The language is dense and tough to get into but after a while oh so nurturing. I probably only understand half of it as a non-academic, but here’s my current interpretation so far:
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
The abject defines boundaries. Identities, religions, societies are built around what horrifies and repulses us. It is neither fully an object nor a subject but something that disrupts order (bodily fluids, death, crime without a conscience, etc.).
Yet the ‘abject’ also fascinates us and at times offers a ‘jouissance’. It reminds us of our fragility, and by rejecting the ‘abject’ we stabilize our world and reinforce structures that allow us to function.
My explanation barely scratches the depth of her analysis; biology, psychology, history, literature, the abject resides in all of it. Having a 300 character limit also doesn’t exactly help, but perhaps I’ve made you a bit curious.
Comments