ژولیا کریستوا

Routledge Critical Thinkers

by Noëlle McAfee, مهرداد پارسا (Translator)

اندیشه گران انتقادی مجموعه ای است که خوانندگان را با مهم ترین متفکران معاصر و موثر در عرصه های علوم انسانی (به ویژه مطالعات ادبی و فرهنگی) آشنا می کند. این مجموعه طیف متنوعی از فیلسوفان و نظریه پردازان را در برمی گیرد، اما این متفکران همگی اصحاب «اندیشهٔ انتقادی» بوده، هریک به سهم خود آثار ارزنده و راه گشایی برای نقادی وضعیت فکری و فرهنگی معاصر پدید آورده اند. این مجموعه می کوشد تا با معرفی مهم ترین آثار هر متفکر و مرور موشکافانهٔ اندیشه های مطرح در آنها، افزون بر آشنایی ابتدایی، انگیزه ای برای خوانش های پیشرفته‌تر مهیا کند. هر مجلد این مجموعه می کوشد با گزینش دقیق، منسجم و هدف مند اندیشه های اساسی هر متفکر و آثار او، به جای دانشی سطحی، شناختی عمقی به خواننده ارائه کند.

Genres: Philosophy, Theory, Nonfiction, Psychoanalysis, Academic

223 pages, Paperback

First published October 16, 2003

About the author

Noëlle McAfee is a professor of philosophy and the director of the Psychoanalytic Studies Program at Emory University. Her books include Habermas, Kristeva, and Citizenship (2000), Julia Kristeva (2003), and Democracy and the Political Unconscious (Columbia, 2008).

Reviews

[Ipsa · Rating 3 out of 5]

she brings the flesh, the body back into language, into the processes of subjectivation. i like her.

[Golfa · Rating 3 out of 5]

«اگر ما قلمروی درونی، یک باغ مخفی، یک زندگی ذهنی را زنده نگه نداریم، احتمال اندکی برای هرگونه سرپیچی سیاسیِ بامعنایی باقی می‌ماند. هر انقلاب دیگر هم به بوروکراسی‌سازی و ترور منجر خواهد شد، مگر این‌که فرد خصوصیت‌اش را حفظ کند و روح‌اش را زنده نگه دارد.»

[Aidalí González · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tengo aún que descubrir si la explicación de la autora es la que deja tan abstracta la posición de Kristeva o es que ella genuinamente piensa de esa manera. Igualmente es una buena introducción, solo que hay partes que en mi opinión no son esenciales.

[isaac smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a compilation of every tl;dr from the posts I have done on each chapter of "Kristeva" by Noelle McAffee. The actual notes linked in each section are less surface-level than the tl;drs listed below for what it’s worth.

Semiotic & Symbolic
Kristeva's language theory, rooted in works like "Semiotiké" and "La révolution du langage poétique," explores the chora, semiotic, and symbolic aspects. Her main thesis in "Revolution in Poetic Language" is that avant-garde writers challenge traditional meaning, impacting ordinary language use. Language shapes subjects, rejecting static views. Kristeva criticizes non-post-structuralist theories, emphasizing dynamic meaning generation.

Language merges bodily drives and meaning, driven by affect. Symbolic is orderly, semiotic evokes feelings. Everyday language contains disruptions; art and rites channel them. Dualistic thinking is rejected; semiotic and symbolic intertwine. In Joyce's Ulysses, semiotic and symbolic modes are evident. Semiotic chora, pre-linguistic psychic space, shapes meaning through rhythm, gestures, and intonations.

Child development moves from semiotic to symbolic, marked by the thetic phase. Affect shapes communication; semiotic persists. Literary analysis considers genotext (drives) and phenotext (meaning). Intertextuality transitions between sign systems, yielding polysemy. Language is inseparable from individuals; semiotic influences linguistic expression.

https://open.substack.com/pub/uncerta...

The subject in process
In Kristeva's language theory, the subject's identity arises through signifying processes, and language is inseparable from the speaking beings who use it. She draws on Freud and Lacan, highlighting the symbolic's role in shaping the ego. Subjectivity forms through cultural, linguistic, and unconscious influences. Lacan's three realms—the imaginary, the real, and the symbolic—shape the child's understanding of self and others. Contrasting Lacan, Kristeva places the infant's differentiation from the mother before the mirror stage during abjection. Her semiotic chora merges with the symbolic, shaping communication and subjectivity. The semiotic continually disrupts the subject, leading to a "subject in process." "Signifiance" blends semiotic and symbolic to create meaning, while the imaginary persists in semiotic disruptions. Kristeva challenges dualistic thinking, linking body and signifying practices. The "I" emerges through false identifications in the imaginary, driven by libidinal energies. She uses unconventional methods, like music, to strengthen the imaginary realm for communication. Subjectivity is viewed as an open system, influenced by relationships and constant change. Kristeva's work integrates linguistics and psychoanalysis, emphasizing the importance of the semiotic alongside the symbolic. The imaginary's imprints in the semiotic disrupt traditional notions of subjectivity, presenting a dynamic and ongoing view of the self.

https://open.substack.com/pub/uncerta...

Abjection
Kristeva's concept of abjection and its role in shaping self-boundaries relates to the interplay between the semiotic and symbolic realms, emphasizing the threat posed by the semiotic to the symbolic order. The discussion centers on "Powers of Horror," which delves into subjectivity and self-construction. Infants' initial unity with their surroundings and the semiotic chora lead to self-boundary formation. Kristeva's idea that abjection starts before the mirror stage is highlighted, emphasizing its role in rejecting and excluding parts that seem part of oneself. Various examples of abjection, from curdled milk to corpses, and bodily reactions like gagging are discussed. The rejection of milk cream symbolizes the subject's need to expel elements to establish a distinct self. The encounter with a cadaver blurs life and death, revealing mortality. Abjection is described as violently excluded yet lingering in consciousness, threatening selfhood. The abject mother is significant, impacting self-formation. A distinction between Kristeva's abject and Freud's repressed is drawn, with the abject residing on the periphery. Abjection remains throughout life, discussed in rituals and art. Literature is a cathartic tool to confront abjection. Céline's works are explored, delving into his malady, anti-Semitism, and impact on readers. Céline's writings challenge self-boundaries, eroding judgments. His anti-Semitism reflects a rage against the symbolic, aiming to return to a pre-thetic state. Abjection plays a central role in Kristeva's subjectivity theory, shaping borders and perpetually threatening selfhood. Literary catharsis purges the abject, preserving self-boundaries.

https://uncertaintysedge.substack.com...

Melancholia
Early maternal loss effects an individual's psyche, even before the acquisition of language. This pre-verbal loss can lead to depression in early adulthood. Melanie Klein's psychoanalytic theory of mourning for the lost internalized object is explored, while Julia Kristeva's perspective challenges traditional notions, emphasizing the impact of pre-language loss on a primal sense of self-harm. Two types of depression, objectal and narcissistic, are distinguished. The individual in a narcissistic depression lacks the drive for symbolic engagement, making their grief incommunicable. Kristeva introduces the concept of the "enigmatic Thing," a Lacanian notion of the real that exerts an ambivalent pull. Creativity, often stemming from melancholia, can offer a means of sublimation. The life of poet Gérard de Nerval illustrates these concepts, especially in his poem "El Desdichado." Kristeva suggests that, through metaphor and creative expression, the melancholic can momentarily transform their anguish into symbolic creations, offering a means to engage with the world despite their struggle.

https://uncertaintysedge.substack.com...

Herethics
Kristeva questions power-focused feminist ideologies and contrasts American and French feminist interpretations. Kristeva, along with other French feminists, critiques a movement in France that she sees as perpetuating oppressive tactics. Her relationship with feminism is complex, aiming to liberate women from restrictive thinking without imitating male norms. She advocates a unique "third way" that integrates motherhood, culture, and nature. Her ethical framework challenges Western individualism, drawing from her experiences of pregnancy and motherhood, promoting interconnectedness. French feminists like Kristeva focus on metaphysical assumptions rather than societal oppression, exploring sexual differentiation. They debate whether a core "woman" essence exists or is symbolic. Critics raise concerns about essentialism and biological reductionism. English-speaking feminist critics scrutinize Kristeva's ideas, associating them with fixed female essence. Critics worry her work reinforces passive female identity and male-centric frameworks. Some accuse her of adopting historical and universalist perspectives. Kristeva's linguistic theory links the semiotic to the maternal body, raising concerns of essentialism. She explores motherhood's complex dimensions, advocating redefining its portrayal. Her "herethics" ethical paradigm bridges the semiotic and symbolic, challenging traditional dualisms. She seeks transformative community-building, inspired by process philosophy. Kristeva integrates language, culture, and biology in psychoanalysis, opposing Cartesian separation. Her approach values the evolving self, resisting essentialism. In her work, feminism values dynamic aspects of existence and challenges traditional classifications.

https://uncertaintysedge.substack.com...

Women’s time
Julia Kristeva's unique focus on embracing sexual difference distinguishes her from earlier waves of feminism that aimed at overcoming it. The earlier feminists fought for rights like voting and equality with men, while Kristeva critiques viewing feminine expression as marginal and rejects labeling women as inferior. She highlights two feminist paths: subverting societal norms and embracing exclusion's latent power. Kristeva emphasizes the need for women as vigilant outsiders, resisting marginalization. In "Le Temps des femmes," Kristeva introduces a third approach to feminism. She examines three generations of feminism, evolving from seeking equality to valuing individuality. Kristeva delves into the complexities of power dynamics, societal roles, and women's distinct desires. She explores the interplay of symbolic representation and sexual difference. Kristeva urges a counterapproach against established powers and for the creation of a harmonious countersociety. She warns against idealizing an abstract "Woman," advocating for recognizing individuality. Kristeva delves into the metaphysical aspects of identity and difference, suggesting that internalizing societal structures can transform perceptions. Ethics, psychoanalysis, and aesthetics become tools for a new ethical framework. Kristeva advocates for shared responsibility, challenging gender norms, and embracing complexity. The third generation of feminists shifts focus towards broader human progress and reevaluating established orders, aiming for an emancipatory sexual difference. Kristeva's feminist perspective emphasizes embracing sexual difference, recognizing individuality, and reshaping societal structures to foster a transformative and emancipatory ethic of shared responsibility and progress.

https://open.substack.com/pub/uncerta...

Revolt
Julia Kristeva's framework introduces the "speaking being," situated in symbolic identity yet influenced by bodily and psychic shifts. The speaking being is fluid, disrupted by semiotic language, balancing with the symbolic. Semiotic absence leads to stagnation, excess detaches from meaning. For borderline subjects, balance is challenging, vital for growth. Kristeva explores revolt via societal, psychological rebellion, and political transformation. Blurring public-private spheres, disconnection risks anesthesia. Revolt, from Latin "volvere," implies transformation. Kristeva links to Debord's "society of spectacle," unreal experiences distancing life. In various forms—advertising, information, propaganda, and entertainment—the phenomenon arises from economic structures. Modern identity thrives on consumerism, fulfilling insatiable desires through escalating consumption. The "society of the spectacle" dictates desires, treating individuals as instruments. Desires are commodities manufactured within the spectacle, leading to oblivion. Kristeva and Debord recognize this, with Kristeva's "culture of the show." Blurring pleasure and reality, images dominate, distorting the psyche. Kristeva's psychoanalysis reveals declining psychic space, coping mechanisms leading to body dominance. Anesthetic mass media suspends meaning, detaching subjects from themselves. Workers contribute to alienation. The spectacle envelops, stifles, and inhibits psychic life. In psychoanalysis, modern patients display symptoms revealing their inability to symbolize. Kristeva identifies two alienations: depressives from speech, appearing robotic, and broader self-body alienation, perceiving the body as inherited. Modern economic transformation erodes personhood, resulting in fragmented, commodified selves. Amidst this psychic disconnect, the soul is lost. Kristeva's call for revolt extends beyond symbolic numbness, advocating cultural and psychological change with political implications. She traces Europe's tradition of revolt through historical figures, art movements, emphasizing its role in transformation. Revolt, she argues, is linked to happiness and pleasure, addressing marginalized groups' needs. In today's bureaucracy and spectacle, possible forms of revolt are questioned. Kristeva explores these dimensions across her works, examining liberty through psychoanalysis and literature within the context of revolt. In today's context, the question arises: What modes of revolt are viable amidst the dominance of the show culture, often overshadowing rebellious spirit? Kristeva's focus shifts from avant-garde literature's revolutionary potential to experiential priorities, including the pleasure principle and renewed meaning. Freud's influence shapes her departure, notably the Oedipal revolt concept structuring the psyche and taboo of incest, historically seen as a societal rebellion. Kristeva explores Freud's 1936 letter, contrasting clinical grounding with metaphysical flights. She connects Freud's ideas to archaeological metaphors, delving into revolutionary aspects in analytic experience. Kristeva identifies three revolt figures and analyzes writers - Sartre, Aragon, and Barthes - illustrating endangered yet attainable rebel culture. Common ground emerges in revolts against identity facets, maintaining symbolic structure flexibility for renewal and joy. Aragon, Sartre, and Barthes' works reveal promising paths, expanding subjectivity within tribal identity, pushing linguistic boundaries. In contrast to regressive identity-based systems like nationalism and conservatism, this offers potential for an enthusiastic, questioning life. Kristeva emphasizes individual tools—enthusiasm, doubt, inquiry—to counter distraction culture. Shifting to psychoanalytic exploration, she addresses personal and political concerns like love and abjection, where analysts engage microscopically. Kristeva differentiates psychological and societal revolt, highlighting nurturing inner sanctuaries as vital for meaningful upheaval. Her works stress revolt as a defense against decay, safeguarding the psyche and countering stagnation. In the face of spectacle culture, her insights champion renewal and lasting rebellion.

https://uncertaintysedge.substack.com...

[Melvyn · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a Czech-English translator I am always impressed when somebody occasionally manages to convey European academese in no-nonsense, down-to-earth :-) English, so it was almost in enchantment that I kept reading to the very end, not only because Kristeva’s ideas were sometimes being demystified ( = made slightly less mystifying but not slightly less odd), but also because I rather admired the language used to accomplish this. Say goodbye to ‘the subversive nature of celebrating dialogism’; say hello to ‘now what do we mean by dialogism?’ (Cf. Peter Newmark's approach e.g.: 'en
bonne épistémologie' = 'strictly speaking' and 'manichéisme' = 'a black or white approach'.)

Although my interest primarily centred around Kristeva’s conception of semiotics, my seemingly rapid comprehension of the main points led me on (perhaps in the negative sense) with little effort to the more abstruse realms of Marxist-tainted feminism, philosophy and bizarre radical 1960s politics, and I even paddled in the very shallow end of Lacanian-influenced psychological theories.

Some insights?

“Bakhtin was one of the first to replace the static hewing out of texts with a model where literary structure does not simply exist but is generated in relation to another structure. What allows a dynamic dimension to structuralism is his conception of the “literary word” as an intersection of textual surfaces rather than a point (a fixed meaning), as a dialogue among several writings: that of the writer, the addressee (or the character), and the contemporary or earlier cultural context.”

“Where structuralism looked at systems synchronically (in a snapshot of time), post-structuralism looked at systems diachronically, through time, as events or processes.“

“My position was that mere structure was not sufficient to understand the world of meaning in literature and other human behaviors. Two more elements were necessary: history and the speaking subject”

All our attempts to use language neatly, clearly, and in an orderly way are handmaidens of our attempts to be neat, clearly demarcated, orderly subjects. But such attempts are continuously disrupted by certain elements of our signifying practice.

“the speaking subject makes and unmakes himself ”

“Instead of seeing language as a tool used by selves, those who use the term subjectivity understand that language helps produce subjects.”

‘’any theory of language is a theory of the Subject”

‘’When we attend to language within the signifying process, Kristeva says, we may notice two ways or modes in which it operates:
(1) as an expression of clear and orderly meaning; and (2) as an evocation of feeling or, more pointedly, a discharge of the subject’s energy and drives. In other words, we may find ourselves using certain words because they get something across clearly or because they express some feeling, desire, or unconscious drive. The words she uses for these modes are, respectively, symbolic and semiotic.’’

‘’The difference with Kristeva’s use of these kinds of polarities is that the former pole (semiotic / nature /body /unconscious, etc.) always makes itself felt – is discharged – into the latter (symbolic/ culture /mind/consciousness). Instead of holding to the dualistic thinking of the West, Kristeva is showing how the poles of these dichotomies are intertwined.’’

‘’Chora: the wetnurse of becoming.’’

‘’Plato likens the chora to a mother (as a space that receives and allows something to flourish). But this “mother” has no qualities of its own; it fully takes on the imprint of whatever fills it – and derives its powers from what fills it.’’

‘’Even the most plain-spoken language is an uneasy merger between a sound-image and the meaning it is supposed to denote. The sound image cannot be completely divested of its semiotic motility, for example the affective import of a term’s alliteration and rhythm.’’

‘’But this does not mean that the semiotic is a stranger to meaningfulness; it is “always in sight of it or in either a negative or surplus relationship to it” ''

‘’The genotext is the motility between the words, the potentially disruptive meaning that is not quite a meaning below the text. The phenotext is what the syntax and semantics of the text is trying to convey.’’

You get the drift. :-)

[Mohit Dhanjani · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very accessible, short and to-the-point book for anyone trying to know Kristeva's work and ideas for the first time.

Chapters that are explained in a simple yet powerful manner and are must read. -
1. Semiotic and symbolic.
2. The subject in process.
3. Abjection.
7. Revolt.

Noëlle manages to encourage you to go further and read more of the works by Kristeva and get to know her ideas in detail.

Most important idea in the book was that of 'Revolt. It was heartwarming and truly a bliss. It changes your perception in a drastic manner.

[Joseph M.]

I was pleasantly surprised at how a complex figure such as Kristeva was rendered in such simple terms and in an easy-to-digest format. Although I still don't quite understand a lot of her theories (especially on melancholy) I found many of her ideas to be profound and useful tools in literary criticism, some of my favorites being the ideas of abjection and poetic revolt. Kristeva was revolutionary for her way of blending psychoanalysis and linguistics, and in contrast to the "static" ways of approaching texts, she saw language as ultimately being the result of desires, drives, and affects, which is where all the psychoanalysis mumbo jumbo comes in. But it was a surprisingly pleasant read, and Kristeva is such a fascinating thinker!

[Cassey · Rating 4 out of 5]

An accessible introduction to Kristeva.