Abstract
Beginning from the hypothesis that Slavoj Žižek's recent ‘theological’ writing really concerns issues in political theory — historicity, modernity and freedom — ‘polemical ambivalence’ uses a fundamental structural ambiguity in his recent book, The Puppet and Dwarf, to interpret his larger project as split about the utopian aspect of modernity. The Puppet and the Dwarf is riven by modernity, with the text's central argument demonstrating the importance of the modern perspective but with the framing material (introduction, appendix, etc.) demanding that we reverse this appraisal. Modernism elicits both a basic allegiance from Žižek and (in the form of historicism) a basic opposition. Since for Žižek it is the only way that political theory can remain true to the utopian demands of freedom, such ‘ambivalence’ about modernity is the unacknowledged ground of Žižek's thought, and my paper moves toward a consideration of its value in explaining some of the elusive elements of his work — the role and limits of ‘science’ in politics, the necessity and impossibility of utopian imagination, the problem of belief and faith in revolutionary movements.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Furthermore, Žižek seems to question consistently the importance or even the continued relevance of the utopian question. For example, in a recent essay, Žižek analyzes The Matrix as the logical end of Western utopian thought, the point where digitization and Romantic reactions to it exhaust all conceptual space for utopian hope (‘The Matrix, or, The Two Sides of Perversion’ (Žižek, 2002)). The Puppet and the Dwarf follows a related line of thought, suggesting in its Appendix that the historical logic of later Adorno or Heidegger — the logic of a historical ‘checkmate’ at the end of modernity — is more important for us today than any utopian vision (see my discussion of this in the body of the text).
(Žižek, 2003, 16): ‘In all other religions, God demands that His followers remain faithful to Him — only Christ asked his followers to betray him in order to fulfill his mission. Here I am tempted to claim that the entire fate of Christianity, its innermost kernel, hinges on the possibility of interpreting this act in a nonperverse way’.
See ‘On Divine Self-Limitation and Revolutionary Love’, where Žižek demands that we read the subtitle as ambiguous: ‘In a way, I’m sorry for that subtitle because some of my more vulgar materialist, antitheological friens misread it and thought that I was saying Christianity is in itself perverse, and that I want to point to some perverse core in a negative way’ (Žižek and Delpech-Ramey, 2004).
Thus, Žižek argues against the ‘enlightened’ or non-fundamentalist versions of religion popular in our culture: ‘Against this attitude, one should insist even more emphatically that the ‘vulgar’ question ‘Do you really believe or not?’ matters — more than ever, perhaps’ (Žižek, 2003, 6). See, also, the discussion of Buddhism in Chapter 1 of Puppet.
In the first chapter of The Ticklish Subject, Žižek distinguishes between the ‘synthetic imagination’ responsible for the kind of imaginary invoked as an element of utopian projection and a ‘pre-synthetic’ imagination whose work is primarily corrosive (see, Žižek, 1999, 51–52).
References
Žižek, S. (1989) The Sublime Object of Ideology, London and New York: Verson, 336pp.
Žižek, S. (1999) The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Center of Political Ontology, London & New York: Verso, 409pp.
Žižek, S. (2000) The Fragile Absolute — Or, Why is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For?, London & New York: Verso, 182pp.
Žižek, S. (2001a) On Belief, London & New York: Routledge, 170pp.
Žižek, S. (2001b) Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?: Five Interventions in the (Mis)Use of a Notion, London & New York: Verso, 280pp.
Žižek, S. (2002) ‘The Matrix, or, The Two Sides of Perversion’, in: W. Irwin (ed.) The Matrix and Philosophy, Chicago and La Salle: Open Court, pp. 240–266.
Žižek, S. (2003) The Puppet and the Dwarf: The Perverse Core of Christianity, Cambridge: MIT Press, 190pp.
Žižek, S. (2004) Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences, London & New York: Routledge, 217pp.
Žižek, S. and Daly, G. (2004) Conversations with Žižek, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 176pp.
Žižek, S. and Delpech-Ramey, J. (2004) ‘A ‘On Divine Self-Limitation and Revolutionary Love’ [Interview]’, Journal of Philosophy and Scripture (Spring) 2004. www.lacan.com/Zizekscripture.html.
Žižek, S., Laclau, E. and Butler, J. (2000) Contingency, Hegemony, Universality: Contemporary Dialogues on the Left, London & New York: Verso, 329pp.
Žižek, S. and Lenin, V.E. (2002) Revolution at the Gates: A Selection of Writings from February to October 1917, London & New York: Verso, 352pp.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brockelman, T. Polemical Ambivalence: Modernity and Utopia in Žižek's The Puppet and the Dwarf. Contemp Polit Theory 6, 272–290 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300278
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300278