Lacan's argument

            Jacques Lacan is a famous theorist that uses Freudian themes throughout his thinking.  In this particular blog, I will discuss Lacan’s ideas of the signifier and the signified; I will also discuss Lacan’s utilization of Freudian themes as well as metonymy and metaphor to express desires and symptoms.  To conclude this blog, I will criticize a flaw that I see in Lacan’s argument and I will suggest an idea to better construct or finalize his argument. 

            Lacan discusses the signifier and its relevance to the signified.  The equation is f(S) * (i/s).  That is to say that the function of the signifier times the identity of ones’ self, divided by the signified. It may seem like a very complex equation but I think that it is quite simple once it is broken down.  The function of the signifier is dependent on the individual perception which illustrates the significance of the signifier.  I believe that Lacan should better structure his argument to say that the function of the signifier is dependent on the individual’s perception of the signal.  Therefore, I would argue that the correct formula should be I =  s/S.  In my formula, the identity of ones’ self is equivalent to the significance of the signifier.  Therefore, the individual’s perception will determine the significance of the signal.  In my argument, I would further my argument by criticizing the idea that the significance of a signifier is not only determined by the individual perception but the environment of the signifier.  The significance of a symbol may vary based upon the location so I need to further revise my formula.  I is equivalent to M+E because I represents the identity of the individual.  The environment of an individual is a heavy influence on how they perceive things so it is important to place it in the formula.  Therefore, in the equation I = s/S, you may substitute the I for (m + e ) because it is the same exact meaning. 

            Now that I have criticized Lacan’s ideas of the signifier and significance, I will discuss his relations to Freud and his application of literary features to explain his ideas.  In his argument, Lacan states that we as humans do not know what we want.  It is a simple case of metonymy for Lacan.  People desire objects because the objects themselves project a feasible concept of desire.  Individuals seek out these objects because they believe it is what they desire when in reality they do not know.  This concept can be compared to the literary feature of metonymy because it is substituting the meaning of ones desires toward an object when in reality it is the object that creates desire.  This is compared to Freud’s ideas of dreams.  Freud argues that there are two types of content in dreams, latent and manifest.  The manifest content is the imagery that is present throughout the dream whereas latent content is the significance of the dream.  I would argue that the manifest content would be the symptom of the latent content.  I will dive into this idea in the next paragraph while identifying the literary features.

            The manifest content is influenced by the subliminal urges of the individual.  Therefore, I would argue that the manifest content can be compared to metaphor.  The metaphor that Lacan utilizes is the metaphor I want x.  This x factor shows that the individual is not complete because he desires something to make him complete.  However, as previously stated, Lacan flips this phrase and shows that it is actually “x creates a wanting I”.  Therefore the desires are lying present in the object itself.  Therefore, the manifest content of a dream is considered to be the metaphor because it is showing the symptoms of our wanting.  The literal events of the dream are Freudian slips of the desires.  The latent content is metonymy because it is hidden behind the shroud of the dream. The latent content utilizes a signifier (the manifest content) to show the signified (the desires).  Metonymy is the substituting of another thing to show the same meaning.  Lacan shows that the desires of the individual in a dream are the latent content because it is hidden behind the shroud of the manifest content.

            Lacan shows that metonymy and metaphor can be used throughout the world to represent our desires and the symptoms of our pursuit of these desires.  He utilizes Freudian themes to illustrate this idea.  Lacan’s argument of the signifier and the signified are lacking a certain element to make them concrete.  I have presented an idea to help solidify them but it may not be the only answer to the solution.