A critical analysis of Diana Fuss's Essentially Speaking: Feminism, Nature, and Difference and Elizabeth Grosz's Sexual Subversions: Three French Feminists.

This paper examines some French feminist uses of Lacanian psychoanalysis. I focus on two Lacanian influenced accounts of psychological oppression, the first by Luce Irigaray and the second by Julia Kristeva, and I argue that these accounts fail to meet criteria for an adequate political psychology.

The psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan (1901–81) left a legacy of thought that increasingly commands the attention of American scholars and critics. His provocative essays and wide-ranging seminars and lectures attempted, with remarkable success, to bridge the supposedly unbridgeable gap between the humanities and modern science. For some time his influence has shadowed the theoretical work being done in philosophy, psychology, anthropology, women’s studies, and literature. In Lacan and the Human Sciences eight eminent scholars examine how ideas entered these fields, how well (...) they were understood and adapted, and what fruit they have produced. The editor, Alexandre Leupin, whose introduction reveals the underpinnings of Lacan’s thought, views the book as a blueprint for overcoming the present impasses of scientific and humanistic discourses and their imaginary contradictions. The essays demonstrate the interdisciplinary nature of Lacanian psychoanalysis. The relevance of his work to epistemology is considered by Jean-Claude Milner, François Regnault, and Ellie Ragland-Sullivan; to anthropology, by Jean-Joseph Goux; to feminist studies, by Jane Gallop; and to literature, by Dennis Porter and Denis Hollier. The result is a book that points to a new and more pertinent way of dealing, on one hand, with the problems of epistemology and, on the other, with the question of literary theory in the humanities. (shrink)