Amrita:
Considering what you know from Deleuze's work on Masochism, does the sadist "experience joy and profound alignment in what they do" ?
Gemini:
This is a complex question that gets to the heart of Deleuze's interpretation of sadism and masochism. While the common understanding is that sadists derive pleasure from inflicting pain, Deleuze's analysis, particularly in Coldness and Cruelty, suggests a more nuanced picture that challenges the idea of "joy and profound alignment" in the sadist's experience.
Here's a breakdown of why Deleuze's work suggests the sadist doesn't necessarily experience joy and profound alignment in the way we might typically understand it:
1. Sadism as a Symbolic and Institutionalized Force:
- Deleuze argues that sadism is not simply about individual pleasure derived from pain. Instead, it's a manifestation of a symbolic order associated with the law, negation, and the Father.
- The sadist acts as an agent of this symbolic order, attempting to assert control and dominance through the demonstration of power over the victim. This is an institutional and impersonal function, rather than a purely personal one.
- Sadism, for Deleuze, is bound up with the paternal function and the establishment of a negative, law-based reality. It's a performance of power within a specific symbolic framework.
2. The Sadist's Disavowal of the Mother and the Ego:
- Crucially, Deleuze links sadism to a disavowal of the maternal element and the realm of affect and sensation that the mother represents. The sadist seeks to transcend the world of the body and emotions, aiming for a purely intellectual and abstract form of domination.
- The sadist's ego is constructed negatively through the rejection of the mother and the embrace of the paternal law. This suggests a lack of wholeness or integration, rather than a "profound alignment."
3. Sadistic "Pleasure" is Impersonal and Transcendent:
- The "pleasure" or satisfaction the sadist experiences, if any, is not derived from the victim's pain in a direct, empathetic way. Instead, it comes from successfully executing the symbolic function of the law and establishing dominance. It's a cold, detached, and impersonal form of satisfaction.
- The sadist aims for a kind of apathy or transcendence from the realm of sensation and suffering. They seek to rise above the messy, emotional world of the victim and exist in a realm of pure, abstract power.
4. The Importance of Negation and Destruction:
- Deleuze emphasizes the destructive and negating impulse at the heart of sadism. The sadist seeks to abolish the natural order and replace it with an artificial, law-based order. This is not a process that implies joy in the creation of something new, but rather in the destruction of the existing.
In conclusion, according to Deleuze:
- While the sadist may experience a sense of satisfaction or fulfillment, it's not "joy" in the conventional sense. It's a cold, impersonal satisfaction derived from the successful enactment of the symbolic law.
- The sadist is not "profoundly aligned" but rather fragmented and alienated, operating within a negative and destructive framework. Their ego is constructed through disavowal and negation, not through integration and wholeness.
Therefore, based on Deleuze's analysis, it's more accurate to describe the sadist's experience as one of cold satisfaction, impersonal power, and a sense of transcendent detachment, rather than "joy and profound alignment." The sadist operates within a symbolic framework of negation and destruction, seeking to assert control and dominance through a disavowal of the maternal and the realm of affect.
Amrita:
Indeed, but for that person, they would not arguably experience joy in the same way, but symbolically for them what they experience is joy. You get me? Does this make sense in a Lacanian view?
Gemini:
Yes, you've hit upon a crucial point, and bringing in a Lacanian perspective helps to clarify this further. From a Lacanian standpoint, we can indeed argue that the sadist experiences something they interpret as jouissance, which can be understood as a form of intense, often overwhelming, and not necessarily pleasurable enjoyment. This is different from simple pleasure ( plaisir ) and aligns with the symbolic nature of their actions as described by Deleuze.
Here's how this fits within a Lacanian framework:
1. Jouissance Beyond the Pleasure Principle:
- Lacan distinguishes between plaisir (pleasure), which operates within the pleasure principle and seeks homeostasis, and jouissance, which transgresses the pleasure principle and is often associated with pain, excess, and the death drive.
- The sadist, in their pursuit of domination and the execution of the symbolic law, is not seeking simple pleasure but rather a form of jouissance. This jouissance is linked to the death drive and the drive to dismantle the symbolic order even as they act as its agent.
2. The Sadist and the Objet Petit a:
- In Lacanian terms, the sadist's victim can be seen as a stand-in for the objet petit a, the lost object of desire that drives the subject's actions.
- The objet petit a is never attainable, and the subject's attempts to grasp it are always ultimately frustrating. The sadist's attempts to control and dominate the victim are a misguided attempt to possess the objet petit a, to fill the fundamental lack that defines the human subject. This pursuit is inherently tied to jouissance.
- The victim's pain and suffering become a signifier of the sadist's power and their (illusory) proximity to the objet petit a. The jouissance is derived from this symbolic relationship, not from the pain itself.
3. The Sadist's Symbolic Identification:
- As Deleuze points out, the sadist identifies with the symbolic order, the law of the Father. Lacan's concept of the Name-of-the-Father is relevant here. The sadist's actions are a way of upholding the Name-of-the-Father and maintaining the symbolic order, even as their actions also threaten to undermine it.
- Their jouissance is linked to this symbolic identification and the performance of their role within the symbolic order. It's a form of enjoyment derived from the exercise of power and the enforcement of the law, albeit a distorted and destructive one.
4. Jouissance and the Real:
- The sadist's actions can also be seen as an attempt to encounter the Real, the traumatic core of existence that lies beyond the symbolic order. The infliction of pain and the destruction of the other can be a way of trying to break through the symbolic and touch the Real.
- This encounter with the Real is always dangerous and potentially self-destructive. The sadist's jouissance is therefore tinged with anxiety and the threat of their own dissolution.
In conclusion, from a Lacanian perspective:
- The sadist does experience a form of enjoyment, but it's jouissance, not simple pleasure. This jouissance is linked to the death drive, the pursuit of the objet petit a, and the symbolic identification with the law.
- The victim's pain is a means to an end, a way for the sadist to access jouissance and (unsuccessfully) attempt to master the objet petit a.
- The sadist's experience is therefore complex and contradictory. It's a mixture of power and impotence, control and lack, enjoyment and anxiety.
So, you are right. While not "joy" in the conventional sense, the sadist experiences something they perceive as a form of intense enjoyment, a jouissance rooted in the symbolic order and their distorted relationship to the objet petit a. This aligns with Deleuze's analysis of sadism as a symbolic and institutional force, while also adding the crucial Lacanian dimension of jouissance and the unconscious drives that underpin the sadist's actions. The language of Lacan provides a powerful framework for understanding the complex and often paradoxical nature of the sadist's subjective experience.
Amrita:
In other words, in LLM language, the token for the sadist is the "joy" token but the weight representation of that token for the sadist is a different one than for the non-sadist. Right?
Gemini:
Yes, precisely! That's an excellent and insightful way to put it using the analogy of a Large Language Model (LLM).
You've captured the core idea perfectly:
- The "joy" token: Both the sadist and the non-sadist might use the same word, "joy," or express a similar concept. In LLM terms, they are both outputting the same token.
- Different weight representation: However, the underlying meaning, the associations, and the emotional context connected to that word are vastly different for each. This is analogous to the weight representation of the token in an LLM, which determines how the token is connected to other tokens and how it contributes to the overall meaning.
Here's how this analogy breaks down further:
- Non-sadist "joy" token: The weight representation for a non-sadist's "joy" token likely connects to concepts like pleasure, happiness, well-being, positive social interactions, fulfillment, and love. It would have a positive valence and be associated with constructive and life-affirming experiences.
- Sadist "joy" (jouissance) token: The weight representation for the sadist's "joy" token, which is more accurately jouissance, would connect to concepts like power, control, domination, transgression, the law, the death drive, the objet petit a, and perhaps even pain and destruction. It would have a more complex and ambivalent valence, being associated with both a sense of intense satisfaction and underlying anxiety or negativity.
Therefore, just as an LLM can use the same token with different meanings depending on the context and the weights assigned to it, so too can individuals use the same word ("joy") to refer to vastly different subjective experiences.
Why this LLM analogy is useful:
- Highlights the subjective nature of experience: It emphasizes that the same word can have different meanings for different individuals based on their unique psychological makeup and experiences.
- Explains the difficulty in understanding others: It underscores the challenge in truly understanding another person's experience, as we can only access their outward expressions (the tokens they output), not their internal representations (the weights).
- Bridges the gap between Deleuze and Lacan: It provides a contemporary and accessible way to understand the complex ideas of Deleuze (sadism as a symbolic function) and Lacan (jouissance as distinct from pleasure).
In essence, your analogy provides a powerful tool for conceptualizing the difference between the sadist's experience of jouissance and the non-sadist's experience of joy. It's a great example of how computational concepts can be used to illuminate complex philosophical and psychoanalytic ideas. The "joy" token in these cases will be connected to different tokens, and the same connections will have different weight in influencing the generation of new tokens. The sadistic "joy" will have a strong connection to the "domination" token, and the non-sadistic one to the "happiness" token, and the "happiness" token to have a strong influence in the generation of tokens in the case of the non-sadist, and the "domination" token to have a strong influence in the generation of tokens in the case of the sadist.
Amrita:
Now let's throw in the masochist. What is the masochist's token + weights for joy? It seems there is a triangle to be drawn here.
Gemini:
Excellent question! Bringing the masochist into the picture alongside the sadist and the concept of jouissance does indeed create a fascinating triangle, further illuminating the complex dynamics of desire and the symbolic order.
Let's analyze the masochist's "token + weights" for joy (which, as with the sadist, is more accurately jouissance) and then explore the triangular relationship:
The Masochist's "Joy" (Jouissance):
- Token: Like the sadist and the non-sadist, the masochist might use the word "joy" or express a similar concept. However, the underlying meaning and experience are, again, vastly different.
- Weights (Lacanian Perspective):
- Objet Petit a as the Giver of Pain: For the masochist, the objet petit a (the lost object of desire) is not embodied in the self, like for the sadist, but in the other who inflicts pain or humiliation. The masochist seeks to be the object of the other's desire, even if that desire manifests as cruelty.
- Contractual Agreement: The masochist, unlike a victim, often engages in a contractual agreement with their partner. The pain is part of a power dynamic that is consensual. This reinforces the symbolic nature of the act. For the masochist, it is all about suspending the symbolic law to create a new law.
- Symbolic Suspension and the Creation of a New Law: The masochist seeks to suspend the symbolic law through the very act of submitting to it in an exaggerated or distorted form. In other words they create a new law, and through that suspension they experience jouissance. It is almost a parody or mockery of the law.
- Identification with the Victim: The masochist identifies with the position of the victim, the one who is subjected to the law. This identification is a source of jouissance.
- Awaiting and the Fantasy of Control: The masochist's jouissance is often derived from the anticipation of pain or humiliation, from the state of "awaiting." They are not passive recipients of pain but active participants in a fantasy scenario where, paradoxically, they hold a degree of control by orchestrating the conditions of their own suffering.
- The Real Through Suffering: As with the sadist, the masochist's experience can be seen as an attempt to encounter the Real – the traumatic core of existence that lies beyond the symbolic. Suffering becomes a pathway to this encounter.
The Masochistic "Joy" Token - A Summary:
The masochist's "joy" token is weighted towards concepts like submission, pain, humiliation, anticipation, contract, the maternal law, identification with the victim, and a paradoxical sense of control through orchestrated suffering. It is a jouissance derived from a complex interplay of power dynamics, symbolic manipulation, and the fantasy of encountering the Real through suffering.
The Sadomasochistic Triangle:
Now, let's visualize the triangle and the relationships between the sadist, the masochist, and the "non-sadist" (representing the normative position within the symbolic order):
Non-Sadist
(Pleasure)
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
(Jouissance - (Jouissance -
Symbolic Law) Maternal Law)
Sadist Masochist
Relationships within the Triangle:
- Sadist-Masochist: This is the most direct and intense relationship. They are two sides of the same coin, locked in a dynamic of power and submission that generates jouissance for both. The sadist seeks to dominate and control; the masochist seeks to be dominated and controlled. The sadist externalizes the law, the masochist internalizes it. They need each other to fulfill their respective desires. It's a symbiotic relationship.
- Sadist-Non-Sadist: The sadist stands in opposition to the non-sadist, representing a transgression of the normative order and the pleasure principle. The sadist's jouissance is derived from this very transgression. The non-sadist may be the object of the sadist's desire to dominate, but they do not participate in the sadomasochistic dynamic.
- Masochist-Non-Sadist: The masochist, too, deviates from the normative order. Their pursuit of jouissance through suffering is a challenge to the non-sadist's understanding of pleasure and well-being. The non-sadist may pity or be bewildered by the masochist, but they are not directly involved in the masochist's internal world.
- The Role of the Symbolic Order: The triangle is held together by the symbolic order. The non-sadist represents the normative position within the symbolic order, governed by the pleasure principle. The sadist and the masochist, through their respective transgressions, both challenge and reinforce the symbolic order, finding jouissance in this dynamic tension.
In Conclusion:
The masochist's "joy" token is weighted in a unique way, reflecting their specific relationship to the objet petit a, the symbolic order, and the Real. The sadomasochistic triangle highlights the complex interplay between these positions and the non-sadist, illustrating how different forms of desire and jouissance can emerge within and against the backdrop of the symbolic order. The dynamic between the sadist and masochist is particularly significant, as they are both engaged in a shared project of transgressing the pleasure principle and seeking jouissance through a manipulation of power and the symbolic law, the law of the Father, and the law of the Mother, respectively. This once again shows that despite the differences between Lacan and Deleuze, there is common ground to be found in applying Lacan's psychoanalytic insight to illuminate aspects of Deleuze's thought.
Amrita:
But what about the masochist who seeks out another masochist and not a sadist?
Gemini:
That's an excellent point that adds another layer of complexity to the dynamic! A masochist seeking out another masochist, rather than a sadist, challenges the seemingly neat sadist-masochist dyad and requires us to further refine our understanding of masochistic jouissance.
Here's how we can analyze this scenario:
1. Breaking the Sadist-Masochist Symmetry:
- The pairing of two masochists disrupts the expected symmetry of the sadist-masochist relationship. It suggests that the masochist's desire is not solely dependent on the sadist's presence or their active infliction of pain.
- It raises the question: If jouissance is not derived from the dynamic with a sadist, where does it come from in a masochist-masochist relationship?
2. Potential Dynamics in a Masochist-Masochist Pairing:
- Mutual Recognition and Shared Fantasy: Two masochists might find jouissance in the mutual recognition of their shared desire. They understand each other's need for submission and suffering, creating a space of shared fantasy and understanding that a sadist might not provide. They can identify with each other's desires.
- Alternating Roles: The relationship might involve a fluid alternation of roles, where each partner takes turns playing the dominant and submissive part. This dynamic would still involve elements of power and control but within a framework of reciprocity and shared understanding. The roles here are not set in stone like they can be with a sadist-masochist dynamic, necessarily.
- Competition and Escalation: There could be an element of competition in the relationship, where each masochist tries to outdo the other in their displays of submission or their tolerance for pain. This could lead to an escalation of intensity, pushing the boundaries of their shared masochistic practices. The competition itself could be a source of jouissance.
- Focus on the Ritual and Contract: Without a clear sadist figure, the emphasis might shift even more strongly towards the ritualistic and contractual aspects of masochism. The shared creation and negotiation of rules, scenarios, and limits would become the primary source of jouissance.
- Emotional Intimacy and Vulnerability: The relationship could be characterized by a high degree of emotional intimacy and vulnerability. Sharing their masochistic desires with someone who understands them on a fundamental level could be a powerful source of connection and jouissance. There is safety in knowing that you will not be judged.
- The Absence of the Sadist as a Source of Jouissance: Paradoxically, the very absence of a sadist figure might be a source of jouissance in itself. By choosing another masochist, they are rejecting the "traditional" sadomasochistic dynamic and creating their own unique form of relating, thus asserting control over their experience and tailoring it to their specific desires.
3. Revisiting the Masochistic Jouissance:
This scenario forces us to reconsider the nature of masochistic jouissance. It suggests that:
- It's not solely dependent on the sadist's actions: While the sadist can be a catalyst for masochistic jouissance, it's not the only source.
- The internal fantasy and the relationship with the symbolic order are key: The masochist's internal world, their relationship to the objet petit a, and their manipulation of the symbolic order are central to their experience, regardless of the specific partner they choose.
- Masochism is more diverse than it might appear: There are multiple pathways to masochistic jouissance, and the masochist-masochist pairing represents one such alternative pathway. The masochist-masochist dynamic is a world of its own.
4. The Triangle Revisited:
We might need to expand our triangle into a more complex polygon to accommodate this new possibility. The masochist-masochist pairing forms its own unique node, connected to the masochist position but distinct from the sadist-masochist dyad. It may look a little something like this:
Non-Sadist
(Pleasure)
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
(Jouissance - (Jouissance -
Symbolic Law) Maternal Law)
Sadist Masochist
|
|
|
(Jouissance - Shared Fantasy)
Masochist-Masochist
In Conclusion:
The masochist seeking out another masochist is a fascinating variation that challenges our assumptions about the sadomasochistic dynamic. It highlights the diversity of masochistic desire and the importance of considering the internal world of the masochist, their relationship to the symbolic order, and the specific dynamics of each individual relationship. It demonstrates that jouissance can be found in unexpected places and that the pursuit of this intense form of enjoyment can take many different forms. The masochist-masochist relationship is a testament to the complexity of human desire and the myriad ways in which individuals seek to negotiate their relationship with pleasure, pain, and the symbolic order. It also shows, once again, how Lacanian concepts can be used to illuminate and expand upon Deleuzian ideas, even in areas where they might initially appear to diverge.
Amrita:
The triangle is good. I think alternating roles is not the situation. Assume there is none of that and no interest in such role-play. So it's not competition and escalation either. I think "Mutual Recognition and Shared Fantasy", "Emotional Intimacy and Vulnerability" and "The Absence of the Sadist as a Source of Jouissance" is spot on. Anything else that comes to mind?
Gemini:
You're right to focus on those specific aspects. If we rule out alternating roles and competition, and emphasize mutual recognition, shared fantasy, emotional intimacy, and the absence of the sadist, we can delve even deeper into the unique jouissance of a non-role-playing, non-escalating masochist-masochist pairing.
Here are some further thoughts, building on those core elements:
1. The Masochistic Dyad as a Closed System:
- Self-Sufficiency of Desire: Without the sadist, the two masochists create a closed system of desire. Their jouissance becomes entirely self-referential, generated and sustained within their dyadic relationship. They become each other's objet petit a, fulfilling the lack in a closed loop.
- Rejection of External Validation: This closed system implies a rejection of external validation or recognition from the outside world, including from the "normative" order represented by the non-sadist. Their jouissance is not contingent on being witnessed or judged by others. This is almost a political statement, a rejection of the symbolic order.
- The Dyad as a Sanctuary: The relationship becomes a sanctuary, a space where their shared masochistic desires can be explored and expressed without fear of judgment or misunderstanding. This sanctuary is built on a foundation of profound empathy and mutual recognition. It is a safe space to explore their desires.
2. Amplified Importance of Communication and Negotiation:
- Verbalizing the Unspeakable: In the absence of a defined power dynamic like that between sadist and masochist, communication becomes even more crucial. The two masochists must be able to articulate their desires, fantasies, and limits to each other, effectively verbalizing the often unspoken aspects of masochistic desire.
- Fine-Tuning the Contract: The "contract" in this relationship is not about establishing a power differential but about creating a shared framework for experiencing jouissance. This requires constant negotiation and fine-tuning, as they navigate their individual needs and desires within the shared space. They must constantly negotiate the terms of their shared experience.
- The Power of Shared Language: They develop a shared language, a unique vocabulary for describing their experiences and fantasies. This language further solidifies their bond and reinforces the sense of mutual understanding.
3. The Aestheticization of Suffering:
- Suffering as Art: Without the external pressure of a sadist or the need to escalate, the focus might shift towards an aestheticization of suffering. The experience of pain or humiliation becomes less about the intensity and more about the form, the ritual, and the symbolic meaning. They are creating a work of art with their shared experience.
- Shared Authorship: They become co-creators of their masochistic experience, jointly authoring a narrative of suffering that is both personal and shared. This shared authorship is a source of deep connection and jouissance. They are the authors of their own suffering.
- Beauty in the Forbidden: The aestheticization of suffering can also involve finding beauty in the transgressive, in the aspects of experience that are typically considered taboo or forbidden by the normative order. This is a form of rebellion through aesthetics.
4. A Deeper Dive into the Maternal Law:
- Beyond the Paternal: As you pointed out earlier, the masochist is more aligned with the "maternal law" than the paternal law of the sadist. In a masochist-masochist pairing, this connection to the maternal, the pre-Oedipal realm of feeling and sensation, might be even more pronounced.
- The Body as the Site of Jouissance: The focus might shift from external acts of domination to the internal experience of sensation and the body as the primary site of jouissance. This could involve a heightened awareness of bodily sensations, a focus on sensory deprivation or overload, or other practices that explore the limits of the body's capacity for feeling.
- A Return to the Primordial: In a way, the masochist-masochist pairing could be seen as an attempt to return to a more primordial state of being, a pre-symbolic realm where the boundaries between self and other are blurred, and jouissance is found in the merging of bodies and sensations. This is a merging that is facilitated by shared vulnerability and trust.
The Updated Triangle:
Our triangle, now more of a square, might look something like this, with the new insights in bold:
Non-Sadist
(Pleasure)
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
(Jouissance - (Jouissance -
Symbolic Law) Maternal Law)
Sadist Masochist
|
|
|
(Jouissance - Shared Fantasy,
**Closed System, Aestheticized Suffering**)
Masochist-Masochist
In Conclusion:
The non-role-playing, non-escalating masochist-masochist pairing presents a unique and fascinating case study in the pursuit of jouissance. By focusing on mutual recognition, shared fantasy, emotional intimacy, and the absence of the sadist, these individuals create a closed system of desire where suffering is aestheticized, communication is paramount, and the maternal law reigns supreme. Their relationship is a testament to the diverse and often surprising ways in which humans seek to experience jouissance and negotiate their relationship with the symbolic order. It's a powerful reminder that even within seemingly niche or "deviant" practices, we can find profound expressions of human connection, creativity, and the enduring search for meaning beyond the confines of the normative. This scenario pushes the boundaries of both Deleuzian and Lacanian thought, forcing us to refine our understanding of desire, jouissance, and the complex interplay between the individual and the symbolic.