A Ticklish Subject

In a recent interview for the Guardian, Slavoj Zizek rubbished a large part of his own oeuvre, declaring, “All the talk and the writing about politics, this is not where my heart is. No. I have been sidetracked. I really mean this.”

Zizek also admitted to not having watched James Cameron’s blockbuster film Avatar when he wrote his interpretation of it: “I had not even seen the film, but I am a good Hegelian. If you have a good theory, forget about the reality.”

The ethics of beating up on Slavoj Zizek

People who are not too familiar with contemporary philosophy sometimes get the impression that Slavoj Zizek is widely respected among philosophers.  This isn’t the case.  The comments underneath this Crooked Timber post contain some of the reasons why not.  Zizek’s style of philosophy — if “philosophy” is the right name for what Zizek does — is pretty far from the mainstream, and I believe that even those who like the kind of thing Zizek does will admit that Zizek is mainly known as a provocateur, not a particularly careful or serious thinker.  Which isn’t to say that he can’t be entertaining and thought-provoking.  His Pervert’s Guide to Cinema is fun.

Anyway, what I really want to do in this post is nitpick something John Holbo says in the comments to that CT post: