Narcissus and the Other in the Mirror

8/12/2019 Narcissus and the Other in the Mirror

1/33

L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o l V I II n o 1 [ 1 9 97 ]

I N T R O D U C T I O N T O T H E T H E O R Y O F T H E I M A G E :N A R C I S S U S A N D T H E O T H E R I N T H E M I R RO R *

P I E R R E L E G E N D R E * *tra ns lat ed by PETER GOODRICH*** and AL AIN POTTAG E . . . .

I. T h e S u b j e c t a n d t h e I n s t a n c e o f R e p r e s e n t a t i o nT h e y o u t h d i e s, l o st in t h e l o v e l o rn c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f h i s o w n r e f l e c t i o n

i n t h e w a t e r ' s s u r fa c e . H e e x h a l e s h is d e s p a i r a t b e i n g u n a b l e t o r e a c ht h i s " s h a d o w o f a r e f l e c t e d i m a g e , " n a m e l y , h i s o w n f a ce . 1 T h e n , a c c o r d i n gt o t h e p o e m : " O ut i nam a nostro secedere corpore poss em " . A l i t e r a lt r a n s l a t i o n o f w h i c h m i g h t b e : " Oh t h a t I a m n o t a b le t o s e p a r a t e m y s e l ff r o m o u r b o dy " . N o t e t h a t t h e t e x t s a y s " o u r b o d y " r a t h e r t h a n " m y b o d y . "I n o t h e r w o r d s, N a r c i s s u s a d d r e s s e d h i s o w n i m a g e a s t h o u g h i t w e r ea n o t h e r p e r s o n w i t h w h o m h e n e v e r t h e l e s s s h a r e d t h e s a m e b o d y. I n sod o i ng , h e e s t a b l i s h e d t h e i n d i s s o c ia b l e , i n d e s t r u c t i b l e , b o n d b e t w e e n b o d ya n d i m a g e .

T h e m o d e r n m i n d i s so t h o r o u g h l y a t t u n e d t o t h e c a l c u l a t i v e s c i e n ce st h a t i t is d if f i cu l t t o ac c e p t t h a t t h e b o d y i s m a d e p r e s e n t f o r t h e s u b j e c tb y m e a n s o f a n i m a g e . E v e n i f t h i s i s a cc e p t e d , i t i s d i f f ic u l t t o t a k e t h ef u r t h e r s t e p o f a d m i t t i n g t h a t t h e s t a t u s o f t h e b o d y is t h e r e b y m o d i f ie d ,t h a t i n i t s t r a n s l a t i o n b y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h e b o d y l os e s i t s s t a t u s a s ab i o lo g i ca l o b j e ct a n d b e c o m e s s o m e t h i n g f i c ti o n a l. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h eb o d y i s n o t t h e b od y . I t s c o n s t r u c t i o n h a s b e e n t r a n s p o s e d i n t o t h ed o m a i n o f t h e i m a g e ; t h e b o d y w h i c h w e i n h a b i t i s i n d i s s o c ia b l e f r o m t h eg r i p o f t h e i m a g e .

* Tran s la ted from Dieu au mirroir: Etude sur l'institution des images, Lemons I I I(Paris: Faya rd, 1994), 41-88, with the kin d perm issio n of the pu blishe r.

** Ecole Prat iqu e des Hautes Etu des , Sect ion des Sciences Rel igieuses (Paris ) .*** De pa rtm ent of Law, Birkbeck College, Un ive rsity of London, U.K.**** De pa rtm en t of Law, Lond on School of Econom ics, U.K.1 "repercussae ... imagin is umbra" , Ovid, Metamorphoses (Warmins te r : Ar i s and

Phi llips, 1985 ed.), Book III, ver se 434, 110.


2/33

4 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o l V I I I n o 1 [ 1 9 9 7 ]

A t t h e s a m e t i m e , h o w e v e r , t h e e l a b o r a t i o n o f h u m a n s p e e c h t a k e si n t o a c c o u n t t h e p e c u l i a r f a c t t h a t t h e b o d y c a n n o t b e s a i d e x c e p t i n s o f a ra s i t i s in t h e g r i p o f f i c t io n ( fi c ti o n h e r e b e i n g u n d e r s t o o d i n t h e s e n s e o ft h e L a t i n v e rb f i n g e r e : t o m o u l d s o a s to r e p r e s e n t ) . T h e b o d y c a n o n l yb e c o m e s a y a b l e i f i t m a k e s i t s e l f a n i m a g e . T h e b a s i c a x i s o f m e a n i n g - -t h e b o n d b e t w e e n w o r d a n d t h i n g - i s i n d i s s o c i a b l e f r o m t h e s u b j e c t 'ss t r u c t u r e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . O n c e i n t h e g r i p o f t h e i m a g e , t h e b o d y c a n b ec a p t u r e d b y l a n g u a g e .

I t s e e m s t h e n t h a t t h e k n o t t i n g o f b o d y , i m a g e a n d w o r d p r e s u p p o s e sa n i n s t a n c e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . T h e d i f f ic u l t y i n i t i a l l y i s to c o n c e iv e t h ea r t i c u l a t i o n o f t h e i m a g e b e t w e e n b o d y a n d w o r d , w h i l e a t t h e s a m e t i m er e c o g n i s i n g t h e p r i v i l e g e d r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e i m a g e a n d t h e n o t i o n o ft h e i n s t a n c e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .

M y u s e o f t h e t e r m i n s t a n c e p l a y s o n t w o a s p e c t s o f t h e w o r d w h i c hc a n b e d e r i v e d f r o m i t s L a t i n e t y m o l o g y . 2 O n t h e o n e h a n d , i n s t a n c ei n d i c a t e s a w a y o f r e m a i n i n g c o n s t a n t l y p r e s e n t , i n t h e m a n n e r o fs o m e t h i n g t h a t h o l d s s o m e o n e r e l e n t l e s s l y , g r i p p i n g t h e m t i g h t ly , p e r h a p se v e n s o a s t o c o n s t i t u t e a t h r e a t . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i n s t a n c e a l s oi n c l u d e s t h e n o t i o n o f a n i n s i s t e n t d e m a n d w h i c h r e q u i r e s s a t i s f a c t i o n o rw h i c h h a s t o b e a d d r e s s e d t o a p a r t i c u l a r p la c e . F r o m t h i s , t h e i d e a o f ap l a c e i n w h i c h t h e i n s t a n c e i s t h e e l e m e n t o f a to p i c a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n c a nb e d e r i v e d . 3

T h e s u b j e c t i s g r i p p e d t i g h t l y a n d u n r e l e n t i n g l y b y t h e i m a g e , w h i c h ,t o r e c a l l O v i d ' s f o r m u l a h e d i d n o t k n o w w h a t h e w a s s e e i n g , c o n s t i t u t e st h e e n i g m a t i c s t a k e i n th e s t o r y o f N a r c i s s u s . 4 A f t e r s o m e f a l s e s t a r t s ,w h i c h w e r e f i n a l l y o v e r c o m e b y L a c a n ' s s t u d y o f s p e c u l a r i t y , 5p s y c h o a n a l y s i s h a s m a n a g e d t o a d d r e s s t h e i m a g i n a r y s u b s t a n c e o f m a n ' sb e i n g . T h a t c o n c e p t u a l e l a b o r a t i o n s h o u l d n o w b e d e v e l o p e d b y r e c a s t i n gt h e w h o l e q u e s t i o n o f t h e s p e c u l a r . S i n c e F r e u d , t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a ld i m e n s i o n a n d s t a k e o f s u b j e c t i v i t y h a s b e e n n e g l e c t e d , m u c h t o t h ep r e j u d i c e o f c l i n i c a l p r a c t ic e . A l s o , s p e c i f i c a ll y i n r e l a t i o n t o im a g e s , a s i n

2 T h e v e r b ins to ( t h e p r e s e n t p a r t i c i p l e o f i n s ta n s ) , d e r i v e s f r o m s t o. S e e E r n o u l ta n d M e i l l e t , Dic t io n n a i r e d ty mo lo g iq u e d e la la n g u e la t in e ( P a r i s : K l i n c k s i e c k ,1979), 653.

3 A d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w h i c h in t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s r e l a t e s t o t h e t r il o g y o f t h e image ,th e b o d y a n d t h e w o r d .4 qu id v iden t , nesc i t , supra n . 1, a t v e r s e 43 0, p . l l l .5 T h e m i r r o r s t a g e a s f o r m a t i v e o f t h e f u n c ti o n o f t h e I , i n J a c q u e s L a c a n ,

]~crits. A Selection (London: Tav is tock , 1977) , 1 -8 .


3/33

L e g e n d r e : I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e T h e o r y o f t h e I m a g e

so many of the questions which it initiated, psychoanalysis is in dange r ofselling itself short, or of becoming nothing more th an the exercise ofwriting glosses on partic ular authors. Consequently, the study of theimage has to proceed by mean s of certain detours. Principally, it has tobegin again with the famili ar process of inter rogatin g traditions, and inparticular those which are contained in poetic, mythological, and religiousworks. The path to the unconscious dimension of the image a nd ofspeech - - or, more simply, to the foundations of the subject - - remain s inrebellion against the line tak en by scientific doctrines and glosses. Theunconscious dimension of the life of the speakin g being becomes plausibleonly when the enigmatic and opaque trace of our relation to images isreplayed to us directly, as a structure that is at first sight impervious tothe hum an condition. For that reason, and given that it holds us sorelentlessly, the image will be approached progressively.

The same approach will be taken to the other aspect of the i nstan ce ofrepresentation: the idea of the place to which the image addresses itself.From this perspective, the image is taken as a message, because it bears ademand. In asking what demand, or why the message should beconst rued as such, I shall make use of classical texts.

1. The Meaning and the Despair of Narcissus. Rem ark s on the Imag eand the Category of NothingnessTo begin at an e lemen tary level, one should first gather some sense of

the idea of representability, withou t which the concept of the imagecrumbles into nothing. The story of Narci ssus offers jus t su ch anintroduction. How migh t the despa ir to which the lovelorn yo ut hsuccumbs be seen as a sort of prototype of despair? Having arrived in theresting place of the dead, Narc issus continues to gaze at the surface of theStyx, s which suggests perhaps tha t death is only a tran sitor y point in thejourn ey taken by his absolute desire to be joined with himself. Wha t is atissue in this dual relation between subject and image for it to lend itself tosuch extremism?

Narcissus wastes away, and eventu al ly dies, because of theimpossibility of rejoining his image, an impossibility that is clarified an demphasised by something that we have already seen in the text: the bond

6 ... postquam est inferna sede receptus, In Stygia spectebat aqua , supra n. 1, atverse 504-505, p. 112.


4/33


5/33


testifies to an absence?I will first ret urn to the conclusion of the myth of Narc issu s, to th e

moment when the poem uses the meta phor of a floral memoria l to captu rethe notion of the re pre sent abil i ty of absence. What is at issue in th atnotion of absence? Most imme dia tel y the ques tion is tha t of the subject srelati on to disa ppear ance , to the pl ausi bili ty of loss, and, beyond this, todeath as the precondition of life. The flower is pres ent i n th e n a m e o f [ aun o m d e ] an ab sent cause. In the space of the story, it effects a rec urr ingdelegation: the flower is presen t in the name of the youth Narc issus andin the na me of his image; in the name of an abs ent body and also of asubject which has w ith dra wn into death; and, finally, in the na me of hisname. The narciss us as floral memori al does not rest ore the lost objectbut i nstea d testifies to its irre deema ble loss.

Tran slat ed to a space outside of the s tory of the death of Narciss us,the conclusion introduces the subject to the rel atio n to nothingnes s whichis implicit in the life of images. The subject has to dialec ticis e thealte rnat ion of presence and absence which makes the object, and the bondbetween word and thing, represent able. The basic question is how tomake tha t which is absent present in repres entati on without denying thestat us of the a bsen t object as, precisely, an a bsent being. Ovid touches onthe question of a dist ance [dcar t] on the v ery essence of the image, andthe phenomenon of the delegation of thing to image and of image to word.The story of Narcis sus stages the impossible absence of the object, theimposs ibili ty of acceding to the categ ory of nothi ngnes s and so to self-annih ilati on. Each life is lived in the face of the following problem: inorder to enter into speech, the subject must l ive the constantly reite rat edloss of the object, and the commemora tion of tha t loss as it is inde fini telyreit era ted in the order of wha t we call symbolic life.

I have dealt, thus far, with two different mean ings of the image: first,the n a r c i s s i s t i c i m a g e -- a description which follows Freud s a tte nti vereading of certain poetic texts -- and secondly the image unders tood ast r a c e . It is esse ntial to distingui sh these two meaning s if we are toapprecia te the importa nce and complexity of the sta kes manoe uvred bythe insti tutional structures of society. However, although ps ychoanalysisnow offers us the tools needed to deal with such a question, it should benoted that the legal, theological and philosophical tradi tions with whichthe civilis ation of civil law has been as socia ted since the me dia eva lin te rpre ta t i ve revolu t ion had a l ready foreseen the impor t ance ofdisting uishing image and trace. In doing so, they followed the Roman


6/33

8 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o l V I I I n o 1 [1 9 9 7 ]

d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n imago ( i m a g e ) a n d vestigium ( a f o o t, a n d t h e n c e af o o t p r i n t ) . C l a s s i c a l s c h o l a s t i c i s m m a d e b r i l l i a n t u s e o f t h e s e t w o t e r m s ,n o t l e a s t i n p r o b l e m a t i s i n g t h e r e l a t i o n o f m a n t o t h e Imago Dei a n d t oi m a g e s i n g e n e r a l . 10

2. The Image is Bearer of a Demand. Remarks on the Image as MessageO n e a s p e c t o f t h e i d e a o f a n instance of representation i s t h a t s u c h a n

i n s t a n c e i s a n e l e m e n t o f a t o p ic a l d i f f e re n t i a t i o n w h i c h i s i t s e l f o r g a n i s e db y a l o g i c . T h e p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e o f O v i d ' s p o e m i t s e l f s u g g e s t s t h i sd i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b y r e p r e s e n t i n g N a r c i s s u s ' a l i e n a t io n i n a n i m a g e w h i c h h ec o n t e m p l a t e s f r o m a f a r a n d to w h i c h h e s p e a k s . T h e e n t i r e d r a m a t i s a t i o no f t h i s s c e n e d e p e n d s u p o n t h e c o n c e p t o f t h e g a p o r d i s t a n c e w h i c hd u p l i c a t e s N a r c i s s u s , w h i c h d i v i d e s h i m b y s p l i t t i n g h is b e i n g , b u t w h i c hr e m a i n s u n r e c o g n i s e d b y h i m : h e s p e a k s t o h i m s e l f a s h e w o u l d t oa n o t h e r . H e r e , s o m e r a t h e r b a n a l o r n a i v e q u e s t i o n s c o m e to m i n d : W h e r ed o e s t h i s s t r u c t u r e c o m e f ro m ? W h a t p l a c e i s i n v o k e d b y it ? W h a t p l a c e isi t t h a t i s e ch o e d b y t h e i m a g e ?

T h e p o i n t t h a t t h e i m a g e i s a n e c ho e m e r g e s i f o n e r e a d s c a r e f u l ly t h ep a s s a g e s o f t h e Metamorphoses w h i c h l e a d u p t o N a r c i s s u s ' s f a t a l e m b r a c eo f h i s i m a g e . T a k e t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h t h e n y m p h E c h o : h e g o t b a c kj u s t a s m a n y w o r d s a s h e h a d s p o k e n . 11 I f o n e r e l a t e s t h i s t o a n o n - p o e t i ct e x t o f I s i d o r e o f S e v i l l e , t h e l o g ic o f t h i s t o p i c a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e c o m e sr a t h e r C l e a r e r . I s i d o r e r e f e r s to a r o c k w h i c h c r e a t e s a n e c h o b y th eL a t i n i s e d G r e e k t e r m icon : i n a n s w e r i n g a v o i ce , i t b e c o m e s t h e i m a g e o fa n o t h e r ' s s p e e c h . 12 T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n c a n f r e e u s f r o m t h e p e r v a s i v em o d e r n i d e a t h a t i m a g e s a r e n e c e s s a r i l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h v i s io n , a n d c a nl e a d u s t o w a r d a m o r e i m p o r t a n t i s s u e , n a m e l y t h e p r o f o u n d r e l a t i o n s h i pb e t w e e n i m a g e a n d s p e e c h .

I t is r e l e v a n t h e r e t o e m p h a s i s e t h e d r a m a t i c i n t e n s i t y o f t h e t r u t hr e p r e s e n t e d b y O v i d ' s p o e m : t h e i n e l u c t a b l e t e a r i n g o f t h e s u b j e c t a w a yf r o m a n a t t a c h m e n t t o a n i m a l o p a c i t y i n o r d e r to e n t e r i n t o s p e e c h is a10 M o s t n o t a b l y , t h e t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r y s c h o l a s ti c A l b e r t t h e G r e a t , Summatheologiae sive de mirabili scientia Dei ( L i b r i I P a r s I , q u a e s t i o n e s 1 - 50 A )

vol .34(I ) o f Opera Omnia, 1978 , Aschen dorff .11 totidem, quot dixit, recipit', supra n . 1 , a t ve rse 384, p .108 .12 I s i d o r e o f S e v i l l e ( d e c e a s e d 6 3 0) t r a n s m i t t e d a g r e a t d e a l o f l a t i n a n t i q u i t y t o

l a w y e r s : i n p a r t i c u l a r , i n h i s Etymologiarum sive originum libri XX, ed .L i n d s a y (O x fo rd : O x fo rd U n iv e r s i ty P re s s , 1 9 11 ).


7/33


movement which has nothing to do with any merely mechanical access toreality. Rather, it can only be achieved at the price of spli ttin g the bein gof man, not only through the image of himsel f as another, bu t also throu ghthe image of the speech of another . To tr ans lat e this into the e conomy oflanguage, when a child begins to speak, or to inhabit language, i t isinevi tably the image of the speech of another, which might indeed be oneway of defining a proper noun. This division of the subject pre pa re s itsapproa ch to repr ese ntat ion and to the rela tion of signification; in short, itenables the subject to att ach its elf not to things but to words. Thetre atme nt of images is essential to this subjective work of abstraction.

The idea of an instance therefore enables us to understa nd b ett er thelogical struc ture of the fabrication of the subject, which is nece ssa rily aquestion of the i nstit ution of images. We can usefully propose the not iontha t t he insta nce of rep res ent ati on is a place, a place in which image andword originate, and in which repre sent atio ns of self and other are born.Ovid's poem identifies this place as a place which is addressed, n ame ly theplace addresse d by Narciss us ' demand for love. This is wha t make sNarcis sus' image so vivid for him: the demand which, para doxically , headdres ses to himself bears witne ss to the existence of this place. Thisra ises an unforeseen problem: the message which i s unwi t t ing lyaddr esse d by Narci ssus to hims elf constitut es a circuit. The poem directsus to the essent ial issue: behind the recognition of the m inima l re al itywhich veils the represe ntation of things -- what he thought was his bodywas but water ~- there lurks an enigma which has to do with theprinciple of Reason. How can I ignore the fact th at the other to whom Iaddres s my message is none other th an myself?. For the re ade r of thepoem the problem is to understand Narcissus' i l lusion in relation to themessage, and to draw out the implic ation s of this illusion. Messa ge an dmessenge r are confused. One might here refer to Lacan 's judicio usobservation that this is a sort of str uct ura l crossroads at which one has totak e one's bearings. T

In order to understa nd the stran ge idea of a mess age-me ssenge r i t isinstruc tive to recall Rimbaud's l ine, I am an other (Je est un autre),which well expresses something tha t psychoanalysis, in addre ssi ng thenarciss istic phase of the subject's development, has clearly brou ght out bymeans of the theoretical notion of the i magin ary structure of the self. AsOvid's fable makes clear in a mythical register, the subject does not13 corpusputat esse quod unda est , supra n.1, at verse 417, p.108.14 Jacques Lacan, supra n.5, at 8-30, Aggressivity in psychoanalysis .


8/33

1 0 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o I V I I I n o 1 [ 1 9 9 7 ]

c o n f u s e i t s e l f w i t h i t s s e l f . T h e d r a m a o f N a r c i s s u s i n s t a n t i a t e s , w i t h i nt h e m y t h i c a l s p a c e o f t h e n a r r a t i v e , t h e f o r m u l a I a m a n o th e r . T h ef o r m u l a m e s s a g e - m e s s e n g e r i s a p t b e c a u s e N a r c i s s u s i s t h e m e s s e n g e rc o n f r o n t e d w i t h h i s o w n m e s s a g e . T h e r e i s n o r e a l d i a l o g u e , o n l y a f o r m o fr e f l e x i v i t y . T h e t e x t r e a d s : . . .e a c h t i m e t h a t I h a v e s t r e t c h e d m y l i p sd o w n t o t h e l i m p i d w a t e r s , e a c h t i m e h e h a s s t r a i n e d t o w a r d s m e w i t hu p t u r n e d m o u t h , .. . w h e n I s m i l e , y o u s m i l e b a c k , . .. I h a v e s e e n y o u r t e a r sf l ow , w h e n I h a v e c r i e d . 15 T h e m e s s a g e c o n s i s t s i n t h e v e r y p r e s e n c e o ft h e m e s s e n g e r , a p r e s e n c e w h i c h c a p t i v a t e s h i m .

T h e c a p t u r e 1~ o f t h e s u b j e c t b y t h e i m a g e - - a s i s s u g g e s t e d b y t h ef r a g m e n t f r o m I s i d o r e d e s c r i b i n g t h e ro c k w h i c h c a p t u r e s t h e s o u n d o ft h e h u m a n v o i c e - - s e e m s o n t h i s b a s i s t o b e th e c e n t r a l e l e m e n t o f t h ed i v i s i o n o f t h e s p e a k i n g b e i n g w h i c h s t r u c t u r e s i t s e n t r y i n to d i s c o u r s e ,b o t h a t t h e l e v e l o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l a n d a t t h e l e v e l o f s o c i e t y . H u m a nc o m m u n i c a t i o n i s a t t a i n e d n o t t h r o u g h a m a i e u t i c s o f d i a lo g u e , b u t r a t h e rb y w a y o f a n i m a g e , a n d , t h e r e f o r e , a s o r t o f f o r m a l i s m . T h e c o n c e p t o f t h em e s s a g e - m e s s e n g e r i d e n t if i e s a p r i m o r d i a l s t r u c t u r a l i m p a s s e w h i c h i sl i n k e d t o t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f l a n g u a g e . A t t h e s o c i a l l e v el , i t i s l e f t t o t h en o r m a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s o f a c u l t u r e ' s s y m b o l i c o r d e r t o p e r f o r m t h ea n t h r o p o l o g i c a l l y e s s e n t i a l t a s k o f m a n i p u l a t i n g t h e i n s t a n c e o fr e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n su c h a w a y t h a t t h e n a r c i s s i s t i c i m p a s s e m i g h t b e t a k e nu p b y t h e s u b j e c t a n d s o f o rm t h e b a s i s o f s o c i a l e x c h a n g e .

I I . T h e O t h e r i n th e M i r r o r a n d t h e S u b j e c t ' s S p e c u l a t i o n o n S i m i l a r i t y .T h e N a r c i s s i s t i c B a s i s o f S o c i e t y

I t i s n o w n e c e s s a r y t o a d d r e s s t h e m y t h o f N a r c i s s u s i n t e r m s o f i t sr o l e i n t h e c u l t u r a l s t r u c t u r a t i o n o f i d e n t i t y . T h e h u m a n w o u l d b eu n t h i n k a b l e w i t h o u t t h e b o n d i n g o f b o d y , i m a g e a n d w o r d , o r w i t h o u t a ni n s t a n c e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . I t f o l l o w s t h a t s o c i e t y i t s e l f w o u l d b eu n t h i n k a b l e i f t h i s w a g e r , w h i c h i s e s s e n t i a l t o l i fe w i t h i n t h e s p e c ie s ,w e r e n o t m a d e . I t i s i m p o r t a n t , t h e r e f o re , t o d e v e l o p t h e s t u d y b y a s k i n gh o w t h e m e c h a n i s m a t w o r k in t h e m y t h o l o g y o f N a r c i s s u s , a n d w h i c hp s y c h o a n a l y s i s h a s c a r e fu l l y b r o u g h t t o l i g h t , i s a c c o u n t e d f o r w i t h i n t h es t r u c t u r e o f a s o c ie ty . H o w d o e s i t p e r f o r m i t s r o le i n a m a n n e r t h a t i s15 q u o t ie n s l i q u i d i s p o r r e x i m u s o s c u l a ly m p h i s , H i s t o t ie n s a d m e r e s u p i n o

n i t i t u r o r e ... C u m r is i, a d r i d es . L a c r i m a s q u o q u e s a e p e n o ta v i M e l a c r i m a n t et u a s . S u p r a n .1 , a t ve rses 451-452 , 459-460 , p .110 .

16 S u p r a n.12, .. . h u m a n a e v o ci s s o n u r n c a p t a n s . .


9/33


i n t e l l i g ib l e t o t h e s u b je c t , a n d h o w d o e s a c h ie v e t h e s t a b i l i t y a p p r o p r i a t et o a n o r g a n i s a t i o n b a s e d u p o n s p e e c h .

F r o m a n a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e e s s e n t i a l i s s u e is t h a t t h es u b j e c t ' s p o i n t o f g r e a t e s t v u l n e r a b i l i t y i s a l so t h e p o i n t o f i t s m e e t i n gw i t h t h e i n s t i t u t i o n . I n a l l c u l t u r e s t h e p r i n c i p l e o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l i t yn e c e s s a r i l y h a s t o d o w i t h t h e i m a g i n a r y c o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e s e lf , t h ea l i e n a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t i n i t s i m a g e , a n d t h e l o v e o f t h e s e l f a s t h ee m b r a c e o f a n o t h e r , a l l o f w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e w h a t I d e s c r i b e a s t h e m a t e r i a lo f n a r c i s s i s m . W e a r e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a n i n e r a d i c a b l e f a c t w h o s ei m p o r t a n c e i s h a r d t o g a u g e b e c a u s e t h e l i n k b e t w e e n s o c i a l f u n c t i o n a n dr e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l l o g ic h a s n o t y e t b e e n e s t a b l is h e d . T h i s i s n o t i n i t s e l fs u r p r i s i n g . T h e b e l i e f s t r u c t u r e p r e s u p p o s e d b y m o d e r n s c i e n t i s m h a ss o u g h t t o c l o se o f f i n q u i r y i n t o t h i s p r o b l e m . T h e r e a r e , t h e r e f o r e , g o o dr e a s o n s t o b e g i n a g a i n , a t t h e b a s i c l e v e l a t w h i c h w e l e f t i t , w i t h t h ep h e n o m e n o n o f n a r c i s s i s m : h o w c a n t h e c l a ss i c a l i m p a s s e o f n a r c i s s i s m b et r a n s p o s e d s o t h a t i t m i g h t b e a s s u m e d b y t h e s u b j e c t a n d f o r m t h e b a s i so f so c i a l e x c h a n g e s ?

I n o r d e r t o g r a s p i n w h a t s e n s e t h e n a r c i s s i s t i c s t r u c t u r e o f a s o c i e t yi s e s s e n t i a l , i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o a p p r e c i a t e t h a t t h e s u b j e c t iv e m e c h a n i s mt h a t u n d e r p i n s O v i d ' s m y t h s e r v e s a n e s s e n t i a l r e q u i r e m e n t o f l if e : t h a ts o m e t h i n g s h o u l d b e p r e s e r v e d e v e n a s i t i s t r a n s c e n d e d . T h i s i s n o t ar e f e r e n c e t o s o m e s o r t o f p s y c h o l o g i s m , b u t t o t h e H e g e l i a n n o t i o n o fA u f h e b u n g , 17 o r , m o r e s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l y , a r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e s y m b o l i cc h a r a c t e r o f w h a t i s i n i s s u e in t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a s s u c h ,a n d w h i c h i s n o r m a l l y p r o c e s s e d b y a n i n s t i t u t i o n a l d i a l e c t i c .

W h a t N a r c i s s u s f i n d s s e n s e l e s s - h e d i d n o t k n o w w h a t h e w a ss e e i n g - r e l a t e s t o t h e s o u r c e o r o r i g in o f h i s i m a g e . B u t w h a t t h e n i s t h i ss o u r c e f o r t h e s u b j e c t , o r f o r N a r c i s s u s , w h o a l o n e c a n b e p r e s e n t b e f o r eh i s o w n i m a g e ? I t i s a n o r i g i n w h i c h i s p u r e ; o r, to a d o p t D e r r i d a ' s p h r a s e ,i t i s t h e n o n - r e f e r e n c e t o t h e s el f . 18 T o c i t e D e r r i d a a g a i n : A n d i f t h e17 T h i s t e r m r e t u r n s u s b o t h to t h e i d e a o f g a t h e r i n g to g e t h e r , c o n s e r v in g , a n d t o

t h a t o f s u p p r e s s i o n o r a b o l i ti o n . I t p l a y s a v e r y i m p o r t a n t r o l e in t h ed e v e l o p m e n t o f H e g e l i a n t h o u g h t o n n e g a t i v i t y a n d t h e d i a l e c t ic . S e e t h er e m a r k s o f H y p p o l i te , t h e t r a n s l a t o r o f T h e P h e n o m e n o l o g y o f S p i r i t i n t oF r e n c h ( P a r i s : A u b i e r - M o n t a i g n e , 1 94 7) , 1 9 -2 0; a n d a l s o A . K o j~ v e ,In t roduc t ion ~ l a l ec ture de Hege l (P a r i s : G a l l ima rd , 1 96 8) , 5 5 4-55 9. J . D e r r id aa d d r e s s e s t h e q u e s t io n o f N a r c i s s i s m a n d s p e c u l a r i t y i n t e r m s o f t h ep r o b l e m a t i c o f A u f h e b u n g i n M a r g i n s o f P h i l o s o p h y ( C h ic a go : U n i v e r s i t y o fChicago Press , 1982), 283-288.

18 l'irreference a soi , D e r r i d a , ibid. , at 283.


10/33

1 2 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o l V I I I n o 1 [ 1 9 9 7 ]

s o u r c e h a s n o p r o f i le fo r i t se l f , i t is l i k e a n a b s o l u t e g l a n c e w h i c h b e i n ga l w a y s o p e n e d w i d e a n d t h r o w n t o w a r d t h e v i s i b le , c a n n o t i t s e l f p e r c e i v ei t s e l f , n e v e r e m e r g i n g f r o m i t s n i g h t . m T h i s b r i n g s o u t t h e i d e a t h a t t h es c e n e c o n s t r u c t s t h e s e l f a s a n e x t e r n a l o b j e c t w h i c h i t i n t e r r o g a t e s , n o t i na c a u s a l m o d e - w h y i s t h i s o b j e c t h e r e ? - b u t r a t h e r a c c o r d i n g t o am o d e o f s u f f e r i n g c o n s c io u s n es s : w h y a m I n o t a n u n s e p a r a t e d p r e s e n c e ?

T h e r e i s a n i m p o r t a n t l e s s o n to b e fo u n d i n t h i s s c e n e . I t i s t h e m o d e lo r m o u l d o f a l l t h e s c e n e s o f o r ig i n e n c o u n t e r e d b y m e n ; i t i s t h e o r i g i n a lg a z e , o r t h e s t r u c t u r a l p o i n t o f t h e l o g ic o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n w h i c h f o u n d st h e s u b j e c t ' s s e n s e o f b e i n g i n t h e w o r l d o r i t s s e n s e o f t h e b e i n g o f t h ew o r l d , a b e i n g w h i c h is s u p p o r t e d b y sp e e ch . B e f o re b e i n g s u m m o n e d t oi n h a b i t w h a t m o d e r n j a r g o n , i n i t s u n w i t t i n g d e a l i n g s w i t h t h e s t r u c t u r e so f I n t e r d i c t i o n , c a l l s p a r e n t a l i m a g e s , h u m a n b e i n g s e n t e r i n t o a ne l e m e n t a r y f o r m o f k n o w l e d g e ; n a m e l y , t h a t o f t h e i n s t a n c e o f s p e c u l a r i t y .H o w i s th i s i n s t a n c e t o b e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e a b s o l u te f o r m o f n a r c i s s i s m ?

A m i r r o r i s a n o p e r a t i o n o f d i v i s i o n w h i c h n e c e s s a r i l y t r a n s f o r m s : i tp r e s e n t s a n o r i g i n a s a n o u tc o m e . I t t r a n s f o r m s a n o r i g i n i n t o a no u t c o m e , o r i n t o s o m e t h i n g f r o m w h i c h i t d e r i v e s , m u c h a s in O v i d ' s s t o r yt h e i m a g e c o m e s f r o m N a r c i s s u s . T h e e l e m e n t s o f t h i s o p e r a t i o n c a n b es e t o u t b y a s k i n g t h r e e e s s e n t i a l q u e s t io n s .

F i r s t , w h a t i s a n o r ig i n w i t h i n t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ? O r ,m o r e p r e c i s e l y , h o w d o e s t h e o r i g i n c o m e to b e m a n i f e s t e d t o t h e s u b j e c t ;h o w d o e s i t b e c o m e a n e f f e c t o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ? T h e I [ l e J e ] m u s t b ei d e n t i f i e d a s t h e p o i n t t o w h i c h a n y p r e s e n c e i s r e l a t e d , i n c l u d i n g t h ep r e s e n c e o f t h i s I i n t h e w o r l d , t h e i m a g e o f t h e s e l f i n t h e w o r l d , a n d t h ew o r d s w h i c h i t u t t e r s . T h i s s o u r c e o r o r i g i n , h o w e v e r , o n l y k n o w s i t s e l f b ym e a n s o f t h a t w h i c h i s g i v e n to i t i n i t s p r e s e n c e a s o b j e c t a n d a c c o r d i n g tot h e d i f f e r e n t m o d e s o f t h i s o b je c t . M o r e o v e r , i t o n l y k n o w s i t s e l f a s t h eo n e w h o s e e s t h i s o b je c t , n o t a s a g a z e u p o n t h e g a z e w h i c h s e e s . W i t hr e g a r d t o t h e t h e o r y o f t h e r e l a t i o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e s t o r y o fN a r c i s s u s , i t b e c o m e s a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e k n o w l e d g e w h i c h t h e I h a s o f t h eI i s a f a l s e l y r e f l e x i v e k n o w l e d g e : t h e I a s a p o i n t o f o r i g i n o f i t s o w np r e s e n c e i n t h e w o r l d i s d i s c o v e r e d o n l y t h r o u g h t h i s o t h e r a s o b je c t ,n a m e l y i t s im a g e . I n s t r i c t ly H e g e l i a n t e r m s , t h e s o u r c e o r o r i g i n i s h e r e ar e s u l t . ~

S e c o n d , w h a t i s t h e e s s e n t i a l l e s s o n o f N a r c i s s u s ' o s c i l l a t io n b e t w e e nt h e r e c o g n i t i o n a n d n o n - r e c o g n i t i o n o f h i s o w n im a g e ? T h e p r o b l e m i s19 Ib id . at 284.2 0 T h e s o u rc e r e s u l t s h e re . I b i d . at 281.


11/33

L e g e n d r e : I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e T h e o r y o f t h e I m a g e 3

that of pure identity: how can one coincide with one's mirror image, andwho or what war ran ts th is coincidence? This essent ial ly philosophicalpr obl em -- and here some reference should be made to the scholast icproblematic of id cujus es t imago ( that of which the ima ge is animage) 21 - - gives us a clue as to the be ing of the ima ge for the subje ct. Bythis I mea n that a t ra nsc ende nta l elem ent is at s take in the relat ion ofresemblance, an element which has to do with somet hing other t ha n theconcrete rela tio n of res emb lan ce for a give n subject or, if I put it like this ,the subject of the face. This trans ce nde nta l stake refers the subject -- an ysubjec t - - to a guar ant ee of coincidence, or, more precisely, to the Rea sonof signs, to pure al terit y as the gua ran tee of the presence of the world as arela tion of me an in g which is take n to be true. In other words, the objectof Narcis sus ' osci l lat ion between the recognit ion and non-recogni t ion ofhis image is the g uar ant ee of his divided being, the f oundat ions of tr uth ,or the pre supposition of the inst ance of the third [tierce] which founds anyrelation to the object, the other-than-self, and which, as we shall see,undoes any dual relation with the object. This suggests tha t the str uct ureof the huma n sub ject i s a s t ructu r e o f represen ta t ion . Narci ssus i sfaceless for Narcissus: because he has no guara nte e he is denie d access tothe m irr or which, in repr es ent ing the Reas on of signs, is always at rans cenden ta l theatre . Narcissus i s thus , u l t imate ly , in the un te nab l eposition of a divine creator, for whom t he question of the mirr or or of thegua ran tor simply does not arise.

Third , what makes the mythical circuit of speech work? A properunde rs t and ing o f the o r ig inal scene o f communic at ion a t the h igh lyabstract level at which Ovid places i t , suggests that the answer is adivision or a cut [coupure]. In using th is term, which was muc h favouredby Valdry, 22 and which has enjoyed muc h success in co nt em por ar y

21 Thus Albert the Great expounds a doctrine of Reference through the image forthe human animal: the creature which possesses a truth copied from the divinetruth ( creatura ... veritatem habet exemplatam a divina veritate ). In the sameway that the oath of the juror refers to God, so also a person who worships a nimage of a sa int refers, through the image, to the truth of God. Commenta rySuper Matthaeum, ch.5, verse 34 (Neque per caelum = Do not swear a t all, noteven to the sky ...), Opera Omnia , -1987, vol.21, Part II, 112.

22 It is an extraordinary fact tha t we talk to ourselves and that thi s discourse isindispensable to us ... Who speaks? Who listens? It is not exactly the sameperson ... This voice can become (morbidly) a complete stranger. The existenceof this speech of the self to the self is the sign of a cut. The possibil ity of beingseveral is necessary for reason, but also used by it. Perhaps we take the image


12/33

1 4 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o I V I II n o 1 [1 9 9 7]

philosophy and psychoanalysis , I take i t to designate that which is atwork in the reflexivity of the relat ion of self to self, nam ely the division ofthe subject, which implies its presence in the world, or, as I have alr eadysuggested, the mec han is m of objectification of the I as ano the r for the Ith at sees itsels This presence of the s elf as an effect, as an origin th at is aresult, is unavai labl e to Narcissus.

The mir ror is a structure, or montage, of speech and division. It is alogical presupposi t ion of hu ma n repre senta t ion, and i t s ignifies for thesubject. It signifies in two senses. First, i t mobilises the mac hi ner y ofmeani ng, and constructs the subject hermene utical ly as the in te rpre ter ofits own repr ese nta tion . Secondly, according to the juridi cal me an in g ofsignif icat ion, d ivision notifies the subject of an irre media ble loss, or ,according to the Hegelian category of negativ i ty , the tor ment of orig in .Indeed , a Hegel ian phrase s umma ris es the sub ject ive s ta tus o f thedivi ding cut: "separ atio n from origin" [Tr ennu ng yon de m Ursprung]. 23 Inthese terms, Narcissus' futile despair expresses the horror that follows inthe trai n of non-separat ion.

The ma teri al of narcissism is therefore an ineradicable given of theorg ani sa ti on of all social bonds. Again, Val~ry is instruc tive:

Because I love myselfi ... oh ironic reflection of myselfiOh my kisses flung at the calm fountain ......

Must I give my life to your love, oh sweet shadow? uWhe n at th is point in h is move ment of osci l lat ion Narcissus says "I

love myself ' , he situates his image as other than himself, as the object ofhis gaze. We know, on the basis of the pr eceding observations, tha t this

as other to the impulse of the mirror", P. Val~ry, manuscript edition (Paris:C.N.R.S., 1918-1920, 1958), vol.7,615.

23 The formula relates back to what Hegel says of the re lation of par ent s tochildren: "the piety of the children with regard to their parents is in its turnaffected by the emotional contingency of the ir having become form themselves,or in themselves, in the form of an other who disappears so as to attain abeing-for-itselfand a conscience proper to itsel f through its separat ion from itssource - - a separat ion in which this source dries up." Phenomenology of Spirit,VI, A, vol.II at 24. One could say that the origin suppresses itself.

24 "Car, je m'a ime ... o reflet ironique de Moi 0 mes baisers lancds & la calmefontaine ... Faut-il ma vie ~t ton amour, o spectre cher?" Val~ry, in one of theversions of"Nareicisse parle" [Narcissus speaks], in P. Val~ry, Oeuvres (Paris:Gallimard, 1957), Vol.I, 1558-1559.


13/33


s i t u a t i n g o f w h a t i s o t h e r t h a n t h e s e l f , a t t h e m o s t b a s i c l e v e l o fr e p r e s e n t a t i o n , d o e s n o t l e a d t o a n y e x p r o p r i a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t , b u tc o n s t i tu t e s a m o v e m e n t o f d e l e g a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t t o w a r d s t h e i m a g e . I fw e a n a l y s e t h i n g s i n th i s w a y , t h a t i s , b y a n a l y s i n g t h e g r a m m a t i c a lp h r a s i n g o f t h e I l o v e m y s e l F ' a s a r e f l e x iv e f o rm , t h e m o v e m e n t o fd e l e g a t io n a p p e a r s a s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o r a s s e m b l i n g o f t h e e l e m e n t s t h a tc o n s t i t u t e t h e m i r r o r . T h i s d e l e g a t i o n o f s e l f t o s e l f p r e s u p p o s e s t h ef o l l o w i ng : t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e o b j ec t , o f t h e i m a g e , o r, i n o t h e r w o r d s , o ft h e s o u r c e a s e f f e c t , o f t h e o r i g i n a s o u t c o m e ; t h e a s s u m p t i o n o f ag u a r a n t e e o f c o in c id e n c e , o r a r e l a t i o n o f r e s e m b l a n c e ; a n i r r e m e d i a b l el o s s , a s e p a r a t i o n f r o m o n es e lf , th e a s s u m p t i o n o f n e g a t i v i t y . W e h a v eh e r e , t h e r e f o r e , i n t h e f o r m u l a I l o v e m y s e l f ' , t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h ec o m p o s i t i o n a n d t r a n s p o s i t i o n o f t h e m a t e r i a l o f n a r c i s s is m , a n d w e c a n i nt h i s w a y u n d e r s t a n d t h e m o v e m e n t o f d e l e g a t i o n w h e n N a r c i s s u sr e c o g n i s e s h i s o w n i m a g e . N a r c i s s u s is t r a n s p o r t e d , l i t e r a l l y : t h ec o n s t i t u t i v e a l i e n a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t i n i t s i m a g e f i n d s i t s g r e a t e s ta c c o m p l i s h m e n t i n t h e t r a n s p o r t o f l ov e . A n d , to th e e x t e n t t h a t t h e r e i st r a n s p o r t a t i o n , w e a r e r e f e r r e d t o t h e c o n c e p t o f m e t a p h o r w h i c h , a s i t se t y m o l o g y su g g e s t s , i s d e f i n e d a s a t r a n s p o r t .

T h e m o m e n t i n w h i c h N a r c i s s u s r e c o g n i s e s h is o w n i m a g e c a n b ed e f i n e d a s a n instance of metaphorisation L e t u s r e t u r n t o t h e b a s i ce l e m e n t s : t h e o r i g in a s o u tc o m e , t h e g u a r a n t e e o f r e s e m b l a n c e , n e g a t i v i t y .W e f i n d t h a t t h e y a r e a s s u m e d b y t h e r e l a t io n o f s e l f t o se l f i n t h e p h r a s e

I l o v e m y s e l f ' , w h i c h w e n o w k n o w t o b e s a y a b l e o n l y i f t h e s e l f i s s e e n a sa n o t h e r . I l ov e m y s e l f ' p r e s u p p o s e s t h a t I i s a n o t h e r . T h e m o m e n t inw h i c h t h e i m a g e i s r e c o g n is e d is a m e t a p h o r i c a l m o m e n t i n t h e s e n s e t h a ti t is t h e m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n o f t h e o t h e r t o t h e s e lf , a n d o f t h e o t h e r a s s e l f .T h e m a t e r i a l o f n a r c i s s i s m i s t h e p i l l a r o f b o t h s u b j e c t i v e a n d s o c ia li d e n t i t i e s .

T h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e i m a g e i s n o t o n ly a q u e s t io n o f t h e a l i e n a t i o n o ft h e s e l f . A l i e n a t i o n , w h i c h i s o n l y o n e a s p e c t o f t h e p r o b l e m a t i c o fs p e c u l a r i ty , i s a n a r t i c u l a t i o n o r t r a n s p o s i t io n . I t m a k e s t h e a r t i c u l a t i o no f s u b j e c t a n d i n s t i t u t i o n - - t h e s y m b o l i c - - t h i n k a b l e . T h e s y m b o l i c h a st o b e r e p r e s e n t a b l e ; a n d , g i v e n t h i s n e c e s s i t y , i t h a s t o r e p r o d u c e t h eo r i g i n a l s c e n e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n - t h e d iv i d e d s u b j e c t ' s r e l a t i o n t o t h eo t h e r o f t h e s e l f - - i n o r d e r t o m o d u l a t e a n d d e v e l o p i t a t a l e v e l w h i c ht r a n s c e n d s o r e x c e e d s t h e s u b je c t . T h e m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n o f a l i e n a t i o n i st h e f o u n d a t i o n o f s y m b o l i c o r g a n i s a t i o n . T h e r e i s m o r e t o t h e i m a g e t h a nt h e i m p a s s e o f t h e s e l f b e c a u s e t h e i n s t a n c e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , w h i c h h a s


14/33

1 6 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o l V I I I n o 1 [1 9 9 7]

t o d o w i t h t h e i m a g e a n d w h i c h m i g h t b e t e r m e d t h e imaginal c o n s t i t u t e st h e b a s i s o r t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t o f t h i s t r a n s p o r t o f m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n . I no t h e r w o r d s , f o r t h e imaginal t h e s y m b o l i c i s a l r e a d y t h e r e .

I f i d e n t i t y e m e r g e s f r o m t h e e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e n a r c i s s i s t i c i m p a s s e ,t h i s e l a b o r a t i o n , w h i c h c r e a t e s t h e s i m i l a r a s a t e r m o f t h e d i a l e c t i c o f t h em i r r o r , w o u l d b e i n c o n c e i v a b l e fo r t h e s u b j e c t a s s u c h w e r e i t n o t f o r t h ec u l t u r a l u s e o f t h e m i r r o r . F o c u s i n g on t h e s t r u c t u r e s o f w e s t e r n c u l t u r e ,m y a n a l y s i s w i l l d e v e l o p t w o t h e m e s . F i r s t , i t r e v e a l s t h e f a t e o f t h en a r c i s s i s t i c s t r u c t u r e b y l o o k i n g a t i ts e n c o u n t e r w i t h t h e p r i n c i p l e o fi n s t i t u t i o n s , t h a t i s, w i t h t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r o f a p a r t i c u l a r s o c ie t y . I tt h e n r e t u r n s t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e m i r r o r a s a p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o fm e t a p h o r i s a t i o n , t h e a i m b e i n g to d e f i n e th e c o n t r a d i c t i o n w h i c h r e q u i r e su s t o t h i n k o f t h e m i r r o r - - o r, h e r e , s o c i e t y a s i t p r e s e n t s i t s e l f a s am i r r o r - - a s b e i n g c a p a b l e o f f u l f i l l in g t h e f u n c t i o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o r o fh o l d i n g a n i m a g e u p t o t h e s u b j e ct .1. The Narc issis tic Process and the Differen tiati on of the Other.

Observations on the Institution of the Simi larT h e a i m o f t h i s a n a l y s i s i s t o g r a s p t h e p r o c e s s o f i d e n t i t y i n i t s

u n a v o i d a b l e s t a g e o f t r a n s i t io n , w h a t m i g h t b e t e r m e d i t s e l e m e n t a r yn a r c i s s i s t i c s t r u c t u r e . O n e o f t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s o f e m b a r k i n g o n s u c h a s t u d yi s t h a t i n c o n t e m p o r a r y w e s t e r n s o c ie t y , w h i c h c l a i m s t o h a v e n e i t h e rt o t e m n o r t a b o o , t h i s n a r c i s s i s t i c s t r u c t u r e - t h e t r a n s i t i o n o f t h eq u e s t i o n i n g s u b j e c t to w a r d s d i a l e c t ic i s a t io n b y t h e m i r r o r o f c u l t u r e - - i sn o l o n g e r p e r c e iv e d . W e f a l l b a c k i n s t e a d o n e r s a t z v e r s i o n s o f t h e m i r r o r ,w h i c h a r e i n e s se n c e t o t a l i t a r i a n e v en t h o u g h t h e y a r e s u p p o s e d t o s h e l t e rt h e s t r u c t u r a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t - - t h e l i b e r a t e d s u b j e c t w h i c h i d e n t i f i e sw i t h a d v e r t i s i n g i m a g e s . I n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n o ft h e o t h e r o f t h e s e lf , a n d o f t h e o t h e r a s s e l f , i s n o l o n g e r u n d e r s t o o d t oi n v o l v e i n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s . M y o b s e r v a t i o n s r u n c o n t r a r y toc o n t e m p o r a r y c l ic h e s a b o u t t h e s o v e r e i g n s u b j e c t w h i c h , b e c a u s e i t d e n i e si t s o w n d i v i s i o n , i s s u p p o s e d t o h a v e n o s i m i l a r s . W h a t t h e n d o e s s i m i l a rm e a n ? W h a t d o es i t m e a n t o r e p r e s e n t s i m i l a r i t y t o o n e s e l f o r t o i d e n t i fyo n e s e l f w i t h t h e s i m i l a r?

W h e n h e r e c o g n i s e s h i s i m a g e , N a r c i s s u s s a y s , I a m h e w h o is o v e rt h e r e ... I b u r n w i t h l o v e f o r m e . 25 T o r e c o g n i s e o n e s e l f , to i d e n t i f y o n e s e l fw i t h t h e o t h e r o f t h e m i r r o r , i s t o k n o w o n e s e l f t o b e d i v i d e d a n d r e f e r r e d25 Supra n .1 , Book I I I , a t ve rse 463 , 464 , p .84 .


15/33


to tha t other, the status of the mirror being that of a dividing thirdinstance or the i naugura tor of a relation which I have elsewhere ter medthe separa ting bond. m It is by virtue of this distance, by virtue of the veryfact of the dimension of division, tha t the image of the self always bearsthe s tamp of the other. This irreducible aspect of alterity, which stam psthe image, founds the subjective question to which insti tutionalinterve ntions give shape and status. Thus the question of a relation toalterity is at once intrasubjective and institutional. On the other hand, toaccommodate oneself to the alterity of one s image by symbolising divisionis the basis of the subject s relation to culture. Our problem is to envisageby wha t me ans and in what mode, the me taphori sation of the other isconst ructed by the social order of images.

I shall ret urn to the idea of tran spor t t hat I raised in connection withmetaphor. The mode of the discourse by which Narcissus addresses theother of the self is tha t of the tr ansport of love. This gives us a val uableclue in dealing with those cultural constructions which are based on themater ial of narcissism. The repre senta tion of alterity, to which theamorou s subject refers, is a universal condition of hum ani ty. Thisrepres entati on or staging inevitably constructs the image of othernessth at it holds out for the world. And it is at jus t this point, where it is ati ts most fragile, that the speaki ng anima l anchors i tself toinstitutionalised alterity, using the multiple links which it offers to thefigure of the other. At the level of Narcissus other, we reach th e level ofano the r sort of other, the absolute Other rath er tha n the narcissisticother, the former enabling the subject to assume identity and alterity inone movement. The absolute Other therefore signifies the point ofopening which the subject uses to organise its narcissistic bond, not onlyby referring to itself but also by reference to all others. It is import ant toillustrate this mechanism in order to grasp its nature and to gauge itssignificance in the unfolding of the institutional order.

In dealing with the western universe of representation, we canapprop riate some traditional elements. The them e of the divine Face isone of the most int eres ting of these because of its links with theology,philosophy and the arts. It shows us quite precisely the na tur e of asociety s imaginal instance, and how the repres entatio n of the absoluteOther, tha t is to say the Image of the principle of alterity, comes to play ametaphorical mediating role for the subject at the same time as it makesthe idea of culture possible. By th at I mea n tha t it makes possible the26 P. Legendre, Le ddsir polit ique de ieu (Paris: Fayard, 1988), 132.


16/33

1 8 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o I V I I I n o 1 [1 9 9 7 ]

government of the empire of narcissistic images which constitute what wecall the huma n community. Of course the theme of the Face of God is onlyone mani festa tion of the E uropean thea tre of images: nevertheless, therich ness of expressio n th at i t provides allows it to be invoked as areprese ntative discourse.

The theme of the divine Name and the divine Face emerge d from theJew ish t rad i t ion before being take n up, enriched and amplif ied, byChrist iani ty . I am most interest ed here in Lat in Christ iani ty , and itsiconographic and theoret ical developments . S ince the mediaevalrevolut ion of the in ter pre ter which opened the era of ins t i t ut i ona lmodernity, Europe has had at its dis posal a vast corpus of scholastic textsin which the interrogat ion of man's encounter with the image of theCreator (Imago Dei) finds its nat ur al place. But, to follow the fabl e ofNarcissus, and to grasp the fact tha t al l theories of the image arestructurally moored to the debate about the image, we shall give someconsi dera tion to one form of the cult of the Holy Face, which i nsp ire d adevotional l i te ratu re and an almost uninte rrupt ed exercise of the plasticarts, from the end of the Middle Ages up to Matisse. This concreteexampl e suggests how the non-correspondence of self and other -- theimpossibi l i ty of the subject ever joining i ts i ma ge -- opens on to thedimension of absolute, irremediable, alterity, a dimension which engulfsany re lati on to the sim ilar other.

The problematic of the Holy Face emerge d from a complex legendwhose basic elements are common to the Ea stern and Weste rn traditions.According to the L ati n tra ditio n, it is linked exclusively to the legend ofVeronica, who in one old version is said to have me t Jesus , who a sked h erfor a piece of cloth, pr esse d it to his face, and ga ve her back t he clothimp rin ted with his image. 27 In an other, mediae val version, which isconcerned with the suffering of Chris t and which has t ake n over themodern t radi t ion, Christ ' s self-portrai t is presented ra ther different ly .The s tory tells of a woman from Jer us al em who wiped Christ 's face as heascended Calvary; the image of Christ remain ed impr inted on the cloth.This produced the tr ue image (vera icona) of the Saviour. The nam e of thelege ndar y heroine of this episode of the Passion is taken from the a ncien ttradition: Veronica, which according to Greek etymology mean s bri nge r of27 On the history of this legend, see J.A. Robilliard, Dictionnaire de spiritualitdascdtique et mystique (Paris : Beauchesne, 1964), sub Face, col.27-28.

Numerous other indications can be found in A. Chastel, La V6ronique', Revuede l Art (1978), 71-78.


17/33


victory, is also the name given to the veil bea ring the image of the HolyFace t he v e ron ic a ) . Notice the se mantic shift , from the n ame of thelege ndar y saint to the Effigy of Chri st Ef f ig i e s C hr i s t i ) , to the prodigiousimage which was imprinte d on the veil and venera ted by pilgrims in theMiddle Ages.

The repre sentation of alter ity -- in this case the Holy Face, the figureof the abso lu te Other which was invented by Chr is t ian soc ie t i es - -organis es the offer to the subject for which it met aphori ses the othe r of theself and the ot her as self. For each subject who is of this cu lture, thisrep res enta tion founds the second order of the image, an d it is by mea ns ofthese procedures that the ins titution of images is inaugura ted. Liturgiesand ri tual s bear witness to this shift in register. We are no longer in arela tion of symme try, or a point for point correspondence with N arc iss usimpasse with his image; we are dealing with the advent of the other, notof the self as an other, but of the great Other who bears the impr int of thedivine, which pilgrims came to admire. We should att em pt to define theterm s of this change of register.

2 . T h e S t a g i n g o f t h e A b s o l u t e O t h e rThere are three essential points here:

a) I n t h e r e p r e s e n ta t i o n o f t h e a b s o l u t e O t h e r i n v e n t e d b y C h r i s t i a ns o c ie t ie s , t h e re c o g n i t i o n o f d i s t a n c e l i t e r a l l y m a k e s t h e i m a g ep r o d i g i o u sThe holy object, the divine self-portra it, the true icon, or pai nte rle ss

painting, is given the Greek term ac he i ropo ie t e s , or works made withoutthe inter vention of the hand, the ter m which in Byzantine Chri sti ani tywas us ed to designa te the most impo rta nt icons. We may leave to one sidefor the m oment the works of classical painting, and re mai n with thereliq uary of miracles which was exhibited in Sa int Peter s in Rome andvene rate d by the tr adit ion throughout the Middle Ages.

The r i tual ist ic or l i turgical s taging of the subject presuppo ses apri mar y element which is often overlooked. This elemen t is the s i n e q u an o n of the prodigious image, the precondition without which it couldneit her come into being nor produce its effects; namely, the construction ofan uncrossable distance, an irreduci ble gap, or a void which cannot befilled. In common with all holy dialectics, the believer s ven era tion of the


18/33

2 0 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o l V I I I n o 1 [1 9 9 7]

H o l y F a c e p r e s u p p o s e s a s e p a r a t i o n f r o m s o m e t h i n g i n c o m m e n s u r a b l e .T h e m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n o f p u r e a l t e r i t y b y t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a n a b s o l u teO t h e r , w h i c h t h e r e b y a c q u i r e s fo r t h e s u b j e c t t h e s t a t u s o f a t r a n s c e n d e n ti m a g e , i s e f f e c te d b y a s s u m i n g t h a t w h i c h t o r e N a r c i s s u s i n tw o : as e p a r a t i o n f r o m s e lf . T h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e H o l y F a c e i s f i r s t a n df o r e m o s t a n a p o l o g i a o r d e f e n c e o f t h e g a p , a n d i t i s o n t h e b a s i s o f t h i s

' r h e t o r i c o f d i v i s i o n t h a t t h e d i v i n e c a n w o r k s u b j e c t i v e l y a s a m e t a p h o r f o rt h e v o i d a n d f o r t h e g a p .

W h a t f o l l o w s d e p e n d s u p o n t h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n e f f e c t e d b y t h eV e r o n i c a a s a m i r r o r i n t h e s e c o n d o r d e r o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . W h a t i s t h i sd e m o n s t r a t i o n ? F i r s t , t h a t t h e o v e r c o m i n g o f N a r c i s s i s m i s n o t h i n g o t h e rt h a n a f o r m o f a c c e s s io n to a l i m i t , o r m o r e e x a c t l y to t h e p r i n c i p l e o fl i m i t a t i o n . I n c u l t u r a l t e r m s t h i s i s p r e c i s e l y w h a t w a s a t i s s u e i n t h ev e n e r a t i o n o f t h e d i v i n e p o r t r a i t ; i t w a s a m e a n s o f s e t t i n g t h e s u b j e c t o nt h e w a y t o a r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h i s p r i n c i p l e o f t h e l i m i t . R e a s o n i n g i nm o d e r n t e r m s , o n e m i g h t s a y t h a t t o a d m i r e o n e s e l f i n t h e d i v i n e i m a g eg i v e s t h e k e y t o t h e i m a g e o f t h e s e l f a s a n u n a t t a i n a b l e i m a g e . T h i sm o d e o f s u b j e c t i v e a c c e s s t o t h e l i m i t , t o s o c i a l i s a t i o n t h r o u g h a ne s s e n t i a l l y r e l i g i o u s s t r u c t u r e , i s a c o n d i t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v e l if e; i t i n s t i t u t e st h e s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s e l f a n d i t s i m a g e .b) T h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e a b s o l u t e O t h e r c o n s t r u c t s t h e s u b j e c t s

r e l a t io n t o t h e s im i l a r : N a r c i s s u s i s s t u c k a t t h i s p o i n t , p r e s e r v e d y e ts u p e r s e d e dT o r e t u r n t o t h e d i v i n e i m a g e g a t h e r e d b y V e ro n i ca , a h y m n c o m p o s e d

i n t h e f o u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y i n h o n o u r o f t h e H o l y F a c e c o n t a i n s a p h r a s en o t e d b y C h a s t e l : D a t a q u e V e r o n ic a e s i g n u m o b a m o r i s ( G i v e n to V e r o n i c aa s a s ig n o f l ov e) .2 s I f N a r c i s s u s ' q u e s t i s s u s t a i n e d b y t h e t r a n s p o r t o fl o v e , t h e n w e f in d t h e s a m e d i s c u r s i v e s t a m p i n t h i s r i t u a l s c en e . T h ep r o b l e m a t i s a t i o n o f a r e l a t i o n t o t h e o t h e r i n t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h ea b s o l u t e O t h e r i s co n c e i v a b le o n l y o n t h e b a s i s o f d e s i r e . V e r o n i c a ' s v e i l i sa m i r r o r w h i c h i s o f f er e d t o t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e p h r a s e I l o ve m y s e l f .

T h e p e r s i s t e n c e o f t h e n a r c i s s i s t i c I l o v e m y s e l f ' c a n n o t b e d o u b t e da n d f i n d s a n e c h o i n c l a s s i c a l a r t , a s , f o r e x a m p l e , i n D u r e r ' s 1 5 13e n g r a v i n g o f t h e v e i l . T h e a r t i s t c r e a t e d a H o l y F a c e w h i c h r e p r o d u c e d h i so w n f e a t u r e s i n v i r t u a l l y t h e s a m e f o r m a s t h e y a p p e a r i n h i s s e l f - p o r t r a i t

2 8 C h a s te l , ibid., a t 72 .


19/33


of 1500. 29 Nor are the mystics, in this r egard , far behind. Consider, forexample, the amorous passion of Th~r~se de Lisieux for the divine face:'~(our Face is my only fatherland , she exclaims in her poem To live forlove . At the level of monta ge where the absolute Oth er emerges, we re-encounte r narcissistic desire. 3~

Having tak en note of the distance between subject and image which isinstituted by the ritual represe ntation of the principle of alterity, andwhich figurative ly symbolises the ab solute Other, the basis of theoperation becomes clear: there is a transfe r of narcissistic d e s i r e - thedesire of the ot her for its image -- towards this Other, the absolute Objectwhich is made pr esent th rough the agency of ritual. This transi tion fromOvid's fable to the social thea tre of the Holy Face vene rate d b y thebeliever, institutes the metaph orisati on of the other at two structurallevels, tha t of the subjective and tha t of the cultural. The principle ofalter ity acquires the sta tus of a metaphor, or a specular object. Hence, thesocial construction of the distance which makes the cultural ent ry of thesubject into alterity possible should be analysed as the transposition of thelogic of the mirror, a phenome non upon which the e ntire normat ivesystem is dependent. Law itself, as a repre sent ation al effect whichcivilises the subject-- in other words, law understood as a symbolicstru ctur atio n - - depends upon this logic. It is therefore no exagger ationto say that in bringing to light the production of the other as a specularobject, we are isolating the social mec hani sm of identity with in thewestern cultural tradition.

The motor principle of this m ech ani sm is of impo rtan ce toanthropology, and its fragility has been identified by psychoanalysis. Inorder tha t the me taphorisation of self and other should take shape in aninsti tutional perspective of differentiation, that is to say, one which foundsthe relations between subjects in the distance which is essential torecognition of the other tha n self, identity can become intelligible only if itis cons truct ed as a medi ated relation be tween th e self and itself,mediated, th at is, by a principle of alte rity which is posited as being itsel fidentical with itself. The possibility of the subject as sum ing its owndivision, which founds its identity and from which its entry into a relationof alterity proceeds, is played out on this basis. The constru ction of theprinciple o f alterity as it is produced by the scene of the Holy Face, hasmeaning only because the absolute Other which is made metaphorically29 Chastel, ib id . at 75-76.30 Robilliard, supra n.27, at col.32.


20/33

2 2 L a w a n d C r i t iq u e V o l V I I I n o 1 [1 9 97 ]

p r e s e n t c o i n c i d e s w i t h i t s e l f , o r i s i t s e l f i d e n t i c a l w i t h i t s e l f . T h em e t a p h o r o f t h e a b s o l u t e O t h e r s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d a s t h er e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a r e l a t i o n o f i d e n t i t y fo r t h e d i v i d e d s u b je c t . H e r eb e l o n g s t h e v a s t t h e o l o g i ca l r e f l e c t i o n on t h e H o l y T r i n i ty , w h i c h f r o m t h i sp e r s p e c t i v e r e s o l v e s i t s e l f i n to a n a t t e m p t t o d i a l e c t i c i s e a n i d e n t i t yt h o u g h t i n t h e m o d e o f a t e r n a r y d i v i s i o n w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e s a u n i t y . I no t h e r w o r d s , w e s t e r n c u l t u r e d o e s n o t c o n ce i ve t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a p u r ev o id , o r N o t h i n g n e s s , b u t r a t h e r t h e a b s e n c e o f a n O b j e c t w h i c h i si n d e f i n i t e l y d e s t i n e d t o a t t a i n a r e d i s c o v e r e d p r e s e n c e .

I d e n t i t y is t h e r e f o r e a r e l a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n w e c a na p p r e c i a t e t h a t t h e o p e r a t i v e m e c h a n i s m w h i c h m o b i l i s e s r e p r e s e n t a t i o ni s b a s e d u p o n th e f o r m u l a I a m a n o t h e r . A n y so c i a l i se d r e l a t i o n w i t h a no t h e r b e a r s t h e s t a m p o f n a r c i s s i s m , o r, m o r e p r e c i se l y , t h e s t a m p o f t h er e l a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t to i t s i m a g e o f t h e o t h e r . I t t h e r e f o r e b e c o m e se a s i e r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h e r e c o g n i t io n o f t h e o t h e r - w h a t I c a l l t h em o m e n t o f m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n - - i s a t o n ce t h e m e t a p h o r i s a t i o n o f t h e o t h e rt h a n t h e s e l f a n d t h e o t h e r a s s e lf . F r o m t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , c u l t u r e i s ag e n e r a l i s a t i o n o f t h e l og ic o f t h e m i r r o r .

T h a t i s t h e l e s s o n to b e l e a r n e d f r o m p u t t i n g O v i d ' s f a b le a n d t h el e g e n d o f t h e eronique n p e r s p e c t i v e . W e d is c o v e r t h e m o s t b a s i c s t a g ei n h u m a n c o m m u n i c a t i o n : t h e a b s o r p t i o n o f t h e o t h e r , a n y o t h e r , i n t h ei m a g i n a r y c o n s t i t u t io n o f t h e I . W e a l so e s t a b l i s h , t h r o u g h t h e i n s t i t u t i o no f a d i s t a n c e , o r a s e p a r a t i o n f r o m s e l f, t h a t t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f i d e n t i t y , o ro f t h e r e l a t i o n t o s e l f a n d t h e r e l a t i o n t o t h e s i m i l a r , i s a t h r e e - p a r t s c e n e .T h i s d o u b l e d t e r n a r i t y w a s q u i t e r e m a r k a b l y s e t o u t b y M a t i s s e i n h i s

S t u d y fo r S a i n t V e r o n i c a . H e d e p a r t s f r o m t h e p r e c e d i n g p i c t o r i a lt r a d i t i o n i n w h i c h t h e v e i l c a r r y i n g t h e i m a g e t h e H o l y F a c e i s p a i n t e d , b yi n c l u d i n g t h e g a z e o f t h e v i e w e r : V e r o n i c a s h o w s t h e v e i l t o a b e l i e v e r w h oc o n t e m p l a t e s t h e H o l y F a c e , t h e G o d in w h o s e i m a g e h e h i m s e l f i s m a d e ,a n d t h e w h o l e o f t h i s s c e n e is o f f er e d t o t h e s p e c t a t o r o f t h e S t u d y .

I d e n t i t y a s a r e l a t i o n , o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n s e l fa n d s i m i l a r , i n v o l v e s p l a c i n g t h e s u b j e c t u n d e r a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e a b s o l u t eO t h e r w h i c h g u a r a n t e e s a n e c e s s a r y d i s t a n c e o r g a p ; i t i s p l a c e d u n d e r t h eb a n n e r o f t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a l t e r i t y , t h e O t h e r w h i c h i s b e y o n d a n yf o u n d a t i o n , t h e O t h e r w h i c h f o u n d s a l l b o n d s w i t h t h e o t h e r . T h i s i s t h ek e r n e l o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . W e c a n t h e r e f o r e d e f i n e h u m a ns o c i e t y a s a g e n e r a l i s e d m i r r o r a n d t h e i n d e f i n i t e m u l t i p l i c a t i o n o fm a s t e r e d s p e c u l a r o b je c ts , w h i c h a r e m a s t e r e d b e c a u s e t h e y a r e r e f e r r e dt o t h e d i m e n s i o n o f t h e T h i r d ( T ie r s) .


21/33


These observations make the terms of our star ting point, Narci ssusplaced before the enigma of the image or the other of the mirror, evenclearer. For each subject the other is a supposition. The problem is tomake tha t supposition plausible and viable: that is the basic principle ofthe enterpri se of instituting images. The question of Narcissus allows usto decipher the rela tion to the world as a process based upon the subject'scons titu tion of the world for himself, and to meas ure the effect ofrepresentation which normative systems have to deal with permanently:others are first and foremost specul ar objects, or a collection of othersymmetr ical 'Ts . If we have properly understood this pri mordi al fact,juri dica l struct ures of differentiation become logically referab le to therepre senta tion of the absolute Other, which I term Reference. Struct uresof kinship, i f they are seen otherwise t han according to plat i tu dinoustheories of social regulation, l ie at the hea rt of those grea t manoeuvres ofident ity which institu te the hum an subject as a l iving inca rnati on of arelation to the simila r.(c) The representation of the absolute and the problem of instituting

easonThe legend of Veronica shows how the divine image was intr oduc ed

into the na rcissistic relation. In constructing the void through t he veryfact of i ts own inst itut ed place, the absolute O ther is the figure t ha tgua ran tee s the pr incip le of a l te r i t y and the procedures for themetaphorisa tion of the image of the other th an self and the other as self atthe level of the institu tion. The exampl e of the Holy Face allows us toidenti fy wha t is in issue for the subject in the scene of division which isthe re by projected on the social stage. We can now develop thisexplanation so as to grasp the extremity involved in the power of stagingthe absolute Other, or of presen ting the absolute specular Object to thesubject.

The logic of repre senta t ion is such tha t the va rious eleme nts orindices of the problematisat ion of the mirror which we have jus t invoked,once they are mobilised at the social level, are refe rabl e to this scene ofdivision. In partic ular , if the s tat us of the absolut e Other is one ofspec ular presence, this mode of presence suggests the w ay in whichculture manoeuvres the origin or the source of what presents i tsel f as theimage of the subject, of the outcome which the struc ture of the mirr orproduces as origin. The question of origin is therefo re an effect of


22/33

2 4 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o I V I I I n o 1 [1 9 9 7 ]

repres entat i on, a quest ion which puts the seeing subject in relat ion withthe enigma tic presence of the other as being, according to Ovid's formula,

that which he sees but does not know . To echo the la ngu age of theMetamorphoses I shall summarise what is in issue for the subject in thescene of the Holy Face by referenc e to an extra ct from one of Borges'poems: ... the mirror s of the Ete rnal ... Tha t which has nei the r whe n norwhy. 3a

Wha t this me ans is that the operation is one of reversal. The absoluteOth er of division becomes a figur atio n of the origina l Other; i t is, yetagai n, an origin as a result. It is an effect of re pr es en ta ti on which iseonfigured as a scene of origin. This observation takes us back to thefoundati ons of the question of narcissi sm; the problem of rep res ent ing theself for the subjeet, in which the origi n is no more th an a supp osit ionwhieh ma kes the image of self plausible. More precisely, the problem ofan u n rep r esen t ab le r ep resen ta t io n of se l f - - a p rob lem wh ich L ou isMari n 's s tudy of the Veronica laboriously revolves a roun d az -- is not theprob lem of work ing ou t wheth er the un rep res en t ab l e can in fac t berepresented, but rather that of working out what is so unatt ain abl e for thesubject in this re pres enta tion: name ly, the point of origin, the souree ofthe subject 's own image, locked in a gaze in whieh it cannot see itself.Th is g ives a new and ra ther unexpected s lan t to P ier re Nieo le ' sobser vation tha t bit by bit we will ereate so detaile d a portr ait th at wewill be able see in each mome nt everyt hing tha t we are. 33 I ean thin k ofno bett er way into the problem with which we are concerned here, na me lythe ques tio n of how to conceive of the rad ica lit y of the power wiel ded bysocial organis at ion in i ts ma nip ula t i on of the absolute spe eular Object ,towards which we address our desire to see 'al l that we are ' in everymo me nt of our lives. This is the pri ncipal lever which power uses andabuses in its role of ins tit utin g Reason.

We can see quite clearly in the example of the r itu al cons truc tion ofthe Holy Face jus t wha t the re prese ntat i on of al ter i ty ordains in relat ionto the i ns t i t u t ion o f the s imi lar fo r man . Narcissus ' sensele ssness i sreineorpor ated in the service of life, or transf orme d into Reason. By virtue

31 From a poem of Emmanu el Swedenborg, reprin ted in J.L. Borges and O.Ferrari, Ultimes dialogues (Paris: Zo~/Aube, 1988), 85.32 Louis Marin, Figurabilit~ du visuel: la V~ronique ou la question du portra it hPort-Royal , Nouvelle revue de psychanalyse 35 (1987), 51-65.

33 Extract from Traitd de la connaissance de soi-m~me which is cited from supran.32.


23/33


o f d i s t a n c e t h e u n r e p r e s e n t a b l e i s r e l a t i v i s e d a n d t h e s u b j e c t s a b s e n c ef r o m i t s e l f i s no l o n g e r a n a b o l i t i o n o r a n n i h i l a t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t : t h eo t h e r c a n c o m e t o b e i n g a s t h e s i m i l a r a n d t h i s s i m i l a r i s i n s t i t u t e db e c a u s e i t r e c e i v e s t h e m a r k o f R e a s o n . I n t h e s e t e r m s , R e a s o n i s t h er e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s p e c u l a r o b j e c t i t s e l f , o r t h e s t r u c t u r a l o ra n t h r o p o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n o f g i v i n g li fe to r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o f c a u s i n g t h es p e a k i n g a n i m a l t o l i v e a n d t o r e p r o d u c e a c c o r d i n g t o t h e l a w o f t h es p e c ie s . R e a s o n c a n t h e r e f o r e b e c a l l e d t h e R e a s o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , t h eR e a s o n o f s i g n s a n d c a t e g o r i e s , t h e R e a s o n o f t h e s u b j e c t . T h r e e b r i e fo b s e r v a t i o n s m i g h t h e l p t o e l u c i d a t e t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l a s p e c t o f t h i sc o n c e p t o f r e a s o n a n d i t s ro l e i n r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a l t e r i t y a n dt h e w a y i n w h i c h i t i n t r o d u c e s u s t o th e p o l i t i c a l s i g n i f i c a t i o n o f t h ea b s o l u t e s p e c u l a r O b j e c t , t h e i m a g e i n w h i c h , a s N i c o l e s f o r m u l a h a s i t ,w e a r e s u m m o n e d t o se e a l l t h a t w e a r e .

F i r s t , t h e r e l i g i o u s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a l t e r i t y i n t h ef o r m o f t h e s p e c u l a r O b j e c t sh o w s r e l ig i o n s r o le i n g u a r a n t e e i n g R e a s o nb y g i v i n g t h e s u b j e c t a w a y o f p u t t i n g a n e n d t o t h e i n f i n i t e r e g r e s s o fc a u s a t i o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s p e c u l a r o b j e c t s e r v e s t om e d i a t e t h e s u b j e c t s a c c e s s t o t h e w o r l d a l l o w s u s a c c e s s t o ar e p r e s e n t a t i o n w h i c h m a k e s o f t h e o r ig i n a l O t h e r a c a u s a l O t h e r . T h i sd i m e n s i o n o f i n s t i t u t e d d i s t a n c e f a b r i c a t e s t h e s p e c u l a r O b j e c t a s a no b j e c t w h i c h i s a t o n c e c a u s e d a n d c a u s a l , a n d a l l o w s a n y s u b j e c t to c o m et o p r e s e n c e i n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n : t h e r e a l m o f t h e v i s i b le b e c o m e s a u n i v e r s eo f o b j e c t s w h i c h i s o u t s id e t h e s u b j e c t , b u t w h i c h i s n o n e t h e l e s s s t i l la t t a c h e d t o t h e t h e a t r e o f n a r c i s s i s m a n d h e n c e t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f a l l t h a tw e a r e

S e c o n d l y , l y i n g b e h i n d r e l i g i o n t h e r e i s a p u r e P o l i t i c s , a p o w e r o v e rt h e m o s t b a s i c p r i n c i p le o f h u m a n i t y , o n e w h i c h m a n o e u v r e s t h e s p e c u l a ro b j e c t a n d w h i c h b y th i s m e a n s g o v e r n s t h e n a r c i s s i s t i c r e l a t io n . P o w e r ,t h e r e f o r e , is i n a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e R e a s o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . I no r d e r t o i n s t i t u t e t h e s i m i l a r , a s o c ie t y c o n s t r u c t s a n i m a g e o f a l l t h a t w ea r e . P o l i t i c s , t h e r e f o r e , i s e m i n e n t l y r e l i g i o u s ~ , w h i c h i s e v i d e n t i f w e34 S e e E m i l e B e n v e n i s t e, Le Vocabula i re des i ns t i t u t i ons i ndo-europdens (P a r i s :

E d i t i o n s d u S e u i l) , I I , 2 6 7- 27 2 , w h i c h s h o w s t h a t t h e d e r i v a t i o n o f t h e l a t i nreligio i s n o t fr o m t h e v e r b ligare ( to b in d ) , b u t f ro m legere ( to c o l l e c t t o g e th e r ,b r i n g b a c k t o o n e se l f, r e c o g ni s e , a n d b y e x t e n s io n , t o r e a d ) . I t i s f o r t h i s r e a s o nt h a t I h a v e t e n d e d t o u n d e r s t a n d r e l ig i o n a s t h e a s s e m b l a g e O f m o n t a g e s a n dp r o c e d u r e s w h i c h p u t h u m a n b e i n g s i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f c o l l e c ti n g t o g e t h e r ,b r i n g i n g b a c k to o n e t h e m s e l v e s , r e c o g n i s i n g a n d r e a d i n g t h e d i s c o u r s e o fIn te rd ic t io n .


24/33

2 6 L a w a n d C r i t i q u e V o I V I II n o 1 [1 9 97 ]

a t t e n d t o t h e e t y m o l o g y o f t h e w o r d i ts e l f . P o l i t i c s o c c u p ie s t h e s t r u c t u r a lp o s i t i o n o f t h e Theos o f a n t i q u i t y i n t h e s e n s e t h a t H e r o d o t u s g i v es t o t h a tt e r m - - i t p o s i t s t h i n g s a n d t h e u n i v e r s e 3 5 - a n d w h i c h m a y b et r a n s l a t e d a s fo l lo w s : i t s fu n c t i o n i s t h a t o f p o s i n g a n d e x p o s i n g a m o d e o fp r e s e n c e o f t h e w o r l d , a n d o f t h e w o r l d f o r t h e s u b j e c t , t h r o u g h t h et h e a t r i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s p e c u l a r O b j e c t .

T h i r d l y , i t c a n b e o b s e r v e d b y w a y o f t h e r e l i g i o u s s t a g i n g o f t h ep r i n c i p l e o f a l t e r i t y , t h a t t h e s y m b o l i c a b s o l u t e O t h e r i s i n t a n g i b l e . N o -o n e c a n t o u c h R e a s o n , t h e R e f e r en c e , o r t h e a b s o l u t e M i r r o r . T h i s i s t h ec o re m e a n i n g o f a l l t h o s e l e g a l m a n o e u v r e s w h i c h a r e d e s i g n e d t o p r o t e c tt h e s o c i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f f o u n d a t i o n s . A m o n g th o s e m a n o e u v r e s , w h i c hl ie d o r m a n t i n a s e c u l a r i s e d w e s t e r n c u l t u r e w h i c h h a s i n v e n t e d m o r em o d e r n n o r m a t i v e m e t h o d s o f s o c i a l i s a t i o n , t h e r e i s o n e q u i t e e s s e n t i a lt e c h n i q u e , n a m e l y t h o s e d o c t r in e s o f b l a s p h e m y w h i c h h a v e n o w b e c o m es o o b s o l e t e a n d i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e , d e s p i t e t h e i r r e n e w a l i n t w e n t i e t hc e n t u r y t o t a l i t a r i a n e m p i r e s . I f, h o w e v e r , w e r e m a i n w i t h t h e r e l i g i o u st r a d i t i o n r a t h e r t h a n w i t h i ts t o t a l i t a r i a n a p p r o p r i a t i o n s , w e c a n s e e t h a tb l a s p h e m y i s b o t h a m a t t e r o f ( c r i m i n a l ) s o c ia l j u r i s d i c t i o n a n d a q u e s t i o no f ( p e n i t e n t i a l ) s u b j e c t i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n ; in o t h e r w o r d s , i t h a s t o do w i t hb o t h d i m e n s i o n s o f w e s t e r n p r a c t i c e s o f p o w e r . I t i n s t i t u t e s a n a b s o l u t ec r i m e , i n a f o r m t h a t i s v e r y s i m i l a r to th e R o m a n n o t i o n o f laesa majestaso r t r e a s o n . B e c a u s e i t i n v o l v e s a n a t t a c k o n a n i n d e s t r u c t i b l e d i v i n i t y , i ti s a v i c t i m l e s s c r i m e . T h e c r i m e i s c o n s i d e r e d a b s o l u t e b e c a u s e i ti n f r i n g e s t h e s p e c u l a r s t r u c t u r e - - t h e m o n t a g e - - o f a g iv e n c u l t u r e ; i n as e n s e t h e b l a s p h e m e r p r e t e n d s t o t a k e u p t h e p l a c e o f t h e M i r r o r , h ec l a im s t o i n v e r t t h e o r d e r o f t h e w o r ld . T h i s m a k e s i t e a s i e r to u n d e r s t a n dw h a t i s i n i s s u e i n th e c a n o n i c a l t r a d i t i o n o f b l a s p h e m y : t h e e q u i v a l e n t o fa p a t r i c i d e p e r p e t r a t e d a g a i n s t th e f o u n d i n g N a m e , a g a i n s t t h e f o u n d i n gO t h e r a n d t h e s y m b o l i c p r i n c i p l e t h a t f o u n d s th e l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e o fw h a t i s l a w f o r m a n i n a n y g i v e n s oc i e t y . A c c o r d i n g t o c l a s s i c a l E u r o p e a na n a l y s e s , b l a s p h e m y w a s r e l a t e d t o i d o l a t r y , s a c r i l e g e , a n d m o r e g e n e r a l l yt o c r i m e s a g a i n s t R e f e r e n c e w h i c h t o u c h e d u p o n t h e p r o b l e m o f m a d n e s s( G o d a n d R e a s o n ) : t h e s e w e i g h t y q u e s t i o n s h a v e s u c h r e s o n a n c e s i nc o n t e m p o r a r y m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f f a n a t i c i s m t h a t s o m e f u r t h e r e x p l o r a t i o no f t h e m i s i n o r d e r.

3 5 T h e v o c a b le Theos c a n b e l i n k e d h e r e t o t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e G r e e k v e r btithemi t o p o s e , e s t a b l i s h , f o u n d , a s H e r o d o t u s i n h i s t e x t r e l a t e s t h a t t h ea n c i e n t G r e e k s i n v o k e d t h e G o d s w i t h o u t e v e r c h o o si n g a p e r s o n a l n a m e f o rt h e m . H e r o d o t u s , Histories.


25/33


II1. The Relational Nature of Identity a nd the MirrorOne of the impor tant benefits of psychoanalysis, at least if Freud 's

work is t ake n seriously, was to help the culture of scientific technology toretu rn to the path of human ity by reflecting on the repres entati on of thefounda tions of Reason. Now, as much as in the pas t, we quest ionourselves in mythological terms, throu gh words which found our life,which through the ages have had in common the t as k of bringin g the bondbetween subject and mirro r to life, or to question the principle of alte rity,the absolu te Other which is the founding inst ance of images. Thisdescription of the ritua lisa tion of the gaze offers a valua ble clue to themec hani sm of iden tity which psychoan alysis has done so much to clarify.The history of the ve nerati on of the Holy Face and its pos t-medi aeva lartis tic represe ntat ions brings out the two levels of the mechanism.

The first level is th at of the subject's recognition of di

Documents

Narcissus and the Other in the Mirror