Introduction: “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter
“Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter first appeared in the Southern Journal of Philosophy in 2004 (Vol. XLJI, Supplement). This article explores the intersections of Freud’s psychoanalytic theories, particularly castration theory and fetishism, with Julia Kristeva’s concept of abjection. Chanter revisits Freud’s framework of identification, challenging its paternal emphasis and his systematic avoidance of maternal identification. By integrating Kristeva’s notion of abjection, Chanter pushes beyond its traditional sexual difference framework to critique Freud’s assumptions regarding race and primitivism. This work is significant in literary theory as it interrogates the foundational structures of psychoanalytic discourse, advocating for a re-evaluation of maternal authority and its implications for understanding identity, race, and gender. Chanter’s analysis broadens the theoretical landscape, providing nuanced insights into the unconscious biases embedded in cultural and psychoanalytic narratives.
Summary of “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter
Introduction to Abjection as a Critical Lens
- Chanter explores the concept of the abject, derived from Julia Kristeva, as a tool for addressing the limitations in Freud’s psychoanalytic theories, particularly in fetishistic and racial discourses (Chanter, 2004, p. 49).
- She critiques Freud’s neglect of maternal identification, emphasizing its importance in understanding identity formation and challenging racial and gender biases embedded in psychoanalysis (p. 49).
Critique of Freud’s Gendered Frameworks
- Freud’s castration theory and fetishism revolve around the phallus as a symbolic center, often excluding the mother as a source of identification (p. 50).
- Chanter highlights Freud’s “systematic avoidance of the mother” and critiques the preference for paternal identification, which distorts the role of the maternal in psychic development (p. 49-50).
Abjection and Maternal Reconsideration
- Drawing on Kristeva, Chanter reorients the discourse of abjection to emphasize its potential to critique and reframe Freud’s assumptions about sexual and racial difference (p. 49).
- She argues for a reconfiguration of abjection to include the maternal figure as central to the process of subject formation, countering Freud’s erasure of maternal authority (p. 50-51).
Intersections of Sexual and Racial Differences
- Chanter critiques Freud’s tendency to position racial difference as a mechanism to obscure unresolved issues regarding sexual difference (p. 50).
- She discusses how fetishism and castration theory reflect not only sexual anxieties but also racialized narratives, suggesting an interdependence between discourses of race and gender (p. 50-51).
Revisiting the Phallic Phase
- Freud’s introduction of the phallic phase is examined as symptomatic of his difficulty in reconciling paternal and maternal identification (p. 51-52).
- Chanter challenges Freud’s claim that identification with the father precedes object-choice, noting the unresolved tension in his differentiation of maternal and paternal roles (p. 52-53).
Logic of Fetishism and Maternal Suppression
- Chanter identifies fetishism as central to Freud’s theoretical framework, linking it to the suppression of maternal significance and the privileging of paternal authority (p. 55).
- She critiques Freud’s reliance on fetishistic disavowal to sustain patriarchal narratives, arguing for an alternative that reclaims the maternal role (p. 55-56).
Towards a Revised Psychoanalytic Framework
- By integrating Kristeva’s abjection, Chanter envisions a psychoanalytic framework that addresses unconscious forces driving exclusionary practices, especially regarding race and gender (p. 62).
- Her work advocates for a “radicalization” of abjection to deconstruct patriarchal, racist, and heteronormative assumptions within psychoanalysis (p. 62-63).
Conclusion
- Chanter’s reinterpretation of Freud and Kristeva opens a path for rethinking foundational psychoanalytic concepts, emphasizing maternal identification and the intersections of racial and sexual difference.
- Her work underscores the need to rethink abjection as a tool for inclusive critical theory, challenging entrenched biases in cultural and psychoanalytic narratives (p. 63-64).
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter
| Theoretical Term/Concept | Definition/Description | Relevance in Chanter’s Argument |
| Abjection | A concept from Julia Kristeva, referring to the process of separating oneself from what is deemed unclean or threatening to subjectivity. | Used to critique Freud’s neglect of the maternal and to propose a rethinking of subject formation, emphasizing the maternal body and its role in identity construction (Chanter, p. 49-50). |
| Castration Theory | Freud’s theory positing that fear of losing the penis drives male psychosexual development and informs gender roles. | Critiqued for its phallocentric focus; Chanter challenges its exclusion of maternal identification and its implications for understanding race and gender (p. 51). |
| Fetishism | A psychological mechanism described by Freud, where a substitute object denies and acknowledges castration anxiety simultaneously. | Linked to racial and gendered discourses; Chanter critiques its use as a way to suppress maternal significance while sustaining patriarchal norms (p. 50-55). |
| Phallic Phase | Freud’s developmental phase where the penis becomes the central organ of sexual identity. | Seen as symptomatic of Freud’s difficulty reconciling maternal and paternal roles; Chanter argues this phase reinforces the marginalization of the maternal (p. 51-52). |
| Identification | A process in which an individual aligns themselves emotionally or psychologically with another person, often the parent. | Critiqued for its patriarchal bias in Freud’s work, where identification is tied predominantly to the father; Chanter argues for a rethinking that incorporates maternal identification (p. 50-51). |
| Object-Choice | Freud’s term for the selection of a love object, typically associated with the mother in early development. | Chanter explores the interplay between identification and object-choice, highlighting the tension in Freud’s prioritization of paternal identification over maternal object-choice (p. 50-52). |
| The Phallus | A symbolic representation of power and authority in psychoanalytic theory, central to Freud and Lacan’s frameworks. | Critiqued for perpetuating patriarchal structures; Chanter argues that its symbolic dominance marginalizes maternal authority and reinforces fetishistic logics (p. 55). |
| Racialized Other | A term describing how psychoanalytic theory incorporates race as a category of difference subordinate to sexual difference. | Chanter critiques Freud for using racial difference to obscure unresolved issues of sexual difference, thereby intertwining race and gender in problematic ways (p. 50). |
| Maternal Identification | The emotional or psychological alignment with the mother, often overshadowed by Freud’s focus on paternal identification. | Central to Chanter’s critique; she calls for rehabilitating maternal identification as vital to understanding subjectivity, abjection, and identity (p. 50-51). |
| The Enigma of Woman | Freud’s concept of woman as an unresolved mystery in psychoanalytic theory. | Chanter argues that Freud’s difficulty in addressing the “enigma of woman” is tied to broader exclusions, including racial and maternal dimensions (p. 50). |
| Disavowal | A psychological mechanism where reality is both acknowledged and denied, often related to fetishism. | Used by Chanter to illustrate how Freud’s theories suppress maternal influence and shore up patriarchal structures (p. 55-56). |
| Totemic Ritual | Freud’s concept linking primitive societies’ rituals to the development of social, moral, and religious structures. | Chanter critiques the use of primitivism as a parallel to psychoanalytic development, noting its racialized implications and its role in suppressing maternal significance (p. 59). |
| Pleasure Principle vs. Reality Principle | Freud’s framework contrasting the human drive for immediate pleasure with the constraints imposed by reality. | Chanter links this dichotomy to the dynamics of abjection and fetishism, illustrating how it informs gendered and racialized narratives in psychoanalytic theory (p. 51). |
Contribution of “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter to Literary Theory/Theories
1. Psychoanalytic Theory: Reconfiguration of Maternal Identification
- Challenges Freud’s focus on paternal identification, advocating for the inclusion of maternal identification as a central aspect of subject formation (Chanter, p. 50-51).
- Offers a critical perspective on the phallic phase, exposing its role in suppressing maternal authority and reinforcing patriarchal norms (p. 51).
- Proposes that the logic of abjection provides a framework to rethink foundational psychoanalytic categories, such as the Oedipus complex and fetishism, to better address gender and race (p. 62-63).
2. Feminist Literary Theory: Critique of Phallocentrism
- Criticizes the phallocentric bias in Freudian and Lacanian frameworks, particularly their emphasis on the phallus as a symbolic center of power and identity (p. 55).
- Advocates for a feminist rethinking of psychoanalytic categories by integrating Kristeva’s concept of abjection to foreground the maternal (p. 50).
- Highlights the systemic marginalization of women’s experiences in psychoanalytic discourse, particularly the “enigma of woman,” to encourage feminist critiques of gendered narratives (p. 50).
3. Critical Race Theory: Intersections of Race and Psychoanalysis
- Identifies the racialized underpinnings of Freudian discourse, showing how racial difference is used to obscure unresolved issues of sexual difference (p. 50).
- Critiques the appropriation of fetishism in discourses on race, arguing that it imports phallocentric assumptions into racialized contexts (p. 50-51).
- Calls for a psychoanalytic framework that recognizes the interplay between race and gender without subordinating one to the other (p. 51).
4. Poststructuralist Theory: Deconstruction of Foundational Binaries
- Employs Kristeva’s concept of abjection to deconstruct the binary oppositions central to Freud’s theory, such as identification versus object-choice and castration versus fetishism (p. 49-50).
- Argues that Freud’s reliance on primitivism and patriarchal narratives reflects a deeper structural dependence on exclusionary categories (p. 59).
- Positions abjection as a tool for interrogating and reconfiguring the symbolic, imaginary, and real within psychoanalytic discourse (p. 63).
5. Postcolonial Literary Theory: Critique of Primitivism
- Critiques Freud’s analogy between psychic development and the so-called “primitive,” exposing its colonial and racialized assumptions (p. 59).
- Links Freud’s use of primitivism to the marginalization of maternal significance and its implications for colonial narratives in psychoanalytic thought (p. 59-60).
6. Affect Theory: Emphasis on Emotional and Psychic Processes
- Expands Kristeva’s notion of abjection to explore its affective dimensions, focusing on how processes of separation and rejection shape identity and subjectivity (p. 62).
- Reframes affective responses to the maternal body, challenging their exclusion in Freud’s focus on symbolic and phallic structures (p. 63).
Examples of Critiques Through “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter
| Literary Work | Critique Through Chanter’s Lens | Key Concepts Referenced |
| Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein | The creature’s rejection by society and Victor’s denial of parental responsibility can be analyzed as processes of abjection, emphasizing the suppression of maternal identification. | Abjection, maternal identification, phallic symbolic, repression of the maternal (Chanter, p. 49-50). |
| Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s The Yellow Wallpaper | The narrator’s descent into madness reflects the abjection of the feminine body and psyche, showcasing patriarchal suppression and the erasure of maternal authority in caregiving roles. | Abjection, phallocentrism, gendered marginalization, repression of the maternal (p. 50, 55). |
| Toni Morrison’s Beloved | The haunting presence of Sethe’s dead daughter illustrates abjection as a confrontation with repressed maternal trauma and racialized histories of exclusion. | Abjection, racialized other, intersections of race and gender, maternal loss (p. 50-51, 63). |
| Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness | The portrayal of Africa as a space of “primitivism” and Kurtz’s breakdown exemplify Freud’s reliance on racialized narratives to navigate sexual and cultural difference. | Racialized other, primitivism, psychoanalysis and race, fetishistic disavowal (p. 50, 59). |
Criticism Against “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter
1. Overreliance on Psychoanalytic Frameworks
- Chanter’s critique is deeply rooted in Freudian and Kristevan psychoanalysis, which some argue are overly theoretical and disconnected from lived experiences or contemporary social contexts.
- Critics might suggest that her reliance on psychoanalytic language limits accessibility and applicability to broader cultural or interdisciplinary discussions.
2. Insufficient Engagement with Race Theory
- While Chanter critiques Freud’s racialized assumptions, her engagement with race theory could be seen as secondary to her focus on gender and maternal identification.
- Critics might argue that she does not adequately address how racialized and colonial frameworks persist in contemporary psychoanalytic and cultural discourses.
3. Limited Development of Kristeva’s Abjection
- Chanter builds on Julia Kristeva’s notion of abjection but fails to push its boundaries significantly beyond its original formulation in Powers of Horror.
- Some may view her critique as a reiteration of Kristeva’s ideas rather than a groundbreaking extension of them.
4. Neglect of Intersectionality
- Although Chanter discusses intersections of race and gender, her analysis may not fully embrace an intersectional framework that integrates class, sexuality, and other dimensions of identity.
- Critics might argue that the discussion remains confined to a dual focus on race and gender without exploring other intersecting axes of marginalization.
5. Abstract Theoretical Focus
- Chanter’s arguments are heavily theoretical, which may lead to critiques that her work lacks concrete examples or practical applications to literary texts or cultural phenomena.
- This abstract focus could limit her relevance to those seeking actionable insights for interdisciplinary or activist scholarship.
6. Overemphasis on Maternal Identification
- While Chanter’s advocacy for maternal identification is innovative, critics might contend that it risks reifying the maternal role in ways that could reinforce traditional gender roles.
- Some feminist scholars may argue that focusing on maternal identification detracts from broader critiques of patriarchal systems.
7. Overshadowing of Contemporary Feminist and Queer Critiques
- Chanter’s focus on Freud and Kristeva might overshadow more recent developments in feminist, queer, and postcolonial theory that provide alternative critiques of psychoanalysis.
- Critics might argue that her work could benefit from engaging with contemporary theorists who challenge or expand upon psychoanalytic frameworks.
8. Potential for Misinterpretation of Freud
- Chanter’s critique of Freud’s theories as patriarchal and phallocentric may be seen by some as reductive, oversimplifying the complexities and historical context of Freudian psychoanalysis.
Representative Quotations from “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “The abject can be used as a resource to rework the fetishistic discourses that have come to dominate a good deal of contemporary theory, including film theory and race theory.” | Chanter highlights the critical potential of abjection as a framework to challenge established discourses, particularly those rooted in fetishism. This underscores abjection’s relevance beyond psychoanalysis, extending it to cultural and theoretical domains such as film and race studies. |
| “Sexual difference founders on the rock of racial difference.” | Chanter critiques Freud’s inability to think through sexual difference without simultaneously relying on unexamined assumptions about race. She posits that psychoanalysis avoids confronting race, thereby revealing an interdependency that remains under-theorized in Freud’s work. |
| “Kristeva’s notion of abjection deals with affect, not with an idea that is disavowed.” | This statement distinguishes Kristeva’s approach to abjection from fetishism. While fetishism relies on denial and substitution, abjection engages with affective responses to boundaries and exclusions, offering a different conceptual entry point for rethinking psychoanalysis and social systems. |
| “Freud’s phallic phase…can be read as symptomatic of Freud’s suppression of maternal identification.” | Chanter argues that Freud’s introduction of the phallic phase reflects an implicit effort to marginalize maternal identification. This critique reconfigures Freud’s theory, suggesting that maternal roles were systematically downplayed to prioritize paternal figures in identity formation. |
| “The attribution to women of a fetishistic substitute or imaginary penis…has been extended to discourses on race.” | This quotation critiques the ways Freud’s theory of fetishism, originally about sexual difference, is uncritically adapted to racial difference. Chanter highlights the danger of transferring psychoanalytic assumptions about the phallus to racialized others, risking the perpetuation of racialized stereotypes. |
| “The reign of the phallus is thoroughly fetishistic.” | Chanter critiques the centrality of the phallus in psychoanalysis, describing it as an extension of fetishistic logic. She challenges the emphasis on the phallus, arguing that it overshadows other dynamics, such as maternal identification and abjection, in psychoanalytic theories of identity. |
| “Abjection offers a new way of rethinking what is at issue in the Lacanian mirror stage, by pushing back the question in a way that doesn’t foreclose the maternal body as a locus of the inception of meaning.” | Here, Chanter proposes that abjection provides a means to revisit Lacanian psychoanalysis, particularly its conceptualization of subject formation. By centering the maternal body, she seeks to challenge Lacan’s focus on paternal authority and the symbolic order. |
| “The white man knows that the racialized other is castrated—without power—but nonetheless attributes to him a mystical, magical, transcendent, threatening aura.” | Chanter critiques racialized applications of fetishism, arguing that Freud’s logic of fetishism reappears in racial discourses. The racialized other is paradoxically perceived as powerless yet threatening, a contradiction that mirrors the fetishist’s simultaneous acknowledgment and denial of castration. |
| “There is a sense in which the logic of fetishism produces, retroactively as it were, the logic of the phallus.” | Chanter reinterprets the relationship between fetishism and the phallus, suggesting that the former retroactively constructs the latter. This challenges the presumed primacy of the phallus in psychoanalytic theory, opening up alternative ways of understanding subjectivity and identity. |
| “Is there a way of recasting the abject so that its processes do not line up along lines that systematically disenfranchise certain groups at the expense of others?” | This question encapsulates Chanter’s broader aim: to reconfigure abjection as a tool for inclusivity and equity. By interrogating the structures of exclusion embedded in psychoanalytic and cultural frameworks, she seeks to develop a more just and expansive theoretical approach. |
Suggested Readings: “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism” by Tina Chanter
- DOHMEN, JOSH. “Disability as Abject: Kristeva, Disability, and Resistance.” Hypatia, vol. 31, no. 4, 2016, pp. 762–78. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44076536. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.
- Lloyd, Moya. “Julia Kristeva (1941–).” Contemporary Critical Theorists: From Lacan to Said, edited by Jon Simons, Edinburgh University Press, 2006, pp. 135–51. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctvxcrrt8.13. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.
- Singh, Surti. “Spectacle and Revolt: On the Intersection of Psychoanalysis and Social Theory in Julia Kristeva’s Work.” New Forms of Revolt: Essays on Kristeva’s Intimate Politics, edited by Sarah K. Hansen and Rebecca Tuvel, State University of New York Press, 2017, pp. 23–42. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.18253903.6. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.
- Chanter, Tina. “Abjection, or Why Freud Introduces the Phallus: Identification, Castration Theory, and the Logic of Fetishism.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 42 (2004).