지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article IS a psychoanalytic exploration of William Shakespeare's Othello and Chan-ok Park's movie "Jealousy is My Middle Name," which was released in 2003. I analyze the two works through the Lacanian psychoanalytic. From the psychoanalytic viewpoint, the most distinguishable parts of the two works include the question what is the force that moves the human mind and where does it come from ; the inquiry whether the negatively regarded emotion of jealousy and/or envy is the drive that moves human minds; and the doubt whether the Oedipus conflict can be resolved completely and permanently.
Lacan used to say, Love is to give what you haven't got to someone who does not want to know.' Which means: to love is to recognize your lack and give it to the other, place it in the other. It's not giving what you possess, goods and presents, it's giving something else that you don't possess, which goes beyond you. To do that you have to assume your lack, your 'castration' as Freud used to say. And that is essentially feminine. One only really loves from a feminine position. Loving feminises. That's why love is always a bit comical in a man. But if he lets himself get intimidated by ridicule, then in actual fact he's not very sure of his virility.
Lacan distinguishes desire from need and demand. Need is a biological instinct that is articulated in demand, yet demand has a double function: on the one hand, it articulates need, and on the other, acts as a demand for love. Even after the need articulated in demand is satisfied, the demand for love remains unsatisfied. This remainder is desire. For Lacan, "desire is neither the appetite for satisfaction nor the demand for love, but the difference that results from the subtraction of the first from the second."
In conclusion, the two works discuss the possible inadequacy of interpreting the unconscious meanings of movies because the value of movies could be totally different from that of psychoanalytic practices.
Lacan used to say, Love is to give what you haven't got to someone who does not want to know.' Which means: to love is to recognize your lack and give it to the other, place it in the other. It's not giving what you possess, goods and presents, it's giving something else that you don't possess, which goes beyond you. To do that you have to assume your lack, your 'castration' as Freud used to say. And that is essentially feminine. One only really loves from a feminine position. Loving feminises. That's why love is always a bit comical in a man. But if he lets himself get intimidated by ridicule, then in actual fact he's not very sure of his virility.
Lacan distinguishes desire from need and demand. Need is a biological instinct that is articulated in demand, yet demand has a double function: on the one hand, it articulates need, and on the other, acts as a demand for love. Even after the need articulated in demand is satisfied, the demand for love remains unsatisfied. This remainder is desire. For Lacan, "desire is neither the appetite for satisfaction nor the demand for love, but the difference that results from the subtraction of the first from the second."
In conclusion, the two works discuss the possible inadequacy of interpreting the unconscious meanings of movies because the value of movies could be totally different from that of psychoanalytic practices.
목차
1. 사랑의 정의에 대한 단상과 문제제기
2. 욕망과 결핍이 만들어가는 사랑에 대한 이해
3. 대상에게 없는 것을 대상에게서 찾는 욕망으로서 사랑 읽기
4. 또 다른 질투가 그려내는 사랑의 단상들
5. 짧은 생각
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2012-001-004299490