Beyond Lacan

Jan 04, 03:52 AM

James M. Mellard. Beyond Lacan. Albany: SUNY Press, 2006.288 pp. $ 75.00 cloth; $ 24.95 paper. In Beyond Lacan, James M. Mellard continues the literary, critical trajectory of work that he had started in previous publications, notably in Doing Tropology: Analysis of Narrative Discourse and in Using Lacan, Reading Fiction. The commonality between these two works lies in Mellard's search for a distinctive and refreshing approach to reading fiction. While the former, as the title indicates, relies heavily on the metadiscursive theory of tropes (Giambattista Vico, Kenneth Burke, and Hayden White are the major theoretical players here), the latter explores in depth the early work of the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, as a follower of Freud, and the usefulness of such work as a literary approach to reading fiction. In one way, Beyond Lacan appears to be a continuation of Using Lacan, Reading Fiction; in another way, Mellard's new book means to bring the textual Lacan up to date by approaching the work of the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek and by offering us literary readings in the middle and late phase of Lacan's teachings. In an interesting and very important way then, Mellard's work traces the history of psychoanalysis and its implication for literary studies as it follows the approach of the psychoanalytic thinkers he feels are most relevant for the practice of reading.

Before moving on to discuss why I feel what Mellard is doing here matters and how, I should say that I was once Mellard's student, and wrote a dissertation under his direction. Even though at the time Mellard was already what we might call a "psychoanalytic literary critic," my work with him did not center much at all on psychoanalysis per se. In fact, the dissertation had nothing to do with psychoanalysis. Despite this fact, I should be remiss if I did not acknowledge that his work has influenced mine somehow. After a while, I did become more and more interested in psychoanalytic theory and, in an attempt to understand it more, sought instruction outside traditional academic circles and took up psychoanalytic training, which includes the treatment of patients under supervision. Thus in some sort of ironic way, Mellard's influence accomplished, for me, a departure from theory per se and a redirection of my career towards a very different focus on practice. Thus it is with curiosity that I have approached this text. I think my curiosity relates to how consistently Mellard has remained wedded to a search for a reading methodology embedded in psychoanalytic theory, and as to how he uses the writings of Slavoj Zizek, whose work appears strangely inescapable these days.

Beyond Lacan consists mostly of previously published items that were revised-actually substantially revised-for publication in this book. In all of them, Mellard brings his current understanding of Lacanian theory to bear on provocative and highly illuminating readings of Ralph Ellison, Flannery O'Connor, Susan Glaspell, and Scott Fitzgerald. These readings are formidable in offering the student of psychoanalytic theory clear examples of how major concepts are put to literary use. Some of these concepts are the textual unconscious, Lacan's theory of subjectivity, the dynamics, or interactions, among the registers of the Imaginary, the Symbolic, and the Real, the important notions of the drive and jouissance, among others. It would be futile of me to try and summarize the wealth of knowledge these readings provide. I think it is enough for me to say that these chapters are obligatory reading for anyone interested in understanding the complex nuances of the Lacanian discourse and its application to literary analysis. I think, further, it is enough for me to say that there is no other material that I am aware of that does this type of literary work with Lacan. That alone makes this book worth reading.

Yet the overaching assumption governing this text is that the Lacanian Unconscious is always textual. That idea drives the whole of Beyond Lacan, and it is a good thing too. In claming so, Mellard continues working within the Freudian Lacan. What I mean to highlight is that although Lacan has of course been subjected to as myriad readings as is humanly imaginable, it is remarkable how often it is forgotten that his work makes the best sense if understood as a clinical practice based on a return to the Freudian Unconscious. With Freud's culture, we should recall, there was a widespread belief in the concept of the Unconscious. That belief seems to have ceased to exist, and only seldom do people believe in the idea any more. Because of this, it is almost as though large parts of the psyche have disappeared in contemporary culture. In linking Lacan's ouvre so intimately to the idea of a textual unconscious, Mellard revives a very important line of thinking very much in need of attention, even claiming, as it makes logical sense, that unless there was such a thing as a textual unconscious, there would be no Lacan, as we know him. But why are literary critics continually interested in psychoanalysis beyond the fascination with its central role in the history of humans' thought about themselves and the recognition of its centrality to any account of turn-of-thecentury modernism?

I think Mellard provides his most convincing answer to this question in the Zizek chapter, where he discusses, in particular, a "method" of reading. This "method," I should add, is in itself a way of understanding phenomena-a theory of thinking, if you will. Thus Mellard's text places psychoanalysis squarely within the realm of an important epistemological enterprise, one where we, as humans committed to particular ways of understanding, are the principal actors. One of the most refreshing aspects of this book is that readers are not likely to find here the same Zizek who has become fashionable in American academia, say, in the last decade or so. This is the "cultural studies" Zizek, who is known primarily for his dazzling readings of all sorts of things cultural. There is, however, something deeply unsatisfying about this cultural Zizek: as Tim Dean and others have pointed out, the "cultural Zizek" is best known for his quick, brilliant, readings of short portions or sections of films, books, political commentary and so forth. I call this the "soundbite Zizek." This Zizek is so incredibly appealing to American audiences precisely because he gives them what they want- an apparent methodology one can use quickly, and in a wide variety of contexts, to supposedly understand all varieties of issues. However appealing and entertaining, this is the work of Zizek that ultimately disappoints. In creating a "one-size-fits-all" approach, what gets lost are specifics, the uniqueness of each of the situations Zizek is supposedly so good at reading.

There is no emphasis here, strangely, on what is unprecedented; rather, and again very strangely, the emphasis tends to fall on looking for what is analogous. Because this strategy becomes so repetitive, there is no attempt to understand meaning, thus the "cultural Zizek," appears caught in the compulsion to repeat, and to repeat without insight or understanding. Nothing is so remote from psychoanalytic understanding than what Zizek offers in these moments.

But there is another aspect of Zizek. This is far more interesting-if perhaps less dazzling. This is the Zizek Mellard brings to light. For here Beyond Lacan presents us with a Zizek who offers what Mellard calls a method "quite subjective and associational" (217). This is the Lacanian/Freudian Zizek. To claim that his method is "associational" answers the question of why reading psychoanalytically still matters today. To study something associationally is to study something in its ordinary sense, without any kind of predetermined ideas as to what conclusions one will derive from data. This means that thought, in the simplicity of the everyday, is the primary data of scholarship. Long before there was any particular system of thinking in place, before any kind of logical system of thinking, associations were all we had, and in a fundamental way, this is the Zizek that matters most profoundly: in offering us a return to a view of subjectivity that relies heavily on the unconscious. Zizek's model then, breaks with a certain way of thinking about objects. It promotes a new intelligibility that is receptive to the idea of bringing to light hidden relations among objects and among their elements. This is what Mellard's book teaches, and we can only look forward to more of this type of work.

Gustavo Guerra

The George Washington University

The Washington Center for Psychoanalysis

Gustavo Guerra (gguerra@gwu.edu) was educated in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and in the US. Before his current position at The George Washington University, he held positions of various sorts at the University of Buenos Aires, the University of La Plata, Northern Illinois University, Dartmouth College, and Penn State University. His work has appeared in journals such as Style, Papers on Language and Literature, The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, and the Journal of Aesthetic Education among others, and in book chapters. His work centers around problems in pragmatist philosophy, Freudian psychoanalysis, and aesthetics. He is also a candidate in the Washington Psychoanalytic Center.

Copyright Northern Illinois University, Department of English Fall 2007

(c) 2007 Style. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved. Beyond Lacan
Back to Current Headlines