{"id":4078,"date":"2009-10-14T20:43:17","date_gmt":"2009-10-15T00:43:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=4078"},"modified":"2009-10-15T11:00:49","modified_gmt":"2009-10-15T15:00:49","slug":"pluth-the-act-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2009\/10\/14\/pluth-the-act-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Pluth the act part 2 subject as thing and not as agent"},"content":{"rendered":"

Pluth, Ed. Signifiers and Acts: Freedom in Lacan’s Theory of the Subject<\/em>. Albany: SUNY Press, 2007.<\/p>\n

Lacan seems to have favored a certain kind of subject<\/em><\/strong><\/span>, one that is engaged in maintaining an inconsistency in the Other, one that signifies in such a way that the order of the Other itself gets scrambled<\/strong>. Instead of merely seeking a signification for an event in terms already available in the Other, an act puts a resistance to signification into words<\/strong>. … A pun creates a new signifier that resist signification without being completely nonsensical. It is a signifier that is not simply “the Other’s” but forces a new place for itself in the Other (115).<\/p>\n

While it is fairly easy to see how acts use signifiers in a way that is different from other signifying practices, the position of the subject in an act, and whether this subject differs, structurally, from the subject as meaning<\/em><\/span>, remains to be explored<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

One attractive aspect of the subject-as-meaning <\/strong>was that such a subject seemed more or less thinglike and substantial: a knot of signifiers, if you will. This can be thought of as a “subject as substance”: not the thinking substance that characterized the Cartesian cogito but substancelike nonetheless. The view of the subject as a thing<\/strong>, however, and not as an agent, although it does insist and repeat.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Pluth, Ed. Signifiers and Acts: Freedom in Lacan’s Theory of the Subject. Albany: SUNY Press, 2007. Lacan seems to have favored a certain kind of subject, one that is engaged in maintaining an inconsistency in the Other, one that signifies in such a way that the order of the Other itself gets scrambled. Instead of … Continue reading “Pluth the act part 2 subject as thing and not as agent”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[24,40,119,15,106,41],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4078","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-lacan","category-lack","category-language","category-subjectivity","category-the-act","category-the-real"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4078","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4078"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4078\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4091,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4078\/revisions\/4091"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4078"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4078"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4078"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}