[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Glice

Ok, yes. I wrote a long response on Lacan, but essentially, there's no point me hair-splitting over it. I agree with most of what you've said. I would say that, if you can be bothered, then give Lacan another go. But, I really wouldn't recommend it - he's very good, incredibly clever, widely misinterpreted, impossible to practise, exceptionally obscure to read and numerous other things, but he does not, prima facie, say that language governs reality.

oh no i didnt say that it "governs reality" -- i said that language determines our thoughts-- but i'm probably wrong. i mean he talked about "the real" which was beyond language (and beyond the reach of the "subject" supposedly)-- but as far as the "subject" goes isn't language what constructs it? (pardon my imprecisions but i've been drinking)

my problem i suppose has to do with his bad followers (most) that end up saying in so many asinine ways that there is nothing but language. fuck those idiots.

if lacan complained that freud had been misunderstood, what can we say about every other fucking "lacanian" critic? i know... fucking wankers!!!

i would give him a try but first i have to get through freud. i'm a sucker for chronologies.