Freudian slip, Unconsciousness, and Orality.

Freudian slip, Unconsciousness, and Orality. Posted By: dinavionetta Sun Nov 25, 2012 4:52 pm  | Options

I am interested in the concept of unconsciousness that is presented in some works in Critical Theory class. The idea that I have got is everything is happen for a reason, even if it is accidental. It is like the campaign of Mitt Romney in president election when he and his family, which was his supporters, tried to arrange the letter on their shirt to be "ROMNEY" but it turned out to be "RMONEY". In other case, he also said United States as "a company" instead of "a nation". Some people called this kind of accident as Freudian slip. Febi Laraswati, Isnan, and Lia Arisyanti discussed this with me. Febi Laraswati agreed with a passage in Freud's essay, "The Interpretation of Dreams". Freud said that "Such material is generally in the unconscious because it has been repressed, or driven from consciousness by a mental censor that judges what is fit for expression." From that expression, can we say that it was unconsciously represented Romney's desire of, let me say, money? In line with that, the example that Freud gave in his essay is desire of sexuality. Isnan has the question in this statement. What kind of unconsciousness that has something to do with sexuality? Jacques Lacan mentioned it in his essay "The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason since Freud". What we desire is always a signifier of something else. What we desire is desirable because it is connected to our needs and experience with mother's body, but how? Isnan also added this question to our discussion. If a person did not get an experience of mother's body, how is about that person's desire? Lacan connected that to Saussure's concept of structural linguistics. One desire stands for any other desire that stands for other desire and so on. Is it happening to us unconsciously? We may not know it since Freud said that it has been repressed. Besides that, I think it has some connection with discussion in class about the resistance of theory that refers to Paul de Man's "Resistance of Theory". The idea that I got is when people try to resist a theory, it does not help to disappear that theory. Nevertheless, it is even make the theory keep continued. What if it is connected with our unconscious? Like if we do not like something, we actually do not want that thing to vanish, but to still exist, so we can always beat that. Lia Arisyanti also added the statement about orality. Problem about the concept of unconsciousness is also emerged in the beginning of writing that she is sure it was made by men to express human's language. Unconsciously, they made this kind of language with incision, carving, or scratch. It is also a kind of men's image that they have instinct to violent, consciously or unconsciously. It is different with women whom have the image of suavity, like when some women meet, it will be common if they are hugged each other, but the men? Maybe they are not. Otherwise, they like violent things that are commonly being the theme of many Hemingway's novels. Dina Syahrani Vionetta 180410100199