{"title":"MELANCHOLY:","authors":"A. Kaledin","doi":"10.12987/yale/9780300119312.003.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper attempts to construct a theoretical account of what melancholy—in a psychoanalytical and cultural sense—may mean for jurisprudence. It argues that the map of relations and displacements between the object and the subject that is associated with melancholy in different psychoanalytical approaches can be fruit-fully adopted for understanding of normativity. Based on a thorough re-reading of Freud’s Trauer und Melancholie ( Mourning and Melancholy ), it suggests that there is an irremovable component of melancholy contained in the primordial act of separation of normativity from non-normative reality. This interpretation is confronted with Kelsen’s Theory of Pure Law in order to analyse in which respect the momentum of self-sufficiency within normativity entails structures of melancholy. Kelsen’s concept of ‘effectiveness’ is proposed as a key link which explains how melancholic withdrawal allows the law to interact with reality. Then the paper discusses Agamben’s theory of applicability and of the state of exception to demonstrate the law’s melancholic trap. Finally, the paper draws on Lacanian and post-Lacanian approaches to melancholy in order to investigate how melancholic momentum is inherent in the very structure of the law’s validity.","PeriodicalId":185734,"journal":{"name":"Modernity, Melancholy and Predestination","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modernity, Melancholy and Predestination","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300119312.003.0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The paper attempts to construct a theoretical account of what melancholy—in a psychoanalytical and cultural sense—may mean for jurisprudence. It argues that the map of relations and displacements between the object and the subject that is associated with melancholy in different psychoanalytical approaches can be fruit-fully adopted for understanding of normativity. Based on a thorough re-reading of Freud’s Trauer und Melancholie ( Mourning and Melancholy ), it suggests that there is an irremovable component of melancholy contained in the primordial act of separation of normativity from non-normative reality. This interpretation is confronted with Kelsen’s Theory of Pure Law in order to analyse in which respect the momentum of self-sufficiency within normativity entails structures of melancholy. Kelsen’s concept of ‘effectiveness’ is proposed as a key link which explains how melancholic withdrawal allows the law to interact with reality. Then the paper discusses Agamben’s theory of applicability and of the state of exception to demonstrate the law’s melancholic trap. Finally, the paper draws on Lacanian and post-Lacanian approaches to melancholy in order to investigate how melancholic momentum is inherent in the very structure of the law’s validity.
本文试图从精神分析和文化意义上构建一个关于忧郁症对法理学意义的理论解释。它认为客体和主体之间的关系和位移在不同的精神分析方法中与忧郁相关,可以有效地用于理解规范性。在对弗洛伊德的《哀悼与忧郁》(Trauer und Melancholie)进行全面重读的基础上,作者认为,在将规范性与非规范性现实分离的原始行为中,包含着一种不可消除的忧郁成分。这种解释与Kelsen的纯粹法则理论相冲突,以分析规范性内自给自足的势头在哪些方面需要忧郁的结构。Kelsen提出的“有效性”概念是解释忧郁的退缩如何使法律与现实相互作用的关键环节。在此基础上,对阿甘本的适用理论和例外状态理论进行了探讨,论证了该法的忧郁陷阱。最后,本文借鉴了拉康和后拉康对忧郁的研究方法,以探讨忧郁的动力是如何在法律有效性的结构中固有的。