My best laid plans to make this blog a weekly event were set aside by the visit of a former student, now a dear friend, who was in town to see his ageing father. Time was not lost, however, since we had several lively discussions centred on the questions I posed in the previous blog. 

Tom's doctoral dissertation dealt in part with the ways in which First Nations have been dealing with the impact of North American culture on their traditional way of living in the land. We tried to thrash out the interactions between native culture -- all the various aspects of family relationships, role models, entertainment, rhythms of seasonal activities-- and the importation of mechanical devices such as guns, snowmobiles, radio, and planes. We differed in our approach: Tom preferred to think of the First Nations' world view as "culture"; I am leaning towards the cluster of ideas grouped under "ideology".

Lacan rarely used the term "ideology".  Instead, focussing on the preeminence of language, he developed his thinking according to the three orders: Symbolic, Imaginary, and Real. The Symbolic deals with language. Beyond that simple statement lies: the language that the child learns in the context first of the family -- the "mother tongue" in common parlance, harking back to a time when children were raised in the early years by a mother (or mother substitute in wealthy families) -- then the extended family, early schooling, and so on up to the general level of the nation. Signifiers are grouped by sense into sentences, then into more complex conscious constructions. However, at some stage, links beyond sense are formed as the unconscious comes into play. Firstly, one signifier becomes "lost" -- it simply disappears from conscious recall. It will however play a role in organizing, beyond conscious control, other signifiers. Among these other signifiers, some will act as "quilting points", drawing some signifiers into chains or webs. When in early sessions the analysand is asked to freely associate, avoiding where possible conscious choice of words, the analyst is listening for those signifying chains, in order to determine the "quilting points", and eventually the "lost" signifier. This is a rather crude description of the Symbolic order.

The Imaginary is more difficult to describe. It includes all the visual images that surround the child and then the adult, which are absorbed without conscious effort. They include the obvious: buildings, advertisements both large and small, photographs (especially family photos that place the subject in the nexus of family relations), statues, monuments, and so on. And then the tricky notion of ideology. Most of ideology rarely receives conscious expression until it is analysed from a radically different point of view. Class consciousness, which may be dimly perceived by the subject through an awareness of the quality of clothing, accent, topics of conversation, cultural references, manners, and so on; religion or general world view, including race; political views. In a separate but related category I am placing work relations, and especially the relationship between worker and the means of production. My reasons for separating this aspect is because as the means for production remained stable over a fairly long period of time, there was a direct and sustained impact somatically. (I will deal with this in more detail later.)

The third order, the Real, is not to be confused with reality. Lacan came to identify the real with the "lost" object mentioned above, giving it the "title" (not the name) objet a. No signifier can be attached to it, but it has an enormous impact on the subject. If a metaphor might help, it is like a black hole -- nothing escapes from it, because its magnetic force is so great. The subject experiences it as the object cause of their desire, something they constantly strive to reach, but from which their drive is diverted.

Next time I want to focus more on the Imaginary, since I think that it is there that I will find some answers to my initial questions.