Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
The Death Drive, Politics, and Love: a conversation between Todd McGowan and Julie Reshe
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 01. 2022
- Todd McGowan and Julie Reshe discuss the concept of the death drive, politics, sacrifice, love, parenthood, existentialism, art, and much more.
I love this talk immensely, and I am very grateful for the little moment of happiness you have brought me.
20:01 *We want to suffer* “So many other political projects promise a pure.. some kind of enjoyment or satisfaction without suffering attached to it. And I think that the idea of death drive is that it’s through our suffering that we find our satisfaction and enjoyment-which is not to say that you’re just.. oh all you do is suffer, but that the suffering is actually integral to the enjoyment or satisfaction.”
Todd seems to say: I was in a spiral of being angry all the time and being out of control. And then I totally gave that up. I started to see death drive as revolutionary. It even is linked to liberty, fraternity, equality. Death drive as insight about things destructive of our own interest. To jettison my own interest as an opening to think of other people
Such a great conversation, thank you both. I've listened to this a few times, and at the point where the topic of abusive relationships and openness comes up I always think I must comment about Sarah Kane and then I forget. But yes, Sarah Kane. She was a British playwright active in the 90s who explored this proximity of love and abuse. If you don't know her work, it's really wonderful, in particular for me Crave and 4.48 Psychosis which wer her last two.
Brilliant, thank you.
I love how the talk about death drive turned for a minute to a cosy talk of two complaining parents
our parental trauma kicked in
Oh, this tickles my bones!
It begins with a tickle and ends with a blaze of petrol
Another interesting bit of commentary. I would suggest however that you revisit the idea of hopeless Ness and depression. Hope is meaningless and often is the cause of the lack of activity. If we hope to God, country, partner, will take care of things there’s no need for us to become active. If hopelessness is combined with helplessness then we have a clear definition of depression. But being hopeless gives won the choice of being stagnant Lee helpless or having agency. I suggest that it is in the moment that the individual senses complete health hopelessness that they have the choice and if they choose agency then things begin to happen I. E. Revolution.
32:18 can’t help but think of Jesus here
46:12 *benefit in Absolute knowing* “Even Hegel there is the kind of.. like there does seem to be some kind of benefit of knowing-even of knowing that you don’t know, that’s still something.”
Todd is a real one no hyperbolae
Isn’t what’s beautiful recognizing our ability to reason this, to see the grounding cut of contradiction-to see the success in reason’s failure like Hegel thought? What’s the point of reasoning other than to come to terms with lack? To see the comedy in the fact that you’ll continually have to get over it..
Is there really no benefit in seeing what drives us? Even if this picture is dark don’t we get the benefit of no longer simply being chased around arbitrarily by some feeling of wholeness awaiting us out there. Does knowing of death drive not empower us to respond to failure differently? I feel like it allows us to accept it more, to align our suffering with all other souls.
Like the gap of the Holy Spirit, is there no benefit or freedom in a community of commiseration? Like you and Todd enjoying talking here about this. If we are alone yet together in this condition then does that not help us live more gracefully in this hospice? Maybe I am seeing it wrong tho..
Or bring it into your meditation as a recognition, that when it arises you can see it and recognize it for what it is and say “no” I will not engage this time. That is my understanding of conscious thought, that while our conscious thought arises before we are aware we can refuse to be brought along by the thought… ie say “No”.
Or better yet bring the recognition into your community. So that we can recognize it in each other and help each other when the struggle arises.
@@MarvinRoman Ya I believe in the power of negation, but what do you mean by “I will not engage this time”? Do you mean not engaging in thinking about contradiction/failure/lack?
@@nightoftheworld what I mean is that through meditation or social recognition of the death drive taking hold of a circumstance that is destructive. The recognition of the drive can lead to enough distance to be able to not engage it’s manifestation in real world actions that would come from it. Hope that is making some sense.
How does Todd's function of sacrifice differs from Zizek's? From my understanding Todd is emphasising sacrifice as central and necessary but Zizek has an ampler idea on the subject (sacrifice of sacrifice; sacrifice what to whom; it's more satisfying to sacrifice oneself for the poor victim then enable the other to overcome and maybe become more successful then us, etc)
❤❤❤
37:26 “is it possible to be hopeless and not depressive” - see Albert Camus.
All art is self destructive. Sitting is the new smoking (unless you have a stand up desk). Staring at a canvas or screen up close screws up your eyes. Playing music can mess up your ears, joints, tendons, etc. Ballet is hard on you. You are literally crystalizing the wear and tear of your body into decorations, audio, and events for others to enjoy.
based
Can you recommend some books about Death drive?
Civilization And Its Discontents
@@lotoreo Thanks :)
@@colinbennett9751 Thanks I'll check it out. I ordered Byung-chul Han's "Capitalism and death drive" from Book depository, they say it is good. :)
35:10 well isn’t the payoff in kids keeping your genes/memes moving through time.. it’s selfish in a genetic/memetic longevity kind of way it seems. I can see part of me continue even when I die and that’s consoling in a deep way I think. Even in the case of adopted children.. your ideas, your parenting continue through them even sans genes.
Considering the last question: I don't think that psychoanalysis aims at winning or "healing" at all. The patients come in with that idea, sure. It is a very important part of transference and leads the patient through this idea- working through it is the real psychoanalytic work- until he/she can give this idea up, thus losing and accepting it. Even Freud knew this (see Die endliche und die unendliche Analyse). So I take your question as a hint of your own intellectual resistence (to losing) considering psychoanalysis ;) But seriously, the problem is that in many countries (not in all) psychoanalysis is just a branch of psychotherapy and, unfortunately psychoanalysis gets watered down with "softer" theories (and practices! i.e. to fit into a health system/enterpreneurship). Where in fact- and you argue in this video spendidly for it- psychoanalysis is not psychotherapy (how we understand it today, Freud did not have to make this distinction but Lacan does voice a lot for it).