Event: A Philosophical Journey Through A Concept (Philosophy in Transit Book 2)

Slavoj Zizek is one of the most interesting contemporary philosophers, his synthesis of Lacanian psychoanalysis and Hegelian philosophy is thought provoking, and his cultural observations open up new ways of seeing and understanding films, novels and events. One gets the impression, reading his books and watching his lectures on You Tube, that one of his goals is to help people understand the world they live in, in order to impress on them the urgent need for radical change. In Event there isn't much that is new, however, it is a more accessible book than some of the others, and it does provide an interesting journey through the concept of event. What he says in this book about the three events of psychoanalysis (real, symbolic and imaginary) is not clear, one would have to go to his other books to find clearer explanations, but the big problem I have with Event is the section on Buddhism. Zizek views Buddhism as offering relief from the negative effects of capitalism and scientific/technological innovation. He finds it dangerous because it actually functions as capitalism's perfect ideological supplement. This is vague. He talks about Buddhism as if it were a monolithic institution with one set of beliefs and just one interpretation of those beliefs. He concentrates his critique on Zen Buddhism, and bashes it for not having a moral core. He likes to point out how D.T. Suzuki supported the war effort in Japan, etc. The point he wants to make is that Zen could be used by capitalists and torturers and therefore is a dangerous view. However, one could say the same thing about Christianity; it's all a question of how you interpret it, is't it? One could be a Christian and a fascist, but does that mean that Christianity is inherently rotten and flawed? He says that "everything the Buddhist does is ultimately for the attainment of Enlightenment." He claims that morality is advocated while on the road to Nirvana, but once there, one is beyond morality. But enlightenment is the existential, subjective experience of the truth of the three marks of existence, namely that even though there is happiness and joy in life it is also full of dukkha (suffering that results basically from the kind of beings we are, the five aggregates; anatta (no soul, entities, including ourselves, are not what they are due to an eternal essence); and anicca (there is change, things do not remain the same). The Buddhist strives to go beyond ideology, to experience the world beyond the symbolic and the imaginary, to the extent that such experience might be possible. When one has achieved Nirvana, one is where he or she was before, but hopefully that experience can be brought to bear on how life is lived. Nirvana is beyond morality because compassion becomes a direct response, not a rule that one has to follow. If someone is hungry, you give them food, not because it's the right thing to do, but simply because they are hungry. Zizek criticizes the Buddhist view that we don't have a self, but he falls into the fallacy of equivocation here. The self exists, but not as an essence, a fixed substance that survives the disintegration of the body. The self is an ephemeral, impermanent, fluid structure mostly made up of the real, the symbolic and the imaginary. On page 68 Zizek accuses Buddhism of rejecting the Self as a free responsible agent, but he's attacking a straw man. It is only through enlightenment that we can become truly free, responsible agents. I don't understand why of late Zizek feels the need to bash Buddhism, but one thing is clear, his understanding of it is superficial. Except for the section on Buddhism, I found the book engaging and worthwhile.

It's amusing to read a philosopher who is up to speed on pop-culture. There are several laugh out loud commentaries, but the funniest was his deconstruction of Psy, the South Korean trance dance phenomena we're all still trying to forget. Other than the hoots, this book is great if you like the circularity of Continental fare. Even though it strains the patience of Americans, 'lets get 'er done mentality', it also illumines each subject with untold nuances, as befits poetic elegance and a participatory world-view.Here and there, scattered throughout the text are insights worthy of Nagarjuna or Wallace Stevens - jewels that shatter our conventions and open facets of contemplative intensity. I enjoyed reading this book and came upon information and points of view that were genuinely new and interesting. Like any bard, Zizek sometimes gets lost in his own bombast. This can be funny, or annoying. In any case, the joke is on you!

A good bookIf you want to understand Lacan's psychoanalysis Zizek is one the authors to read about that topic. Another way is to look at the South American school. Due to his background there's inevitably some influence from Marx or Engels. useful if you want to understand novel authors such as Murakami, Ozeki.

Zizek understands the contours of our current political climate. In this new book, he explores the various ways one can approach and interpret the philosophical concept of the Event, or an occurrence that radically reframes our relationship to not only the present and future, but even the past itself.His interpretations of Buddhism however leave a bit to be desired. Zizek may be the master of random connections, but sometimes his connections are a little too random and scant on source material. Regardless, this is a stimulating read and would be of particular service to any new readers of Hegel or Lacan, with whom Zizek always engages in exciting ways.

Easy to read and rich in insight. Zizek is a treat and I recommend anyone looking for a moderate read in terms of difficulty check it out.

five star event what is event new event old world fantastic book fast as always happy to read awaiting new events hope to understand

I expected something more defiying from Zizek. Though I enjoyed his ideas and the way he exposes them, I felt the book is kind of "inorganic".

school requirement

I've previously only seen Zizek interviewed on television, and always liked his commentary so decided to dip my toe into his writing. What's curious about this book is that exactly what attract me to do this in his interviews is detrimental in his writing. He is clearly very knowledgeable and clever with a broad spectrum of interests: he uses many and eclectic examples to explain his point. The problem is this is often done to the extent the original point is lost, so you have to go back to rediscover what the point actually is - not the easy read the blurb proports it to be. That said the examples are always relevant and interesting, they are just too long and too frequent. I found the parts of the chapter "The Three Events of Philosophy" needed some foreknowledge of some basic academic philosophy so of you lack this you might struggle - I certainly did in the section refering to Hegel and Lacan.All that said I don't think he's hiding behind complexity to obscure lack of content, it's more like a stream of consciousness, where he writes as if he is speaking. Will probably give one of his other books a try.

Žižek makes some good points. He just takes an age to get to them. Meanwhile, the reader has to wade through over-described religious, historical and metaphorical examples before getting to the point, then realising that you need to re-read the chapter to see how the examples and point match!Žižek also can be a bit heavy in his sentence structure and vocab. I am doing an EdD and I was confused many times.

Zizek ages well, like good leather. I do not yet have the groundings in Hegel and Lacan for the lengthier tomes. First encountered Zizek writings on a film MA course at Kent University. Subversive and illuminating thinker, cliches but both true.

Provides some really good insights into subjects not usually thought about in everyday life. Great read, short but still provides some great information. If you are a fan of Zizek's writing this is a must read, although some points have been made before its always nice to see them in a different context.

Very good book.