I love Byung chul-han’s Philosophy, I have spent multiple hours dissecting why is he so dystopian, while I was reading burnout society, one of his exemplary works on capitalism and destruction, In the chapters Han prescribes that, Our competitive, service-oriented societies are taking a toll on the late-modern individual. Rather than improving life, multitasking, “user-friendly” technology, and the culture of convenience are producing disorders that range from depression to attention deficit disorder to borderline personality disorder. Byung-Chul Han interprets the spreading malaise as an inability to manage negative experiences in an age characterized by excessive positivity and the universal availability of people and goods. Stress and exhaustion are not just personal experiences, but social and historical phenomena as well. Denouncing a world in which every against-the-grain response can lead to further disempowerment. he also draws a parallel between kafka and neurological interpretation of competition, “ I would subject Kafka’s version to further revision and turn it into an intrapsychic scene: the contemporary achievement-subject inflicting violence on, and waging war with, itself”
The eagle that consumes an ever-regrowing liver can be interpreted as the subject’s alter ego. For all that, Kafka envisions a healing tiredness: the wound closes wearily. It stands opposed to “I-tiredness,” whereby the ego grows exhausted and wears itself down; such tiredness stems from the redundancy and recurrence of the ego.
He also correlates that the psyche of today’s achievement-subject differs from the psyche of the disciplinary subject. he also critics, increasingly, it is shedding the negativity of prohibitions and commandments and presenting itself as a society of freedom. he asserts that the Freudian unconscious is not a formation that exists outside of time. It is a product of the disciplinary society, dominated by the negativity of prohibitions and repression, that we have long since left behind. The obedience-subject is not a subject of desire or pleasure, but a subject of duty. Thus, the Kantian subject pursues the work of duty and represses its “inclinations.” The contradiction of post-pint culture reflects the late-modern achievement-subject does not pursue works of duty. Its maxims are not obedience, law, and the fulfillment of obligation, but rather freedom, pleasure, and inclination.He also criticizes the way emotions function. The concept of self-love remains entwined with negativity as it involves diminishing and repelling the Other in preference for the self. This self-centered perspective positions itself in opposition to the Other, leading to the Other’s efforts to maintain a certain distance. Self-love, in this context, requires a clear and defined stance in relation to the Other. In contrast, narcissism blurs this distinction. When afflicted by a narcissistic disorder, an individual becomes excessively absorbed in oneself, losing the clarity of boundaries that distinguish the self from the Other.“sign of inner conflict to have more than one real enemy.”
Part-I
Psychoanalysis operates on the assumption that repression and negation are inherently negative processes. According to Freud, the unconscious and repression are closely intertwined. However, contemporary psychological disorders like depression, burnout, and ADHD diverge from this framework. Instead of being rooted in negation, these disorders signify an excess of positivity—characterized by an inability to refuse rather than a restriction in permissible actions. They do not signal a lack of permission [NichtDürfen] but rather an unrestricted ability to do everything [Alles-Können]. Consequently, psychoanalysis lacks a suitable approach to address these conditions. Depression, for instance, does not result from repression linked to dominance, such as the superego. Furthermore, depression does not lend itself to “transference,” a psychoanalytic concept indicating indirect indicators of repressed elements.As per Ehrenberg, depression signifies the “uncontrollable” and is inherently “irreducible.” It emerges from the clash between the concept of limitless possibilities and the recognition of the uncontrollable. According to this perspective, depression manifests when an individual striving for initiative encounters the insurmountable. However, these elements of the uncontrollable, irreducible, and unknown, akin to the unconscious, are characterized as negative entities. They no longer play a constitutive role in an achievement-driven society dominated by excessive positivity.In Freud’s view, melancholy is portrayed as a destructive relationship with the Other that becomes internalized through narcissistic identification, resulting in conflicts with the self. This internalization transforms original conflicts with the Other into a self-relationship marked by conflict, leading to a depletion of the ego and self-directed aggression. However, the depressive disorder experienced by the contemporary achievement-oriented individual does not arise from a conflicted relationship with the Other, which has now become absent or missing.
The late-modern achievement-subject, with a surplus of options at its disposal, proves incapable of intensive bonding. Depression severs all attachments. Mourning differs from depression above all through its strong libidinal attachment to an object. In contrast, depression is objectless and therefore undirected. It is important to distinguish depression from melancholy. Melancholy is preceded by the experience of loss. Therefore it still stands in a relation—namely, negative relation—to the absent thing or party. In contrast, depression is cut off from all relation and attachment. It utterly lacks gravity [Schwerkraft].
PART-II
The process of mourning is activated when a deeply cherished object loses its emotional significance. In mourning, the individual is wholly engrossed in the absent, beloved Other. However, in the context of the late-modern ego, a significant portion of emotional energy is directed inward. The majority of libidinal energy is self-directed, leaving only fragments dispersed among a multitude of transient connections and relationships. The weakened libido can be easily withdrawn from the Other, allowing for its redirection towards new objects. Unlike the extended and emotionally taxing “dream work” characteristic of mourning, the late-modern individual, especially in social networks, swiftly shifts libidinal energy to new objects. In these networks, the role of “friends” primarily revolves around enhancing narcissism by providing attention to the ego, essentially treating the ego as a marketable commodity.
PART-III
Originally, “homo sacer” denoted an individual excluded from society due to a transgression, someone deemed killable without facing legal consequences. The sovereign possesses absolute authority to suspend the established legal norms, embodying legislative power that operates independently yet maintains a connection with the legal order. Consequently, the sovereign doesn’t require justification to establish rights. The state of exception, through the suspension of the legal order, generates a lawless space where any individual can be subject to absolute control. The primary accomplishment of sovereignty lies in creating the vulnerable existence of “homo sacer,” a life stripped of legal protection, existing outside the legal order and consequently susceptible to destruction at any moment.
PART-IV
Agamben’s concept of homo sacer adheres to a framework centered around negativity. In this framework, distinctions between perpetrators and victims, sovereign and homo sacer, are explicitly and topologically delineated. Agamben asserts that sovereignty and the vulnerable existence of homo sacer exist “at the two extreme limits of the [same] order.” The state of exception in Agamben’s theory is characterized by negativity. In contrast, the individuals labeled as homines sacri in an achievement society inhabit a state of totalized normality, which is a state of positivity. Agamben fails to acknowledge the topological shift in power that underlies the transformation from a society of sovereignty to an achievement society.
PART-V
Gendered Expectations Societal expectations regarding gender roles often impose distinct pressures on individuals, contributing to disparate experiences of burnout. Women, in particular, may find themselves navigating additional stressors related to caregiving expectations both at home and in the workplace. The assumption that women bear the primary responsibility for nurturing roles can intensify their workload, fostering an environment conducive to burnout. The delicate equilibrium between work and personal life plays a crucial role in the manifestation of burnout. Women, especially those fulfilling caregiving roles, encounter difficulties in achieving a balanced work-life dynamic. Juggling professional responsibilities with domestic duties can lead to heightened stress levels and increased susceptibility to burnout. The struggle to maintain equilibrium is exacerbated by societal norms that often place a disproportionate burden on women in managing competing demands.
Double Burden: The concept of the “double burden” underscores the challenges faced by women as they navigate both professional and domestic spheres. Managing the demands of a career alongside responsibilities at home can result in heightened stress levels and a greater propensity for burnout. This phenomenon is rooted in societal expectations that may not equally distribute caregiving and domestic responsibilities, contributing to a systemic imbalance. Gender disparities within the workplace create an environment where experiences of burnout can vary significantly. Women, confronted with issues such as unequal pay, lack of representation in leadership roles, and workplace discrimination, may encounter unique stressors that increase their vulnerability to burnout. Inequitable treatment within professional settings further compounds the challenges faced by women as they strive to maintain well-being and professional success.
Intersectionality: The intersectionality of gender with other social categories, such as race, class, and sexual orientation, introduces nuanced layers to the experience of burnout. Women of color, for instance, may confront distinctive challenges that impact their susceptibility to burnout. Intersectional perspectives highlight the importance of recognizing and addressing the interconnected systems of oppression that contribute to differential experiences of burnout among diverse groups of women. Byung-Chul Han’s exploration of self-optimization intersects with gender identity, as societal expectations and norms often pressure individuals to conform to specific gender roles. The constant striving for perfection, driven by societal pressures to meet gendered ideals, can contribute significantly to burnout. Women may find themselves navigating a relentless pursuit of societal expectations, impacting their mental well-being and creating an environment conducive to burnout. The intersection of identity and self-optimization emphasizes the need for a critical examination of societal expectations to foster a healthier and more equitable work-life balance.
PART-VI
Cinematic Critique of Hyperproductivity: The emphasis on productivity and the pressure to achieve in contemporary society is a central theme in Han’s work. Films that critique or explore the negative consequences of hyperproductivity may align with Han’s perspectives.Depictions of Individualism and Isolation: Han discusses the downside of individualism and the impact on social connections. Films that depict characters navigating isolation, loneliness, and the consequences of extreme individualism could be examined in the context of Han’s ideas.Exploring the Digital Age: Given Han’s focus on the digital age and its effects on human relationships, films that explore the influence of technology on society, communication, and personal well-being could provide interesting points of comparison.
Lastly – “All of you who are in love with hectic work and whatever is fast, new, strange—you find it hard to bear yourselves, your diligence is escape and the will to forget yourself. If you believed more in life, you would hurl yourself less into the moment. But you do not have enough content in yourselves for waiting—not even for laziness”
By: Kaushiki Ishwar; BAP (3rd year)
Celluloid: The Film Society of Miranda House 