Mad World: War, Movies, Sex - Slavoj Zizek
Published in 2023 by OR Books, London, UK and New York, NY
220 pages
ISBN: 978-1-68219-449-2
Slavoj Zizek, if nothing else, is known as a prolific, provocative, and vociferous writer. In recent years, avid readers of Zizek know that he will almost invariably release at least two books: one dense, academic book of philosophy and another collection of articles on current events. Whether you love or hate him, it is undoubtedly fascinating to see someone like Zizek occupy the space of a public intellectual, a position that has faded in prevalence over the past half-century.
In his 2023 work, Mad World: War, Movies, Sex, Zizek gives his quick assessments of contemporary geopolitics and film. Tackling current political events such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, lamenting the state of leftist opposition in an increasingly reactionary world, and commenting on the ideological function of films such as Tár, Black Widow, Luca, The Woman King, Moonfall, and Everything, Everywhere, All At Once, Zizek once again brings these incendiary essays to the forefront of discussion.
Overview:
As another collection of previously published essays, Mad World is a whirlwind tour through the thoughts of Zizek as he analyzes current events and films. The essays are divided into three main sections. In the first, Zizek directly addresses the war in Ukraine, emphasizing the importance of supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression. In one chapter, Zizek links the struggle against Russia to the Palestinian struggle against Israel and the US occupation of Iraq. In another, he questions whether a proposed Ukrainian public orgy would be considered morbid and strange in the face of Russian nuclear destruction. Zizek also defends his decision to publish articles in Russia Today, claiming that it was the only way to publish essays about Julian Assange, the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and the weakness of liberal democracy to the widest possible audience. In this way, he believes that Leftists should not be afraid to play one global superpower against the other in bringing attention to the universal struggle in which we are engaged.
In the second section, Zizek turns to one of his favorite hobbies: analyzing the ideology at work within contemporary cinema. Always attentive to the changing landscape of Hollywood, Zizek decries the rise of “falsely progressive movies--ones that illustrate openness to immigrants, the predicament of the nomadic working class, feminine solidarity, etc. But these films deal with these topics in a ‘decaffeinated’ way, blurring their critical edge” (72). He then lambasts the faux-progressivism of Black Widow, Luca, and Nomadland. Zizek also devotes one of the longest chapters to analyzing Todd Field’s 2022 movie, Tár. After recounting the plot “shamelessly condensed from Wikipedia” (footnote 52, pg. 83), Zizek argues against the common readings of Tár as either a politically correct tale or anti-cancel-culture critique, suggesting that rather than a case of narcissism, Lydia Tár’s characterization is one of “authentic dedication to her Cause” (94).
Zizek then goes on to connect four seemingly disparate events -- the funeral of Elizabeth II, the election of Georgia Meloni, the debut of the movie The Woman King, and the eruption of protests in Iran after the killing of Masha Amini -- through the prism of the rise of female right-wing nationalist leaders. Essentially, instead of the standard liberal vision of femininity as a #GirlBoss, we need women mobilizing their marginalization into a universal struggle. He then turns his attention toward Belgian filmmaker Chantal Akerman’s 1975 classic Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles, commenting on symbolic suicide and socio-symbolic identity under patriarchal domination.
He then analyzes the 2022 blockbuster film, Everything, Everywhere, All at Once. Zizek argues that the subversive edge of the film is disrupted by the “false humanist ending: the Leibnizian insight that, in spite of all troubles, we live in the best of possible worlds” (122). He criticizes the film for its depiction of multiple realities, arguing that it is less radical in its depiction of multiplicity than the scientific notion of superposition. To pick one reality and be happy with it is a false choice because it is not us that picks; rather, reality simply happens to us. Finally, Zizek utilizes two of his guilty pleasures -- Roland Emmerich’s Moonfall and Adam McKay’s Don’t Look Up-- to contemplate the use of satire and absurdity as a response to inevitable catastrophe.
In the third and final section, Zizek comments on a wide range of socio-political events that filled the headlines of 2022. He praises Gabriel Boric’s victory in the Chilean election as a positive sign of principled pragmatism from the Left. Zizek comments on the rising role of China as a global hegemonic power, writing that it is a supreme irony that it was Mao himself, “by tearing apart the fabric of traditional society, who created the ideological conditions for rapid capitalist development” (155). He also utilizes Emma Watson’s 2022 pro-Palestine Instagram post and the resulting backlash and accusations of anti-Semitism as a springboard to critique the Zionist insistence that solidarity with the suffering of Palestinians and against the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank is anti-Semitic. Zizek then offers commentary on the vapid rise and precipitous fall of BitCoin and NFTs before using the strange discourse that arose regarding AOC’s boyfriend’s feet to discuss the relationship between consent, desire, patriarchy, and sexual violence. Finally, he rounds out these essays by surveying the current geo-political landscape and the emergence of a new Cold War with Russia and China.
Commendations:
There are a few key strengths to this collection from Zizek. First, the brief length of each essay and the direct language that Zizek employs allows for a quick read. While this brevity prevents Zizek from going into depth on any one topic, it also mostly curtails the tangents he’s known for in other works. Zizek continues his penchant for combining pop culture, Lacanian analysis, and the fascinating and strange dimensions of current geopolitical events. Despite some sloppiness in a few places (and his incessant dependence on Wikipedia as a source), Zizek still has a talent for communicating complicated philosophical ideas in relatively accessible language.
The chapter on anti-Semitism and Palestinian solidarity is quite prescient and astute in diagnosing the current discourse that the events of October 7th and its aftermath have wrought. He correctly recognizes how claims of anti-Semitism have been weaponized against anyone critical of the state of Israel. He writes:
The title of a recent dialogue on anti-Semitism and BDS on Der Spiegel was: “Wer Antisemit ist, bestimmt der Jude und nicht der potenzielle Antisemit” (Who is an anti-Semite is determined by the Jew and not the potential anti-Semite). Okay, sounds logical, the victim should decide if they are really the victim. But there are two problems here: (1) Should not the same hold for Palestinians who should be able to determine who is stealing their land and depriving them of elementary rights? (2) Who is “the Jew” who determines who is an anti-Semite? What about the numerous Jews who support BDS, or who have doubts about Israel’s politics regarding the West Bank? (181-182)
By highlighting the ideological divisions within a particular identity group, Zizek reveals the logical limits of identity politics, particularly Zionism. At the time of this review (early 2024), the war in Gaza is still raging on as Israel continues to bombard the region, murdering thousands of civilians in the process. As such, while it seems like we are beginning to reach a turning point in what was previously unilateral Western support for Israel after the murder of seven aid workers by an Israeli drone strike, Leftists still face an uphill battle in a country whose House of Representatives passed a measure explicitly equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.
Relatedly, Zizek also links Ukraine’s struggle against Russia to the Palestinian struggle against Israel’s occupation. Slamming Zilensky’s speech at the Knesset where he likened Ukraine to Israel, Zizek flips the script, writing, “Similar to how Russians treat Ukrainians, Israel denies Palestinians are a nation, they are dismissed as part of the Arabs….Like Israel, Russia is a military superpower colonizing a smaller and weaker entity (the West Bank and Ukraine, respectively). Like Russia in occupied Ukraine, Israel is practicing a politics of apartheid that reduces Palestinians to second-class citizens” (31). Again, Zizek’s commitment to Palestinian liberation here is prescient and applicable today just as much as when he originally wrote this essay.
Finally, I appreciated Zizek’s consistent insistence on eschewing particularist demands in favor of a universal struggle. Following Badiou and his philosophy of the Event, Zizek writes, “It is crucial for us to discern between fundamentalist pseudo-events (mobilization for a national cause) and authentic events (struggle for social justice, against global warming, etc.). To do this is pretty easy: A pseudo-event is by definition exclusionary, a passionate defense of one’s own state or ethnic or religious identity, while an authentic event is by definition universal” (164). These small rays of hope for change help to lift what is an otherwise dour and pessimistic tone that Zizek employs throughout these essays, which often leave the reader feeling doomed to inevitable failure and destruction.
Critique:
On the other hand, this volume has several key weaknesses. In a similar vein as Pandemic!, Pandemic! 2, and Heaven in Disorder, the articles collected here do not offer the deepest philosophical or theoretical reflections as one might hope from Zizek. While there are plenty of interesting twists and turns that are typical of Zizek’s writing, these essays often sacrifice depth for the sake of brevity, leaving the reader with little more than a collection of hot takes on current issues.
As stated earlier, his view of the conflict between Israel and Palestine is correct in its overall assessment. In light of the brilliant article previously mentioned in this collection, it is so frustrating to see Zizek deliver casually anti-Arab hot-takes on television networks that work to sully his gradually souring reputation among even his most ardent followers. This is especially perplexing because, at least in one essay, he critiques Europe and the Western fantasy of defending Western civilization against the “barbaric-totalitarian East,” which ignores “the dark side of Europe, which is marked by modern slavery, colonialism, and Fascism, to name a few” (31). While Zizek has certainly embraced a certain brand of Eurocentrism in recent years, he is also not always consistent in the framing of his critiques.
Ultimately, I often try to give the benefit of the doubt to a charitable reading of Zizek’s worst takes. In this case, I think that Zizek spoke far too loosely and carelessly on this particular issue, even though the crux of his argument is correct. It comes down to trying to systematize a thinker who is often not consistent in their argumentation which leads to much of the current frustration with Zizek.
Finally, when it comes to his summation of popular films, it is clear that he most likely did not watch several of the movies on which he offers commentary. Zizek has done this many times before, and his recalcitrant insistence on offering commentary on media he only reads summaries of is often frustrating. For example, he quickly gives a Wikipedia-sourced summary of the Disney film Luca, offering the obvious insight that Luca’s identity as a sea monster is an analog for feeling like an outsider (particularly LGBTQ+). Yet, he continues, “This sounds nice, but it is ideology at its worst: In this universe, there are no antagonisms among sea monsters or humans, so all that is needed is trust, friendship, and tolerant understanding” (74). While Zizek is right to point out that ideology does indeed function in this film, he completely misses the mark in suggesting that there is no antagonism between humans and sea monsters, as Luca’s attempts to hide his identity due to prejudice serve as the primary driving force of conflict within the plot of the film. Again, while it is refreshing to read clear and confident statements, Zizek’s more gratuitous and outlandish statements contribute to the occasional sloppiness of his work.
Conclusion:
Overall, Mad World is another insightful addition to the ongoing conversations currently engulfing our political landscape. While there is plenty to disagree with in this slim volume, Zizek never fails to challenge and provoke readers to think critically about the world and the seemingly insurmountable crises that we face. If you’re interested in some pop philosophy that addresses contemporary events, then this work serves as a valuable introduction to Zizek and his unique theoretical approach. If you’re already familiar with Zizek and are looking for deeper philosophical and theoretical reflection, then you might find many of these entries to be too surface-level for your preference. In an increasingly mad world, one thing remains consistent: Zizek’s never-failing penchant to provoke readers, short-circuiting common wisdom to think about the world anew.