What do you think?
Rate this book
Theory Q
ΣΕΞ Ή ΤΟ ΑΒΑΣΤΑΧΤΟ
Το Σεξ η το Αβάσταχτο είναι ένας διάλογος μεταξύ της Lauren Berlant και του Lee Edelman, δύο από τους κορυφαίους θεωρητικούς μας για τη σεξουαλικότητα, την πολιτική και τον πολιτισμό. Αντιπαραθέτοντας το "σεξ" και το "αβάσταχτο" δεν προτείνουν ότι το σεξ είναι αβάσταχτο, αλλά ότι απελευθερώνει αφόρητες αντιφάσεις που παρόλα αυτά παλεύουμε να αντέξουμε. Στον διάλογο των Berlant και Edelman, οι όροι αυτοί αναφέρονται σε διαταραχές που παράγονται στις συναντήσεις με τους άλλους, τον εαυτό μας και τον κόσμο - διαταραχές που πηγάζουν από τον φόβο της απώλειας, της ρήξης αλλά και από την ελπίδα μας για επανόρθωση. (Από την παρουσίαση στο οπισθόφυλλο του βιβλίου)
258 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 2013
37 people are currently reading
1533 people want to read
About the author
Lauren Berlant
29 books322 followersLauren Berlant was an English Professor at the University of Chicago, where they taught since 1984. Berlant received their Ph.D. from Cornell University. They wrote and taught on issues of intimacy and belonging in popular culture, in relation to the history and fantasy of citizenship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
June 14, 2015
This is definitely an important book for anyone interested in queer theory, psychoanalysis, affect, and sexuality. Reading this book was a roller coaster for me in a lot of ways. I admire the critical conversation that develops and I am constantly reminding myself, since encountering this text, to think "with and against" everything I read--that "thinking with and against are the same." That is probably the most important take away here. At other points it feels as though Edelman and Berlant talk in circles around each other or concepts and never quite reach productive end points, as in "Living With Negativity." However, the critical readings that develop around these, at times circular, conversations sometimes had me excited in a way I have not been excited by a critical text in some time: the queer adorable being one of the high points, I do very much appreciate Berlant's reading of "Me and You and Everyone We Know." Edelman, however, is stronger in the reading of pronouns in Lydia Davis' "Break it Down."
One major issue that i have with the conversation style is that it seems to make Berlant pay less attention to the interesectionality of race and sexuality than she does in her earlier texts. This is often a problem for Edelman, whose work tends to neglect feminist and critical race theory. In dialogue with Edelman, Berlant seems less engaged with nuanced thinking on race, class, gender, and sex as well.
One major issue that i have with the conversation style is that it seems to make Berlant pay less attention to the interesectionality of race and sexuality than she does in her earlier texts. This is often a problem for Edelman, whose work tends to neglect feminist and critical race theory. In dialogue with Edelman, Berlant seems less engaged with nuanced thinking on race, class, gender, and sex as well.
June 6, 2015
"Alain Badiou has good reason to remind us that 'every definition of Man based on happiness is nihilist,' but we can never be reminded often enough that the political program of happiness as a regulatory norm is less a recipe for liberation than an inducement to entomb oneself in the stillness of an image." 18
January 19, 2015
Not enough sex, and sometimes rather unbearable to slog through. My main takeaway was that I need to read Eve Sedgwick and Lydia Davis.
Read
May 10, 2016Anyone remotely interested in affect theory or queer theory would do well to read this book.
In some respects, this is an incredibly compelling book. The questions posed that trouble both Edelman's and Berlant's theories about relation, politics, etc. are substantial. LE, if negativity is itself structure, can the so-called "antisocial" project do what it claims to do? LB, what if the encounter with the unbearable cannot shift the consequences of world-building; what if the Symbolic is as intractable as Edelman thinks it is?
Of course, in another sense the book is a failure. It concludes with LB asking, with some exasperation: "If not repair, what? If not world-building, what?" Meanwhile, in his respective concluding statement, Edelman continues to more or less implicitly dismiss Berlant's optimism as naive. Though they both explicitly say that they would like to somehow "multiply" their formulations, it's not clear how that might ever happen, unless both Edelman and Berlant are willing to make some serious theoretical concessions (spoiler alert: they're not).
Personally, I tend to reluctantly agree with Edelman. We can't think outside the Symbolic structure until that structure has become totally unlivable.
In some respects, this is an incredibly compelling book. The questions posed that trouble both Edelman's and Berlant's theories about relation, politics, etc. are substantial. LE, if negativity is itself structure, can the so-called "antisocial" project do what it claims to do? LB, what if the encounter with the unbearable cannot shift the consequences of world-building; what if the Symbolic is as intractable as Edelman thinks it is?
Of course, in another sense the book is a failure. It concludes with LB asking, with some exasperation: "If not repair, what? If not world-building, what?" Meanwhile, in his respective concluding statement, Edelman continues to more or less implicitly dismiss Berlant's optimism as naive. Though they both explicitly say that they would like to somehow "multiply" their formulations, it's not clear how that might ever happen, unless both Edelman and Berlant are willing to make some serious theoretical concessions (spoiler alert: they're not).
Personally, I tend to reluctantly agree with Edelman. We can't think outside the Symbolic structure until that structure has become totally unlivable.
March 20, 2017
Not for the faint of heart. Read this for my first graduate class in critical theory. It was pretty intimidating. Written in a conversational manner, which is somewhat helpful as Berlant's tone is much more reader-friendly than Edelman's. Hard to say what I think presently. We're discussing this book in class tomorrow. Maybe I'll come back to this for a second read over the summer while I'm catching up on gender and queer theory readings.
May 14, 2025
A highly engaging conversation between two queer theorists -- one psychoanalytical (Edelman) and the other more affect-orientated (Berlant) -- both trying to get close to theorising non-belonging, all the while misinterpreting each other, this creating a meta experience of the very thing they are aiming to describe. Fantastic!
May 11, 2020
Berlant runs circles around Edelman in this conversational book... he's just so stuck on these Lacanianisms, whereas she is much more interested in the connection between theory and life. If the whole book had been Berlant, it would be 4.5 stars!
September 4, 2016
Viva la cute asshole!
May 3, 2024
Oof, this is a tough one. I'm not quite sure what to think of this book. As has been mentioned in numerous other reviews, this book will seem more than intimidating, unintelligble even, if one isn't already familiar with both theorists' work. On top of that, one's understanding of the text is complicated even more by the two authors' writing styles: both of them, but Edelman in particular, are (in)famous for their embellishing, pun- and wordplay-heavy, and convoluted use of language - which can be a pleasure in its own right, of course, but which, in this instance, felt - at least to me - more like the two were constantly trying to one-up each other, leaving the reader in the uncomfortable position of having to make sense of a jumbled word salad in order to get to the jucier ideas.
As for those ideas, I'm uncertain as to whether the book is able to achieve what it sets out to do. I was intrigued by its experimentation with form: a book not co-authored in the traditional sense and presenting one shared, coherent argument, but instead a dialogue that we can read as it unfolds, with its interlocuters acting and reacting to the other's claims, questions, and criticisms. Yet oftentimes those exact criticisms felt rather bad faith, and the reactions tended to be defensive, with the two being busier refuting each other's misconceptions and misreadings of their own arguments than with actually bringing together their respective theories in a productive manner.
Nevertheless, there are parts that I enjoyed and which gave me food for thought, especially the separate analyses of the works chosen by each author, such as those describing how adorability or cuteness serves to domesticate and de-intensify feeling and how it thereby contains a certain violence of mastery. The analysis of Larry Johnson's "Untitled (Ass)" made me laugh out loud, and I ended up using it for one of my own lectures.
Read in the context of both authors' previous (and later) works, Sex, or the Unbearable can help elucidate concepts and ideas that perhaps remain largely implicit or under-explained elsewhere, and it hammers home the irreconcilable differences between both their underlying theories and assumptions. It's an intriguing adventure for those interested in questions of negativity and subjective incoherence, especially when it is viewed from the different standpoints of Lacanian psychoanalysis and affect theory, but I wouldn't for the life of me recommend this book to beginners in the field of queer theory or with only rudimentary - or no - knowledge of psychoanalytic vocabulary, or even to anyone who's prone to getting headaches because of the pun-induced eyerolling that the book is likely to cause.
As for those ideas, I'm uncertain as to whether the book is able to achieve what it sets out to do. I was intrigued by its experimentation with form: a book not co-authored in the traditional sense and presenting one shared, coherent argument, but instead a dialogue that we can read as it unfolds, with its interlocuters acting and reacting to the other's claims, questions, and criticisms. Yet oftentimes those exact criticisms felt rather bad faith, and the reactions tended to be defensive, with the two being busier refuting each other's misconceptions and misreadings of their own arguments than with actually bringing together their respective theories in a productive manner.
Nevertheless, there are parts that I enjoyed and which gave me food for thought, especially the separate analyses of the works chosen by each author, such as those describing how adorability or cuteness serves to domesticate and de-intensify feeling and how it thereby contains a certain violence of mastery. The analysis of Larry Johnson's "Untitled (Ass)" made me laugh out loud, and I ended up using it for one of my own lectures.
Read in the context of both authors' previous (and later) works, Sex, or the Unbearable can help elucidate concepts and ideas that perhaps remain largely implicit or under-explained elsewhere, and it hammers home the irreconcilable differences between both their underlying theories and assumptions. It's an intriguing adventure for those interested in questions of negativity and subjective incoherence, especially when it is viewed from the different standpoints of Lacanian psychoanalysis and affect theory, but I wouldn't for the life of me recommend this book to beginners in the field of queer theory or with only rudimentary - or no - knowledge of psychoanalytic vocabulary, or even to anyone who's prone to getting headaches because of the pun-induced eyerolling that the book is likely to cause.
August 23, 2025
I am a big fan of depressive/negativity theory, or at least theory not stuck in the Panoptisism (thanks to this book for this great term based on Foucault and Ahmed). Through the lens of psychoanalysis, affect theory and queer theory, Berlant and Edelman sketch how/why (sex) negativity is at the core of subjectivity, and that it mainly comes out in relation to sex and desire. Why sex often undoes our fantasies of sovereignty, resolving trauma and wholeness, and why we should not be so happy to invest in relationally as the (narcissistic? nihilistic?) fantasy of repair and connection. Somehow I would have liked to see a little bit less repetition and a bit more structure in their conversation, and them reaching more conclusive statements in the end, but it's overall a good overview of one of the core returning arguments in queer theory's negative turn.
December 20, 2020
A delight is to be found in this book regarding Lauren Berlant's consistent correction of Lee Edelman's interpretations of her work. I do not recommend this to anyone who is unfamiliar with either theorists' work or general ideas associated with queer futurity, but this book presents a fascinating inquiry into the nature of negativity (i.e. queerness, otherness, divisions) and relationships. The presence of "Sex" in the title feels a bit inconsequential as both Berlant and Edelman's seem more concerned with concepts of the unbearable in general, with sex serving as just one of many instances where interlocutors come to reveal potentially unbearable revelations about the self. However, this nitpick does not merit a lower overall Goodreads score.
June 2, 2025
Tough, but very thought provoking. The second chapter may not have excited me as much as the first, but the third chapter really gets at and dramatises some fascinating aspects of the issue of relationality.
Really felt Berlant pp. 110-111…haha
Really felt Berlant pp. 110-111…haha
May 21, 2023
Immensely difficult to read. Its analysis of the Lydia Davis short story is probably how I'll remember it. Quite clever.
Read
April 23, 2014"Berlant and Edelman’s three-act dialogue is wonderfully intriguing, especially in regard to how the dialogue itself bears witness to the intellectual process of ‘thinking through’ in the dialogic form."--Marcie Bianco, Lambda Literary Review
“What’s lovely about this exchange is that Berlant and Edelman’s mutually locked horns don’t make us feel as though a cleverer person has already figured things out and we’re simply not smart or qualified enough to piece together the unspoken counterarguments they would have to our doubts.” --Colin Low, Against the Hype
“What’s lovely about this exchange is that Berlant and Edelman’s mutually locked horns don’t make us feel as though a cleverer person has already figured things out and we’re simply not smart or qualified enough to piece together the unspoken counterarguments they would have to our doubts.” --Colin Low, Against the Hype
September 13, 2014
The dialogical format of the book provided a fascinating example of the unbearable nature of communication and relationality. Sex, or the Unbearable led me in a very different direction from what I expected but it was a welcome shift
September 27, 2014
*I received this book as a First Reads giveaway*
Definitely thought-provoking and very refreshing as it's been written in the form of a dialogue. Concentration and a theoretical mindset are both required before tackling this book.
Definitely thought-provoking and very refreshing as it's been written in the form of a dialogue. Concentration and a theoretical mindset are both required before tackling this book.
February 16, 2015
Engaging discussion between two prominent queer thinkers, a meta discourse on unbearable relationality. I found Edelmen's responses to the question of politics in his Lacanian anti-social thesis to be particularly helpful, after reading No Future.
June 10, 2014
Very thought provoking. The structure is fascinating. Full review coming in Journal of Popular Romance Studies.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews