Enjoy Your Symptom!: Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out

by Slavoj Žižek

Slavoj Zizek, dubbed by the Village Voice "the giant of Ljubljana," is back with a new edition of his seriously entertaining book on film, psychoanalysis (and life). His inimitable blend of philosophical and social theory, Lacanian analysis, and outrageous humor are made to show how Hollywood movies can explain psychoanalysis-and vice versa using films such as Marnie and The Man Who Knew Too Much .

Genres: Philosophy, Psychoanalysis, Nonfiction, Psychology, Film, Theory, Cultural Studies

250 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1991

About the author

Slavoj Žižek is a Slovene sociologist, philosopher, and cultural critic.

He was born in Ljubljana, Slovenia (then part of SFR Yugoslavia). He received a Doctor of Arts in Philosophy from the University of Ljubljana and studied psychoanalysis at the University of Paris VIII with Jacques-Alain Miller and François Regnault. In 1990 he was a candidate with the party Liberal Democracy of Slovenia for Presidency of the Republic of Slovenia (an auxiliary institution, abolished in 1992).

Since 2005, Žižek has been a member of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts.

Žižek is well known for his use of the works of 20th century French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan in a new reading of popular culture. He writes on many topics including the Iraq War, fundamentalism, capitalism, tolerance, political correctness, globalization, subjectivity, human rights, Lenin, myth, cyberspace, postmodernism, multiculturalism, post-marxism, David Lynch, and Alfred Hitchcock.

In an interview with the Spanish newspaper El País he jokingly described himself as an "orthodox Lacanian Stalinist". In an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! he described himself as a "Marxist" and a "Communist."

Reviews

[Phillip]

What I am finding really fascinating as I read more of Zizek's books on Lacan and Hollywood, or introducing Lacan, or rethinking Lacan, is that many of them rely on the same subject matter--obviously the same Lacanian theories being elucidated, but also the same readings of the same movies and stories presented again and again in different books. For instance, this book, Sublime Object of Ideology, and Looking Awry (and probably others) all have similar discussions of Hitchcock's The Birds as a terrifying encounter with the Real. Of course, I find this example both convincing and illuminating, but its repetition over so many books seems uncannily psychoanalytic.

[Tintarella]

کتاب شش فصل داره و در حقیقت برای آشنایی مخاطب آمریکائی با روان‌کاوی لاکانی نوشته شده.
1. چرا نامه همیشه به مقصدش می‌رسد؟
بررسی مسیر چاپلین از روشنایی‌های شهر تا روشنایی‌های صحنه و از سینمای صامت به ناطق
2. چرا زن نشانگان مرد است؟
نقد آثار روسلینی از آلمان سال صفر تا دوران برگمن-روسلینی
3. چرا هر عملی یک تکرار است؟ (بهترین فصل کتاب)
تحلیل «تکرارِ» کیرکگور
سقراط در برابر مسیح
نقد آلتوسر و هابرماس با لاکان
4. چرا فالوس ظاهر می‌شود؟
پدر مخرجی
پست مدرنیسم
سوژه‌ی روشنگری
5. چرا همیشه دو پدر هست؟
تحلیل داستان کاراگاهی نوآر با تاکید بر تفاوت‌های ریموند چندلر و دشیل همت (ادامه‌ای برای فصل مقایسه داستان کاراگاهی کلاسیک و نوآر کژنگریستن)
فقر سوبژکتیو
چشم‌پوشی فرویدی versagung
فوکو همراه با لاکان
6. چرا واقعیت همیشه چندگانه است؟
آیا امکان بازسازی فیلم هیچکاکی وجود دارد؟
ماتریکس و واقعیت مجازی
.
دیگه مثل قدیم 22م این ماه رو دوست ندارم. آه نویدکم نوید...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=qHPqJaAE4...

[Larry]

I saw once an itw of Bret Easton Ellis and they asked him what books he’d buy someone for a first date. I’d definitely buy them a copy of Enjoy Your Symptom. If they didn’t like it I’d be ok too but I’d just be interested in their answer.

[Kev Nickells]

Much as Žižek is the clown prince of theory, this is kind of a great book. He's about as approachable as a Lacanian can be. He's really at his best when he is talking about cinema in Lacanian terms. He keeps the Hegel shit on the down low. He's nailed Lacan in properly Catholic terms.
There's a load of his usual antagonisms - there's a chapter 'Why is woman a symptom of man?' where he doesn't explain the chapter's title until the next chapter. Because everyone reading is well aware of the relatively obscure Lacan essay he's referring to and the ways in which it might be observed as not being an outrageous question.

The other side of that is a super brief description of a Lacanian understanding of gender where male is not 'opposed' to female but both act as an 'other' (small o) to self (which is to say 'Žižek said trans rights', inexplicably).

I'm not committed to defending Žižek but if we're going to keep one edgelord theorist I'm voting for him.

[Fuat]

Painfully confusing but also very enjoyable. Probably need to read it 9 more times and watch all of Hitchcock movies.

[Andrew Hathaway]

While psychoanalysis may not have the same diagnostic use for people, it's still an invaluable tool for analyzing larger societal and cultural issues. Zizek's book wisely sidesteps most clinical diagnoses to cut a wider swath through mostly American culture using fundamental concepts of Lacanian psychoanalysis. What results is a book that I'll be unpacking for a very long time and whose explanation of sacrifice and separation, through Lacanian terms, has already paid off in dividends with my close readings of contemporary film.

[JUAN CARLOS VILLASEÑOR]

Lacan, Cine Noir y Hard boiled, la máscara como un yo asimilado como propio. Muchas reflexiones e ideas fascinantes.
Y además divertido. Quien pensaría que un
Filósofo de la talla de Zizek fuera divertido.
Tiene partes densas que merecen más estudio, pero en general es un libro entretenido.

[Andrew]

Brilliant, prescient, useful and useless invention for the world of alternative facts. Guided by the opposites of the closed-system theories of Freud and the perpetual striving of Marxist otherness. Both seem grounded by a pessimism in the way-things-are, while the interjecting films add an experiential freedom and reality - perhaps the more salient medium for faith and trust because it is deliberately illusionary.

[Miguel Soto]

Me parece que la tesis central en este libro, o al menos la que pude captar, es la inexistencia del Otro como agente de soporte, y nuestro gran esfuerzo por hacerle existir a cada momento, pero también la posibilidad de vivir en el acto, asumiendo esas rupturas que se producen al caer la figura del Otro.

Por otro lado, terminé muy decepcionado de mí mismo porque capto mejor las referencias filosóficas que las cinematográficas, tengo ahí algo que corregir.

[Isaac Lambert]

🤯

deep thoughts about some of my favorite films. I don't know very much about Lacan, but reading through this was fascinating. a snippet of explanatory behavior from twin peaks I sent to a lynch, and of course there were great bits about shit. I recently watched Perverts Guide to Cinema, and this was a great companion piece (although with the film you could better see the scenes he's analyzing! but what is reality anyway)

[micha cardenas]

read some of this, jordan crandall refers to it as the only zizek book you need to read.

[Chad]

Lacanian readings of everything from Chaplin to Twin Peaks. Fun stuff.

[Melusine Parry]

Extremely interesting, lively, though difficult here and there (especially if, like me, you don't know anything about Lacan and have only seen a few Hitchcock movies). Great, original writing.

[David Barrera Fuentes]

Fuck you Lacan.

A mi juicio, los mejores capítulos y secciones son los dedicados a Hitchcock.

[Valentina]

Will have to re-read this around four more times probably

[Fernando Angeleri]

📙 ¡Goza tu síntoma!: En este libro, el autor reflexiona sobre lo simbólico y lo real, a través de una mirada que mezcla el psicoanálisis con la filosofía. Un viaje cinematográfico por clásicos que van desde los años 50 hasta el 2000, y en el que la lectura del autor sobre lo expresado en los filmes tiene múltiple interpretación.
Claves:
֎ Filosofía
֎ Análisis cinéfilo
֎ Psicología de personajes
Opinión 🗣: No había leído nunca un libro como este y el veredicto es: No estaba preparado. Pensé que leer un ensayo iba a ayudarme a no aburrirme de la fantasía, pero pasó todo lo contrario, me esforcé por terminarlo para agarrar un nuevo libro de fantasía.
El autor utiliza su amplio interés en el cine clásico (más en los autores clásicos) para identificar algunos aspectos del psicoanálisis y de la filosofía que se traslucen a través de ellos. Hay muchos pasajes que son sumamente interesantes y te atrapan, pero también hay muchas partes en las que reflexionar sobre las ideas lo lleva a sobrepensar y buscar las más insólitas conexiones, que pueden ser reales, o pueden ser completamente casuales. Por ejemplo: en el final de una película, la protagonista que había sufrido mucho en un pueblo se escapa, vive una nueva vida, y al terminar el film, ella ve en el horizonte el pueblo y termina la película, dando la doble posibilidad si volvía redimida, o si lo dejaba en su pasado. Y con esas posibilidades envuelve la teoría del triunfo de la persona sobre su destino.
Pero hay mucho más de estos ejemplos, y yo no soy un experto en el cine clásico como para sacarle el jugo a este libro. Sí entendí y reflexioné sobre lo que menciona de Twin Peaks, algo de Hitchcock, The Truman Show y gran hermano y la relación de la realidad múltiple o identificando cual es la real realidad en the Matrix.
El libro me sirvió para renovar la mirada sobre las películas y series que veo y como pueden tener múltiples interpretaciones al racionalizar la intensión de los directores o al hacerlo una experiencia propia.

[Bor]

Ik zeg al jaren dat ik meer (of nou ja, überhaupt wat) van Žižek wil lezen, en op een gegeven moment moet je dan de daad bij het woord voegen… Begin deze zomer was ik in Praag en voelde ik me cultureel genoeg onderlegd om tot de aanschaf van dit boek over te gaan. In Enjoy your symptom! legt hij de ideeën van Lacan uit aan de hand van Hollywoodfilms.

De grote kracht van het boek is ook z'n zwakte: als je de films niet helder op je netvlies hebt, begrijp je de metaforen niet. Helaas is het een boek uit 1992 (met een extra hoofdstuk uit 2008) en niet alle blockbusters die Žižek kiest hebben de tand des tijds echt goed doorstaan, of ik heb ze gewoon om wat voor reden dan ook niet gezien… Bij sommige hoofdstukken had ik echt het gevoel dat ik zowel te weinig van filosofie als van films wist om er ook maar íéts van mee te krijgen, en als dan ook alle culturele en politieke referenties van voor je geboorte zijn maakt dat het lezen nogal tot een zware kluif.

Ik heb het meeste leesplezier gehad aan (en inzicht opgedaan uit) de hoofdstukken waarin hij films gebruikt die ik wél had gezien, en dan is het ook duidelijk waarom mensen gek op dit boek waren. Op z'n allerbest is Žižek leerzaam, grappig en slim. Ik heb echt genoten van de delen waarin hij aan films als Logan's Run refereert, verhalen van Hitchcock en de gebr. Coen gebruikt, uitgebreid op De Schreeuw van Munch blijft terugkomen, en van het laatste hoofdstuk over The Matrix. Maar ook dat nieuwere hoofdstuk voelt erg 15-jaar-oud aan als hij het bijvoorbeeld heeft over het inherent voyeuristische van zogeheten "web cam" internetsites waarin je door vreemde mensen kunt worden geobserveerd terwijl je autorijdt of op een plein rondwandelt.

Hier een cijfer op plakken is te ingewikkeld, dus dat ga ik niet doen. De enige logische conclusie is… Ik moet nog altijd meer Žižek lezen, en dan bij voorkeur binnen 6 maanden nadat hij het geschreven heeft.

[Христо]

This might be the definitive Zizekian book. Perhaps not the extended edition (containing chapter 6) but the original 1992 Routledge edition.

At the start of my journey into Lacanian thought, I took Zizek as the guide and teacher (a subject-supposed-to-know). It is only with Laclau's prompt criticism that I realized the bubbling suspicions that Zizek sometimes "just says things" were not only true but deliberate. You see, Zizek knows perfectly well the tenets of Lacanian theory - as perfectly demonstrated by this book. Yet, at some point around The Ticklish Subject, he decided his "pathological", subjective commitments to some Causes are more important than parsimoniously presenting the theory. This tainting of the theory, one might argue, is its constitutive impossibility. I would rather say, it's Zizek's dumb little sinthome - his relentless grasp of the Communist (whatever that may be) dream.

But here, in this book, we get a film lover who's desperate to teach us Lacanian theory - which is fantastic, delectable, and admirable.

I did not care all that much for the Noir chapters, and those can be entirely skipped. They weigh little on the bulk of the theoretical edifice. As I've written in my other reviews, Zizek's biggest blunder is reifying the Real to serve his Marxist dream and Hegelian orgy. We (almost) see none of that here.

[Matt Sautman]

My qualms with this book mostly stem from an editorial perspective as the content implied by chapter headings often do not explicitly parallel chapter content. The book makes for a fine companion to Reading Lacan and is useful for thinking about how Zizek approaches the deconstruction of phenomenological experience in a fairly accessible way.

[Tallulah]

Zizek made a lot of very interesting points and overall I enjoyed this book. On the downside, the book is written like a long ramble and is often hard to follow (but I suppose that is typical for Zizek knowing his eccentric nature).

[Diego Pérez]

Dificilisimo de leer, 277 citas en 333 carillas… no solo tenes que entender a Lacan sino que a varios filósofos, así como haberte visto mil películas para entender bien. De todas formas, logra ilustrar ciertas imágenes interesantes. Entendí un 20% del libro

[Roz]

Some interesting insights, especially in the final chapter about the matrix and how people perceive contemporary life, but I’d be lying if I said I felt I understood Lacan (or even Hitchcock, who Zizek refers back to often) any more than before.

[Carolina Abarca]

No entendí muchas de las referencias que usa el autor, por lo que me confundió un poco más de lo que me pudo ayudar a clarificar mis conocimientos con respecto a la teoría psicoanalítica con enfoque lacaniano.

Sin duda, es un poco más mi culpa el no haber disfrutado tanto el libro.

[Moss Bioletti]

challenging but awesome

[Chad]

It took a while. This book is packed with ideas and side trips and wow!! This dude has quite the brain. Very good very complex.

[Emma]

I started off very cold on this and wondered why people kept recommending that I Zizek but it really grew in me as I went. A few interesting ideas to think over.

[Aaron Schuschu]

A Lacanian analysis of film noir/ Hitchcock that spirals into a discussion of my usual bag. It centered around the moral dilemma of a forced choice.

[Matt Morse]

Really good but incomprehensible 🫠

[Imer Acuña]

Brillante

[Nowosolow]

Macht verdammt viel Spaß.
Erwähnt niemals mehr Hitchcock in meiner Umgebung. Ich werde dieses Buch circlejerken.