“Another dream about you – ..I ..had forgotten your address, not only the street but also the city.. ..I hoped to engage the entire government in my search for you. ..Don’t let this sway you against me. It’s only in dreams that I am so sinister.” – source: Alterities – FRANZ KAFKA


Kafka was embracing the nothingness at the core of things, the void from which creativity springs. Kafka is Zizek’s prime example for working and writing despite the uncertainty at the heart of things. Kafka said, I must embrace the nothing. By this he did not mean suicide or self-harm, but the idea of doing nothing in order to be able to do anything at all. – ANDRE VANTINO

Zizek lives the same idea when he says that he lives purely in literature, that he only does what he likes. By this he takes away all the superego pressure and is able to endure the existential void of being alive. He then can live the drive as a death drive that is no longer a selfdestructive drive but one in tune with the Real, a drive no longer repressing the void of the Real. – ANDRE VANTINO

Something can be too realistic to endure, but what makes it Real is not that. What makes it real is its undeniability, its irreversibility, like the irreversibiility of an accident or of realising that one is exposed to a threat. In the same sense nature is real, because it can kill us if we don’t think ahead or respect its dangers. – ANDRE VANTINO

“The obsessive masculine subject is constantly locking the doors of the symbolic order through which he might slip [away from it], while the feminine is constantly knocking on the doors.. This is why the masculine cannot respond to the feminine – she is the reminder of the open door.” – Turning Law Inside-Out – JEANNE SCHROEDER

“the so-called ‘irrational guilt’ of the Kafkaesque hero bears witness to the fact that, somewhere, he compromised his desire.” – the more we endeavour to exculpate ourselves by sacrificing the pathological object which induced us to betray our desire, the greater is our guilt. ..The most dangerous form of betrayal is not a direct yielding to our ‘pathological’ impulses. ..The most dangerous form of betrayal [of my desire is] a reference to some kind of Good, as when I shirk my duty with the excuse that I might thereby impair the Good (my own or the common [Good])