“The Actuality of Ayn Rand” by Slavoj Žižek: Summary and Critique

1. Psychoanalytic Literary Theory

• Key Contribution: Žižek uses Lacanian psychoanalysis to reinterpret Rand’s characters, particularly the dynamics of drive and desire.
  • Lacanian Drive: Roark in The Fountainhead is presented as a figure of pure drive, free from symbolic recognition: “The prime mover is innocent, delivered from the fear of others” (Žižek, 2002).
  • Hysterical Subjectivity: Dominique exemplifies the “hysterical subject,” caught in the Other’s desire. Her attempts to destroy Roark are interpreted as efforts to reconcile her admiration for his independence with societal expectations.
  • Subjective Destitution: Rand’s heroes, through their ethical selfishness, embody the Lacanian ideal of subjective destitution, where they reject societal norms and emerge as pure subjects (Žižek, 2002).

---

2. Ideological Critique

• Key Contribution: Žižek positions Rand as an “overconformist” author who critiques ideology by taking its premises to their extreme.
  • Rand’s unrelenting embrace of capitalism, as seen in Atlas Shrugged, exposes the system’s contradictions by stripping away its communal and welfare aspects: “Rand fits into the line of ‘overconformist’ authors who undermine the ruling ideological edifice by their very excessive identification with it” (Žižek, 2002).
  • The “utopia of greed” described in Atlas Shrugged serves as a satirical critique of unbridled market ideology, presenting a dystopia masked as an ideal (Žižek, 2002).

---

3. Feminist Literary Theory

• Key Contribution: Žižek provides a feminist reinterpretation of Rand’s work by identifying a latent lesbian economy in her narratives.
  • He reinterprets the relationships in Rand’s novels, such as Dominique and Roark or Dagny and Galt, as expressions of feminine subjectivity liberated from the constraints of hysterical desire: “The upright, uncompromising masculine figures with a will of steel with whom she was so fascinated, are effectively figures of the feminine subject liberated from the deadlocks of hysteria” (Žižek, 2002).
  • Žižek aligns Rand’s protagonists with feminist ideals of independence and agency, paradoxically rooted in Rand’s exaggerated veneration of strong male figures.

---

4. Structuralism and Semiotics

• Key Contribution: Žižek applies structuralist analysis to Rand’s character dynamics, particularly in The Fountainhead.
  • He constructs a Greimasian semiotic square with the four central male characters: Roark (autonomous hero), Wynand (failed hero), Keating (conformist), and Toohey (diabolical evil). This structural opposition clarifies Rand’s ideological framework: “Roark is the being of pure drive… Toohey, his true opponent, is the figure of diabolical Evil” (Žižek, 2002).

---

5. Political Philosophy and Literary Theory

• Key Contribution: Rand’s portrayal of prime movers as the ultimate creators reshapes the narrative of strikes and social collapse.
  • By reversing the traditional strike dynamic (workers versus owners), Rand’s works suggest a critique of labor politics, positioning capitalists as the truly productive class. Žižek critiques this as a “fantasy” sustaining capitalist ideology: “It is not workers but the capitalists who go on strike, thus proving that they are the truly productive members of society” (Žižek, 2002).
  • Rand’s ideological framework, while overtly capitalist, ironically critiques the system’s dependency on the creative elite.

---

6. Postmodernism and Metafiction

• Key Contribution: Žižek’s analysis reveals the metafictional and fantasmatic elements of Rand’s narratives.
  • He highlights how Atlas Shrugged constructs a “fantasmatic scenario” of the world’s collapse and rebirth, reflecting postmodern skepticism toward grand narratives: “John Galt succeeds in suspending the very circuit of the universe… causing its symbolic death and subsequent rebirth of the New World” (Žižek, 2002).

---

7. Ethics in Literature

• Key Contribution: Rand’s radical reinterpretation of ethics is explored through Žižek’s lens of ethical selfishness.
  • Her concept of ethical selfishness, where individual self-assertion becomes the highest virtue, challenges traditional moral frameworks: “Love for others is the highest form of properly understood ‘selfishness'” (Žižek, 2002).
  • Žižek links this to the Lacanian distinction between ethics and morality, emphasizing how Rand’s characters transcend moral guilt to achieve pure ethical action.

---

Conclusion: Multidimensional Theoretical Insights

Žižek’s The Actuality of Ayn Rand makes significant contributions across several theoretical domains. By employing psychoanalysis, structuralism, feminist critique, and ideological critique, Žižek repositions Rand’s work within broader intellectual traditions. His analysis reveals the layered complexities of Rand’s ideology, situating her as both a critic and product of capitalist modernity. This multifaceted reading enriches literary theory by bridging diverse frameworks and offering novel interpretations of Rand’s controversial philosophy.

1. Overreliance on Psychoanalytic Framework

• Žižek’s heavy use of Lacanian psychoanalysis might alienate readers unfamiliar with these complex theoretical terms.
• Critics may argue that this lens imposes a predetermined theoretical framework on Rand’s work rather than engaging directly with her ideas.

---

2. Oversimplification of Rand’s Philosophy

• Žižek reduces Rand’s philosophy to her opposition between “prime movers” and “secondhanders,” potentially overlooking the broader nuances of her objectivist ideology.
• By emphasizing her “over-orthodoxy” to critique capitalism, Žižek risks misrepresenting her original intention of celebrating individualism and rational self-interest.

---

3. Lack of Engagement with Rand’s Political Context

• Critics might find Žižek’s essay lacking in historical and political context, such as the Cold War environment in which Rand wrote, which shaped her staunch anti-communist stance.
• Žižek’s focus on psychoanalysis and ideology downplays Rand’s contributions to the discourse on freedom and capitalism as a response to totalitarianism.

---

4. Gender Analysis as Overreach

• Žižek’s interpretation of Rand’s heroes as “feminine subjects liberated from hysteria” and his reference to a latent lesbian economy may appear speculative or unfounded to some readers.
• Such an analysis might be seen as diverting attention from the primary philosophical concerns of Rand’s works.

---

5. Limited Representation of Rand’s Ethics

• Žižek highlights Rand’s concept of “ethical selfishness” but does not fully engage with her broader moral philosophy, such as the role of reason, productive achievement, and individual rights.
• This selective focus could be criticized as an incomplete engagement with her ethical system.

---

6. Allegations of Misinterpretation

• Some might argue that Žižek misconstrues Rand’s portrayal of “prime movers,” interpreting them more as ideological constructs than as moral exemplars, as Rand intended.
• Critics could claim Žižek misrepresents Rand’s narratives as critiques of capitalism rather than celebrations of its virtues.

---

7. Overemphasis on Fantasmatic Elements

• Žižek’s framing of Atlas Shrugged as a “fantasmatic scenario” might be viewed as overly dismissive of the novel’s real-world applications and philosophical explorations.
• This focus on fantasy could be seen as undermining the text’s grounding in Rand’s objectivist philosophy.

---

8. Exclusion of Broader Audience Engagement

• Žižek’s dense, theoretical style and use of abstract language may limit the accessibility of his critique to a broader audience, including Rand’s supporters or general readers.
• Critics might argue this restricts productive dialogue between Rand’s objectivism and Žižek’s critique.