Changes

[[Lacan]] does not, at this point, develop his own concept of the [[gaze]], and seems to be in general agreemtn agreement with [[Sartre]''s views on the [[subject]].<ref>{{S1}} p. 215</ref>

<blockquote>Of course what ''most often'' manifests a look is the convergence of two ocular globes in my direction. But the look will be given just as well on occasion when there is a rustlin go rustling of branches, or the sound of a footstep followed by silence, or the slight opening of a shutter, or a light movement of a curtain.<ref>[[Jean-Paul Sartre|Sartre, Jean-Paul]]. ''[[Jean-Paul Sartre|Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology]]'', trans. Hazel E. Barnes, London, Methuen, 1958 [1943]. p. 257</ref></blockquote>

===New Concept of the Gaze==Object=====It is only in 1964, with the development of the concept of ''[[objet petit a]]'' as the casue [[cause]] of [[desire]], that [[Lacan ]] devlops his own theory of the [[gaze]], a theory which is quite distinct from [[Sartre]]'s.<ref>{{S11}}</ref>

Whereas Sartre had confalted conflated the [[gaze ]] with the [[gaze|act of looking]], [[Lacan ]] now separates the two; the [[gaze ]] becomes the [[object ]] of the [[gaze|act of looking]], or, to be more precise, the [[object ]] of the [[drive|scopic drive]].

The [[gaze ]] is therefore, in [[Lacan]]'s account, no longer on the side of the [[subject]]; it is the [[gaze ]] of the [[Other]].

=====The Gaze and The Eye=====And [[whereas Sartre ]] had conceived of an essential reciprocity between seing seeing the OTher [[Other]] and being-seen-by-him, [[Lacan ]] now conceives of an antinomic relation between the [[gaze ]] and the [[eye]]: the [[eye ]] which looks is that of the [[subject]], while the [[gaze ]] is on the side of the [[object]], and there is no coincidence between the two, since "You never look at me from the place at which I see you."<ref>{{S11}} p. 103</ref>

When the [[subject ]] looks at an [[object]], the [[object ]] is always already gazing back at the [[subjet]], but from apoitn point at which the [[subject ]] cannot see it.

This [[split ]] between the [[eye ]] and the [[gaze ]] is nothing other than the [[split|subjective division ]] itself, expressed in the field of vision.

The However, many of these critics have conflated [[Lacan]]'s concept of the [[gaze was waken up by psychoanalytic film criticism in ]] with the [[Sarte]]an concept of the 1970s (e.g. MEtz. 1975), especially by feminist film critics[[gaze]] and other ideas on vision such as [[Foucault]]'s account of [[Foucault|panopticism]].

However, many of these critics have confalted Lacan's concept of the gaze with the Sartean concept of the gaze and other dieas on vision such as Foucault's account of panopticism. Much of so-called "Lacanian [[Lacan]]ian [[film theory]]" is thus the site of great conceptual confusion.