Skip to main content
Log in

Polemical Ambivalence: Modernity and Utopia in Žižek's The Puppet and the Dwarf

  • Article
  • Published:
Contemporary Political Theory Aims and scope

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 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).

  2. (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’.

  3. 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).

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (1999) The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Center of Political Ontology, London & New York: Verso, 409pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (2000) The Fragile Absolute — Or, Why is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For?, London & New York: Verso, 182pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (2001a) On Belief, London & New York: Routledge, 170pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (2001b) Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?: Five Interventions in the (Mis)Use of a Notion, London & New York: Verso, 280pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (2003) The Puppet and the Dwarf: The Perverse Core of Christianity, Cambridge: MIT Press, 190pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (2004) Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences, London & New York: Routledge, 217pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. and Daly, G. (2004) Conversations with Žižek, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 176pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300278

Keywords

Navigation