Introduction: “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster
“Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster first appeared in October, Vol. 78 (Autumn, 1996), published by The MIT Press. In this pivotal essay, Foster explores a shift in contemporary art, literature, and critical theory: from understanding “the real” as a product of representation to viewing it as an event of trauma. Drawing on Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theories, particularly the notion of the gaze, Foster interrogates how contemporary culture grapples with the destabilization of the subject and the erosion of traditional representational frameworks. He delves into the abject, as conceptualized by Julia Kristeva, and its implications for identity and boundary formation, while also tracing a broader cultural fascination with trauma and its representation. Foster’s analysis is significant for its articulation of how contemporary art and theory probe the intersections of psychoanalysis, the symbolic order, and the visceral reality of human experience. The essay challenges readers to reconsider how aesthetic practices engage with profound existential and cultural ruptures, influencing ongoing debates in literary theory, art criticism, and cultural studies.
Summary of “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster
Shift in Conceptions of the Real
- Foster identifies a critical shift in contemporary theory and art, from understanding the real as a product of representation to viewing it as an event of trauma (Foster, p. 106).
- This shift highlights the increasing reliance on psychoanalysis, particularly Lacan’s concept of the gaze, to critique critical culture (Foster, p. 106).
Lacan’s Gaze and the Mortification of the Subject
- Drawing on Lacan’s The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, Foster explains that the gaze exists outside the subject, positioning the individual as a “stain” within the spectacle of the world (Foster, pp. 106-107).
- The gaze mortifies the subject, questioning their coherence and challenging their perceived transparency (Foster, p. 108).
Art’s Relationship to the Gaze
- Foster notes that classical and modern art sought to “tame” the gaze through representational forms like the image-screen, which mediates and protects the subject (Foster, p. 109).
- However, much contemporary art refuses this function, instead exposing the gaze as pulsating, dazzling, and threatening (Foster, p. 110).
The Abject and the Maternal
- The concept of the abject, derived from Julia Kristeva, plays a central role in Foster’s analysis. It represents what must be expelled to maintain subjectivity, often tied to the maternal body (Foster, p. 114).
- Contemporary art explores the abject through themes of bodily fluids, decay, and rupture, pushing against societal boundaries of representation (Foster, pp. 114-115).
Cindy Sherman and the Evolution of the Abject
- Foster examines Cindy Sherman’s work as a case study of the abject in art. Sherman’s early works position the subject under the gaze, her middle works challenge representation, and her later works obliterate the subject altogether (Foster, pp. 110-112).
- Sherman’s transition illustrates how art interrogates and dismantles traditional frameworks of identity and representation.
Abject Art and Cultural Politics
- Foster discusses the dual tendencies in abject art: a confrontation with trauma and the obscene, and an effort to expose the operations of abjection itself (Foster, p. 115).
- This approach, however, risks reinforcing abjection through mimicry or confirmation of societal norms (Foster, pp. 116-117).
Trauma, Nihility, and Contemporary Culture
- Foster observes a pervasive cultural turn toward trauma as a lens to interpret personal and historical experience, reflected in art, literature, and popular culture (Foster, p. 123).
- This focus reveals both an impulse to critique the fragmented subject and a retreat into the absolute authority of the “traumatic subject” as a witness or survivor (Foster, p. 124).
The Ambiguity of Abjection
- Foster concludes by highlighting the paradox of abject art: its capacity to critique symbolic structures and its potential complicity in their reinforcement (Foster, pp. 115-116).
- He leaves open the question of whether abjection represents a refusal of power or a reinvention of it, suggesting that abject art operates ambivalently within and against systems of authority (Foster, p. 124).
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster
| Theoretical Term/Concept | Explanation | Significance |
| The Gaze (Lacan) | A concept in Lacanian psychoanalysis where the gaze represents an external, pre-subjective force that “looks” at the subject. | Central to Foster’s analysis of contemporary art; disrupts the coherence of the subject and challenges representation (p. 107). |
| Image-Screen | A mediating framework of representation that protects the subject from the direct impact of the gaze. | Traditional art uses this to tame the gaze, but contemporary art often seeks to tear or bypass it (p. 109). |
| The Abject (Kristeva) | That which is expelled to define the subject, often associated with the maternal body or bodily fluids. | Explores the fragility of boundaries between subject and object; heavily featured in abject art (pp. 114-115). |
| Obscene | A representation without a “scene” or frame, which confronts the viewer with raw reality or trauma. | Challenges norms of visual containment; key in contemporary art’s assault on traditional representation (p. 109). |
| Trauma | An event or state that disrupts temporal and subjective continuity, often leaving a delayed or fragmented impact. | Frames the shift from representational reality to one defined by traumatic rupture (p. 106). |
| Informe (Bataille) | A state of formlessness where distinctions between figure and ground dissolve, challenging representational norms. | Related to abject art; signals the breakdown of meaning and the symbolic order (p. 114). |
| Symbolic Order | The Lacanian concept of societal rules and structures mediated through language and culture. | Art and theory probe the disruptions and crises within this order (p. 115). |
| Desublimation | The breakdown or reversal of sublimation, where elevated cultural forms are degraded or dissolved. | Exemplified in abject art’s attack on the ideals of beauty, form, and propriety (p. 116). |
| Apotropaic Function | A protective function that seeks to ward off danger, often through artistic representation. | Foster contrasts this with art that confronts the gaze or the real directly (p. 110). |
| Pere-Version (Bataille) | A perversion that twists societal or paternal laws, challenging symbolic norms. | Represents art’s defiance of cultural authority and its norms of representation (p. 118). |
| Subject-as-Picture | The idea that the subject is represented and captured as an image within the gaze or symbolic system. | Explored in Cindy Sherman’s work, highlighting self-surveillance and psychological estrangement (pp. 110-111). |
| Paranoia (Lacan) | A condition of the subject’s hyper-awareness of being watched or dominated by external forces. | Associated with the gaze’s perceived maleficence and its impact on subjectivity (p. 110). |
| Hyperreal (Baudrillard) | Although not directly named, the essay implicitly engages with ideas of the hyperreal in its critique of postmodern simulacra. | Contrasts earlier postmodernism’s focus on surface with the abject’s pursuit of the “real” (p. 123). |
| Corporeality | A focus on the material body, especially in its grotesque or abject forms. | Central to abject art’s exploration of the body as a site of trauma and disruption (p. 114). |
Contribution of “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster to Literary Theory/Theories
- Reinterpretation of Lacan’s Gaze: Foster expands on Lacan’s concept of the gaze by examining how contemporary art externalizes and confronts the destabilizing force of the gaze. This challenges the subject’s coherence and questions traditional representations of subjectivity (Foster, p. 106-107).
- Trauma as a Lens for Subjectivity: The essay reframes subjectivity through trauma, presenting it as fragmented and defined by events that disrupt temporal and psychological continuity (Foster, p. 123).
- Deconstruction of Representation: Foster critiques the notion of representational reality, emphasizing the collapse of the image-screen in contemporary art and theory. This aligns with poststructuralist views of meaning as unstable and constructed (Foster, p. 109).
- Critique of the Subject: Building on poststructuralist critiques, Foster highlights how abjection and trauma evacuate the subject’s centrality, revealing its fragility and contingency (Foster, pp. 114-115).
- Gendered Dimensions of the Gaze: Although the essay critiques the male gaze, it does so by situating it within a broader psychoanalytic framework, showing how the gaze functions beyond embodiment and is tied to systemic structures of representation (Foster, p. 108).
- Exploration of the Maternal and Abject: Foster’s use of Kristeva’s abjection foregrounds the maternal body as a site of cultural anxiety and symbolic exclusion, which feminist theorists explore in the context of gender and identity formation (Foster, p. 114).
- Transition from Simulacra to Trauma: Foster critiques the earlier postmodern celebration of surfaces and simulacra, instead highlighting the return of the real through traumatic and abject states (Foster, pp. 123-124).
- Art and Postmodern Identity: The essay situates abject art as a response to postmodern identity’s fragmented and performative nature, probing deeper into affective and bodily realities (Foster, p. 116).
Cultural and Visual Studies
- Crisis of Visuality: Foster contributes to debates in visual studies by analyzing how contemporary art undermines traditional frames of viewing, focusing on the tension between the gaze and the screen (Foster, p. 109).
- Intersection of Culture and Psychoanalysis: The essay bridges cultural studies and psychoanalysis, particularly through its focus on abjection and trauma as culturally produced yet deeply subjective phenomena (Foster, p. 114).
Abject Theory (Kristeva)
- Radicalization of the Abject: Foster extends Kristeva’s notion of the abject to contemporary art, emphasizing how artists like Cindy Sherman use abjection to challenge symbolic orders and societal boundaries (Foster, p. 115).
- Interrogation of Sublimation: The essay critiques the modernist reliance on sublimation, presenting abject art as a counter-movement that resists purification and elevation (Foster, p. 116).
- Reevaluation of Aesthetic Practices: Foster argues that art has moved beyond taming the gaze to actively confronting or even embracing its violent potential. This redefines art’s function in the face of trauma and abjection (Foster, p. 110).
- Art as Apotropaic and Critical: The analysis repositions art as both a protective mechanism (apotropaic) and a critical force against societal norms, offering a dual function within aesthetic theory (Foster, p. 110).
Examples of Critiques Through “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster
| Literary Work | Critique Using Foster’s Concepts | Relevant Theoretical Lens |
| Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein | The monster embodies the abject, representing what Victor must expel (failed creation, unnatural). This aligns with the maternal and bodily horror Foster discusses (Foster, p. 114). | Abject Theory (Kristeva), psychoanalytic lens on abjection and subject formation. |
| Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s The Yellow Wallpaper | The narrator’s descent into madness parallels Foster’s notion of the subject being overwhelmed by the gaze. The “yellow wallpaper” functions as an intrusive gaze that traps her (Foster, pp. 108-110). | Psychoanalytic theory (Lacan); the gaze as a force that mortifies and destabilizes the subject. |
| Toni Morrison’s Beloved | The ghost of Beloved symbolizes trauma and the return of the real, as Sethe confronts her past atrocities. The narrative’s fragmented structure reflects trauma as an event outside representation (Foster, p. 123). | Trauma theory; psychoanalysis (Lacan, Kristeva) on repressed histories and abjection. |
| Samuel Beckett’s Endgame | Characters inhabit a world of nihility and abjection, where bodily decay and existential despair reflect Foster’s discussion of the corpse as the subject of abjection (Foster, p. 123). | Aesthetic theory of the abject; existential and postmodern critiques of subjectivity and representation. |
Criticism Against “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster
Ambiguity and Overgeneralization
- Vagueness in Conceptual Definitions: Critics argue that Foster’s application of Lacanian and Kristevan concepts such as the gaze and the abject can be overly abstract, leaving room for misinterpretation and overgeneralization.
- Lack of Specificity in Art Critique: The essay draws heavily on theoretical frameworks without offering detailed analysis of a broad range of specific artworks, making the application seem selective or incomplete.
Overreliance on Psychoanalysis
- Limited Scope of Analysis: Foster’s reliance on Lacanian and Kristevan psychoanalysis may exclude other interpretive frameworks, such as sociopolitical or historical approaches, which could provide alternative insights.
- Problematic Universality of Psychoanalytic Constructs: Concepts like the abject and the gaze are applied as if universally relevant, potentially overlooking cultural, historical, and individual variations in perception and experience.
Representation of Trauma
- Simplistic Treatment of Trauma: While Foster emphasizes trauma’s centrality, critics may argue that his analysis risks aestheticizing trauma, reducing it to a conceptual tool rather than addressing its lived realities.
- Neglect of Intersectionality: The essay does not sufficiently account for how experiences of trauma and abjection intersect with factors like race, gender, and class.
Neglect of Agency
- Passive View of Subjectivity: Foster’s depiction of subjects as overwhelmed by the gaze or abjection minimizes agency, potentially portraying individuals as entirely dominated by external forces.
- Overemphasis on Destruction: The focus on tearing apart the image-screen and symbolic order may neglect more constructive or subversive possibilities within art and culture.
Theoretical Echo Chamber
- Limited Engagement with Counterarguments: Foster’s essay heavily relies on Lacan, Kristeva, and Bataille without engaging with critical counterarguments or alternative theoretical perspectives.
- Repetition of Familiar Postmodern Critiques: Some critics may see Foster’s arguments as reiterations of established postmodern and psychoanalytic critiques, offering little innovation.
Art and Audience Disconnect
- Elitist Framework: The dense theoretical language and focus on avant-garde art may alienate general readers or practitioners outside academic or high-art circles.
- Limited Accessibility: The essay does not sufficiently address how these theoretical insights apply to broader cultural or mainstream artistic expressions.
Representative Quotations from “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “In contemporary art and theory… there is a general shift in conceptions of the real: from the real understood as an effect of representation to the real understood as an event of trauma.” | Foster argues that contemporary theory moves away from seeing “the real” as mediated by representation (symbolic systems) and toward understanding it as directly linked to trauma—a rupture in symbolic order. This sets the stage for analyzing abjection and the gaze as central themes in art and critical theory. |
| “The gaze, qua objet a, may come to symbolize this central lack expressed in the phenomenon of castration.” | Borrowing from Lacan, Foster interprets the gaze as a representation of the “lack” that structures subjectivity. This lack is central to psychoanalytic theory, where it is tied to symbolic castration. Foster uses this to critique the positioning of subjects in art and theory, exploring how they confront or evade this lack. |
| “The screen mediates the object-gaze for the subject. But it also protects the subject from this object-gaze.” | Foster draws on Lacan’s concept of the screen to explain its dual role: it not only facilitates visual representation but also shields the subject from the overwhelming, unmediated real (trauma, abjection). This mediation is necessary for perception, and contemporary art often plays with the tearing or disruption of this protective screen. |
| “Obscene does not mean ‘against the scene,’ but it suggests an attack on the scene of representation, on the image-screen.” | Foster redefines “obscene” in the context of art as an assault on representation itself. Rather than showing what is traditionally hidden, the obscene disrupts the frameworks (screens) that shape how images are perceived, challenging the viewer’s comfort with mediated reality. |
| “In a world in which the Other has collapsed, the task of the artist is no longer to sublimate the abject, to elevate it, but to plumb the abject.” | Foster invokes Julia Kristeva’s theory of abjection, suggesting that contemporary art no longer seeks to transform or idealize the abject but instead delves into its raw, unsettling qualities. This marks a shift in artistic priorities, reflecting broader cultural changes in addressing the real and the traumatic. |
| “Today, thirty years after the death of the author, we are witness to a strange rebirth of the author as zombie.” | Here, Foster critiques the paradoxical revival of the author (or subject) in trauma discourse. While poststructuralism sought to deconstruct subjectivity, trauma theory reintroduces a new kind of subjectivity—a “zombie” figure whose authority is rooted in the personal experience of trauma and the inability to challenge it. |
| “Why this fascination with trauma, this envy of abjection, today?” | Foster questions the cultural and theoretical preoccupation with trauma and abjection, pointing to social factors (e.g., AIDS crisis, poverty, systemic breakdowns) and dissatisfaction with prior theoretical models that sought to explain or transcend the real. This reflection critiques how trauma has become a dominant mode of engagement in art and theory. |
| “Some art may attempt a trompe-l’œil, a tricking of the eye, but all art aspires to a dompte-regard, a taming of the gaze.” | Foster suggests that artistic practices are inherently tied to controlling or negotiating the gaze. While certain movements play with deceiving the viewer’s perception, all art is engaged in mediating the gaze, whether through containment, exposure, or disruption. |
Suggested Readings: “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic” by Hal Foster
- Foster, Hal. “Obscene, Abject, Traumatic.” October, vol. 78, 1996, pp. 107–24. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/778908. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.
- Murray, Derek Conrad, and Soraya Murray. “Uneasy Bedfellows: Canonical Art Theory and the Politics of Identity.” Art Journal, vol. 65, no. 1, 2006, pp. 22–39. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/20068437. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.
- Wark, Jayne. “Queering Abjection: A Lesbian, Feminist, and Canadian Perspective.” Desire Change: Contemporary Feminist Art in Canada, edited by Heather Davis, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2017, pp. 96–117. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1q31s5m.9. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.
- Kimball, Nicole. “Abjection and Anxiety: The Metamorphosis of the Roman Literary Witch.” Nemo Non Metuit: Magic in the Roman World, edited by Elizabeth Ann Pollard and Fabrizio Conti, Trivent Publishing, 2022, pp. 263–92. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.18376999.11. Accessed 21 Dec. 2024.