Lacan essay on purloined letter

The debate up to the mid-1980s is collected in a helpful though incomplete volume, The Purloined Poe . [14] [15] The volume does not include, for instance, Richard Hull's reading based on the work of Michel Foucault , in which he argues that "'The Purloined Letter' is a good text for questioning the metalinguistic claim that artists can't avoid doing surveillance, because it is a discourse on poetry's superiority over surveillance." [16] Slavoj Žižek asks "So why does a letter always arrive at its destination? Why could it not—sometimes at least—also fail to reach it?" [17] Hollis Robbins critiques Derrida for his own blindness to patriotism in prefacing his reading of "The Purloined Letter" with a reading of " The Emperor's New Clothes ": "In Derrida's view, both Poe's story and Andersen's feature a king whose manhood is imperiled, who is surrounded by habit-driven and ineffectual civil servants, and who is saved by an individual who sees what is obvious... Both save the crown from further embarrassment... There is never a question that a king could or should fall from grace." [18]

Lacan essay on purloined letter

lacan essay on purloined letter

Media:

lacan essay on purloined letterlacan essay on purloined letterlacan essay on purloined letter