This paper investigates the literal, metaphorical and ideological implications of ‘hybrid’ texts/genres for criticism in general, and for the workshopping of creative work in particular. The question underlying this investigation concerns the place of poetic discourse in fictocriticism. This is consonant with my understanding of genre as ‘index and mark’ representing ‘the site of the nonsubstitutable positioning of the I and the you and of their modalities of expression’ and of poetic discourse as ‘an unsettling process … of identity of (...) meaning and speaking subject’. (shrink)

This paper investigates the literal, metaphorical and ideological implications of ‘hybrid’ texts/genres for criticism in general, and for the workshopping of creative work in particular. The question underlying this investigation concerns the place of poetic discourse in fictocriticism. This is consonant with my understanding of genre as ‘index and mark’ representing ‘the site of the nonsubstitutable positioning of the I and the you and of their modalities of expression’ and of poetic discourse as ‘an unsettling process … of identity of (...) meaning and speaking subject’. (shrink)

lack.” Lacan’s conception of Eros revolves around “a presentification of 1 It is my contention that King Lear invites a theoretical reading of kinship as such “presentification of lack.” Indeed, the dialectic of desire in the text derives from King Lear’s discovering that his own kingly signifier signifies nothing. This error of judgment, which stems from a confusion between desire and jouissance, leads him to misappropriate the rules of bothkingship and kinship. Interestingly enough, it is Cordelia, the daughter andsubject with (...) whom he is erotically involved, who brings home to him thetruth of his error. As an incestuous drama of signification, then, King Learnot only relates to the Phallus as master signifier, but also to the Name-ofthe-Father as referent of the law. Moreover, the truth Cordelia speaks is “a half-said” that leads to the “abolition of discourse”: muteness, madness anddeath. 2 Thus, if the violence implicit in the erotics of the play strikes at “the self-contained character of the participators,” it strikes first at the core of language. 3. (shrink)