Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Fetish/Fetishistic disavowal

253 bytes removed, 17:53, 3 September 2006
no edit summary
{{Top}}fétichisme{{Bottom}}
==Definition==
The term "[[fetishism|fetish]]" first came into widespread use in the eighteenth century in the context of the study of "[[religion|primitive religions]]", in which it denoted an inanimate object of worship.
In the nineteenth century, [[Marx]] borrowed the term to describe the way that, in capitalist societies, social relations assume the illusory form of relations between things ("[[commodity fetishism (fÈtichisme]]]") The term 'fetish' first came into widespread use.
==Perversion==It was Krafft-Ebing who, in the eighteenth century in context last decade of the study of 'primitive religions'nineteenth century, infirst applied the term to [[sexuality|sexual behavior]].
He defined [[fetishism]] as a [[perversion|sexual perversion]] in which it denoted an inanimate [[enjoyment|sexual excitement]] is absolute dependent on the [[presence]] of a specific [[object of worship]] (the [[fetishism|fetish]]). (an etymology which Lacan
believes The [[fetishism|fetish]] is important; S8, 169)usually an inanimate [[object]] such as a shoe or piece of underwear. In the nineteenth century, Marx borrowed the
term to describe the way ==Sigmund Freud==[[Freud]] argued that, [[fetishism]] (seen as an almost exclusively [[male]] [[perversion]]) originates in capitalist societies, social relations assume the[[child]]'s horror of [[female]] [[castration]].
illusory form Confronted with the [[mother]]'s [[lack]] of relations between things a [[penis]], the [[fetishism|fetishist]] [[disavow]]s this [[lack]] and finds an [[object]] (the [[fetish]]) as a [[symbolic]] [[substitute]] for the mother'commodity fetishism')s [[lack|missing]] [[penis]].<ref>{{F}}. "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Fetishism]]", 1927e. It was[[SE]] XXI, 149</ref>
Krafft-Ebing who==Jacques Lacan==In [[Lacan]]'s first approach to the subject of [[fetishism]], in the last decade 1956, he argues that [[fetishism]] is a particularly important area of the nineteenth century, first appliedstudy and bemoans its neglect by his contemporaries.
He stresses that the equivalence between the [[fetishism|fetish]] and the term [[mother|maternal]] [[phallus]] can only be understood by reference to sexual behaviour[[linguistic]] transformations, and not by reference to "vague analogies in the visual field" such as comparisons between fur and pubic hair. He defined fetishism as a sexual PERVERSION "<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Variantes de la cure-type]]", in{{E}} [1956b]. p. 267)</ref>
which sexual excitement is absolutely dependent on He cites [[Freud]]'s [[analysis]] of the presence phrase "''Glanz auf der Nase''" as support for his argument.<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of a specificSigmund Freud|Fetishism]]", 1927e. [[SE]] XXI, 149</ref>
object (==Penis and Phallus==In the following years, as [[Lacan]] develops his distinction between the [[penis]] and [[phallus]], he emphasises that the [[fetishism|fetish)]] is a substitute for the latter, not the former. It is this defmition that Freud and most other writers on
sexuality have adopted since==Disavowal==[[Lacan]] also extends the mechanism of [[disavowal]], making it the operation constitutive of [[perversion]] itself, and not just of the [[fetishism|fetishistic]] [[perversion]]. The fetish is usually an inanimate object such as
a shoe ==Male Perversion==However, he retains [[Freud]]'s view that [[fetishism]] is an exclusively [[male]] [[perversion]],<ref>{{Ec}} p. 734</ref> or piece of underwearat least extremely rare among [[women]].<ref>{{S4}} p.154</ref>
Freud argued that ==Phobic Object==In the [[seminar]] of 1956-7, [[Lacan]] elaborates an important distinction between the [[fetishism|fetish]] [[object]] and the [[phobic]] [[object]]; whereas the [[fetish]] is a [[fetishism (seen as |symbolic]] substitute for the [[mother]]'s [[lack|missing]] [[phallus]], the [[phobia|phobic]] [[object]] is an almost exclusively male perversion)[[imaginary]] substitute for [[symbolic]] [[castration]].
originates ==Preoedipal Triangle==Like all [[perversion]]s, [[fetishism]] is rooted in the [[preoedipal]] [[structure|triangle]] of [[mother]]-[[child's horror of female castration]]-[[phallus]].<ref>{{S4}} p. Confronted with the84-5, 194</ref>
However, it is unique in that it involves both [[identification]] with [[mother]] and with the [[imaginary]] [[phallus]]; indeed, in [[fetishism]], the [[subject]] oscillates between these two [[identification]]s.<ref>{{S4}} p. 86, 160</ref>
==Women==
[[Lacan]]'s statement, in 1958, that the [[penis]] "takes on the value of a fetish" for heterosexual women raises a number of interesting questions.<ref>{{E}} p. 290</ref>
Firstly, it reverses [[Freud]]'s views on [[fetishism]]; rather than the [[fetishism|fetish]] being a [[symbolic]] substitute for the [[real]] [[penis]], the [[real]] [[penis]] may itself become a [[fetishism|fetish]] by substituting the [[woman]]'s [[absent]] [[symbolic]] [[phallus]].
Secondly, it undermines the claims (made by both [[Freud]] and [[Lacan]]) that [[fetishism]] is extremely rare among [[women]]; if the [[penis]] can be considered a [[fetishism|fetish]], then [[fetishism]] is clearly far more prevalent among [[women]] than among [[men]].
mother's lack of a penis, the fetishist disavows this lack and finds an object==See Also=={{See}}* [[Castration]]* [[Disavowal]]||* [[Imaginary]]* [[Lack]]||* [[Mother]]* [[Perversion]]||* [[Phallus]]* [[Phobia]]||* [[Symbolic]]* [[Woman]]{{Also}}
(the fetish) as a symbolic substitute for the mother's missing penis (Freud,  1927e).  In Lacan's first approach to the subject of fetishism, in 1956, he argues that  fetishism is a particularly important area of study and bemoans its neglect by  his contemporaries. He stresses that the equivalence between the fetish and the  maternal PHALLUs can only be understood by reference to linguistic transforma-  tions, and not by reference to 'vague analogies in the visual field' such as comparisons between fur and pubic hair (Lacan, 1956b: 267). He cites Freud's analysis of the phrase 'Glanz auf der Nase' as support for his argument (see  Freud, 1927e).  In the following years, as Lacan develops his distinction between the penis  and phallus, he emphasises that the fetish is a substitute for the latter, not the  former. Lacan also extends the mechanism of DISAVOWAL, making it the operation constitutive of perversion itself, and not just of the fetishistic perversion. However, he retains Freud's view that fetishism is an exclusively  male perversion (Ec, 734), or at least extremely rare among women (S4, 154).  In the seminar of 1956-7, Lacan elaborates an important distinction between  the fetish object and the phobic object; whereas the fetish is a symbolic  substitute for the mother's missing phallus, the phobic object is an imaginary  substitute for symbolic castration (see PHOBIA). Like all perversions, fetishism  is rooted in the preoedipal triangle of mother-child-phallus (S4, 84-5, 194).  However, it is unique in that it involves both identification with mother and  with the imaginary phallus; indeed, in fetishism, the subject oscillates between  these two identifications (S4, 86, 160).  Lacan's statement, in 1958, that the penis 'takes on the value of a fetish' for  heterosexual women raises a number of interesting questions (E, 290). Firstly,  it reverses Freud's views on fetishism; rather than the fetish being a symbolic  substitute for the real penis, the real penis may itself become a fetish by substituting the woman's absent symbolic phallus. Secondly, it undermines  the claims (made by both Freud and Lacan) that fetishism is extremely rare  among women; if the penis can be considered a fetish, then fetishism is clearly  far more prevalent among women than among men. == def ==The displacement of desire and fantasy onto alternative objects or body parts (eg. a foot fetish or a shoe fetish), in order to obviate a subject's confrontation with the castration complex. Freud came to realize in his essay on "Fetishism" that the fetishist is able at one and the same time to believe in his phantasy and to recognize that it is nothing but a phantasy. And yet, the fact of recognizing the phantasy as phantasy in no way reduces its power over the individual. Octave Mannoni, in an influential essay, phrased this paradoxical logic in this way: "je sais bien, mais quand-même" or "I know very well, but nevertheless." Zizek builds on this idea in theorizing the nature of ideology, which follows a similar contradictory logic. Kristeva goes so far as to associate all language with fetishism: "It is perhaps unavoidable that, when a subject confronts the factitiousness of object relation, when he stands at the place of the want that founds it, the fetish becomes a life preserver, temporary and slippery, but nonetheless indispensable. But is not exactly language our ultimate and inseparable fetish? And language, precisely, is based on fetishist denial ('I know that, but just the same,' 'the sign is not the thing, but just the same,' etc.) and defines us in our essence as speaking beings."<ref>37</ref> (fEtichisme) == References ==
<references/>
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]][[Category:Jacques Lacan]][[Category:Practice]][[Category:Dictionary]][[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Sexuality]][[Category:Imaginary]][[Category:Symbolic]][[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Terms]]
[[Category:ConceptsEdit]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]{{OK}} __NOTOC__
Riot Hero
Root Admin, Bots, Bureaucrats, flow-bot, oversight, Administrators, Widget editors
24,656
edits
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/Special:MobileDiff/1943...16270"

Navigation menu