Finally, Acker’s fiction will not decide whether, from a perspective that is female history is more accurately represented as being a fragmented group of localized narratives, or as a monolithic singular metanarrative from where ladies have now been methodically excluded.
10 Yet definately not compromising your time and effort to reform and repoliticize psychoanalysis, its exactly this ambiguous mindset toward historic representation which becomes, in Acker, the dwelling regulating the connection between Freudian and theory that is lacanian. Acker’s work assigns these representational different types of history to Freud and Lacan, trying to force a difference between a totalizing Freudian metanarrative, and a contingent Lacanian narrative, of psychoanalytic truth. Needless to say, because Lacan fundamentally relies on the reality of Freud, this is certainly an impossible task. However Acker’s pursuit of a misconception beyond the phallus can be “impossible. ” It really is inside the framework of this acknowledged impossibility that Acker’s fiction overworks and stops working the old-fashioned relationship between the theoretical models she cites. Enforcing a distinction that is impossible Freud and Lacan is very important to affirming feminine fetishism since it offers the necessary leverage with which to pry aside the exclusive symbolic bonds amongst the penis as well as the phallus. The rebuilding regarding the union between Freud and Lacan are able to move through the insertion of this impossible entity, the female fetish, when you look at the brand new area exposed between Freud’s imaginary penis and Lacan’s phallus that is symbolic.