[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 85 KB, 775x828, 1414516435525.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5816109 No.5816109 [Reply] [Original]

Why the fuck do so many people care about Lacan?
Other than Zizek and /lit/ I've literally never seen or heard him referenced and I'm starting to think I'm being trolled. He seems like a charlatan, to a greater degree than most Frenchmen do.

>> No.5816252

>blablabla
>I never see it in my circle of friends so no one care
>I see in my circle of friends that means it's important
>blabla hack charlatan I won't even bother reading
>yadda yadda some prejudice here
>wahwahwah I read a paragraph and didn't get it and didn't want to get it and I hate it so much
>omg why do you like him?? pls don't tell me I don't care
>wahhh I'm a huge baby

>> No.5816372

muh real
muh imaginary
muh symbolic
muh unconscious is a language

>> No.5816375

>>5816252
So instead of being mature and demonstrating why OP is wrong, you regress into immaturity?
Nice.
freudsmokingacigarface.jpg

>> No.5816384

>>5816109
based Lacan gunna rape your brain yo

>> No.5816472

>>5816109
There are three main figures in a field called "psychoanalysis": Sigmund Freud, C. G. Jung and Jacques Lacan. It appears that psychoanalysis influenced post-1950 continental philosophy and occidental literature quite a bit. Therefore, people care about Lacan.

Also:
>he's a charlatan
>never read him
>don't know what he talks about

Grow the fuck up.

>> No.5816486

>>5816472
Even people that read him and understand him call him a charlatan.
underage undergrad pls go

>> No.5816487

I think his idea of the unconscious as linguistic and symbolic means he is easily translatable into literary criticism. It's a way for desires to be talked about in terms of a structure or system within the text. eg Julie Kristeva's project on 'abjection'

>> No.5816490

>>5816109
>Why the fuck do so many people care about Lacan?

Because people like philosophers who confirm their wishful thinking.

It's the same kind of bullshit as when you hear an SJW say that because of the metaphysics of presence, white people can't have an opinion on racial matter, or even more insanely, science is just the blabber of white people, and can't possibly be true any of it, because it's just the "opinions" and "perspectives" of white people.

Literal insanity.

>> No.5816493

Lacan has always been big in france and is usually the refuge of those who like psychoanalytically-flavoured bullshit and are afraid of being laughed at.
But he is indeed a mystic hack just like freud

>> No.5816530
File: 149 KB, 357x917, Lacan is quoted.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5816530

>>5816486
Where are you, anon?

>> No.5816541

>>5816530
>wahhh look a bunch of bureaucratic charlatans quote my favorite charlatan
>stop being mean to my favorite obscurantist hack

>> No.5816545

>>5816530
>ad populum
Why don't you tell us about how much you liked the latest Harry Potter, anon.

>> No.5816551
File: 244 KB, 1066x836, Lacan is quoted 2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5816551

>>5816486
Where are you, anon?

>> No.5816554

>>5816545
>ad populum
>academia counts as popular

What is not populum according to you? Browsing /lit/?

>> No.5816556

>>5816530
>quoting Lacan

And people are suprised why humanities are such a joke these days.

>> No.5816565

>>5816541
>bureaucratic charlatan
>EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A CHARLATAN
>NO FACTS PLEASE, JUST PASSIONS AND FEELS

>> No.5816568

>>5816556
>implying humanities ever were not a joke

>> No.5816581

>>5816565
>wahhh my bureaucratic professor quotes lacan
>therefore, lacan is not a charlatan