Scan barcode
whackboy's review against another edition
4.0
preemptive review (as of page 100 or so): a great exploration of lynch's work from a particular psychological/philosophical perspective. chief observation: desire vs. fantasy. desire for the impossible and fantasy achieving the impossible. interesting reading thus far. i'll probably edit this when i've completed the book.
done. this was an immensely enjoyable read for me. it’s not for everyone, that’s for sure. if you like in-depth analysis and don’t mind spoilers for the films being dissected this MIGHT be for you. there is a stress on the differences and prioritizations of desire and fantasy as to how it structures one’s reality. it is informed by freud, lacan, hegel, heidegger, kant, and more. I would recommend that you watch all of david lynch’s films prior to reading this book as it will make the reading that much more enlightening/interesting. this is recommended reading for the die-hard david lynch aficionado and/or the film theorist with a psychoanalytical bent.
done. this was an immensely enjoyable read for me. it’s not for everyone, that’s for sure. if you like in-depth analysis and don’t mind spoilers for the films being dissected this MIGHT be for you. there is a stress on the differences and prioritizations of desire and fantasy as to how it structures one’s reality. it is informed by freud, lacan, hegel, heidegger, kant, and more. I would recommend that you watch all of david lynch’s films prior to reading this book as it will make the reading that much more enlightening/interesting. this is recommended reading for the die-hard david lynch aficionado and/or the film theorist with a psychoanalytical bent.
colin_cox's review against another edition
5.0
Does fantasy have an ethical dimension? This is the question Todd McGowan explores in The impossible David Lynch, a psychoanalytic study of David Lynch and his film oeuvre.
In The impossible David Lynch, McGowan challenges his reader to reconsider the ways identification functions in film. McGowan writes, “The great achievement of his [Lynch] films lies in their ability to break down the distance between spectator and screen. Rather than permitting the imaginary proximity that dominates in mainstream cinema, Lynch’s films implicate the spectator in their very structure. The structure of a Lynch film alters the cinematic viewing situation itself and deprives the spectator of the underlying sense of remaining at a safe distance from what takes place on the screen” (2). Here, McGowan challenges conventional interpretations of film, especially those interpretations that prize an over-investment in an incorrect understanding of identification. Despite what we might think, the latest Avengers movie, for example, fails to cultivate the sense of identification or proximity a Lynch film does even if it attempts to convince us otherwise. According to McGowan, most Hollywood films disavow what a Lynch film avows. Conventional cinematic fantasy isn’t fantasy at all. If anything, it’s an “ideological supplement” that hides the trauma of the symbolic order. By contrast, Lynch’s films force audiences to confront the trauma of the symbolic order. According to McGowan, “If we escape at all in Lynch’s cinema, we escape into the trauma that remains hidden but nonetheless structures the outside world” (24). We, therefore, escape into the trauma that defines us as subjects.
Therefore, instead of obscuring either our desire or the Other’s desire, fantasy in Lynch’s films lays bare those desires. This, I would argue, is one way to comprehend the ethical dimensions of fantasy in The impossible David Lynch. Fantasy constructs the conditions for desire to emerge, or as McGowan argues, “Desire does not exist prior to fantasy but emerges out of it” (18). This relationship is pertinent when thinking about Lynch because “He uses filmic fantasy to present desire in its immediacy and thereby allows us to see precisely how desire and fantasy interrelate” (18).
But it is also worth contemplating what is “impossible” about Lynch’s films. McGowan pivots from something Lacan says in Seminar XVII regarding the symbolic order and its inability to totalize our existence. McGowan writes, “Within every symbolic order, the real occupies the place of what cannot be thought or imagined—the position of the impossible. The real is not reality but the failure of the symbolic order to explain everything” (25). Thus, to watch a David Lynch film is to expose oneself to the failures of ideology, or as McGowan writes, “They [Lynch’s films] thus provide a fundamental challenge to the ruling symbolic structure, forcing us to see possibilities where we are used to see impossibilities” (25). The dominant symbolic order fights to persuade us of the impossibility of the impossible, but this is precisely what Lynch’s cinematic fantasy reveals.
By creating the conditions for the possibility of the impossible (i.e., the disruption of the symbolic order), fantasy asserts the totality of its ethical dimension. McGowan writes, “Fantasy allows us to discover our freedom only when we cease regarding it as an escape from our reality and begin to see it as more real than our reality” (223). The relationship between fantasy and desire is clearly visible once we take fantasy at its word, once we see the power of the “fantastic beyond,” once we play fantasy out.
Like all of McGowan’s books, The impossible David Lynch is lucid and readable. He expounds upon complex terminology in ways that teach readers about psychoanalysis while also developing an argument that pivot from psychoanalysis. Reading the entire book is not necessary, especially for readers unfamiliar with or disinterested in Lynch. With that said, the introduction and conclusion are worth reading and returning to. From what I gather, The impossible David Lynch is one of the few book-length, academic treatments of Lynch, and to see it done from a psychoanalytical persuasion was extremely satisfying.
In The impossible David Lynch, McGowan challenges his reader to reconsider the ways identification functions in film. McGowan writes, “The great achievement of his [Lynch] films lies in their ability to break down the distance between spectator and screen. Rather than permitting the imaginary proximity that dominates in mainstream cinema, Lynch’s films implicate the spectator in their very structure. The structure of a Lynch film alters the cinematic viewing situation itself and deprives the spectator of the underlying sense of remaining at a safe distance from what takes place on the screen” (2). Here, McGowan challenges conventional interpretations of film, especially those interpretations that prize an over-investment in an incorrect understanding of identification. Despite what we might think, the latest Avengers movie, for example, fails to cultivate the sense of identification or proximity a Lynch film does even if it attempts to convince us otherwise. According to McGowan, most Hollywood films disavow what a Lynch film avows. Conventional cinematic fantasy isn’t fantasy at all. If anything, it’s an “ideological supplement” that hides the trauma of the symbolic order. By contrast, Lynch’s films force audiences to confront the trauma of the symbolic order. According to McGowan, “If we escape at all in Lynch’s cinema, we escape into the trauma that remains hidden but nonetheless structures the outside world” (24). We, therefore, escape into the trauma that defines us as subjects.
Therefore, instead of obscuring either our desire or the Other’s desire, fantasy in Lynch’s films lays bare those desires. This, I would argue, is one way to comprehend the ethical dimensions of fantasy in The impossible David Lynch. Fantasy constructs the conditions for desire to emerge, or as McGowan argues, “Desire does not exist prior to fantasy but emerges out of it” (18). This relationship is pertinent when thinking about Lynch because “He uses filmic fantasy to present desire in its immediacy and thereby allows us to see precisely how desire and fantasy interrelate” (18).
But it is also worth contemplating what is “impossible” about Lynch’s films. McGowan pivots from something Lacan says in Seminar XVII regarding the symbolic order and its inability to totalize our existence. McGowan writes, “Within every symbolic order, the real occupies the place of what cannot be thought or imagined—the position of the impossible. The real is not reality but the failure of the symbolic order to explain everything” (25). Thus, to watch a David Lynch film is to expose oneself to the failures of ideology, or as McGowan writes, “They [Lynch’s films] thus provide a fundamental challenge to the ruling symbolic structure, forcing us to see possibilities where we are used to see impossibilities” (25). The dominant symbolic order fights to persuade us of the impossibility of the impossible, but this is precisely what Lynch’s cinematic fantasy reveals.
By creating the conditions for the possibility of the impossible (i.e., the disruption of the symbolic order), fantasy asserts the totality of its ethical dimension. McGowan writes, “Fantasy allows us to discover our freedom only when we cease regarding it as an escape from our reality and begin to see it as more real than our reality” (223). The relationship between fantasy and desire is clearly visible once we take fantasy at its word, once we see the power of the “fantastic beyond,” once we play fantasy out.
Like all of McGowan’s books, The impossible David Lynch is lucid and readable. He expounds upon complex terminology in ways that teach readers about psychoanalysis while also developing an argument that pivot from psychoanalysis. Reading the entire book is not necessary, especially for readers unfamiliar with or disinterested in Lynch. With that said, the introduction and conclusion are worth reading and returning to. From what I gather, The impossible David Lynch is one of the few book-length, academic treatments of Lynch, and to see it done from a psychoanalytical persuasion was extremely satisfying.
skttrbrn's review against another edition
5.0
This is an incredible book, or should I say, an incredible tool - for both making sense of Lynch's films and deploying Lacanian theory in a comprehensible way. Although the writing is quite dense, it's by no means a boring book. I took quite a while getting through it, but my pace accelerated as my understanding grew.
On the whole, The Impossible David Lynch is a well written and researched book, drawing from the likes of Adorno, Chion and Zizek, and addressing Marxist and feminist perspectives.
My only complaint, if I could call it one, is that the book was published prior to the release of Inland Empire. I'd love to see an updated edition with an essay on this final film.
If you've ever been perplexed by Lynch's films or are looking to understand Lacan, this is the book you need.
On the whole, The Impossible David Lynch is a well written and researched book, drawing from the likes of Adorno, Chion and Zizek, and addressing Marxist and feminist perspectives.
My only complaint, if I could call it one, is that the book was published prior to the release of Inland Empire. I'd love to see an updated edition with an essay on this final film.
If you've ever been perplexed by Lynch's films or are looking to understand Lacan, this is the book you need.
More...