08.12.2012 Views

Edited by Moe Meyer - Get a Free Blog

Edited by Moe Meyer - Get a Free Blog

Edited by Moe Meyer - Get a Free Blog

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

56 THE POLITICS AND POETICS OF CAMP<br />

is effaced. It becomes fully anaclitic and fully present in every subject from<br />

birth.<br />

This reconfiguration of the narcissistic cathexis as anaclitic shows forth most<br />

strongly in Freud’s “short survey of the paths leading to object-choice”:<br />

A Person may Love:<br />

(1) According to the narcissistic type:<br />

(a) What he is himself (actually himself).<br />

(b) What he once was.<br />

(c) What he would like to be.<br />

(d) Someone who was once part of himself.<br />

(2) According to the anaclitic type:<br />

(a) The woman who tends.<br />

(b) The man who protects.<br />

The subdivision of the narcissistic type fully imitates the divisions of subject and<br />

object present in the works of Nicefero, Moll, and Féré; and the specification of<br />

the anaclitic type suggests the ways in which the subject/object divide becomes<br />

associated with and supportive of a heterosexual narrative: the divide is governed<br />

<strong>by</strong> a nurturing mother figure and an aggressive father figure who play the key<br />

roles in the Oedipal narrative of social development.<br />

Examining Freud’s curious repression of clitoral orgasm, Thomas Laqueur<br />

provides a summary that might also be used to synopsize the theoretical<br />

development of narcissism in fin-de-siècle sexology. As he states: “Freud’s<br />

concern…is somehow to assure that bodies whose anatomies do not guarantee<br />

the dominance of heterosexual procreative sex nevertheless dedicate themselves<br />

to their assigned roles” (243). Narcissism and its closely related concept of sexual<br />

inversion seem to recognize alternative cathexes that betray the dominance of the<br />

heterosexual narrative. They seem to be a token concession to “material reality.”<br />

But, at the same time, this concession is consistently subjugated. In all the<br />

examples included here, both narcissism and inversion become, first, ensnared <strong>by</strong><br />

an anaclitic division that replicates the form of heterosexual union, and there<strong>by</strong><br />

both narcissism and inversion seem to make that form inevitable and universal.<br />

Second, and particularly in the case of Freud, the difference of narcissistic and<br />

inverted cathexis is erased <strong>by</strong> rewriting the potentiality for both as a universal trait<br />

of the universalized subject. The traits of objective scientific observation and<br />

liberal acceptance that initially seem to mark the emergence of sexology support<br />

a mimetic strategy of subjective inscription and liberal accommodation—a<br />

strategy that unswervingly maps out differences only as they can serve a<br />

socialized and reproductive tale of indifference. 15

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!