UVM Theses and Dissertations
Format:
Print
Author:
Connelly, Thomas J.
Dept./Program:
English
Year:
2007
Degree:
MA
Abstract:
One can claim that cinema is appealing because we are allowed access to something we normally are not privy to in our lives. We root for the underdog because in our everyday existence we yearn for our own social justice. We enjoy watching the perfect romance unfold on the screen. Yet, we know in real life that love is not perfect. And sometimes we even envision ourselves going the other way and finding ourselves on the side of evil--many Hitchcock films proves this to be. In Psycho, after Norman Bates murders Marion Crane in the famous shower sequence, the spectator suddenly roots for Bates, hoping he will evade the law. How did this transformation happen? How did we end up on the side of evil?
In Jacques Lacan's understanding of castration, to be accepted into culture, one must renounce jouissance (complete enjoyment). Lacan argued that once a subject renounces enjoyment; helshe desires to return to the realm of jouissance--called objet petit a--the object cause of desire. The paradox is that complete enjoyment never existed in the beginning, which creates the barred or antagonistic subject with no possibility of overcoming the antagonism. My thesis will argue that Abbas Kiarostami's Taste of Cherry (1997) demonstrates Lacan's notion of objet petit a. In Taste of Cherry, pertinent exposition is truncated from the spectator, which I have called the "missing scene": the mystery of why Mr. Badii, the protagonist wants to commit suicide. Since Kiarostami provides limited access to the missing scene (the privileged object), the spectator's desire is directed towards death; i.e. the desire to know death. Not unlike the spectator who suddenly roots for Norman Bates, the enjoyment of Taste of Cherry poses the uncomfortable but alluring questions: Will Mr. Badii commit the act of suicide? And what will his suicide look like?
In Jacques Lacan's understanding of castration, to be accepted into culture, one must renounce jouissance (complete enjoyment). Lacan argued that once a subject renounces enjoyment; helshe desires to return to the realm of jouissance--called objet petit a--the object cause of desire. The paradox is that complete enjoyment never existed in the beginning, which creates the barred or antagonistic subject with no possibility of overcoming the antagonism. My thesis will argue that Abbas Kiarostami's Taste of Cherry (1997) demonstrates Lacan's notion of objet petit a. In Taste of Cherry, pertinent exposition is truncated from the spectator, which I have called the "missing scene": the mystery of why Mr. Badii, the protagonist wants to commit suicide. Since Kiarostami provides limited access to the missing scene (the privileged object), the spectator's desire is directed towards death; i.e. the desire to know death. Not unlike the spectator who suddenly roots for Norman Bates, the enjoyment of Taste of Cherry poses the uncomfortable but alluring questions: Will Mr. Badii commit the act of suicide? And what will his suicide look like?