While talking, I am never merely a "small other" (individual) interacting with other "small others": the big Other must always be there. This inherent reference to the Other is the topic of a low-grade joke about a poor peasant who, having suffered a shipwreck, finds himself marooned on an island with, say, Cindy Crawford. After having sex with him, she asks how it was; his answer is, great, but he still has one small request to complete his satisfaction -- could she dress herself up as his best friend, put on trousers and paint a mustache on her face? He reassures her that he is not a secret pervert, as she will see once she has granted the request. When she does, he approaches her, gives her a dig in the ribs, and tells her with the leer of male complicity: "You know what happened to me? I just had sex with Cindy Crawford!" This Third, which is always present as the witness, belies the possibility of an unspoiled innocent private pleasure. Sex is always minimally exhibitionist and relies on another's gaze.
-- Slavoj Zizek: How to Read Lacan
Interesting, gives reason to the need for the code of the gentleman/chivalry, the never telling aspect, a rule almost all men break at some point. Sex for sex's sake, or at least I think in the conquest aspect begs for the need for reportage. However, at some point this should be lost should it not? I get that the example is about more than just sex, but though we do have need to be recognized for our exploits, can the big "other" also create perversion for those times when we wish to hide qualities of ourselves? Sorry I could just be rambling here.
ReplyDelete