![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Abstract:
In this essay, I argue that what I consider a generally valid critique of the traditional model of representation remains too closely focused on its limitations and not its liminality. To make this distinction, I couch my analysis in terms of sacrifice. The canonical model of mimesis was concerned by the sacrificed thickness of “presence” in the thin re-presentation; today's anti-essentialist model is instead concerned that presence or sameness comes at the sacrificial cost of the other. Although the latter is accordingly more sensitive to racial representation, it still fails to come to terms with liminality, which is the structural inability to represent the margins. The Lacanian analysis of an Iranian film that cannot rely on traditional visual cues opens the door to appreciating liminality. But unless a “narcissistic” tendency of the Lacanian scholarship is addressed, liminality becomes a fetish for the other as a “stain.”
Notes
1 Throughout this essay, I capitalize Symbolic, Imaginary, and Real to represent their Lacanian heritage against their ordinary usage.
2 I have recently provided a general philosophical reading of Iranian cinema and its context that I cannot revisit here. See my Iranian Cinema and Philosophy.
3 A poor elderly woman gives him her sole valuable belonging, a necklace, which he falsely promises to give to Nasim.
4 While Noghreh and Jomeh are not the focal points, their names are not ironic either. Noghreh, whose life has no value, means silver. Jomeh means Friday, the holy day of Sabbath and rest.