Saturday, September 19, 2009

Logic of Sexuation and the Real

The masculine logic is the universal and its constitutive exception.

The feminine logic is the not-all. The set is incomplete, but there is no exception to it.

The Real is the irreconcilable difference between the two logics. Here are some simplified examples for the beginner in philosophy that may help give a sense of how this works.

1. In Descartes' Meditations 1-2, the project of methodic doubt functions in a way that is homologous to the feminine logic. The subject as such is feminine, and the subject as such--the feminine subject--is the question.

However, once Descartes isolates his first principle, the cogito, 'I think therefore I am,' he starts with this (allegedly) intuitive knowledge, and begins his attempt to deduce all other kinds of knowledge from it. This project fails: for one thing, it involves a couple of fallacious 'proofs' of God's existence. The process of beginning with a first principle (the cogito) and then deducing all other kinds of knowledge from the cogito is homologous to the masculine logic. Thinking substance is the exception.

2. John Locke's philosophy involves an empiricist theory of knowledge, and a dualist theory of metaphysics. He argues that we receive simple ideas from the two kinds of substance, material substance (matter) and spiritual substance (soul). Out of these simple ideas our minds form complex ideas. Simple ideas of sensation are received into consciousness (through the sense organs) from material substance, and simple ideas of reflection are received into consciousness from the soul. However, Locke acknowledges that we have no knowledge of substance as such, even though all knowledge implies substance (matter and soul) as the origin of the two kinds of simple ideas--from which all complex ideas are formed. Locke's philosophy is homologous to the masculine logic. Substance is the exception.

Hume in a nutshell: Hume is Locke without the notion of substance. What Locke calls 'simple ideas,' Hume calls 'impressions.' What Locke calls 'complex ideas,' Hume calls 'ideas.' Hume argues that the word 'substance' is a word with no meaning, since we have no impression of substance as such. All our knowledge then, is restricted to impressions and the ideas which are faint, weak copies of impressions. Hume's thinking here is homologous to the feminine logic.

3. Kant put simply: Kant distinguishes between phenomena (things-for-us, appearances) and noumena (things-in-themselves). Knowledge is of phenomena (appearances), we have no knowledge of the thing-in-itself which lies behind or beyond the appearance. However, we must presuppose it, especially regarding moral choices, since the phenomenal self is determined, while the noumenal self is free. Kant's philosophy is homologous to the masculine logic. The thing-in-itself is the exception.

Hegel in a nutshell: Hegel is like Kant without the noumena. Appearances are all there is, even though these appearances are incomplete and/or inconsistent with one another. This is homologous to the feminine logic.

4. The relativity of motion. You are standing on a train, and you drop a coin. From your frame of reference, the coin drops approximately 27 inches in a straight-line segment from your hand towards the center of the earth. Now imagine a viewer on the station platform watching through the windows of the train as it speeds past the station at ninety miles per hour. The observer sees the coin leave your hand, and travel forward at ninety miles per hour in the time between when it leaves your hand and when it hits the floor of the train. So the coin actually moved significantly farther than 27 inches, and its path was a forward, downward-sloping curve. Now imagine an observer situated above the surface of the earth. From this frame of reference, the coin not only travels forward as it falls with the movement of the train. In addition, it also travels through space at approximately 1,000 miles per hour with the rotation of the earth. The coin then, moves significantly further than in the previous frame of reference, and the path of its motion is 'twisted' by the earth's rotation. Similarly, there are other, 'broader' frames of reference: the earth also revolves at enormous speed around the sun; the sun revolves at an even greater speed around the center of the milky way galaxy; the galaxy revolves around the center of the cluster of galaxies; the cluster revolves around the center of the supercluster, and the supercluster itself moves. The masculine logic is exemplified if we imagine that there must be some definite, 'true' distance and path of the coin's motion. This unknowable absolute distance and path of motion is the exception that is constituive of all the 'perspectival' descriptions of the coin's motion from the various frames of reference. The definite, 'true' motion is the exception.

The feminine logic in relation to this same example is simply the 'universal perspectivism' of accepting all of the descriptions of the motion from the various frames of reference, while denying the meaning of any definite, 'true' distance and path that somehow exists behind or beyond the various perspectives.

In each of the above 4 examples, the Real is nothing but the difference between the masculine logic and the feminine logic.

Friday, September 18, 2009

Lacanian Definitions

With acknowledgements to Introducing Lacan, written by Darian Leader and illustrated by Judy Groves (Cambridge, UK: Icon Books, 2005).

the subject--the split subject, the divided subject. The subject is a positioning in relation to the Other, a stance adopted with respect to the Other's desire. Whereas the ego is imaginary, the subject is linked to the symbolic. It is divided by the rules of language to which it is subordinate, and split insofar as it does not know what it wants. The divided subject emerges in moments of bungled actions and slips of the tongue. Prior to his symbolic externalization, the subject cannot be said to be 'inexpressible,' since the medium of expression itself is not yet given.
the subject of the enunciation--the one doing the enunciating.
the subject of the enunciated--the subject of the content.
death drive--the subject before subjectivization. Death drive is something like autonomy, or the negativity that is the abyss of freedom.
the Father--the Oedipal function of the Father is as a symbolic function, less a person than a place, which is responsible for separation from the mother. The paternal operation (the Name or 'No!' of the Father) destroys the child's game of trying to be the phallus for the mother. A father becomes Father 'as such,' the bearer of symbolic authority, only insofar as he assumes his 'castration,' the difference between himself in the immediate reality of his being and the place in the symbolic structure which guarantees his symbolic authority: the Father's authority is radically 'decentred' with regard to father as flesh-and-blood person; it is the anonymous symbolic law which speaks through him.
the Name of the Father--this is the symbolic operation that separates mother from child. By her speech the mother situates a reference to something she desires that is beyond the capacity of the child to realize. Castration is the symbolic dimension of the Name of the Father that leads the child to renounce the attempt to be the phallus for the mother.
castration complex--the renunciation of the sustained attempt to be the phallus for the mother. Neurotics are people who have not committed themselves to this renunciation. The child tries to be the phallus for the mother. A boy's use of the penis must involve the acceptance of the fact that there is a symbolic phallus always beyond him. A boy can accept having the phallus insofar as he accepts that having is based on a prior not-having. A girl can accept not having the phallus only insofar as the original phallic identification with her mother is renounced. "Symbolic castration" is the gap between my role in the Symbolic register and the Real, contingent me. Symbolic castration involves the loss of jouissance (pleasure-in-pain) that comes with our entry into language and the symbolic order. Symbolic castration is another name for that which separates us from the Real.
desire--desire is barred from consciousness, unlike a want or a wish. Desire is the process of distortion which turns a wish into some particular image or detail. There is no desire without language. Desire consists of linguistic mechanisms that twist and distort certain elements into others. Desire is a force at work between signifiers. Desire is the essence of the human subject. Desire is the Other's desire. The desire of the Other is a burning question for the child. When the child confronts the enigmatic desire of the Other, it feels unbearable anxiety, since it does not know what the Other wants. Even if the paternal metaphor provides an answer to the burning question with the signification of the phallus, the child must still face the question of its own existence: 'What am I for the Other?' There is a progression from need to demand and then to desire. When the motherer cannot meet the child's impossible demands, the child's dependence on the mother can be overcome. The child must realize that it has desire that does not depend on the mother. When the mother cannot satisfy all of the child's impossible demands, the child is able to begin identifying its own desire. The child's frustrated demands give birth to the child's desire. In this sense, desire is the overcoming of demand.
need--need is primarily physiological, such as the need for food or for shelter. Need can be temporarily eliminated. When it comes to needs, people are similar to animals that do not speak. A newborn infant is in a state of need. Because compared to other animals humans are born biologically premature, they would die without a motherer who tends to their needs.
demand--demand is unsatisfiable. Ultimately it is the demand for love. It is a continuing spiral. Whereas desire is related to specific conditions (as in a fetish), demand is unconditional. The child demands love from its mother. Demands the parents make upon the child include things like 'Eat!' and 'Shit!' After the initial phase of need in infancy, there is a progression from need to demand to desire. A child who demands particular things from its mother will soon afterward demand something else. The child is demanding an object that does not really exist, since he is demanding something that finally will not be given. The child demands until it learns that the mother cannot meet all of its demands. The child demands the impossible (proof of love) in order to separate from the mother. The barred subject in relation to the demands of the parents constitutes the drive. Drives are partial and are tied to specific parts of the body's surface. The drive is not biological like need. The drive is generated by the demands the parents make upon the child ('Eat!', 'Shit!').
the phallus--the object of the mother's desire. That beyond the child towards which the mother's desire is directed. The child tries to be the phallus for the mother. The phallus signifies desire and what we do not have, what is lacking. The phallus is the way the unconscious represents loss. The phallus is the penis plus the idea of lack or absence. It is what one searches for in the mother. The phallus is never 'there' in anyone's experience. The phallus is like a screen or a veil.
the big Other--the Lacanian big Other is the intersubjective, symbolic network which desires for us, and on whose behalf we desire. The big Other is the set of linguistic elements and their otherness.
fantasy--the imaginary scenario that, by means of its fascinating presence, curtains the lack in the big Other. The fantasy hides the inconsistency of the symbolic order; fantasy masks the fundamental impossibility implied in the very act of symbolization. Fantasy conceals the impossibility of the sexual relationship. Fantasy is the ultimate support of our 'sense of reality.' Fantasy constitutes our desire; fantasy teaches us how to desire.
speech--speech is an act, involving subject and other.
language--language is a structure, a formal system of differences.
repression--repression involves overlooking the Real of our desire. Repression occurs when we believe too much in the social 'reality,' the fragile symbolic web that protects us from the unconscious, from the Real of our desire.
jouissance--anything which is too much for the organism to bear. Jouissance is not 'enjoyment' in the sense of please; it is felt most of the time as suffering. What we experience as suffering is experienced by the unconscious drives as satisfaction. Jouissance is Real; it is outside of symbolization and meaning.
neurotic--neurotics have not accepted symbolic castration. They have not renounced the attempt to be the phallus for the mother. The neurotic wants to be the phallus for the mother. The neurotic privileges demand and hides his desire beneath the imposing presence of demand.
psychosis--in psychosis, the Name of the Father is not repressed, but obliterated. When an element is merely repressed, it returns in one's speech, in the signifying chain, in the symbolic. But when an element is foreclosed, it can't return in the symbolic, because it never existed there; it was rejected or banished. Hence it returns in the Real, e.g., in hallucinations. A psychotic delusion tries to supply the missing signification in the place of the hole opened up by the absence of the Name of the Father. A psychotic delusion gives sense to a menacing, meaningless world. The delusional signification replaces the standard Oedipal one.
superego--superego designates the intrusion of enjoyment (jouissance, not pleasure) into the field of ideology. Superego is the revenge that capitalizes on our guilt--the price we pay for betwraying our desire in the name of the Good. Superego is the necessary inverse or underside of the Ego-Ideal, of the ethical norms founded upon the Good of the community.
symptom--something in mind or body which intrudes into your life to bring you misery. The symptom represents a portion of jouissance which has not been dislodged, and which has come back to disrupt your existence.
ego--the ego is an other. The ego is the site of imaginary identifications. This is not the same as the 'I' of speech. The ego is the place from which we speak.
Ideal-Ego--the image I assume, the other I identify with, the imaginary other.
Ego-Ideal--the Other as desire. The point from which you are looked at. It involves the symbolic register. The Ego-Ideal is the one I think is watching me; the symbolic point which gives me a place (e.g., God).
masculine subject position (masculine sexuation)--universality and its constitutive exception.
feminine subject position (feminine sexuation)--no exception to the set, which renders the set non-all.
sinthome--the element which can serve to bind the three orders of Real, symbolic, and imaginary. The word play in French on 'sinthome' involves references to symptom, Saint, and Saint Thomas.
S1--the master signifier: a signifier with no signified content. A master signifier presents itself as a dead end, a stopping point, a term, word, or phrase that puts an end to discussion. The master signifier is the One, the signifier for which all the others represent the subject.
the four discourses--the Master's discourse, the University discourse, the Analyst's discourse, and the Hysteric's discourse.
the four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis--the unconscious, repetition, the drive, and transference.
the Real--the Real is not a circulating object in the symbolic register. Instead the Real is a remainder, a left-over scrap of the whole operation of entering the symbolic. The Real is that which isn't symbolized, which is excluded from both the imaginary register and the symbolic register. The Real is what is not present in a positive way in 'reality.' The Real is irreducible antagonism, trauma, or paradox.
the graph of desire--from Lacan's 1960 text 'Subversion of the Subject and Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious,' which is maybe the most important text in Lacan's Ecrits.
object a, objet a, objet petit a--the surplus, that elusive make-believe that drives us to change our existence. The cause of desire. An empty form filled out by everyone's desire. The objet petit a is the object that has come into being by being lost. It only operates its fascination on individuals who bear a partial perspective on it. The objet petit a is the object-cause of desire. The object a is a quite ordinary, everyday object that, as soon as it is 'elevated to the status of the Thing,' starts to function as a kind of screen, an empty space on which the subject projects the fantasies that support his desire; it is a surplus of the Real that propels us to narrate again and again our first traumatic encounters with jouissance.
anxiety--the price we pay for the absence of shame. Anxiety occurs not when the object-cause of desire is lacking; it is not the lack of the object that gives rise to anxiety, but, on the contrary, the danger of our getting too close to the object and thus losing the lack itself. Anxiety is brought on by the disappearance of desire.

Socialism in the USA

Socialism: What it is and why we need it

Public forums around the country this fall

http://socialistworker.org/socialism-fall-meetings

The word "socialism" has returned to the mainstream of American political debate. But there are widespread misconceptions about what socialism is--and what it isn't.

Republicans fret that the U.S. is fast becoming a socialist country--with government spending on bank bailouts and Barack Obama's proposed health care reform. But the genuine tradition of "socialism from below" means more than state intervention in the economy.

Socialism is really about the struggle to oppose discrimination in all its forms and to put the needs of working people before corporate profits.

Come to a meeting sponsored by the International Socialist Organization to discuss the idea of socialism--and socialist strategies for changing the world.

Below is a list meetings in cities and towns around the U.S. Check back here for updated information and more listings.

East

Albany, N.Y. | September 17, 7:30 p.m.
University of Albany Uptown Campus, Campus Center. Contact ISOAlbany@gmail.com or 518-677-1046 for more information.

Amherst, Mass. | October 1, 7:30 p.m.
UMass Campus Center. Contact charlest.peterson@gmail.com for more information.

Baltimore, Md. | September 30, 7 p.m.
First Unitarian Church, Charles and Franklin Streets. Contact iso_baltimore@yahoo.com for more information.

College Park, Md. | September 22, 7 p.m.
University of
Maryland-College Park. Contact iso_district@Yahoo.com or 202-903-6906 for more information.

Burlington, Vt. | September 9, 7 p.m.
University of Vermont, Lafayette 302. Contact 914-434-2484 for more information.

Ithaca, N.Y. | September 10, 7:30 p.m.
Cornell University Campus, Willard Straight Hall Music Room. ContactYolandaLutefisk@gmail.com for more information.

New Haven, Ct. | September 9, 7:30 p.m.
Southern
Connecticut State University, Engelman Hall, Room A120. Contact 203-645-9473 for more information.

New York City-Barnard/Columbia | September 17, 7:30 p.m.
Columbia University, Hamilton Hall. Contact columbia.iso@gmail.com for more information.

New York City-Hunter College | September 9, 7:15 p.m.
Hunter College, Thomas Hunter 305B. Contact hunterisoclub@gmail.com for more information.

New York City-Jackson Heights/Queens | September 23, 7 p.m.
The Diversity Center, 76-11 37th Ave., 2nd Floor. Contact isojacksonheights@gmail.com for more information.

New York City-Uptown/CCNY | September 10, 7 p.m.
La Pregunta Cafe, 1528 Amsterdam Ave. Contact ISO.Uptown.Branch@gmail.com for more information.

Providence, R.I. | September 14, 7 p.m.
Rhode Island College, Gaige Hall Room 209. Contact iso_ri@yahoo.com or 401-525-1957 for more information.

Rochester, N.Y. | September 17, 7:30 p.m.
Rochester Institute of Technology Library. Contact rochiso@yahoo.com or 585-857-4732 for more information.

Washington, D.C. | September 24, 7 p.m.
Location TBD. Contact iso_district@Yahoo.com or 202-903-6906 for more information.

Midwest

Champaign, Ill. | September 28, 6 p.m.
University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, Greg Hall, Room 307. Contact iso.champaign@gmail.com or 217 649-8830 for more information.

Chicago-Loop | September 16, 7 p.m.
DePaul University, Downtown Campus, 1 E. Jackson, 11th Floor, Room 11013 . Contact isc.uic@gmail.com or 312-771-5699 for more information.

Madison, Wis.-University of Wisconsin | September 10, 7:30 p.m.
University of
Wisconsin, check "Today in the Union" board at Memorial Union for location. Contact 608-358-6822 for more information.

Madison, Wis.-MATC | September 10, 12:30 p.m.
Madison Area Technical College, Truax Campus, Student Lounge. Contact MadisonISO@gmail.com for more information.

Toledo, Ohio | September 3, 7 p.m.
University of
Toledo Student Union, Room 2591. Contact iso_toledo@yahoo.com or 330-571-5072 for more information.

South

Atlanta | September 2, 8 p.m.
Georgia State University, 503 General Classroom Building. Contact atlantaiso@gmail.com or 404-838-7127 for more information.

Austin, Texas | September 10, 7 p.m.
University of Texas, Parlin Hall, Room 201. Contact AustinSocialist@hotmail.com for more information.

Charlotte, N.C. | September 17, 7:30 p.m.
University of North Carolina, Fretwell Building, Room 121. For more information, go to charlotteiso.blogspot.com or call 704-909-9276.

Denton, Texas | September 9, 7 p.m.
University of North Texas, Wooten Hall, Room 121. Contact Dentonlabor@gmail.com for more information.

Gainesville, Fla. | September 10, 7 p.m.
University of Florida, Anderson Hall, Room 34. Contact gainesvilleiso@gmail.com or 352-246-2240 for more information.

Greensboro, N.C. | September 3, 7 p.m.
University of North Carolina-Greensboro, Graham Building, 3rd floor. Contact iso_gso@yahoo.com or 336-312-2918 for more information.

Houston, Texas | September 16, 8 p.m.
University of Houston-Main, University Center, Baltic Room. Contact houston.iso@gmail.com or 713-560-7227 for more information.

West

Berkeley, Calif. | September 3, 7 p.m.
University of California-Berkeley, 251 Dwinelle Hall. Contact berkeley.iso@gmail.com or 510-316-2781 for more information.

Los Angeles | September 9, 7 p.m.
University of Southern California, Leavey Library Auditorium. Contact lacityiso@yahoo.com or 213-309-2713 for more information.

Oakland, Calif. | September 15, 6 p.m.
Laney College, Student Center, Room TBA. Contact laney.iso@gmail.com or 510-325-0599 for more information.

Portland, Ore. | September 24, 7 p.m.
Portland State University, Smith Memorial Student Union Room 236. For more information, go to portlandsocialists.org.

San Diego | September 25, 6 p.m.
City Heights Recreation Center,
4380 Landis Street (NE Corner of Fairmount and Landis). Contact isosandiego@yahoo.com or 619-865-0621 for more information.

San Francisco-CCSF | September 10, 11 a.m.
City College of
San Francisco, Cloud 122. Contact missioniso@yahoo.com for more information.

San Francisco-SFSU | September 2, 7 p.m.
SF
State University, Cesar Chavez Student Center, Richard Oakes Multicultural Center. Contact sidpatel99@yahoo.com for more information.

Seattle | October 7, 7 p.m.
University of Washington, Gowen Hall, Room 201. For more information, go to seattleiso.org.

If you'd like to list a fall Socialism meeting or add more information, e-mail reports@socialistworker.org.

Monday, September 7, 2009

The Split Subject

From Slavoj Žižek: Interrogating the Real, edited by Rex Butler and Scott Stephens (London: Continuum, 2005, 2006), p. 373-4:

For Žižek, the subject is first of all a critical position from which to analyze ideology: it stands for that empty point which precedes ideology and from which ideology is articulated. In this sense, the subject is to be opposed to subjectivization, which is precisely that process of the internalizing and the making natural of ideology: 'As soon as we constitute ourselves as ideological subjects, as soon as we respond to the interpellation and assume a certain subject-position ... we are overlooking the radical dimension of social antagonism, that is to say, the traumatic kernel the symbolization of which always fails; and ... it is precisely the Lacanian notion of the subject as the "empty place of the structure" which describes the subject in its confrontation with antagonism, the subject which isn't covering up the traumatic dimension of social antagonism' (p. 251). To this extent, the subject can be thought as a certain excess of ideological interpellation, that which in a way remains 'beyond interpellation': 'that which defines the subject, let us not forget, is precisely the question' (p. 39). The experience of subjectivity is thus an experience of pure negativity, in which every aspect of identity must be lost or sacrificed: '[In] "tarrying with the negative," ... Hegel's whole point is that the subject does not survive the ordeal of negativity: he effectively loses his very essence and passes over into his Other' (p. 200). The correlative of the subject within the symbolic order can therefore be thought of as objet a, that which stands in for the Real: 'the matheme for the subject is $, an empty place in the structure, an elided signifier, while objet a is by definition an excessive object, an object that lacks its place in the structure' (p. 178). This equivalence must nevertheless be clarified: 'The parallel between the void of the transcendental subject ($) and the void of the transcendental object--the inaccessible X that causes our perceptions--is misleading here: the transcendental object is the void beyond phenomenal appearances, while the transcendental subject already appears as a void' (p. 215).

Other

From Slavoj Žižek: Interrogating the Real, edited by Rex Butler and Scott Stephens (London: Continuum, 2005, 2006), p. 372-3:

Žižek's ultimate position is that there is no 'Other of the Other', that is, no final guarantee of the symbolic order: 'There is no "big Other" guaranteeing the consistency of the symbolic space within which we dwell: there are just contingent, punctual and fragile points of stability' (p. 306). More precisely, a certain 'lack' in the Other at once is necessary for the symbolic order to function and offers a way of thinking an 'outside' of or 'beyond' to the symbolic order. That is, on the one hand, 'if the Other is not fractured ... the only possible relationship of the subject to the structure is that of total alienation, of a subjection without remainder; but the lack in the Other means that there is a remainder, a non-integratable residuum in the Other, objet a, and the subject is able to avoid alienation only insofar as it posits itself as the correlative of this remainder' [here follows Lacan's formula for fantasy: the split subject in relation to the objet a] (p. 31).

And, on the other [hand], 'This other, hidden Law acts the part of the "Other of the Other" in the Lacanian sense, the part of the meta-guarantee of the consistency of the big Other (the symbolic order that regulates social life)' (p. 230). This lack of the Other of the Other has immense consequences for the thinking of ethics and the political: their basis would not be some 'respect for the Other' but the attempt, for a moment, to become the Other or embody the symbolic order, with the symbolic order itself arising only as the after-effect of such 'free' actions: 'For Lacan, the ultimate horizon of ethics is not the infinite debt towards an abyssal Otherness. The act is for him strictly correlative to the suspension of the "big Other"' (p. 318). This will lead Žižek towards consideration of the Pauline notion of love: love as the giving of that which one does not have, that is, something not backed by any symbolic guarantee.

Objet a

From Slavoj Žižek: Interrogating the Real, edited by Rex Butler and Scott Stephens (London: Continuum, 2005, 2006), p. 372:

Objet a, one of Lacan's most famous 'mathemes' or conceptual neologisms, is first of all that element standing in for the Real within any symbolic system. It is at once what cannot be accounted for within this system and yet what produces this system as the attempt to speak of it. It is in this abstract, nonpathological sense that Žižek describes objet a as the object-cause of desire: 'The fundamental thesis of Lacan is that this impossible object is nevertheless given to us in a specific experience, that of the objet petit a, object-cause of desire, which is not "pathological," which does not reduce itself to an object of need or demand' (p. 121). And, as Žižek goes on to say, the aim of the analysis of ideology is to bring out the double status of this objet a, as both what completes the symbolic circle of authority, acting as the guarantee or Other of its Other, and what cannot be accounted for within it, what always appears as excessive within its officially stated rationale: 'The aim of the "critique of ideology," of the analysis of an ideological edifice, is to extract this symptomatic kernel which the official, public ideological text simultaneously disavows and needs for its undisturbed functioning' (p. 269). This objet a can take many forms within ideology: seemingly transgressive enjoyment, racism, paranoia, the belief in an explanation hidden behind the public one. To this extent, it functions as the 'master-signifier' of the master-signifier--and Žižek's point, following Lacan, is to reveal that there is no Other of the Other, that the Other does not possess objet a or the cause of our desire, but that in a way we do: we are ultimately our own cause. That is, if on the one hand, 'Lacan defines objet a as the fantasmatic "stuff" of the I, as that which confers on $, on the fissure in the symbolic order, on the ontological void that we call "subject," the ontological consistency of a "person"', on the other it is 'what Lacan, in his last phase at least, referred to as the "subjective destitution" which is involved in the position of the analyst, of the analyst as occupying the position of objet petit a' (p. 56).

Master-Signifier

From Slavoj Žižek: Interrogating the Real, edited by Rex Butler and Scott Stephens (London: Continuum, 2005, 2006), p. 371:

One of Žižek's key terms and the centrepiece of his renewed analysis of ideology is the notion of the master-signifier. Žižek provides perhaps two accounts of how the master-signifier works in making appear natural or conventional what is in fact a forced and artificial construction of reality: 'The elementary operation of the point de capiton should be sought in this "miraculous" turn, in this quid pro quo by means of which what was previously the very source of disarray becomes proof and testimony of a triumph' (p. 116); and 'the Master-Signifier [is] no longer a simple abbreviation that designates a series of markers but the name of the hidden ground of this series of markers that act as so many expressions-effects of this ground' (p. 186). That is, the master-signifier is not a simple empirical quality that makes sense of previously existing circumstances, but rather a kind of radical hypothesis that proposes an always unrepresentable signifier through which these very circumstances become visible for the first time. 'Therein resides the paradoxical achievement of symbolization: the vain quest for the "true meaning" (the ultimate signified) is supplanted by a unique signifying gesture' (p. 277). But if this is the unique strength and power of a master-signifier--that it is not simply an empirical designation, that it already takes into account our own distance from it, its inability to be definitively stated--it is also this that opens up a certain way out of it, for we are always able to point to a deeper explanation of it, what it itself stands in for and what allows it to be stated. It is something like this that is to be seen in Hegel's notion of concrete universality and in Žižek's thinking of the empty space of enunciation. As Žižek writes of the way that the master-signifier is its own limit: Lacan, in contrast to Derrida, 'directly offers a concept of this element [of the supplement], namely the concept of the Master-Signifier, S1 in relation to S2 ... In Lacan, S1 stands for the supplement ... and, simultaneously, for the totalizing Master-Signifier ... the Centre which Derrida endeavors to "deconstruct" is ultimately the very supplement which threatens to disrupt its totalizing power' (p. 194).