Slavoj Zizek in his flat in the center of Ljubljana
Not because he sleeps with the two Stalins by his side. Not even because he writes about Stalin in glowing terms. Not because 90% of his output is a repetition. Not because of his horrendous mannerisms. Not because he is a post-lacanian heretic and a commie. Slavoj Zizek is an idiot because he *reads* his lectures which makes his books a ghost writing suspect. And no, this is not a language problem, he can speak English pretty well without a paper. I am with Nassim Taleb who said: “Preparing for a lecture is highly unethical: if it is not interesting enough for you to know independently, then you should not be lecturing on it.”
If the ideas are not internalized, get off the stage, professor! Same with every other idiot who reads his or her public presentations.
{ 17 comments… read them below or add one }
Did the NKVD give all prisioners a little bust of Father Stalin as a momento of their stay in Siberia ?
How about an Unemployed Philosophers Guild doll of Stalin f. It should sell well among American Jews of a certain age and … perhaps a few may sell even in C.
Philosopher and unemployed are redundant. And yes they get a matryoshka not a bust. They already have “bust” a plenty.
Whether or not he writes his own material and regardless of his lecturing technique, he is an interesting and (obviously) controversial character. Your emphasis on the word “idiot” reminded me of him as well. Which is cute.
…but is he an idiot for what he says or for the way in which he says it? It would be interesting to read your (not Nassims) views on this.
Peace
Mr. Blank, Zizek has a lot of colorful, original, exiting ideas. He has the advantage (that I share) of knowing the East and the West intimately. But the way he delivers these ideas puts a certain tint on his authenticity as thinker. Taken together with the Stalins and his other vices this earns him an idiot.
So, he’s an idiot just because he reads his lectures? wow, great argument lol
Why Arber, you prefer a diffident explanation? This actually is a major dysfunction of our civilization, the loss of a certain faculty. This is akin to people who go to art museums and take written notes about art, revolting! May be Zizek should cut his rants to 15 minutes, his speaking fees might suffer but the listeners will benefit a great deal.
Not sure which specific lecture you are referring to, of him speaking from a scripted text. From what I saw here & there on youtube etc., see seems to be very comfortable speaking very unscripted & off-the-cuff, which, BTW, does not help in his repetitious locution. Incidentally, repetition features prominently in his works; see “Enjoy Your Symptom,” Ch. titled “Why Every Act is a Repetition.”
Same goes for his kitschiness, which is also a part of his “trash philosophy,” rummaging through the 21st century’s garbage dump to elevate social shit turds with po-po-mo alchemy to shiny golden nuggets.
At least in these areas he is not a hypocrite…
If you look at his formal lectures, i.e. holding a podium by the lecturing “love handles”, it’s all reading.
Hey Ben,
The thing with Zizek is that you don’t need to take everything so serious. What you have to do – is to be more attentive to what he says (especially about Stalin) since Zizek gives a lot of multi layered statements all the time (guess it’s because he’s psychoanalyst as well) with a particular hidden message. Knowing that you were born in Moscow and maybe have some traumatic relations concerning Stalin, your statements are too subjective (Have you watched movie “Zizek!”?). And please give me some reference where he’s reading all the time (I found only few – nobody is a perfect Greek oral speaker these days). And about repetition – again be more attentive – maybe the whole lecture is about the same book like “living in the end times”, “violence” etc. ?
Oh, and if you watched one of his last presentations (and were attentive enough)/ show “living in the end times” (based in Holland) – he actually calls himself an idiot. Again, try to think in what sense.
And no, I am not subjectively praising Him. Nobody’s perfect.
Candidate, If you cant write a single sentence without constantly hedging, why write at all? Besides I like to speak with people with a name.
Ben,
1) English is not my first language, and I always admit that (Or I am an Idiot as well? [insert irony here];
2) You showed your subjectivity again – why you can’t defend thoughts without self – conceit?;
3)And again, Why write? Answer is (like Zizek would say to you) very simple one – just to show that you are : a) bigger idiot than Zizek; b) You need to concentrate more on what are you writing about – you might make mistakes.
4) My name is Tom. Nice to meet you,
5) Return to me with some useful thoughts.
Tom, I ma not here to debate the voluminous legacy of Zizek. I have a very simple criteria, people who read their lectures are idiots. Take a look at YouTube, he reads most of his lectures (except the interviews). This is the only statement I am making here. I don’t know what objectify is and I am not selling any on my blog, that’s fr sure. I am selling my opinions.
I don’t want to offend you or do that on purpose, but you seem contradict yourself. By being narrow – minded you won’t sell your opinions. Especially in the society we live now.
P.S. Stalin was also narrow – minded, yet effective.
Wish you all the best,
thanks for your answers,
Tom.
Slavoj Zizek’s mind goes a mile a minute. He composes and prepares his lectures because if he didn’t he would have a thousand things to say about each point he makes, and end up wasting even more of the audience’s time. Your valorization of “unpreparedness” is entirely unreasonable. I, for one, am glad that professors like Zizek take the time to prepare a cogent lecture for their audience.
Except Mr. Blank, his read outloud texts are un-listenable and much more incoherent than his chaotic rants. Anyone who reads a speech or a lecture is an idiot (especially Zizek). I will concede this to a president perhaps as single exception.
Well, your first comment is simply a matter of opinion rather than an objective fact. I, personally, find his lectures cogent and comprehendable; so you don’t speak for everyone. All you do is continue to make this blanket statement that those who prepare their lectures are idiots because they’re obviously not masters of the material they’re presenting. I disagree, and find absolutely no evidence at all to support that claim in your posts.
Zizek has himself described himself as an idiot – he sees an idiot as someone who has a tendency to interpret things to literary – not because he does not understand irony or fails to see the joke – but because he is too impatient to get too what really matters.
{ 1 trackback }