"The big Other designates radical alterity, an other-ness which transcends the illusory otherness of the imaginary because it cannot be assimilated through identification. Lacan equates this radical alterity with language and the law, and hence the big Other is inscribed in the order of the symbolic. Indeed, the big Other is the symbolic insofar as it is particularized for each subject. The Other is thus both another subject, in his radical alterity and unassimilable uniqueness, and also the symbolic order which mediates the relationship with that other subject."
"here are, however, many features of the “big Other” which get lost in this simplified notion. For Lacan, the reality of human beings is constituted by three mutually entangled levels: the Symbolic, the Imaginary, and the Real. This triad can be nicely illustrated by the game of chess. The rules one has to follow in order to play it are its symbolic dimension: from the purely formal symbolic standpoint, “knight” is defined only by the moves this figure can make. This level is clearly different from the imaginary one, namely the way different pieces are shaped and characterized by their names (king, queen, knight), and it is easy to envision a game with the same rules, but with a different imaginary, in which this figure would be called “messenger” or “runner” or whatever. Finally, real is the entire complex set of contingent circumstances which affect the course of the game: the intelligence of the players, the unpredictable intrusions that may disconcert one of the players or directly cut the game short."
I think a lot about the mirror phase when I paint. It's a perfect reflection of the self as a unified whole, until you're confronted with the inaccuracies of the art, fracturing the unified into a subject/object. It's the semiotics of "my art never turns out the way I imagine it in my head".
>>2971871
neato, enjoyed that. when i was i think 20 or so i too made a big deal about classifying human experience with levels, mine were pretty similar, i actually wrote about 10,000 words on it. but then i read a book by umberto eco called 'foucault's pendulum,' which made me realize i was just trying to project order onto something inherently disordered and thus sort of take control over my own experience.