Žižek’s “Frankenstein”: Modernity, Anti-Enlightenment Critique and Debates on the Left

Jamil Khader

doi:10.5565/rev/enrahonar.1407

El «Frankenstein» de Žižek: modernitat, crítica antiil·lustrada i debats d’esquerra

Autors/ores

Jamil Khader Bethlehem University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-5426

PDF (EN)

Resum

En aquest article examino la interpretació freudiano-hegeliana de Slavoj Žižek de la novel·la Frankenstein o el Prometeu modern (1818) de Mary Shelley i argüeixo que la crítica de Žižek a l’actitud ambigua i contradictòria de Shelley envers la Revolució Francesa i el seu règim de terror continua sent avui dia un punt central en els debats sobre els ideals revolucionaris i de la Il·lustració. Segons Žižek, Shelley utilitza el mite de la família no només per ofuscar la realitat social de la Revolució Francesa, sinó també per subvertir la família burgesa des de dins a través de la seva política sexual transgressiva. A més d’aconseguir desmantellar la modernitat, Shelley expressa un compromís radical amb una forma «pura de la subjectivitat de la Il·lustració». No obstant això, Shelley no aconsegueix articular la identitat especulativa de la Il·lustració i del seu règim de terror. L’anàlisi de Žižek de la postura contradictòria de Shelley respecte de la política d’emancipació té una gran repercussió en la seva crítica als debats d’esquerra sobre els refugiats musulmans a Europa i la sexualitat transgènere. És imperatiu, Žižek reitera correctament, interrogar les maneres en què les polítiques identitàries i el règim dels drets humans poden ser fàcilment apropiats i mercantilitzats.

Paraules clau

Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, dialèctica de la Il·lustració, mite de la família, monstruositat, modernitat, Revolució Francesa, subjectivitat de la Il·lustració, universalitat autèntica, refugiats, sexualitat transgènere

Referències

BENNETT, Betty T. (1980). The Letters of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins UP.

BEST, Steven and KELLNER, Douglas (2001). The Postmodern Adventure: Science, Technology, and Cultural Studies at the Third Millennium. London: Routledge.

BERNSTEIN, J. M. (2006). “Negative Dialectic as Fate: Adorno and Hegel”. In: HUHN, Tom (ed). The Cambridge Companion to Adorno. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

BLUMBERG, Jane (1993). Mary Shelley’s Early Novels. New York: Macmillan.

COFFMAN, Chris (2013). “Queering Žižek”. Postmodern Culture, 23 (1), 56-73.

COLLINGS, David (2016). “The Mother and the Maternal Thing: Mary Shelley’s Critique of Ideology”. In: SMITH, Johanna (ed). Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley. 3rd ed., Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

D’EMILIO, John (1993). “Capitalism and Gay Identity”. In: ABELOVE, Henry; BARALE, M. A. and HALPERIN, D. M. (eds.). The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. London: Routledge.

DAFFRON, Eric (1999). “Male bonding: Sympathy and Shelley’s Frankenstein”. Nineteenth-Century Contexts: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21 (3), 415-435.

DAY, Aiden (1996). Romanticism. London: Routledge.

DEAN, Jodi (2006). Žižek’s Politics. London: Routledge.

ELLIS, Kate (1979). “Monsters in the Garden: Mary Shelley and the Bourgeois Family”. In: LEVINE, George and KNOEPFLMACHER, U. C. (eds.). The Endurance of Frankenstein: Essays on Mary Shelley’s Novel. Oakland (CA): University of California Press.

FINCHER, Max (2007). Queering the Gothic in the Romantic Age: The Penetrating Eye. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

GRENBY, M. O. (2004). The Anti-Jacobin Novel: British Conservatism and the French Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

HOMANS, Margaret (1986). Bearing the Word: Language and Female Experience in Nineteenth-Century Women’s Writing. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.

HORKHEIMER, Max and ADORNO, Theodor (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments. Redwood (CA): Stanford University Press.

KAPOOR, Ilan (2018). “Žižek, Antagonism and Politics Now: Three Recent Controversies”. The International Journal of Žižek Studies, 12 (1).

KHADER, Jamil (2013). “Will the real Robert Neville please, come out? Vampirism, the Ethics of Queer Monstrosity, and Capitalism in Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend”. The Journal of Homosexuality, 6 (4), 532-557.

KHADER, Jamil (Dec 11, 2015). “Why Žižek’s Critics are Wrong—and Where They Could Have Gotten it Right”. In These Times. Retrieved from http://inthesetimes.com/article/18683/why-zizeks-critics-are-wrong-and-where-they-could-have-gotten-it-right

KHADER, Jamil (2017). “Concrete Universality and the Ends of Revolutionary Politics: A Žižekian Approach to Postcolonial Women’s Writings”. In: SBRIGLIA, Russell (ed.). Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Literature but Were Afraid to Ask Žižek. Durham (NC): Duke UP.

KOTSKO, Adam (Nov 25, 2015). “How to Read Žižek on the Refugee Crisis”. An Und Für Sich. Retrieved on 28 Apr. 2021 from https://itself.blog/2015/11/25/how-to-read-zizek-on-the-refugee-crisis/

LA BERGE, Leigh Claire (2007). “The Writing Cure: Slavoj Žižek, Analysand of Modernity”. In: BOWMAN, Paul and STAMP, Richard (ed.). The Truth of Žižek. London: Continuum.

LEVINE, George and KNOEPFLMACHER, U. C (eds.) (1979). The Endurance of Frankenstein: Essays on Mary Shelley’s Novel. Oakland (CA): University of California Press.

LÖWY, Michael and SAYRE, Robert (eds.) (2001). Romanticism against the Tide of Modernity. Durham (NC): Duke UP.

MCGAVRAN, James Holt (2000). “‘Insurmountable barriers to our union’: Homosocial male bonding, homosexual panic, and death on the ice in Frankenstein”. European Romantic Review, 11 (1), 46-67.

MONTAG, Warren (2016). “‘The Workshop of Filthy Creation’: A Marxist Reading of Frankenstein”. In: SMITH, Johanna (ed). Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley. 3rd ed., Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

PERKINS, Margo V. (1991). “The Nature of Otherness: Class and Difference in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”. Studies in the Humanities, 19 (1), 27-42.

RANDEL, Fred V. (2003). “The Political Geography of Horror in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”. ELH, 70 (2), 465-491.

REESE, Diana K. (2009). Reproducing Enlightenment: Paradoxes in the Life of the Body Politic—Literature and Philosophy around 1800. Ithaca (NY): Cornell UP.

ROUSSEAU, Jean-Jacques (1984). A Discourse on Inequality. Translated by Maurice Cranston. London: Penguin Books.

SBRIGLIA, Russell (2017). “Introduction: Did Somebody Say Žižek and Literature?”. In: SBRIGLIA, Russ (ed.). Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Literature but Were Afraid to Ask Žižek. Durham (SC): Duke UP.

SHARPE, Matthew and BOUCHER, Geoff (eds.) (2010). Boucher. Žižek and Politics: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP.

SHELLEY, Mary (2012). Frankenstein: The Original 1818 Text. MacDonald, D. L. and Scherf, Kathleen (eds.). Peterborough (Ont.): Broadview Press.

SMITH, Allan L. (2016). “‘This Thing of Darkness: Racial Discourse in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”. In: SMITH, Johanna (ed). Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley. 3rd ed., Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

SMITH, Johanna (2016). “A Critical History of Frankenstein”. In: SMITH, Johanna (ed). Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley. 3rd ed., Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

SØRENSEN, Esben Bøgh (2015). “Slavoj Žižek: Fortress Europe’s Staunch Defender on the Left”. ROAR Magazine. Retrieved from http://roarmag.org/essays/zizek-refugee-crisis-critique/

STERRENBURG, Lee (1979). “Mary Shelley’s Monster: Politics and Psyche in Frankenstein.” In: LEVINE, George and KNOEPFLMACHER, U. C. (eds.). The Endurance of Frankenstein: Essays on Mary Shelley’s Novel. Oakland (CA): University of California Press.

STRYKER, Susan (1994). “My Words to Victor Frankenstein above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage”. GLQ, 1, 237-254.

TAYLOR, Yvette (2009). “Queer, but Classless?”. In: GIFFNEY, Noreen and O’ROURKE, M. (eds.). The Ashgate Research Companion to Queer Theory. Farnham (UK): Ashgate.

TURNEY, John (1998). Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Science, Genetics, and Popular Culture. New Haven (Con.): Yale UP.

VEEDER, William (1986). “The Negative Oedipus: Father, Frankenstein, and the Shelleys”. Critical Inquiry, 12, 365-390.

WEISSMAN, Judith (1976). “A Reading of Frankenstein as the Complaint of a Political Wife”. Colby Library Quarterly, 12, 171-180.

WOLFE, Leonard (1993). The Essential Frankenstein. New York: Plume.

ZIGAROVICH, Jolene (2018). “The Translegacy of Frankenstein”. Science Fiction Studies, 45, 260-272.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (1991a). For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as a Political Factor. London: Verso.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (1991b). “Lacan in Slovenia: An Interview with Slavoj Žižek and Renata Salecl”. Radical Philosophy, 58, 25-31.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (1991c). Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan through Popular Culture. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (1999). The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology. London: Verso.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (2001). Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism? Five Interventions in the (Mis)Use of a Notion. London: Verso.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (2008a). In Defense of Lost Causes. London: Verso.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (2008b). Violence: Six Sideways Reflections. New York: Picador.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (2013). “Multiculturalism, the reality of an Illusion”. How to Read Lacan. Retrieved on 28 Apr. 2021 from https://www.lacan.com/essays/?page_id=454.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (2016a). Against the Double Blackmail: Refugees, Terror, and Other Troubles with the Neighbor. London: Allen Lane.

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (August 1, 2016b). “The Sexual is Political”. The Philosophical Salon. Retrieved from https://thephilosophicalsalon.com/the-sexual-is-political/

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj (May 31, 2019). “Transgender dogma is naïve and incompatible with Freud”. Spectator. Retrieved from https://spectator.us/book-and-art/transgender-dogma-naive-freud/

ŽIŽEK, Slavoj and MILBANK, John (2009). The Monstrosity of Christ: Paradox or Dialectic? Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.

ZUIDERVAART, Lambert (2015). “Theodor W. Adorno”. In: ZALTA, Edward N. (ed). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/adorno/

Biografia de l'autor/a

Jamil Khader, Bethlehem University

Jamil Khader és degà de recerca i professor de literatura a la Universitat de Betlem (Palestina). És doctor en Literatura Anglesa per la Universitat Estatal de Pennsilvània i autor de dos llibres sobre feminisme i el filòsof eslovè Slavoj Žižek. Les seves nombroses publicacions han aparegut en diverses revistes internacionals i col·leccions, com ara Oxford Bibliographies in Literary and Critical Theory, The European Journal of Popular Culture, Journal of World Systems Research, The Journal of Postcolonial Writing, The Middle East Report (MERIP), Islamophobia Studies Journal, Ariel, Feminist Studies, College Literature, MELUS, The Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts, The Philosophical Salon, Mondoweiss, Truthout, The Palestine Chronicle, entre d’altres.