Skip to main content.
Log In Sign Up. Print X Online Journal homepage: Submit your article to this journal Article views: Routledge, choanalysisthe materiality of the My choosing this text for the seminar, however, also had a more immediate and practical motive. I anticipated that Introduction by Heidi J. To think through the specific historical geog- In the spring of I designed and raphy of manufacturing in Japan and taught an interdisciplinary graduate the United States, I drew on the some- seminar in international studies called Race, Sex, Dif- what Darwinian inflected work of Engels ference, choosing Sexual Difference Between Vitalism and The Origins of Private Property, the Family and the State.
Psychoanalysis as one of the main course texts. My own Published in after the deaths of Darwin and theoretical interests in sexual difference had come largely Marx ; with whom Engels had long collaboratedfrom Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis and from the the text helped me argue that the changing materiality of works of the Belgian French feminist
Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism and psy- geopolitical economic life has always been fundamentally choanalyst, Luce Irigaray.
It examines the for the viability of the maternal and possibilities of and for Darwinian roots of vitalist thinking specifically, in the procreation. If anything, the maternal is exorably creative movements, the inorganic inextricable becoming redundant and, with it, sexual difference, the from and enfolding into the living.
My hope was that Sexual Difference would allow me to see how psychoanalysis and vitalism—particularly that of Bergson and Deleuze—might work together to concep- tualize these tensions in ways that remain open to the unconscious.
Photo by Heidi J. The timing of Sexual Dif- ference, moreover, seemed important in that it coincides its exceptional theoretical density and diversity. The
Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism growing geographical engagements with ideas in ei- writerly nature of Sexual Difference means that the panel ther field.
This second point is arguably tied to popular participants also had to find their own way, each drawn to and scholarly preoccupations with such things as envi- their own theoretical play, some productively frustrated ronmental degradation, climate change, and the wide- by this fact, others not so much. It is the goal of any collective project like this to have the authors in this case, co-editors engage and respond The panel members were invited based on their interests substantively to the points raised by their colleagues.
I am in either or both fields.
Paul Kingsbury has been instru- therefore extremely grateful to Arun Saldanha for craft- mental in introducing Lacanian psychoanalysis into the ing such a lengthy and careful response. His ability to discipline within North America and Britain. Richard Hoffman Reinhardt, meanwhile, was one of the original international studies seminar partici- pants who struggled especially intensely to think through Commentary by Anna Secor, Department the contradictions of Lacanian psychoanalysis and De- of Geography, University of Kentucky, leuzian vitalism.
The Schizo-Commune of Psychoanalysis and
Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism should be noted that there is no introductory chapter Vitalism in Sexual Difference that explains why the particular writ- The most widespread mushroom, Schizophyllum com- ers represented were chosen to contribute or that outlines mune, has some twenty-eight thousand mating types, so the core questions that the authors were asked to address.
These four can be seen this statement. Their temporary, provisional rather safeguards from itself. For Copjec, the paradoxical object or quasi-cause Deleuze is in fact pluralism of gender theory in which the critical move the phallus.
The indicate their presence and to give the reader a sense of paradox of this One is that, in its excess, it is also always what can be learned from this book—but with hard work, less than itself; that is, something has been subtracted, I must add.
This book is not easy. Why would it be? Look something always escapes. It is in this detached surplus at what it has set out to do. This One of asexual being finds an illuminating echo in the deep end. From such a perspective, then, ferred to in several chapters as a foil to be argued against the twoness of sexual difference remains intact even could be used as part of that frame, but it might have within the field of Deleuzian multiplicity. Yet even were there such Other authors likewise demonstrate the affinities between an introduction, it would not have been obligated to ar- Lacan and Deleuze, the points where their difference con- ticulate these ideas with geography per se, as neither the verges.
Kordela also empha- could certainly be made, given the importance of ques- sizes their convergence, but for her this takes place at the tions of difference and dialectics for the field as a whole point of the death drive, on the terrain of psychoanalysis, Cockayne, Ruez, and Secor n. In short, the essays collected here make mobile terms. One first recognizes the multiplicity within powerful theoretical contributions in their own right. Moreover, this problem also applies What kind of reductionism is happening when we equate to Deleuze.
Let alone what kind of rupture as Kordela does. You can do this; using Difference reductionism is happening when these terms are simply and Repetition and Logic of Sense you can make Deleuze equated to a question of Deleuze and Lacan? I am not sug- Lacanian, but is this the best way to make the most gesting that this proliferation needs to be disciplined, but of the insights of Deleuze?
Is the encounter between psy- I do want to know what the call is for examining sexual choanalysis and vitalism one that yields beautiful bastard difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism: What children, or is it an obliterating encounter in which they kind of engagement is being called forth? What are these both disappear? It is not that one must never be a Laca- things such that we posit a between? At it is thus both answered in various ways within this vol- the same time, even as we add one and one and one, it ume and begged by the volume itself.
Kordela puts the does seem to me that we must recognize the difference question as follows: Or is it to be of these connections. In addition, Saldanha and Song them- from organism to body is outstanding; and although the selves make significant contributions to this wonderfully Grosz chapter reiterates her arguments about natural and rich, intricate, and exciting collection. This is a compli- are also addressed in the book, perhaps most memorably ment.
Could was described by Scott L. Whether one advances a Freudian, which spatial thinking is at work in the essays. Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism claims following Lacan how the of sexual difference. Mapping tributors are trained geographers or in geography depart- the relation between the theories of Lacan and Gilles ments. This prompts two considerations.
Sexual Difference Between Psychoanaly- tics.
In part, the brilliance of Sexual Differ- nal. How, where, and to what extent, the very desires people bring to the law, in all its various then, do the calls to become-woman, form new politics spatial and institutional formations—prisons, therapists, and life, and so on, dismiss, negotiate with, or even enlist yoga centers, and so on.
Sexual Difference, Beyond Construction For Arun Saldanha, for example, both of these thinkers For the past few decades, social constructivist accounts of allow conceptions of sexual difference as materially in- gender, sexuality, and race have opposed various manifes- stantiated rather than discursively constructed. Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism, the social constructivist accounts, at the very as spatiotemporally distinct phenomena, following Grosz.
In this respect, Butler and also of its heir schizoanalysis—derives from appre- pointed out some of the problems she saw in retrospect ciating that power is fundamentally vulnerable precisely with her own path-breaking book Gender Trouble. The urgent political concerns of this particular type of It seems fitting to conclude with a few po- ing these theorists engage might be suspected to align tential directions for this agenda-setting work.
First, al- with elaborations of difference as a tactic of capitalism though spatial concerns appear throughout the text, they p. Nevertheless, taken along with the other contri- are often only theorized implicitly.
Third, the political stakes and perhaps even risks of these of lines theory provide a good foun- Although temporality figures prominently throughout dation for both scholars and activists to continue their the contributions of the text, space is also an implicit thought and work.
Individuals to question problems of recognition and representation, are Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism not only through the overlaying and interac- but also
Sexual difference between psychoanalysis and vitalism to articulate problems based on the differ- tion of temporal registers, but space plays a fundamen- ence embedded in the material and spatial situatedness tal role in sexuation.
Copjec develops the notion of its precedents—that representation is never enough. In short, it invites us to consider how tance of limits and barriers as generative pp. This persistent focus on sex phallus, castration, coitus, fantasy, etc.
It is fair to say it is one of the reasons Deleuze and Guattari are Sketching some of the background to Sexual Difference far more influential in geography than Lacan or Freud are.
Between Psychoanalysis and Vitalism will be useful for seeing how thrilled I am with this review section and indicate what readers can take away from it. It has of the most influential thinkers in the humanities and also always held, like psychoanalysis but with a more di- human geography. The rela- ferent philosophical traditions: Simultaneously, I was increasingly both- male, fully female, fully transgender, or fully queer body.
We decided around cal worms crucial to contemporary debates in human ge- to force a sympathetic encounter between these two for- ography, such as the mind—body, materiality—discourse, midable thinkers who are almost never seen together ei- and nature—society interfaces; whether the difference ther in writing or at conferences, and agreed on a small between men and women is something fundamental, and focused symposium on the question of sexual differ- whether it is even knowable; how it is imagined through ence.
Sexual difference, as I explain shortly, is arguably science, politics, love, and art; what the relationship be- the site where the fleshing out of the torsion between tween still mostly male theorists and feminism should the Lacanian and the Deleuzian conceptual apparatuses be with institutional U.
For Lacan, sexual and symptomatically enough, the most dominated by difference grounds but also continually destabilizes the white men, as is increasingly debated in the public; e.