فروپاشي خود در موقعيت تروماتيك و ديالكتيك تابع - خوانش باتلري و پسا لاكاني بر آثار سارا كين
Fragmentation of Self in the Traumatic, Dialectical Status of Subject
Defining Trauma as a psychic event arising from the confrontation between a subject and an external stimulus and inability of the subject to understand and master the related shocks / excitations, Sarah Kane’s characters experience a destroying psychic fragmentation by the time they encounter [the] unconscious . Applying Judith Butler’s idea of gendered identity and Post-Lacanian theory of subjectification and ethical act, the present study attempts to investigate the traumatic splitting of psyche, as the only way that a subject can exist, in case of Kane’s characters, and the compulsory or willing decisions they make to mitigate their plight. This investigation is going to be accomplished by presenting some theatrical pieces to work as the literary context wherein the efficiency of the theories would be verified or even heightened. The text included are : Blasted, Phaedra’s love, Cleansed, and 4.48 psychosis, four major works of Sarah Kane, the playwright best known as a remarkable contemporary figure of modern British drama. Considering grotesque in terms of a device to question the role models of perfection established by patriarchal societies, Kane’s works are seen as a set of anti-worlds opposing the objective world of norms especially those of gender and ideology. It is through such grotesque narratives that Kane creates the polarized world of her plays, the world within which the ceaseless violence between gendered identities appears as inevitable constructive feature. To get a better understanding of the antagonistic air of contact between Kane’s characters , the thesis benefits from Butler’s deconstructive notion of gender and Zizek’s psychoanalytic theory of unconscious and free act. Like Kane, Butler believes in the possibility of reshaping the common gender roles, since, to her, these role actions are merely culturally constructed, and so are not something constant. She avers, it is by means of language that rules and limits of hegemonic cultural discourse are imposed on gender; align with it, she advocates the idea of granting power to sexual other because just through subversive acts there can be assumed any room for change/resistance. The common point between Butler and Postlacanian thinkers, especially, Zizek is the matter of unconscious. Zizek too refers it—unconscious—to the discourse of the Other in oneself, to desire, and fantasies. It is, argues Zizek, language that enables communications, brings meaning to body, its functions and changes one’s need to desire. Zizek’s perception of The Real as the impossibility inherent in language, a hole in the symbolic yet source of contingency, a paradox in a sense that it does not exists helps the readers of Kane’s plays to figure out the yearning demand of characters in building up bonds of communication with [their] world, either within/without, as an attempt to achieve an elusive sense of coherence in confrontation with the traumatic intrusion of the Real.