Žudiko tapatybės paradoksai

The article examines a short story “My Friend Sigitas” [Mano draugas Sigitas] by Alvydas Šlepikas through the lens of Jacques Lacan’s structural psychoanalysis. The main focus is placed on identification, which, unlike in the classical tradition of psychoanalytic literary criticism, is examined not as a mental act of the author or reader, but as an action of verbal communication, embedded in the literary text itself. Thus, a seemingly simple and funny story about the death of a friend is revealed to be rendered around a paradox: through various discursive operations, the homodiegetic narrator simultaneously tries to accept and reject the accusation of murder. In this way, contrary to a common assumption, a traumatic structure of discourse is associated not with a victim or witness, but the accused, i.e., the position of a potential murderer. The latter is analysed neither from the legal perspective, which due to the narrator’s justification to the addressee would be natural in empirical reality, nor by speculating about the inner experiences of the subject, as if he were a real person. By comparing this research strategy with possible alternatives, we demonstrate the differences between psychological and psychoanalytical interpretation of literature.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Jaunųjų mokslininkų darbai
Published
2024-12-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15388/jmd.2024.54.6
Primary Topic
European and International Law Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Žudiko tapatybės paradoksai

Augustas Sireikis
Jaunųjų mokslininkų darbai
European and International Law Studies
article

Žudiko tapatybės paradoksai

Augustas Sireikis
article en

Abstract

The article examines a short story “My Friend Sigitas” [Mano draugas Sigitas] by Alvydas Šlepikas through the lens of Jacques Lacan’s structural psychoanalysis. The main focus is placed on identification, which, unlike in the classical tradition of psychoanalytic literary criticism, is examined not as a mental act of the author or reader, but as an action of verbal communication, embedded in the literary text itself. Thus, a seemingly simple and funny story about the death of a friend is revealed to be rendered around a paradox: through various discursive operations, the homodiegetic narrator simultaneously tries to accept and reject the accusation of murder. In this way, contrary to a common assumption, a traumatic structure of discourse is associated not with a victim or witness, but the accused, i.e., the position of a potential murderer. The latter is analysed neither from the legal perspective, which due to the narrator’s justification to the addressee would be natural in empirical reality, nor by speculating about the inner experiences of the subject, as if he were a real person. By comparing this research strategy with possible alternatives, we demonstrate the differences between psychological and psychoanalytical interpretation of literature.

Jaunųjų mokslininkų darbaiVol. 54
Vilnius University (LT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 57%
European and International Law Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Žudiko tapatybės paradoksai — Augustas Sireikis · Jaunųjų mokslininkų darbai (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS