review of Zizek ideas in NY review of books

[Matthew Cissell]

Let me follow on your analogy but with a twist. Diseases do not create vaccines, people do in response to disease. In the same way criminals do not produce criminal law (except maybe in the IL state legislature and some other failing nation states), people produce laws to deal with criminal behaviour. So I agree that Z not only produces confusion and disbelief (there agreement ends), he produces a comfortable life for himself. "...must be profoundly shocking to the Intellectual Class", I don't know. I suspect I don't belong to that group. Read the bit in Lingua Franca and you will find something shocking, but mabye that has something to do with my work ethic.

Go back to square one? The earth has been reset a couple of times but that is the type of hard boot that we don't want. Year one? That's been tried. The Kmer Rouge is somehow admirable for Zizek (proof the guy has his head too far up his own intellectual ass)? The kind of radical quasi-messianic break that Z wants is not for me, those things always go wrong. He should study more history. Rapid radical change brings bad consequences from the French Revolution to Iraq regime change. When will we learn? This big boat that we are all in takes a long time to change course. You can free slaves, and get rid of Jim Crow laws, and that's a good start, but it will not solve racism suddenly. Zizek wants a quick fix written in blood on the books of history (having the picture of Stalin above the bed is idiotic for being a childish shock factor or for sincere belief). the irony is that in some purge Z would probably get the Robespierre treatment.


It's not for me to tell people what to think, but when I see the emperor has no clothes I speak up. 

not so radical mc

p.s. I love that the membership for the Zizek journal is through Facebook. What would Foucault say?


________________________________
From: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>
To: pynchon-l at waste.org 
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: review of Zizek ideas in NY review of books


On 6/22/2012 5:43 AM, Matthew Cissell wrote:

I thought I had better look up the citation for what I wrote. If you want to read for yourself check Lingua Franca Oct 1998 "Enjoy Your Zizek"
>I guess it wasn't so long ago.
>
>
Isn't Zizek a necessary and useful worker in the fields of Late
    Capitalism.  Just as criminals produce not only crime but also
    criminal law, Zizek produces not only confusion and disbelief  but .
    . . . well, something I probably don't really GET exactly, but do
    sense  must be profoundly shocking to the Intellectual Class. (the
    bourgeoisie is beyond shock) Little gems like Marx wasn't radical
    enough and Bush wasn't imperialist enough are only a start. Maybe
    it's time to go back to square one and start all over. Get a new
    paradigm, or something. 

Hopefully

P



mc otis
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Prashant Kumar <siva.prashant.kumar at gmail.com>
>To: Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es> 
>Cc: "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
>Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 9:36 AM
>Subject: Re: review of Zizek ideas in NY review of books
> 
>
>Wow and here I was about to defend him! I can never bring myself to trust people who treat students badly. Such a concerted attempt to quash discussion is shameful, and invites obvious questions. 
>
>
>Prashant
>
>On Friday, 22 June 2012, Matthew Cissell wrote:
>
>Thanks for sending this along, Paul. The piece is more measured than the one that came up not long ago (by one Johann Hari) but it still hits Z hard, which he deserves.
>>
>>
>>I read an article about 2 decades ago about Z. He was very open about being a scoundrel. It was the 90's and he started to be a big name (riding that cool theory wave) so he was in demand. This got him an invitation to teach at I forget which Uni in the US. He demanded a position for his wife as I recall - ok, fair enough. He would only teach one class (i don't think pay was mentioned, but is it necessary?) and they would provide him with accomodation. So far just a tough negotiator. Now the good part.
>>
>>
>>For the class he told his students that they didn't have to write anything, but if they did want him to evaluate their work, he would (imagine how this appeals to the slothful and intimidates the uncertain - genius). IN the case that someone wanted to talk to him they could only come in certain hours (understandable and standard) but they would have to come with their queries  and talking points written out (this avoids loose rambling students, so i can understand) and they would have to sign up on the list on his door. In the article he admitted to filling the list with false students names so that the others couldn't get in. I was shocked when I read that. It still sounds extremely low, even with  some years of teaching experience. I don't think I could bring myself to do that. It was then that I suspected that the man was running one on people who were ready to get taken in.
>>200 yrs later we still discuss Hegel, 100 yrs later we still read and talk about Joyce. I think we all know that no one will be studying Dan Brown in 100 yrs. And Zizek? What will be his legacy?
>>That jazzy stuff sure sells to some, but long ago I began to think that the sparks and obfuscation were covering something up.
>>
>>
>>mc otis - still damn sick
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> From: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>To: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net> 
>>Cc: "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
>>Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 5:50 AM
>>Subject: Re: review of Zizek ideas in NY review of books
>> 
>>
>>Don't know Mr Z, but don't think I want to.
>>
>>On Thursday, June 21, 2012, Paul Mackin
                            wrote:
>>
>>http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jul/12/violent-visions-slavoj-zizek/?page=2
>>>
>>>I hope this works without a subscription
                              but if not go to their web site nybooks.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
>