Zizek on Ideology and the Relationship Between Ideology and “The Real”

Zizek on political theory and the similarityship Between political theory and The existent CMNS 410 prof Rick Gruneau December 13, 2011 Zizek on political theory and the Relationship Between Ideology and The on-key(a) Slavoj Zizek is unitary of the leading theorists on political orientation since the 1990s and his dreamions of the tangible versus the emblematicalalal versus the imagined argon of crabby grandness when dissecting the question what is political theory? Zizeks follow-up of political orientation and hear to unpack its in ward workings is fascinating, he is a authorful adroit who aims to expose the fake workings of baseball club. In this paper I lead abstr execute Zizeks definition and approach to the memorize of political orientation, paying particular attention to the traffichips he draws betwixt political orientation and the actually, as debate to the imagined and the symbolic. Zizek opens the book Mapping Ideology (1994) with the intro duction The Spectre of Ideology, w present he defines and openly criticizes the appraisal of political theory and its unreal personality.First he presents us with the thought process that political theory is a sort of matrix, a generative matrix that regulates the relationship between visible and non-visible, imaginable and non-imaginable, as advantageously as changes in that relationship (italics mine, p. 1). He yet explains non e rattlingthing that seems to be ideologic, unavoidably is, claiming that unless at that place is a link to precedent relations in the social res publica he does not run into well-nighthing to be ideological.He head miens out that sometimes what we consider to be ideological in detail is not save as well as how at other times, things which we whitethorn not savvy to be ideological, in frankness maintain a very strong ideological orientation. He states that the starting point of the critique of political theory has to be the full ackno wledgment of the circumstance that it is easily possible to lie in the make- entrust of truth political theory that is and this is an authoritative realization for it ispels a common mis patternion we cause of ideology, especially here in the westerly that, ideology is well-nigh lying or misleading others and society. Instead Zizek posits the idea that the field of study of a message is not what makes it ideological, solely instead it is the the musical mode this content is associate to the subjective position implied by its profess process of enunciation that makes it so (Zizek 1994, p. 8).In other watchwords, regardless of whether the content (of a message or object or interaction) is on-key or erroneous, it becomes ideological the molybdenum that content functions to achieve some relation of social domination and as yet more most-valuablely, he adds in an inherently non-transp arnt itinerary, reiterating that often times ideology is in fact of a misleading tempe rament provided not necessarily in content (italics mine, p. 8) it is from this standpoint that we can develop to d aver the stairsstand and critique the concept of ideology.It is outstanding to note here, although Zizek stresses the importance of recognizing dynamics of situation relations ( sort of than content) which bring to passs ideology, he warns this can in like manner be disadvantageous if it reduces the cognitive hold dear of the term ideology and makes it into a unadulterated expression of social circumstances (p. 9). Considering this, as Gerofsky (2010) explains, Zizek takes on Hegels theory of the three-bagger as a heuristic for lonesome(prenominal) developing the theory of ideology, which is something I will address later in this paper, subsequently we go a little tour deeper in defining ideology.According to Zezik then, a necessary condition for something to be ideological is that there must be a relation or motivation to agency in some way, and it must be acquiree so in a way which is not app arnt to the addressees (Zizek, 1994). tranquil this is a rather general and overarching setting when defining the term ideology and it is important to deconstruct the term raze further before we proceed in analyzing its inner workings and effect on society. Zizek states ideology is a systematically distorted chat a text in which under the influence of unavowed social interests (of domination, etcetera a gap separates its official, public center from its actual intention that is to say, we be dealing with an unreflected tension between the definite enunciated content of the text and its pragmatic presuppositions (Zizek, 1994, p. 10). Ideology is a system, he argues, of principles, views, theories destined to move us of its truth, yet actually serving some unavowed particular power interest (p. 10). An ex adeninele Zizek presents to lucubrate this point is the way media envisioned the combat and cause of the Bosnian war. re fresheds insurance coverage consisted of innumerable accounts of the histories of not only Yugoslavia but the entire history of the Balkans from medieval times (p. 5). This incredible amount of breeding, of the struggles and relations between Bosnia and other countries over decades, if not centuries, gives audiences the impression that they must know and gain all the rumpground nurture of this fare if they are to have an opinion on it or take sides, again presenting unconditioned hours of in physical composition and debate on the issue.Zizek explains that although this is a sort of inversion of what we normally constitute as ideological messaging, and it is unlike the conjuring trick and incessant demonization of ibn Talal Hussein ibn Talal Hussein which was circulated to give justice to entering into the Iraq war, the Bosnian war ideological messaging that took array is in fact more cunning, the over exaggerated and false demonization of Saddam Hussein. ecause to put it so mewhat crudely, the evocation of the complexity of circumstances serves to defer us from the responsibility to act (p. 5). He explains that instead of withholding information (as the media most often does), or mis embodying information (Saddam Hussein), in the case of the Bosnian war the media over saturates audiences with information to the point of immobilize them to make a decision or take action against the fact that this war is spurred by political, economic and monetary power interests.Zizek explains the purpose of going into war was portrayed as a need to alter unacceptable human race rights conditions in the country, and although human rights conditions may very well be unacceptable in that country, and then advance as a result of the invasion, the authentic motivations for that war (power, domination, money) were kept concealed. This also illustrates the point made earlier slightly ideology not necessarily needing to be false in its information, but rather unavowed in motive, for the information they presented was by no means false or limited, it was excessive, which proves to be just as debilitating a strategy on the general public.Zizeks examples and definitions of ideology discussed above demonstrate the divider of ideology from Marxs false ken theory (Gerofsky, 2010), but perchance one of the most important classifications Zizek makes in the land of ideology, is its connection to dislocation (dislocating truth from falsity) and how this relates to the idea of the rattling (Stavrakakis,1997). Coming from the Lacanian theoretical rachisground, the concept of Real versus Symbolic versus Imaginary is an intrinsic part of Zizeks theory, one which sets him asunder from traditional conceptions of ideology.The question of the Real also cannot be separated from the dislocation and manifestation of the truth, so these two must be considered together in asserting the concept of ideology. Zizeks Real draws attention to a fascinating idea, th at there is a digression between what is actually real in our cosmea and what is simply a created real by our social structure and by society (Stavrakakis, 1997). The Real, the accredited real, is the part of our world as revealed in our pay off, which escapes our attempts to symbolize and represent it in a final way (1997, p. ). The real is the raw and unstructured acquaintance of what is not yet symbolized or imaged by our social structure, by language, by symbols, and it in fact cannot be symbolized in such(prenominal) a way. Unlike the social frankness, the true Real is out(predicate) to represent, explains Stavrakaki of Zizeks theory, impossible to master or symbolize, whereas the social reality is nothing but symbolism and our rely to cat self-importancerize whatsoever part of our experience into a definition or stuff and nonsense conception of some sort.The real is not only opposed to what is socially constructed as real, the symbolic, but also it is even further r emoved from the imaginary, which falls farthest outside(a) on the spectrum, from true reality. The symbolic comes surrounding(prenominal) to the Real but there is still a gap and something will endlessly be missing from the symbolic real for language can never be a full representation of the real, the true Real however is always in its place. The symbolic real, however is still of importance to Zizek, for it escapes the largest role in our society and is possibly the integral component to ideology in the most general sense.The symbolic, although generally in the dimension of lauguage, Lacan (whos theories Zizek has based his own theories of ideology on) does not describe the symbolic as solely equal to language, because linguistiscs are also present in the realm of the imaginary sphere (Lucaites & Biesecker, 1998). The symbolic rather, is about the relationship to the Other, it is about difference and the phases which create a symbolic order. For Lacan the symbolic is char acterized by the absence of each fixed relations between signifier and signified (Lucaites & Biesecker, 1998).Lastly there is the realm of the imaginary, when Lacan discusses this stage he refers to the formation of the ego. Identification is an important part of the imaginary, for the ego is formed by identifying with the counterpart or specular image (Lucaites & Biesecker, 1998). The ego, basically narcissistic, is centered on identification with lunacy and this alienation is another feature of the imaginary. The imaginary is most fundamentally, however, a constitution of erupt appearances, ones which are formed in conjuring as part of the social order. tone ending back to Zizeks theory on ideology, he suggests that one of the most problematical areas of the concept, is that we as theorists, try to escape from the storage area of ideology in order to see the world from an objective position, however the instant we feel we have managed to take up a position of truth, from which we can excoriate the lie of an ideology, we straight off fall back into the grip of ideology again because our sympathy of the concept is structured on a binary arrangement, which is constantly playing on this relationship between reality and ideology.It is such the issue of ideology, that the moment we feel we are in the realm of truth, at last, we are in fact instantly back into the ideological exchange, without recognizing it (Stavrakakis, 1997). Zezik does not hug drug a solution to this, however he offers a way to counter the problem, and this is where the concept of the Real (vs Symbolic vs Imaginary) comes into play, to help us differentiate and graduation outside the atmosphere of ideology that surrounds us.Instead of the binary relationship between reality and ideology, now there is a three way relationship. Zizek favours the Real over the other two constructs because he argues, the symbolic, although it is representing reality it is in fact where fiction a ssumes the guise of truth (Stavrakakis, p. 3), and the imaginary construct, is of course even farther away from that reality, therefore the Real should be the focus of our understanding.The Real is the only non-ideological position available, and although Zizek does not claim to offer access to the objective truth of things, he explains we must begin with assuming the conception of ideology in every construction of our society, and to take up an actively censorious attitude towards it. This Stavrakakis argues is the main goal of Zizeks theory, to expose the need for constant critique of the ideological realm, especially in a time where our society has proclaimed that ideology is a thing of the sometime(prenominal) and no longer relevant in right aways world.Zizeks theory of ideology is a contemporary one which moves beyond traditional definitions of this concept and is not pertain with the way ideological practices worked in the past and in history, instead he is intrigued wit h the here and now and argues strongly that the concept of ideology is far from extinct in at onces society contrary to what umpteen would like to believe. And he explains that rather than discarding the whimsy solely, what we need to do to understand instantlys politics in a completely new way of sounding at it and defining what it means to be in ideological space and time.Those who believe we are past the concept of ideology, he argues, are in an archeological fantasy and this is only a sign of the greater ability of ideology to ingrain itself without our recognition. In some of his famous presentations Zizek talks about the ideological meaning ingrained even in the simplest of human object and appliances, ones we dont even recognize comport an ideological message. His famous example, and one he self critically acknowledges to be some sort of anal fixation which he needs to address, is the example of toilets and how they are constructed in different ideological environments .In France he explains, toilets are constructed with the localization at the back, so that when used, the evacuation falls directly in the hole and disappears he equates this with Frances exceedingly liberal ideology out of big money out of mind. In Germany, the toilets are constructed with the hole at the front, in a way that holds the excrement on a shelf (not in water or instantly disappearing) but rather in a way for the individual to see and name the specimen for worms and any other diseases he explains this is indicative of the strongly onservative ideology of Germany, where everything is business and completed as necessary. In the Anglo-Saxon world, specifically in America, he explains toilets are somewhere in between, when used the excrement falls in the water but still remains, it is not completely hidden but also not completely displayed this shows the median position the Anglo-Saxon society usually takes on, not too utmost(a) in either respect (Zizek presentation , Youtube. com). This rather disgusting but nonetheless arouse observation does an excellent job of represent his theory on ideology.First, ideology is very much still at play in our society and should be actively observed and considered (in order to minimize any negative and violent effects it may pertain), and secondly, in order to even be able to recognize the workings of ideology in our everyday lives, we have step outside of our customary reality to which we are so well accustomed to, for this symbolic reality is not the Real, and in victorious ourselves out of the imaginary and symbolic which appears to be truth and reality, we can then perhaps attempt to get a true glimpse of what he calls the Real.References Gerofsky, S. (2010). The impossibility of real-life word problems (according to Bakhtin, Lacan, Zizek and Baudrillard). Discourse Studies In The Cultural political relation Of Education, 31(1), 61-73. doi10. 1080/01596300903465427 Lucaites, J. , & Biesecker, B. A. (1998). Rhetorical Studies and the New Psychoanalysis Whats the Real Problem?Or Framing the Problem of the Real. Quarterly journal Of Speech, 84(2), 222. Stavrakakis, Y. (1997). Ambiguous ideology and the Lacanian twist. Journal of the center on for Freudian Analysis and Research, 8, 117-30. Zizek, S. (1994a). The spectre of ideology. In S. Zizek (Ed. ), Mapping ideology (pp. 1-33). London & New York Verso.