I've been working on an essay that examines the film Saltburn through a psychological and psychoanalytical lens...
So, this has led me down a rabbit hole of going back to some readings on Desire from Jacques Lacan and Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus.
I want to share some of those thoughts on desire.
Now to set the stage for this conversation a bit here are a couple of quotes that caught my attention...
"Desire is produced in the margin which exists between the demand for the satisfaction of need and the demand for love." Jacques Lacan
"Desire full stop is always the desire of the Other. Which basically means that we are always asking the Other what he desires." Jacques Lacan
"Desire is not bolstered by needs, but rather the contrary; needs are derived from desire: they are counterproducts within the real that desire produces. Lack is a countereffect of desire; it is deposited, distributed, vacuolized within a real that is natural and social. Desire always remains in close touch with the conditions of objective existence." -- Deleuze and Guattari in Anti-Oedipus
I'll be doing some more posts about desire and its structure in the future. However, I wanted to do some journalistic-style posts as I worked through my research.
Desire lies at the very foundation of everything. We construct our sense of self based on desire. It's not merely a matter of ego-driven desire; numerous factors play a role in how we understand desire. We can never have complete control over it. Our understanding of it is fundamental, similar to how seeing someone yawn can involuntarily trigger a yawn in us. This is a common experience, demonstrating the extent to which desire can influence us.
Merely writing about yawning is creating this pull in me to yawn. And now I'm sure for some reading this... the mere conversation about yawning is triggering one in you.
The mirror stands in front of us!
Often, we overlook the impact of desire on various aspects of our lives. Consider the people with whom we associate. We acknowledge that desire is fundamental, but what are the implications of this understanding?
The environment we inhabit, the individuals we engage with, and the societal structures that surround us all shape our desires, motivations, and drives. Absolute control over these impulses is unattainable, but that's acceptable; its reality renders us more authentically human.
I bring up Anti-Oedipus and the work of Lacan because they view desire quite differently, a topic that I'll dive into more at a later date. However, I think what is intriguing about their views on desire for today is the fact that I see a hybrid that needs to be created between the two.
In the work of Deleuze and Guattari... desire is not about lacking something as it is for Lacan, they conceptualize it more as a productive force of creation. So, for them, it's not about lacking something or seeking fulfillment of something absent. Instead, it is a process of continuous production and creation. They see desire as inherently creative, constantly forming and transforming the reality in which an individual exists.
And in Deleuzian theory, desire is closely linked to the societal structures and systems (although I think Lacan is probably in much of the same camp). In the psychoanalytic lens, desire is viewed, inherently, as repressive. But in the anti-Oedipus position, it's the social and political structures that often channel desire in certain ways, leading towards both repressive and liberating outcomes.
From this, desire is built from a multiplicity and fluidity of a network of relations. And then this network of relations interacts and connects in an endless network of evolving ways.
For Lacan, I see his perception of desire as something built from lack. It's much more ego-driven in the sense that we, as humans, are in this constant pursuit of something that is perceived to be missing or absent. And it's in the perceived lack that our drives and desires become built. In overly simplistic terms, this lack is not just some inner void, but a driving force that motivates us to seek fulfillment, often in the form of relationships or achievements that we believe will complete us.
Does this mean we, in some sense, objectify everything? Probably.
Our initial impulse is to view someone as an object of desire. These desires are instrumental in shaping our identity, as we chase after things that craft the image we perceive of ourselves.
The hyper-consumerist culture further accelerates this dynamic, leaving us in a constant chase of some distant hyperreality.
But what of this chase?
Lacan's view positions desire as fundamentally relational and somewhat reactive, emerging from the dynamics of interpersonal relationships and the quest for love and recognition (recognition from the Other).
Deleuze and Guattari, conversely, view desire as an active, generative force that shapes needs, which includes the perception of our lack.
However, I see that a reactive force can become generative and a generative force can become reactive.
The essential takeaway from both of these perspectives is that our desire, at its foundation, comes from an interaction with the external world.
We incessantly forge identities and structures around our desires to manage them. Our efforts are geared towards fitting in, surviving, and upholding a certain image of ourselves. Often, we refrain from acting on our desires due to the fear of disrupting the illusions we have woven around them. Society itself is constructed on this desire-driven process of identity formation.
Ultimately, desire forms the bedrock of all our emotions, motivations, and drives; it's the Desire that formulates our sense of will.
We seek out that which satisfies our desires and sustains the identity that regulates them. It's an ongoing cycle of interpretation and influence, where certainty and completeness are elusive, and they ought to be.
To put my perspective plainly: certainty is boring (really, really, really…boring).
Emotions such as love and hate, which are two sides of the same coin, are deeply rooted in desire, and our interpretation of it.
Our identities are perpetually evolving, shaped by our relationships and interactions. Friends, loved ones, and family members significantly influence our self-perception. These relationships, imbued with stories and emotions, have a profound impact on our sense of self.
Thus, desire is the catalyst behind our actions, emotions, and relationships, continually molding and remolding our identities.
And while we strive to resolve our feelings of lack or explore our generative desires through these relationships and symbolic alignments, such resolution always remains incomplete; in a state of perpetual evolution.
The state of Desire remains a perpetual, transformative force, constantly reshaping our identity and experiences.
So…
Stay curious.
Note that Jungians talk about eros not id:-)