/IdeologyZizeketc

In Perverts Guide to Ideology Zizek starts to talk about ideology with an approach to the film They Live and the example of the sunglasses. He states that "these glasses function as critique of ideology glasses". +

In his article The sublime object of ideology Zizek presents a shift in the very definition of ideology from Marx and the model of " they do not know it, but they are doing it" to the "they know very well what they are doing, but still, they are doing it" and Sloterdijk's cynical reason. So naivity gives its position to cinicism. And if ideology's dominant mode of functioning is cynical then we should approach a different critique on ideology.

He also talks about the subject and desire as a driving force, an agent of ideology. He takes the notion of the Big other from Lacan to say that the big other is born inside us through our desire and not only in media, politicians, "external" factors. Possibly that is why he says that the time of psychoanalysis is now. He somehow wants to bring responsibility back in the hands of the individual.

Responsibilty draws a connection with Renzo Martens work. Less interested in Renzos motivations and goals I can observe that his approach didnt work. That fact underlines the weak position of the individual in this system. However , Renzo is talking to these people about responsibility and taking some aspects of their lives more "in their hands". Can self care and values like responsibility be transmitted like this? Is it a form of cultural imperialism? After a first reading I saw Renzos project imperialistic. He even states in his interview that they are building an art center in theCongolese rainforest. Is this the reaction of the individual that failed as state above to the system? To create/ be part of an institution?As long as it preserves the economic benefits of Congo people and as the financial outcomes of art production and critique go to their (geographical) sources, Renzo states that its fine. And in fact, this is his proposal.

With the next readings of ENjoy Poverty I started to see more and more how weak the individual is against the (financial) system. To me is still not clear why he did a film out of it. Why he created this images. I believe that this is what finally consists as a "fail" of the whole idea. Because is documenting so clear its desire. To do what he wanted to do. It gives proves to Zizek when he says that agent of ideology is desire. ? Related to cynical reason I think that Renzo is somehow trying to reveal something similar. To say that everybody knows that the money from the benefits for Congo return to the source but still the practise has this philantrhopy notion. Zizek would prefer thus a notion of misanthropy and it makes sense.

In the Act of Killing, a more fictional charakter makes it easier to talk about ideology as false concsiousness according to Zizek, desire, and that ideology as he says is hidden in pain sight. ?Killers that use extacy after the murder, making "art" out of criminality, subjectivity and systems. Gangsters say that they are out of the system. Its like they position ideology and the Big other only in media and not in ones self. The model of they know well what they re doing but they still doing it is interesting here also. I think that in the movie the gangsters present themselves stil with the indentity of the murderer, its like they still killing.

To return to the use of ecstasy after the murder, I found it examplary of the way that Zizek in Zizek reads Lacan talks about the big other. They still maintain appearances by using it.

The two projects as films were different. While Renzo in the first place seems to document the project, Oppenheimer is going a movie that includes indirect narrative?documentation and reenactment. Renzo is standing as individual, the gangsters as a group. As an individual, Renzo is talking about ownsership. But his project comes somehow a product itself that didnt work and now is repositioned in a more institutional structure. I think Renzos film is talking more about the individual, its position in this financial and ideological system, the possibilities, the desire and creation of ideology within us. Oppenheimers film is more about the collective madness, the collective desire and the position of a group, or a network in the above contexts. In Renzo the cynical reason is sort of clearer to see. In the Act of killing we may think that the gangsters are not totally aware of what they do, they are not aware of their psychopathy and this underlines the fact that the psychological implications of what we do (possible driven by our ideology which is driven from our desire) are uknown. In a personal and collective level.

Additionally, the fact that both works are films, we can see that they enscrive the events they include in history under the lense of the creator/?. They not only document but they also enter the sphere of critique, creativity and memory. Finally what clearly connects these movies within the Zizek approach in ideology is the notion of desire. The big other is not only identified and personified in an agent as God, history, the cause but also within each individual.

sources 1 Slavoj Zizek. The sublime object of ideology) http://www.egs.edu/faculty/slavoj-zizek/articles/cynicism-as-a-form-of-ideology/ 2 Renzo Martens. Enjoy Povery 3 3 Joshua Opperheim. The act of killing 4 Slavoj Zizek. How to read Lacan 6 Zizek. The Pervert's Guide to Ideology 7 Renzo Martens Interview. Lost Source! 8 Collective notes piratepad