mitscherlich are monuments within this line of thinking that tries to save the Enlightenment project precisely by taking into account the psychoanalytical critique of it. The reason why most their works has fallen into oblivion could be related to a supposed simplistic, 'pre-Lacanian' reading of Freud, an unconvincing synthesis between Freud's 'pessimism' and Marx's 'optimism', or a naïve and even dangerous utopianism or libertarianism as counterpart of their ideology critique.
However, the idea behind this conference is that these authors are still relevant today and cannot be reduced to being merely 'children of their time' or forerunners of the more sophisticated, Lacan-inspired critique of culture.
This conference is organized in collaboration with KASK - Hogeschool Gent.
Thursday 7 October
3.00pm
Dominiek Hoens (Jan van Eyck Academie)
Introduction
3.30pm
Juliet Flower McCannell (UC, Irvine)
The Dialectic of the Political Imaginary: The Question of the Subject in Politics From Freud to Marcuse
4.45pm
Peter-Erwin Jansen (University of Koblenz)
Traces of Liberation
6.00pm
drinks
7.00pm
dinner
Friday 8 October
11.00am
Frank Vande Veire (KASK, Hogeschool Gent)
Gift and Death Drive in Norman O. Brown's Life Against Death
12.00am
Eli Noé (Jan van Eyck Academie)
The Culture of Narcissism Revisited
1.00pm
lunch
2.00pm
Aaron Schuster (ICI, Berlin)
Against Revisionism: Lionel Trilling on the Fate of Pleasure
3.00pm
Nathaniel Boyd (Jan van Eyck Academie)
Freud, our Hegel
4.00pm
break
4.30pm
Marc De Kesel (Radboud University, Nijmegen)
Fabulous Criticism. On Michel de Certeau's reading of Freud's Moses and Monotheism
6.00pm
drinks
でもフロイト左派の再評価って、あるいは「想像界」の再評価って、ちょっとprovocativeですよね。ちなみに以下にこの企画とかそれを実施する組織のリンクを張っておきます：
オランダって、もう冬ですよね。
