Zizek in the Guardian

Žižek is, if anything, more demonic and unhealthy-looking than his photographs, his matted hair and greying beard surrounding a face that looks like it's never seen sunlight. He suffers from diabetes, a condition not helped by his nomadic lifestyle and manic disposition. "I have exploited you," he says by way of greeting, "in order to have a few hours free from the duties these Spanish leftists expect me to perform."

He seems both eager and uncomfortable and ushers me quickly upstairs to the apartment that is his temporary home. As a cleaner flits about, I ask him if he is surprised at his popularity, particularly among the young.

"My God, I am the last person to know the answer to these questions," he says, looking genuinely dismayed. "But, really, I am now thinking there is so much pressure on me to perform. I am getting really bored with it. I am a thinker, but people all the time want this kind of shitty political interventions: the books, the talks, the discussions and so forth." He sighs and closes his eyes and seems to deflate before my eyes. "I will tell you my problem openly and for this my publisher will hate me. All the talk and the writing about politics, this is not where my heart is. No. I have been sidetracked. I really mean this."

He opens a copy of Living in the End Times, and finds the contents page. "I will tell you the truth now," he says, pointing to the first chapter, then the second. "Bullshit. Some more bullshit. Blah, blah, blah." He flicks furiously through the pages. "Chapter 3, where I try to read Marx anew, is maybe OK. I like this part where I analyse Kafka's last story and here where I use the community of outcasts in the TV series Heroes as a model for the communist collective. But, this section, the Architectural Parallax, this is pure bluff. Also the part where I analyse Avatar, the movie, that is also pure bluff. When I wrote it, I had not even seen the film, but I am a good Hegelian. If you have a good theory, forget about the reality."

Why, then, given that he does not like most of his books and does not have any enthusiasm for the lecture circuit, does he not call a stop to the Žižek show? "I am doing that right now!" he shouts. "I am writing a mega-book about Hegel with regard to Plato, Kant and maybe Heidegger. Already, this Hegel book is 700 pages. It is a true work of love. This is my true life's work. Even Lacan is just a tool for me to read Hegel. For me, always it is Hegel, Hegel, Hegel," he says, sighing again. "But people just want the shitty politics."

Reviewing In Defence of Lost Causes, the British Marxist critic Terry Eagleton concluded that it was "a frenetic, eclectic parody of intellectual scholarship, by one so assured in his grasp of the finer points of Kafka or John le Carré that he can afford to ham it up a little." Only time will tell if Žižek is serious about becoming utterly serious, but if he devotes the rest of his brilliant, brainy, slightly bonkers, utterly singular life to Hegel, and Hegel alone, it will be a great gain for pure philosophy and a great loss to radical, risk-taking political theory.

"He is very much a thinker for our turbulent, high speed, information-led lives," says Sophie Fiennes, "precisely because he insists on the freedom to stop and think hard about who you are as an individual in this fragmented society. We need a radical hip priest and Slavoj is that in many ways." The very thought, I suspect, would have him quaking in his proletarian boots – and free airline socks.

via m.guardian.co.uk

Comments

[Alain]

This would certainly explain why so many of Zizek's comments on politics are so weak compared to his more theoretical work. I think if his vanity allows it he should dedicate himself to a great philosophical treatise.

[Jodi]

I agree.

I also wonder if his comment is also obfuscating. A kind of self-critique that he means and doesn't mean.

[Alain]

Interesting comment - Do you mean obfuscating for us or to himself? It seems to me the above comments sound honest - in fact they might be the reaction of almost anyone who admires his work but finds his "practical" writings a disappointment.

[Jodi]

Both. This might be why the comments sound honest. For example, one writes something quickly that isn't particularly good, doesn't stand up to critical scrutiny, is basically an initial reaction. Still, one actually thinks this and means it. So even if one wants to distance oneself from the remarks this distancing is actually more difficult than one would like because it is what one thinks.

[www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawml6CvEyiZC-o79Oj1jL26zlt8mdtcpPwc]

Like, why don't you also hold his hairy Slovenian balls while you're helping him fornicate, you foolish WOMAN. You have a psychoanalytically flavored excuse for every lie he utters, every hypocrisy, every bullshit. - Parody Lover

[Jamesmartin145]

I firmly believe that Zizek means exactly what he says. He says what he feels. It may be the case that those feelings come and go, but he is like you or me.
He is not trying to obfuscate anything.
Who is the crackpot from google accts "Parody Lover"?
I like your new page. Much easier to deal with.
And thank you for your insights!

[www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawml6CvEyiZC-o79Oj1jL26zlt8mdtcpPwc]

James, I am a Serbian Zizek-hater, dr. Dean's Communist conscience, fan & parody stalker, and an interactive parody artist, all roled into one divine appearance. Jodianne thank you for posting the comment.