Skip to Main Content

Slavoj Žižek’s interventions into the fields of culture and politics have characteristic resemblances with what Freud termed “wild analysis”: they are somewhat premature and do not allow the analysand to speak for itself. Instead, Žižek often poses his conclusions in the form of rhetorical questions à la: “Isn’t this precisely the real motivation behind the so called philanthro-capitalism…?” This essay defends Žižek’s wild analysis as an appropriate form of intervention in a culture that speaks a lot, but doesn’t say much. Further, the essay addresses the anxiety and the ethics of the wild analyst, which necessarily accompany its interventionist form.

Don't already have an account? Register
Close Modal
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal