Floating Signifier

The present paper seeks to closely read Richard Foreman’s My Head Was a Sledgehammer in terms of Ernesto Laclau’s Post-Marxist approach to the analysis of the subject with special reference to his concept of the empty signifier. The emergence of Laclau’s Post-Marxism dates back to the mid-80s de facto with his detachment from reductionist Marxism, which at the same time, led to the reformulation of his discourse theory. In practice, Laclau’s discursive-analytical notion of ideology and hegemony eventuated in the deconstruction of key concepts including discourse, floating signifier, an empty signifier, antagonism, and the category of the subject. Correspondingly, Foreman in his ontological-hysteric drama, with no premeditated narrative strategy, prevents his reader from reaching premature conclusions and meanings. There is thus a confluence between Laclau's critical concepts and the tenets of Foreman's ontological-hysteric theatre to represent the split character of the identity of the subject in the discursively constructed structures.

The concept of “hegemony” in political thought has different philosophical-theoretical foundations and semantic dimensions. This concept should not be perceived merely and necessarily in a way which discloses another ways of perception. This concept should not be perceived in a way which traps us in the abyss of metaphysical disclosure. There is not one way of perception which overcomes other alternatives. Therefore, this article deconstructs this tendency to “the One” and lightens the way of perceiving this concept in “one of the possible ways”. Hence, this article concentrates on the political thought of Ernesto Laclau and hereby probes the philosophical foundations of this concept in the philosophy of Jacques Derrida and reveals the signifiers which construct the articulation of this concept as its semantic dimensions. As we will see, the mentioned signifiers are articulated among a master signifier or a nodal point which is contingency of hegemony. “The undecidable” and “the untouchable” are two Derridean concepts which are the philosophical foundations of these signifiers. However, this contingency does not mean inaccuracy or instability or lack of an ontological basis. Therefore, the contingency, undecidability and untouchability of hegemony should be understood as lack of an "ultimate foundation" and not "the foundation". Contingency and lack of an ultimate foundation have relationship with the aporetic nature of hegemony and its presence in the absence and its absence in the presence.

In his book Différence et répétition (1968), Gilles Deleuze elaborates an essential concept for the theory of the image: the simulacrum. The plane of the simulacra is characterised by the co-extensiveness of images, which are individuated by their own difference, and not by their placement in an ontological hierarchy, platonic at its origin; and that has as its poles true and false, being and not-being, fair or unfair.
In current times, the concept of simulacrum seems to be one of the most efficient tools to overcome a further dichotomy: a dichotomy - old and based on past ontologies -, between virtual and real, and therefore, between virtual images and real images.
Firstly, the present work intends to apply the notion of simulacrum to the study of digitally-based images to make evident their belonging to the same plane of any other kind of images, namely the material ones.
Secondly, the notion of simulacrum is applied to the screen, to make evident how it has been mistakenly included in the plane of the images. Historically, the consequence of this mistake has been inauthentic experiences, and the triggering of processes of desubjectification.
After verifying the mentioned hypotheses and removing the screen from a potential ontology of the image, the screen is then correctly relocated in a semiotic and mediologic horizon. In this context, C.S. Peirce’s notions of icon and symbol, and Bolter-Grusin’s polarities of hypermediation and transparency are applied to demonstrate how the evolution of the screen in the last thirty years has culminated in a strong mannerist phase in the recent past, especially since the touch-screen technology has lead to a blurring of the limits between screen and interface. However, it is relevant to notice that in more recent releases of contemporary interfaces a return to a symbolic and hypermediated regime can be observed.
As a conclusion, the main aim of this article is to restore, in the light of the notion of simulacrum, a clear and fair relation between image and screen, so that from both of them an authentic and subjectifying experience can be drawn.

(Book chapter) Galati, Gabriela (2016) Significante fluttuante, inconscio tecnologico e soggetto digitale. In: Bianchi, A. and Leghissa, G. eds. Mondi altri. Processi di soggettivazione nell’era postumana a partire dal pensiero di Antonio Caronia. Milano: Mimesis, pp. 195-211.

This article contrasts historical and contemporary visualizations of the notions of homeland, other and self that have been applied in the Zionist/Israeli project to colonize Palestine and displace its indigenous inhabitants. It connects theories of visual sociology and cultural studies with (1) various Israeli and Palestinian political discourses of belonging (nationhood) while also (2) providing the reader with clear-cut, material examples of both exclusivist Zionist technologies of power and subaltern Palestinian techniques of counter-discourse, ultimately retracing historical continuity and unveiling resonant dialectics of modern nationalist doctrine across the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first centuries throughout both Europe and the Middle East. By critically decoding the altering semiotics of a set of politicized posters, it highlights the ongoing use of abstract power (cultural hegemony) within Israeli strategies of occupation and siege while simultaneously disclosing innovative Palestinian forms of visual resistance that advocate ‘existence’ in an asymmetric configuration of ‘conflict’. In order to interpret the selected visuals fully, we need to explore the interwoven ‘migration’ of populations, ideas, and politics through both time and space.

This article examines the 2008 World Health Organization/Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS controversy through original reports and media coverage. Analysis reveals that discourse rhetorically exonerates heterosexuals from HIV/AIDS while reifying homophobic and morally righteous ideology about HIV/AIDS and homosexuality. Discourses of “fraudulent science,” “heterosexual absence,” and reverse victimization destabilize meaning of HIV/AIDS and heterosexuality. “AIDS,” “heterosexuality,” and even victimhood and minority status were destabilized and resignified in a rhetoric that benefited from its status as science even as it rendered past science suspect as ideological.

The significance of negativity as a way for conceptual determination in Hegelian dialectics is well-known. Authors such as Gilles Deleuze have underlined, on the other hand, how this notion of (dialectical) negativity is incompatible with a Nietzschean perspective of interplay of forces and affirmation of difference. There is here a real distension (rather than a distinction) — a fissure enabling one to think what connects and inevitably dissociates rationalistic and deconstructive philosophical perspectives on language. In this fissure it is constituted, for instance, the space of dispersion of the so-called Foucaultian statements (énoncés), the focus of his archeology. This essay addresses the context in which the Foucaultian notion of énoncé emerges. It does so by criticizing first the dialectical notion of negativity. It then considers some semiological notions used by post-structuralist authors, such as plethora of signs and floating signifier. In a third moment, examples are taken from a literary work, Vitor Ramil’s Pequod, in order to illustrate more concretely our discussion.