Slavoj Žižek – “First they called me a joker, now I am a dangerous thinker”
You call yourself a Leninist but the media in the West has called you a ‘rock star’ and the ‘Marx Brother’. How do you react to such labels?
With resigned melancholy. They try to say that this guy may be interesting and provocative but he is not serious. To them, I am like a fly that annoys you and provokes you but should not be taken seriously. Though, of late, they have been dubbing me as someone more threatening. In the last two years, the tone has changed. First, there were Marx Brothers’ jokes and now they say I am the most dangerous philosopher in the West. But I don’t care.
This is a very short interview Žižek gave recently during his ‘India Lecture Tour’. The title is misleading, it would be strange for him to complain about his titles, since it looks like his publishers love them. It’s also interesting to see how his taste for a particular film changes depending on who he talks to. I’m not saying he’s lying, It’s just that he’s not saying the whole truth.
What is really dangerous is what “they” do… and don’t do, let capitalism’s madness going on destroying the planet…
Žižek is just the most lucid, coherent and true philosopher in the West.
Is there any way you can post any of the lectures that zizek gave in india?
In fairness before someone goes “oh nose the Master contradicts himself omgbbqkittens” Zizek did say that initially he resisted the film. However I have noticed his recent preoccupation to distance and disclaim things like some liberals’ presupposition of his authoritarianism; maybe he really is getting tired of the whole “Marxist of the Groucho type” image that the mainstream uses so as to not take him seriously?
BTW love the “je dis toujours de la verite; pas toute….” reference.
@Tony K
First thanks for the comment.
About him ‘initially resisting the film’. I remember it well from his Masterclass. He said something like “I hate this film, it’s the worst of both worlds – the most primitive low class faith ideologies and for the liberals it functions as a decaf other (he didn’t say decaf other, but that’s close to what he said)”. I’ll try to link to that specific part of that specific video when I find it. My point here would be that he does this intentionally. Even in his Masterclass, the mention of the film was very strange. It was a sentence or two, it didn’t really fit onto the rest of his talk and he didn’t basically say anything more about it, like he would just want to show that he hates the film. I think this is how his statement that “half of the movies he writes about, he hasn’t seen them” should be taken.
I also think the fact that he chose India for his tour reasonably followed what he was doing in London in summer. You know, to be a little evil… there was an Indian (or was it Bangladeshi?) guy there in the audience who discussed a few things after the lectures with Žižek and didn’t forget to mention that he has some rich relatives in India. I’m sure he has many very good reasons to go there though.
And if you check the link I put under ‘it looks like his publishers love them’ you’ll see what I meant. It really does look like it’s an intentional image put forward from his publishers (check zizek.us which was put up by Verso for example) as a marketing strategy. And about him getting tired of the whole “Marxist of the Groucho type” – well yes, he said this in his Žižek! movie already. But remember, that film is now 5 years old and it’s not like he has stopped his extravagant lectures or excluded the vulgar jokes from them. And the way this ‘interview’ was published it is suggested that he’s mocking the titles people give him. But you know, there is something dishonest in this appearance, if it’s an intentional move from his publishers to propagate these titles (who of course couldn’t do this without his blessing).
That’s true, he did admit that he frequently sacrificed “facts” for theory’s sake, and of course Zizek loves to play with people who blindly follow him. But you have to admit a certain growing weariness about his public image that was previously acknowledged but disavowed, of which is showing more and more.
Or maybe I’m reading too much into everything and should focus on more important things instead like instigating a grass-roots non-hierarchical non-violent anti-oppressive revolution. ;)
Regarding Verso, that is true as well since Zizek has never shied away from playing up “controversies” between him and his publisher. It does however remind me of accusations by some random Leninist bloggers that Zizek is an opportunist playing (quite profitably as they put it) on the fears and insecurities of the contemporary postmodern left. Oh but He Himself has said something much along the same line, I think in one of the talks where he referenced “They Live”’s ideological-critical sunglasses and feared what people might see if they put on the glasses and looked at Zizek. Nice to see all of our bases covered, haha.
Further on Verso, I wonder if they have a heart attack each time Zizek refers to how people should just download his books online for free. Wonder if they ever summon him to the Central Committee and question his loyalty to their revolutionary anti-capitalist copyrights.
Sorry for monopolizing this comments section, here is a collection of responses to Zizek’s talk in India from a bunch of post-Marxists/colonialists, one of which “debated” Zizek at the talk itself (debate being the operative word since Zizek talked four times as long as her)
http://kafila.org/2010/01/07/the-two-zizeks/
Much of it is the usual liberal indignation at Zizek’s vulgarity and Eurocentrism and disavowed Stalinism etc etc, but they do make some good points like pointing out his political dithering and his frequent “misreadings”/”non-readings”.
I have actually been looking for those references. I know I have seen them, as offhand comments during lectures, but they’re difficult to pick out. Do you happen to know where one or more can be found?
Link under “changes depending on who he talks to” updated for a more specific reference.