Thissiteusescookies.Bycontinuingtobrowsethissiteyouareagreeingtoouruseofcookies.

(MoreInformation)
LOGIN REGISTERFORONLINEACCESS

LATEST

SearchtheLRB

ARCHIVE

INTRODUCTION

BOOKSHOP

BACKISSUES

CONTACTUS
CONTRIBUTORS

Vol.28No.177September2006
pages78|3758words

ABOUTTHELRB
CATEGORIES

facebook3 75 twitter

SUBSCRIBE
LETTERS

73 share email letter cite

AUDIO

print

larger|smaller

FirstImpressions
FredricJameson
TheParallaxViewbySlavojiek
MIT,434pp,16.95,March2006,ISBN0262240513

FredricJameson
teachesatDuke
University.Hisbooks
includeValencesofthe
Dialecticandthe
forthcoming
AntinomiesofRealism.

MOREBYTHISCONTRIBUTOR

CosmicNeutrality
LuckyPer
ThenYouAreThem
Atwood

RELATEDARTICLES
24JANUARY2013

PeterGodfreySmith
AntiMaterialism
24JANUARY2013

JerryFodor
PutnamandLanguage
24MAY2012

JerryFodor
Aboutness
9FEBRUARY2012

GideonLewisKraus
Sciencedoesethics
22SEPTEMBER2011

AmiaSrinivasan
Armchairv.Laboratory
28APRIL2011

JerryFodor
MassivelyModularMinds
19AUGUST2010

ThomasNagel
ScienceandReligion

YouareinvitedtoreadthisfreebookreviewfromtheLondonReviewofBooks.
Registerforfree andenjoy24hoursofaccesstotheentireLRBarchiveof
over12,500essaysandreviews.

Aseveryschoolchildknowsbynow,anewbookbyiekissupposedtoinclude,inno
specialorder,discussionsofHegel,MarxandKantvariouspreandpostsocialist
anecdotesandreflectionsnotesonKafkaaswellasonmassculturalwriterslike
StephenKingorPatriciaHighsmithreferencestoopera(Wagner,Mozart)jokesfrom
theMarxBrothersoutburstsofobscenity,scatologicalaswellassexualinterventions
inthehistoryofphilosophy,fromSpinozaandKierkegaardtoKripkeandDennett
analysesofHitchcockfilmsandotherHollywoodproductsreferencestocurrent
eventsdisquisitionsonobscurepointsofLacaniandoctrinepolemicswithvarious
contemporarytheorists(Derrida,Deleuze)comparativetheologyand,mostrecently,
reportsoncognitivephilosophyandneuroscientificadvances.Thesearelinedupin
whatEisensteinlikedtocallamontageofattractions,akindoftheoreticalvariety
show,inwhichaseriesofnumberssucceedeachotherandholdtheaudienceinrapt
fascination.Itisawonderfulshowtheonlydrawbackisthatattheendthereaderis
perplexedastotheideasthathavebeenpresented,oratleastastothemajoronestobe
retained.Onewouldthinkthatreadingallieksbooksinsuccessionwouldonly
compoundthisproblem:onthecontrary,itsimplifiesitsomewhat,asthelarger
conceptsbegintoemergefromthemist.Still,onewouldnothaveitanyotherway,
whichiswhythecurrentvolumewhich,withitscompanionTheTicklishSubject
(1999),purportstooutlinethesystemasawhole(ifitisone),oratleasttomakea
singlemonumentalstatementinspiressomeapprehension.
Itwillbedialecticaltosaythatthisapprehensionisandisnotconfirmed.Thefirst
chapter,whichexplainsthetitleandseekstogroundieksphilosophyinsome
definitivemethod,istoughgoingindeedIllcomebacktoit.Butlaterchapterson
Heideggerandpolitics,oncognitivephilosophyanditsimpasses,onantisemitism,on
politicstodayareluminousandeloquent,andwillsurelystandasmajorstatements,
withenoughtoprovokeandirritatepeoplefromoneendoftheideologicalspectrumto
another(Iammyselfattackedinpassingassomekindofgulliblepractitionerof
commodificationtheory).Noraretheylackinginjokes,astastelessasyoumightwish,
andinpassingremarksoncurrentfilms(iekseemstohavegotHitchcockoutofhis
system,ifnotoutofhisunconsciousoneneverdoesthat).
Asforwhathaspersistedthroughthisnowconsiderableoeuvre,Iwillstartwiththe
dialectic,ofwhichiekisoneofthegreatcontemporarypractitioners.Theold
stereotypeisthatHegelworksaccordingtoacutanddriedprogressionfromthesis,
throughantithesis,tosynthesis.This,iekexplains,iscompletelyerroneous:thereare
norealsynthesesinHegelandthedialecticaloperationistobeseeninanutterly
differentwayavarietyofexamplesareadduced.Still,thatstupidstereotypewasnot
altogetherwrong.ThereisatripartitemovementintheHegeliandialectic,andinfact,
iekgoeson,hehasjustillustratedit:stupidstereotype,ortheappearanceingenious
correction,theunderlyingrealityoressencefinally,afterall,thereturntothereality
oftheappearance,sothatitwastheappearancethatwastrueafterall.
Whatcanthispossiblyhavetodowithpopularculture?LetstakeaHollywoodproduct,

VIDEO

RELATEDCATEGORIES

Philosophy,Mindand
cognitivescience

say,FritzLangsWomanintheWindow(1944).(MaybenowFritzLangbelongstohigh
cultureratherthanmassculture,butanyway...)EdwardG.Robinsonisamild
manneredprofessorwho,leavinghispeacefulclubonenight,getscaughtupinawebof
loveandmurder.Wethinkwearewatchingathriller.Atlength,hetakesrefugeinhis
clubagain,fallsasleepfromexhaustion,andwakesup:itwasalladream.Themoviehas
donetheinterpretationforus,bywayofLangscapitulationtothecheapHollywood
insistenceonhappyendings.Butinrealitywhichistosayinthetrueappearance
EdwardG.Robinsonisnotaquiet,kind,decent,bourgeoisprofessordreamingthathe
isamurderer,butamurdererdreaming,inhiseverydaylife,thatheisaquiet,kind,
decent,bourgeoisprofessor.Hollywoodscensorshipisthereforenotsomepuritanical,
uptightmiddleclassmechanismforrepressingtheobscene,nasty,antisocial,violent
undersideoflife:itis,rather,thetechniqueforrevealingit.

ieksinterpretativework,frompagetopage,seemstorevelintheseparadoxes:but
thatisitselfonlysomestupidfirstimpression(oneofhisfavouritephrases).Inreality,
theparadoxeffectisdesignedtoundothatsecondmomentofingenuity,whichisthat
ofinterpretation(itlookslikethistoyou,butinrealitywhatisgoingonisthis...):the
paradoxisofthesecondorder,sothatwhatlookslikeaparadoxisinrealitysimplya
returntothefirstimpressionitself.
Orperhapswemightrathersay:thisisnotaparadox,thisisperversity.Andindeed,the
dialecticisjustthatinveterate,infuriatingperversitywherebyacommonsense
empiricistviewofrealityisrepudiatedandundermined.Butitisunderminedtogether
withitsownaccompanyinginterpretationsofthatreality,whichlooksomuchmore
astuteandingeniousthanthecommonsenseempiricistrealityitself,untilwe
understandthattheinterpretationsarethemselvesalsopartofpreciselythatfirst
impression.Thisiswhythedialecticbelongstotheoryratherthanphilosophy:the
latterisalwayshauntedbythedreamofsomefoolproofselfsufficientsystem,asetof
interlockingconceptswhicharetheirowncause.Thisdreamisofcoursetheafterimage
ofphilosophyasaninstitutionintheworld,asaprofessioncomplicitwitheverything
elseinthestatusquo,inthefallenonticrealmofwhatis.Theory,ontheotherhand,
hasnovestedinterestsinasmuchasitneverlaysclaimtoanabsolutesystem,anon
ideologicalformulationofitselfanditstruthsindeed,alwaysitselfcomplicitinthe
beingofcurrentlanguage,ithasonlythevocationandneverfinishedtaskof
underminingphilosophyassuch,byunravellingaffirmativestatementsand
propositionsofallkinds.Wemayputthisanotherwaybysayingthatthetwogreat
bodiesofpostphilosophicalthought,markedbythenamesofMarxandFreud,are
bettercharacterisedasunitiesoftheoryandpractice:thatistosaythattheirpractical
componentalwaysinterruptstheunityoftheoryandpreventsitfromcomingtogether
insomesatisfyingphilosophicalsystem.AlainBadiouhasrecentlycoinedthe
expressionantiphilosophyforthesenewandconstitutivelyscandalousmodesof
interveningconceptuallyintheworlditisatermthatiekhasbeenverywillingto
revindicateforhimself.
Still,whatcanbethetheoretical,ifnotindeedthephilosophicalcontentofiekslittle
interpretativetricks?Letsfirsttakeonthesupremelyunclassifiablefigurewho
somehow,inwaysthatremaintobedefined,presidesoveralliekswork.Oneof
JacquesLacanslateseminarshasthetitleLesNonDupeserrent.Thejokeliesinthe
homophonyofthisenigmaticproposition(theundeceivedaremistaken)withthe
oldestformulaintheLacanianbook,lenomduPre,thenameoftheFatheror,in
otherwords,theOedipuscomplex.However,Lacanslatervarianthasnothingtodo
withtheFather,butratherwiththestructureofdeception.Aseveryoneknows,the
truthisitselfthebestdisguise,aswhenthespy,askedwhathedoesinlife,answers,
Why,Imaspy,onlytobegreetedwithlaughter.Thispeculiarityoftruth,toexpress
itselfmostfullyindeceptionorfalsehood,playsacrucialroleinanalysis,asonemight
expect.Andasonemightalsoexpect,itisinthatgreatnonorantiphilosopherHegel
thatwefindthemostelaboratedeploymentofthedialecticofthenecessityoferrorand
ofwhathecalledappearanceandessence,aswellasthemostthoroughgoing
affirmationoftheobjectivityofappearance(oneofthedeepersubjectsofTheParallax
View).Theothergreatmoderndialectician,TheodorAdorno(whosegenerictone
compareswithieks,perhaps,astragedytocomedy),wasfondofobservingthat

nowherewasHegelclosertohisheroiccontemporaryBeethoventhaninthegreat
thunderchordoftheLogic,theassertionthatEssencemustappear!
Yetthisinsistenceonappearancenowseemstobringusaroundunexpectedlytothe
wholevexedquestionofpostmodernismandpostmodernity,whichissurelynothingif
itisnotawholesalerepudiationofessencesinthenameofsurface,oftruthinthename
offiction,ofdepth(past,presentorfuture)inthenameoftheNietzscheaneternally
recurringhereandnow.iekseemstoidentifypostmodernismwithpostmodern
philosophyandrelativism(anidentificationheshareswithotherenemiesofthese
developments,someofthemantediluvian,someresistanttothereificationofthe
label),whileontheotherhandheendorsesthepropositionofanepochalchange,
providedwedontcallitthatandprovidedweinsistthatitisstill,onwhateverscale,
capitalismsomethingwithwhichIimagineeveryonewillnowadaysbepreparedto
agree.Indeed,someofhisbasicpropositionsareunthinkableexceptwithinthe
frameworkoftheepochal,andofsomenewmomentofcapitalismitselfLacanis
occasionallyenlistedinthetheorisationofthesechanges,whichhavetakenplacesince
Freudmadehismajordiscoveries.
Takethenewdefinitionofthesuperego.Nolongertheinstanceofrepressionand
judgment,oftabooandguilt,thesuperegohastodaybecomesomethingobscene,
whoseperpetualinjunctionis:Enjoy!Ofcourse,theinnerdirectedVictorianmust
equallyhavebeendirectedtoenjoyhisownspecifichistoricalrepressionsand
sublimationsbutthatjouissancewasprobablynotthesamekindofenjoymentasthat
takenbythesubjectofconsumersocietyandofobligatorypermissiveness(Marcuse
calleditrepressivedesublimation),thesubjectofadesperateobligationtoliberate
onesdesiresandtofulfiloneselfbysatisfyingthem.Yetpsychoanalysisalways
involvesatrickyandunstablebalancebetweenthetheorisationofaneternalhuman
psycheandthehistoricalsingularityofcultureandmores:thelattertiltsyoubackinto
periodisation,whiletheeternalmodelissecuredbythesimplereminderthatdesireis
neversatisfied,whetheryouareaVictorianinthralltodutyorapostmodernintenton
pleasure.

Thisisthepointatwhichwereachthemostpersistentofallieksfundamental
themes:namely,thedeathwish,theThanatos,orwhathepreferstocallthedeath
drive.ModerntheoryisindeedhauntedbyFreudsdeathwish,thatbettermousetrap
whichanyselfrespectingintellectualowesittohimselforherselftoinventatheoryof
(Freudsownversionhavingsatisfiednobody).Butwealsooweittoourselvestoretain
everythingthatisparadoxical(orperverse)inieks(orinLacans)versionofthe
matterforheretheThanatoshasnothingtodowithdeathatall.Itshorrorliesinits
embodimentaslifeitself,sheerlife,indeed,asimmortality,andasacursefromwhich
onlydeathmercifullyrelievesus(alltheoperaticovertonesofTheFlyingDutchman
arerelevanthere,allthemythicconnotationsoftheWanderingJew,orindeedthe
vampire,theundead,thosecondemnedtoliveforever).Thedeathdriveiswhatlives
insideusbyvirtueofourexistenceaslivingorganisms,afatethathaslittleenoughto
dowithourbiographicaldestiniesorevenourexistentialexperience:theThanatoslives
throughus(inuswhatismorethanus)itisourspeciesbeingandthisiswhyitis
preferable(followingthelaterLacan)tocallitadriveratherthanadesire,andto
distinguishtheimpossiblejouissanceitdanglesbeforeusfromthehumdrumdesires
andvelleitiesweconstantlyinventandtheneithersatisfyorsubstitute.
Asforjouissance,itisperhapsthecentraloratleastthemostpowerfulcategoryin
ieksexplanatoryresources,aphenomenoncapableofprojectinganewtheoryof
politicalandcollectivedynamicsasmuchasanewwayoflookingatindividual
subjectivity.Buttograsptheimplicationsitisbesttoseejouissanceasarelational
conceptratherthansomeisolatedultimatelydetermininginstanceornamedforce.In
fact,itistheconceptoftheenvyofjouissancethataccountsforcollectiveviolence,
racism,nationalismandthelike,asmuchasforthesingularitiesofindividual
investments,choicesandobsessions:itoffersanewwayofbuildinginthewhole
dimensionoftheOther(bynowawellwornconceptwhich,whennotmerelyadded
mechanicallyontosomeindividualpsychology,evaporatesintoLevinassian
sentimentalism).Thepowerofthisconceptionofenvymayalsobejudgedfromthe
crisisintowhichitputsmerelyconsensualandliberalidealslikethoseofRawlsor

Habermas,whichseemtoincludenoneofthenegativityweexperienceineverydaylife
andpolitics.iek,indeed,includespowerfulcritiquesofothercurrentformsofbien
pensantpoliticalidealismsuchasmulticulturalismandtherhetoricofhumanrights
admirableliberalidealscalculatedtosaptheenergiesofanyseriousmovementintent
onradicalreconstruction.
Alltheseidealspresupposethepossibilityofsomeultimatecollectiveharmonyand
reconciliationastheoperativegoalorendofpoliticalaction.Itwouldbewrongto
identifytheseultimateaimswithutopianthinking,whichonthecontrarypresupposesa
violentrupturewiththecurrentsocialsystem.Rather,theyareassociated,foriek,
withthatquitedifferentabsenceofantagonismdenouncedinhisveryfirstbook,The
SublimeObjectofIdeology(1989),atargetalsoidentifiedbyLacanandwhichhas
alwaysbeencentraliniekstirelessexplanationsandpropagationofLacanian
doctrine.Thisistheconvictionthathumansubjectivityispermanentlysplitandbearsa
gapwithinitself,awound,aninnerdistancethatcanneverbeovercome:something
Lacandemonstratedoverandoveragaininanextraordinarilycomplex(anddialectical)
articulationoftheoriginalFreudianmodels.Buttakenatthislevelofgeneralityitisa
viewthatmighteasilyleadtosocialpessimismandconservatism,toaviewoforiginal
sinandtheincorrigibilityofsomepermanenthumannature.
Itistoforestallandexcludejustsuchadisastrousmisunderstandingofthesocialand
politicalconsequencesoftheLacaniangapthatisthetaskofTheParallaxView.The
bookdoesso,however,notbyanyimmediateextrapolationofthegaporconstitutive
distancefromindividualtocollectivebutratherbyjuxtaposingthetheoretical
consequencesofsplitsubjectivityonavarietyofdisciplinarylevels(whencethe
difficultyoftheopeningchapter).
Aparallax,Websterssays,istheapparentdisplacementofanobservedobjectduetoa
changeinthepositionoftheobserverbutitisbesttoputtheemphasisnotonthe
changeorshift,somuchasonthemultiplicityofobservationalsites,forinmyopinion
itistheabsoluteincommensurabilityoftheresultantdescriptionsortheoriesofthe
objectthatiekisafter,ratherthansomemeresymptomaldisplacement.Theidea
thusbringsusbacktothatoldbugbearofpostmodernrelativism,towhichitiscertainly
related.(Popularlocutionmutesthisscandalbywayofnarrative:Xtellsthestoryof
quantumtheory,ormoderndictatorship,thiswayYtellsadifferentstory.These
convenientandwidelyacceptedturnsofphraseeffacealltheseriousphilosophical
debatesaboutcausality,historicalagency,theEvent,philosophiesofhistory,andeven
thestatusofnarrativeitself,whichisprobablywhyiek,assimilatingtheproblems
themselvestopostmodernphilosophy,hasoftenbeendismissiveofnarrativeassuch.)
Themorefundamentaldifferenceatissuecanbemeasuredbycomparingtheparallax
ideawiththeoldHeisenbergprinciple,whichassertedthattheobjectcanneverbe
known,owingtotheinterferenceofourownobservationalsystem,theinsertionofour
ownpointofviewandrelatedequipmentbetweenourselvesandtherealityinquestion.
Heisenbergisthentrulypostmodernintheassertionofanabsoluteindeterminacyof
therealortheobject,whichwithdrawsintothestatusofaKantiannoumenon.In
parallaxthinking,however,theobjectcancertainlybedetermined,butonlyindirectly,
bywayofatriangulationbasedontheincommensurabilityoftheobservations.

Theobjectthusisunrepresentable:itconstitutespreciselythatgaporinnerdistance
whichLacantheorisedforthepsyche,andwhichrenderspersonalidentityforever
problematic(mansradicalandfundamentaldisadaptation,maladaptation,tohis
environs).Thegreatbinaryoppositionssubjectv.object,materialismv.idealism,
economicsv.politicsareallwaysofnamingthisfundamentalparallaxgap:their
tensionsandincommensurabilitiesareindispensabletoproductivethinking(itselfjust
suchagap),providedwedonotlapseintosomecomplacentagnosticismorAristotelian
moderationinwhichthetruthliessomewhereinbetweenprovided,inotherwords,
weperpetuatethetensionandtheincommensurabilityratherthanpalliatingor
concealingit.
Thereaderwilljudgefromthecasestudiesinthisvolumewhetherparallaxtheoryhas
beenfruitful.Inparticular,thechapteronthedilemmasofcognitivesciencethe

materialbrainandthedataofconsciousnessisasuperbachievementwhich
transcendsSpinozanparallelismtowardstheultimateHegelianparadox:Spiritisa
bone.Asfaraspoliticsisconcerned,itseemstomethatiekslessonisas
indispensableasitisenergising.Hebelieves(asIdo)thatMarxismisaneconomic
ratherthanapoliticaldoctrine,whichmusttirelesslyinsistontheprimacyofthe
economicsystemandoncapitalismitselfastheultimatehorizonofthepolitical
situation(aswellasofalltheotheronessocial,cultural,psychicandsoforth).Yetit
wasalwaysafundamentalmistaketothinkthatMarxismwasaphilosophywhich
aimedatsubstitutingtheultimatelydetermininginstanceoftheeconomicforthatof
thepolitical.KarlKorschtaughtuseightyyearsagothatforMarxismtheeconomicand
thepoliticalaretwodistinctandincommensurablecodeswhichsaythesamethingin
radicallydifferentlanguages.
Sohowtothinkabouttheconcretecombinationstheypresentinreallifeandreal
history?Atthispoint,weglimpsewhatisclearlyieksbasicLacanianmodelfor
parallax:itistheMastersscandalousandparadoxicalideathatbetweenthesexesilny
apasderapportsexuel(SeminarXX).If,forLacan,thereisnosexualrelationship,
iekwrites,then,forMarxismproper,thereisnorelationshipbetweeneconomyand
politics,nometalanguageenablingustograspthetwolevelsfromthesameneutral
standpoint.Thepracticalconsequencesarestartling:
ToputitintermsofthegoodoldMarxistcoupleinfrastructure/superstructure:weshouldtake
intoaccounttheirreducibledualityof,ontheonehand,theobjectivematerial
socioeconomicprocessestakingplaceinrealityaswellas,ontheother,thepolitico
ideologicalprocessproper.Whatifthedomainofpoliticsisinherentlysterile,atheatreof
shadows,butnonethelesscrucialintransformingreality?So,althougheconomyistherealsite
andpoliticsisatheatreofshadows,themainfightistobefoughtinpoliticsandideology.

Thisisafarbetterstartingpointfortheleftthanthecurrentinterminabledebates
aboutidentityv.socialclass(italsoseemstomeamoreappropriateclimaxthanthe
enigmaticreflectionsonBartlebythatactuallyclosethebook).
Butitisappropriate,inthelightoftheearlierdiscussion,toaskjusthowdialecticalthis
nowturnsouttobe.Ithinkanargumentwouldrunsomethinglikethis:thatthird
momentofthedialecticwhichreturnedtoappearanceassuchissometimesdescribed
(inHegelianjargon)asreturningtoappearancequaappearance,toappearancewith
theunderstandingboththatitisappearanceandthatnonethelessasappearanceithas
itsownobjectivity,itsownrealityassuch.Thisispreciselywhathappens,Ibelieve,with
thetwoalternativesoftheparallax,letussaythesubjectiveandtheobjectiveone.To
discoverthatneitherthecodeofthesubjectnorthecodeoftheobjectoffersinitselfan
adequaterepresentationoftheunrepresentableobjectitdesignatesmeansto
rediscovereachofthesecodesassheerrepresentation,tocometotheconvictionthat
eachisbothnecessaryandincomplete,thateachissotospeakanecessaryerror,an
indispensableappearance.Iwouldonlywanttowonderwhethertherearenotmore
complexformsoftheparallaxsituationwhichpositmorethantwoalternatives(onthe
orderofsubjectandobject),butwhichratherconfrontuswithmultiple,yetequally
indispensablecodes.
Icannotconcludewithoutexplainingmyhesitantapprehensionsaboutieksproject.
Clearly,theparallaxpositionisanantiphilosophicalone,foritnotonlyeludes
philosophicalsystemisation,buttakesasitscentralthesisthelattersimpossibility.
Whatwehavehereistheory,ratherthanphilosophy:anditselaborationisitself
parallaxical.Itknowsnomastercode(notevenLacans)andnodefinitiveformulation
butmustberearticulatedinthelocaltermsofallthefigurationsintowhichitcanbe
extrapolated,fromethicstoneurosurgery,fromreligiousfundamentalismtoThe
Matrix,fromAbuGhraibtoGermanIdealism.
Yettheorywasalwaysitselfgroundedonafundamental(andinsoluble)dilemma:
namely,thattheprovisionaltermsinwhichitdoesitsworkinevitablyovertimeget
thematised(tousePauldeMansexpression)theygetreified(andevencommodified,
ifImaysayso),andeventuallyturnintosystemsintheirownright.Theselfconsuming
movementofthetheoreticalprocessgetssloweddownandarrested,itsprovisional
wordsturnintonamesandthenceintoconcepts,theantiphilosophybecomesa
philosophyinitsownright.Myoccasionalfearis,then,thatbytheorisingand
conceptualisingtheimpossibilitiesdesignatedbytheparallaxview,iekmayturnout
tohaveproducedanewconceptandanewtheoryafterall,simplybynamingwhatitis
probablybetternottocalltheunnameable.
WehopeyouenjoyedreadingthisfreebookreviewfromtheLondonReviewof
Books. Registerforfree andenjoy24hoursofaccesstotheentireLRB
archiveofover12,500essaysandreviews.

Contactusforrightsandissuesinquiries.
facebook3 75 twitter

73 share email letter cite

print

Morefromthisissue

ISSN02609592CopyrightLRBLtd.,19972015|SendUsFeedback

Morebythiscontributor

^Top|Librarians|Copyright|Terms&Conditions|Privacy|Sitemap|Accessibility