How do psychoanalytic theories, as offered by Freud, Lacan, and Zizek, add to our understanding of popular culture? Do you see any of their arguments contributing new insights into films or videos we’ve viewed this semester? What drawbacks are there to this mode of theory?
Theories of Popular Culture
Class blog for AMST0355, Spring 09, Middlebury College
To begin with the drawbacks (and criticism/revision of Freud is certainly well-trodden ground): I think the primary drawback in using psychoanalytic theory to analyze culture is that it’s founded on the fact that the important things at the heart of a text are the very same things that our minds go through great trouble to repress.
Sorry for that very long, comma-less sentence.
Anyway, trying to study the human truths that our minds supposedly keep hidden from us is, understandably, a tricky matter. That being said, I was surprised at how much psychoanalysis had to offer; I discovered I know much less than I thought about Freud’s theories, not to mention Lacan’s, which offered many fresh ideas.
For that reason, it seems to me that psychoanalysis is extremely widely adaptable and useful in understanding culture; I think Storey shows this with his entertaining symbolic interpretation of Little Red Riding Hood. On top of that, I think Laura Mulvey’s ideas about pleasure and the “male gaze” could be applied to, well…almost everything we’ve watched. I think that was probably her point. If only she still had such interesting things to say…
My brain continues to fail when it comes to psychoanalysis.
Ok, so I get the Oedipus complex, I think, and the narcissism/mirror theory more or less, and I’ve read VPiNC enough times to get the gist of the male gaze and the absence of the penis as both empowering and threatening. But when my friend Clarke is in my dream as someone working at a desk, I’m like, uh…what? I mean, I get the logic, or the analysis, but the psycho bit baffles me.
Anyway, Freud was really big in the US in the forties, right? But the forties films we watched weren’t gothic women’s films or film noirs so unfortunately it’s not really obvious to see the oedipal trajectory play out… but I’m sure there is some ‘X’ reading of the films that I’m not quite getting.
But what I think is really relevant to almost everything we’ve watched is the ideology of romantic love. It is the search for this love that drives Hollywood and has done since, well, forever. And I think psychoanalysis is pretty useful in explaining why this is.
I also think the ideas that surround fantasy and reality are really interesting, especially in this postmodern world where nothing is really real. I also think fantasy is also really interesting in relation to Hollywood and escapism and aesthetic pleasure, which is useful when analyzing a lot of what we’ve watched. Virtual Alicia Silverstone anyone?
Like Toren, I was also surprised at how extensively Freud’s arguments can be applied to popular culture. According to Freud, a text of popular culture can analyzed like a dream. As a dream reveals unconscious needs or fantasies, Freud argues that an author uses his or her text to fulfill all the needs that are not filled in his or her actual life. He writes, “… like any other unsatisfied man, [the author] turns away from reality and transfers all his interest, and his libido too, to the wishful constructions of his life of phantasy…” (Freud, quoted by Storey, Introduction, page 76). Freud argues here that an author’s texts demonstrate the fulfillments of his or hers moral, material and sexual needs through fantasies. Also, psychoanalysis can allow readers or viewers to derive pleasure from texts of popular culture. By putting themselves in the position of the protagonist, these viewers feel the benefits of his fantasy.
Both of these psychoanalytic methods facilitate a new understanding of a film like Die Hard. It is possible that the film originated from the fantasies of its writers or producers who imagined themselves saving the day in a dire situation just like John McClane. The film also allows the viewer to imagine himself as John McClane, experiencing the same panic, distress, and, ultimately, the same heroism and happiness that he experiences. The lack of examination of the female perspective is a drawback to psychoanalysis. Toren mentioned Laura Mulvey, who argues that female characters in films are viewed only sexually or as a threat of castration. These women are completely objectified by the “male gaze”, as spectators identify with the hero and view the heroine through the hero, sexually. Even as a female spectator of Die Hard, I (subconsciously) identified most strongly with John McClane and saw his wife as he sees her: something to be protected and rescued. Mulvey writes that this process occurs for the increase of pleasure. Therefore, in order to free women from this passive and oppressive role, pleasure of popular cinema must be eradicated.
Psychoanalysis is also interesting with respect to Animal House. The film is clearly a fantasy about destabilizing the established systems of school and state. Marginalized misfits who do not care about their academics or appearances are the heroes of the film. This can be seen by the sexual prowess of a man like Otter in comparison to the sexual impotence of his law abiding and preppy opponent. In this way and in many others, the established order is made into a mockery and defeated. For example, though white horses are symbols of traditional heroism, in Animal House the white horse is killed and left in the Dean’s office. At the end of the movie, the heroes, who are really anti-heroes, turn the streets into chaos. The film is clearly a fantasy because despite the chaos and destruction, there is no real harm or consequences for the offenders, most of them end up happy, successful, and with a woman.
Is that sarcasm or an actual dig at Mulvey?
I feel that Zizek commentary about fantasy are most applicable to popular culture. Music and movies are mass produced fantasies. They simply represent a point of view. I feel that genre reflects Zizek notion that desires that are unfulfilled are reproduced in fantasies. I believe that the basic desire (in the case of a movie) is the story formula and this formula is reproduced throughout the genre. Desire also is important in determining the people encode and decode texts.
I also think it is important to note that Zizek and Lacan place emphasis on unfulfilled desires or ‘lack’. Their views on the lack of individuality and self hood play are important in analyzing dominance in society and culture. Understanding the way a person views themselves is a crucial of dominance, consent, and negotiation.
I never quite understood what Lacan was talking about in depth, but after some careful reading I think I got the gist of Slavoj Zizek (I don’t know the alt-code for those cool Zs, sorry).
The idea of fantasy being constructed internally (or in the dream world) in order to give a framework to the Lacanian objet petit a gives a new meaning to It’s a Wonderful Life. George’s aim is the life of adventure he gave up to take care of loved ones back home; he regretted postponing his dream, falls into depression, and embarks on an elaborately detailed fantasy with the help of Clarence. At the end of this fantasy, he returns to the bridge/docks and the meaning of his solo sojourn is recalibrated.
However, It’s a Wonderful Life departs from Zizek’s model in that George’s objet a changes during that fantasy. He realizes that not only is that goal unattainable, but also undesirable. Therefore, he actually does find fulfillment in his Real life, and escapes from the fantasy. If my interpretation is correct, this is more in line with Lacan’s concept that at a certain point we escape our dreams back to the Real when the dreams become overwhelming. With the benefits of psychoanalysis, It’s a Wonderful Life takes on deeper meaning.
Lacan’s treatment of media is very well done. He makes convincing cultural arguments about all of his theories through representative works; the technique succeeds because he views real life as equally fictive as fiction. His description of the Mirror Stage seems less applicable to our work in this course, however.
Wishing you were here,
Noah
P.S. I am writing from the conference center at Sid Richardson Scout Ranch near Runaway Bay, TX, where it was 75 and sunny all day today.
Here is my attempt at looking at Animal House through the psychoanalytic lens.
For Freudian psychoanalysis, the fraternity can be looked at as a collective psyche. Inside the house (the id) is raw, instinctual sexual desire (“parties”), while the house itself (the ego) is literally a boundary between the fraternity and the college – regulating the id with respect to society. When the house is taken away, the ego disappears and the id is no longer repressed by the ego’s rules and regulations. Consequently, destruction.
A Lacanian reading would place the Delta house as a substitute for the unattainable “Real.” Zizek might similarly place the Delta house as a fantasy space. In this sense it is similar to his explanation of the short story, “Black House.” The characters project their desires and memories (7 great years of college) onto the Delta house. When it is taken away, the characters are deprived of the only place they were able to project their desires. Consequently, destruction.
I was actually really unimpressed with her lecture here………and you can read all about it in my review in the Campus.
Freud, Lacan, and Zizek add absolutely nothing to our understanding of popular culture. If you think I’m kidding, read on (because I am).
With a special tip of the hat to Freud, the multiplicity of meanings that lie inherently within cultural texts emerges when we examine the ideas both expressed and not. As in dreams, we battle to understand the unconscious through conscious thought. Despite critics’ desire to say that suppressed meanings are hogwash, derived from speculation, I still observe this allusive concept manifest in virtually every cultural text out there. The car advertisement example that Storey uses with regards to the ‘problematic’ is a perfect illustration of how ignored thoughts tell a more compelling tale the deeper we dig. The cars in the advertisement are conveniently (and most likely, intentionally) placed in the desert to release sentiments of freedom, fun, elegance, power, and grace. However, the fact that these same cars pollute and add to congestion – ideas not represented in this advert – are also manifest unconsciously. By connecting these vehicles to nature, we unconsciously associate them with eco-friendliness and the lack of congestion or traffic that is ubiquitous in today’s commuter and urban world.
As to avoid total redundancy, Animal House provides an apt popular culture text for this ‘art of not’ model. We see the drunken exploits of a decrepit frat, juxtaposed next to a snotty one seeking campus dominance, but we do not view the true importance of the unconscious until the ending: that bachelor goofballs can turn out well when all is said and done, too (with minor exceptions). The way in which such systems of ideology call out to the subjects and create a relationship through recognition – a.k.a. interpolation – never ceases to fascinate me in this film. Great choice!
I can think of two drawbacks with using psychoanalytic theory to analyze popular culture.
First, I don’t think Freud’s ideas about psychology are reflective of the discipline in the modern era. I think psychoanalysis may seem dated and even unscientific to modern psychologists; so the claim that psychological truth about a cultural text can be discovered through Freud’s psychoanalysis seems dubious to me.
Secondly, Psychoanalysis seems to be Eurocentric in its outlook. Western texts like Little Redcape may seem more readily laced with psychoanalytic meaning because it springs from a culture or civilization relatively close in time and space. For example, the oedipus complex assumes a nuclear family structure which would be considered the norm in the West. Psychoanalysis claims to uncover fundamental, universal human truths but it may be more culturally specific.
On the other hand, I do think that psychoanalysis offers a view that sees the reader as an active consumer. For example, the crows in the Six Feet Under opening may be interpreted as a symbol for death. We can guess that the author(s) associates that symbol with that concept, because we also associate that symbol with that concept. Then again, a reader cannot necessarily question an author about his or her associations the same way a psychoanalyst can question a patient.
Also, I agree with the Lacanian perspective of the distinction between objective reality and the cultural and linguistic mapping of reality. I find this similar to the structuralist view of how language itself shapes how we percieve the world.
For me, the most interesting aspect of Freud’s essay The Dream-Work is the distinction it makes between manifest and latent dreams. According to Freud, manifest dreams are the revelation of latent dreams through interpretation. Freud identifies the process through which latent dreams are transformed as dream-work, and suggests that this process has the potential of “dream-distortion” (first page of Freud’s essay, page 99 in the older version of our ‘Reader’ book).
Freud’s discussion of the dream-work is important because it inspired Althusser’s discussion of the problematic. Althusser describes a problematic as “the assumptions, motivations, underlying ideas, etc. from which a cultural text is made.” (Storey, Introduction, 96) Thus, in order to fully understand a text, one must pay attention to what is absent as well as what is in the text. The absent is important here because it shows us the motivations of the text’s author. The visible is important because it is the representation of the author’s fantasies (oppressed desires etc…).
This week’s movie Animal House can be interpreted differently through the application of Freudian psychoanalysis. According to this analysis, the ‘crazy acts’ of the movie’s heroes represent the fantasies of the author. If he had seen Animal House, Freud would most likely suggest that the author(s) of the movie always wanted to ruin a parade but could not to it when they were in college. That is why we see the well-made parade scene at the end of the movie.
Animal House becomes even more interesting if we apply the notion of ‘problematic.’ Althusser would most likely suggest that the lack of academic activities’ portrayal in Animal House tells us something about the author’s motivations. Althusser’s method of reaching the problematic is to find out the questions that the text seems to be answering (questions that the text has not formally asked). I would say. “What is college all about?” is the central question that is not formally asked but answered within Animal House. Academic activities’ lack of portrayal in the movie would thus suggest that the authors view colleges as ‘social’ environments rather than academic ones. (Hurray!)
I see a lot of Freud’s, Lacan’s, and Zizek’s theories apply to pop culture in the form of advertising. There always appears to be this subconscious desire that people have and want that advertisers try to catch onto with their products. Advertisers that use models possibly try to lure people by saying, “Look: you may ‘lack’ the qualities of this beautiful woman, who is wearing this new handbag—but here is this handbag to wear to substitute this absence and to at least cover it up or raise your status.” The handbag is this representation of all these desires, including heightened appearance and attention from peers and the opposite sex.
For many of the Delta members in Animal House, each could not reach that academic potential and high class sophistication that the Omega members have, and so, they choose to settle and substitute those qualities with constant alcohol drinking, partying, and pranks. When reading the example of that black house that Storey spoke about, I could not help but imagine Pluto being the one to kill the newcomer who interrupted their peace of fantasy—the black house as the Delta house, or their nostalgia of beer, partying, etc.