ÃÑ 36ÆäÀÌÁö

17ÆäÀÌÁö º»¹®½ÃÀÛ

Morpheus
¨ÏDogtooth
¡ãTheelderdaughterispracticingself-castrationfromherparents¡¯cultivatedworld,freedfrombeingtrainedlikeadog.
At the scene where we see the father at the dog training facility, from a dialogue of the dog trainer, it
becomes all clear about the method which works for the children¡¯s education. ¡°A dog is like clay. Our
job here is to mold them.¡± Lacan clearly argues that for the children to move out from the pre-linguistic
Imaginary Order into the Symbolic, it is inextricable for them to encounter the domain of the father.
The patriarch of Dogtooth works as the Law, but is trying to create a world without castration fixing the
innocenceoftheadultchildrenbyusingthisSymbolicrealm.Butsuchaworldmayinsulatesubjectsfrom
the Real as well. It would be right to say that breaking from this regime is touching the Real in Lacan¡¯s
sense,eventhoughitcomesviatheoutsideworldanditisdifferent.
Like the girl who sets up psychotic retreat from the Symbolic structure, the subject is always alienated
fromthedeterminationofsignifiersandthusofsociety.Whenone¡¯sthoughtistruetoserveasaprinciple
change, this stands in a contradictory relationship in that it works through the failure of society to work
perfectly as we humans are both the product and negation. ¡°I could either argue the father traps children
in an imaginary order that does not allow them to enter into the larger symbolic order, or he establishes a
distinctsymbolicstructureawayfromthesocialorderandtrapstheminsideit.Iwouldleantowardthefirst
one,butwiththeprovisionthatoneisalwaysinthesymbolicorder,fromthepointofbirth(andeveninthe
womb).Thesymbolicordershapestheimaginaryretreatfromit,¡±interpretsMcGowan.
Tormentinglanguagevariations
Scene#2
¨ÏDogtooth
¡ãBasedonthevocabularieschildrenlearnedfromtherecording,itisnaturaltowatchscenesliketheyoungestdaughteraskingfora
phoneonthedinnertable,andhermotherhandingoverasaltshakerinresponse.
Intheopeningsceneofthefilm,arecordingofafemalevoicethatgiveslessonsofaseriesof¡°today¡¯snew
words¡± flows out. For instance, ¡°Sea¡± is the leather chair with wooden armrests like the one in the living
room.Consequently,suchscenesthatdepictthechildrensometimespickingupnewwordsfromelsewhere,
when the parents were caught off guard and innocently asking them its meaning take place. One might
expect these cases to have fazed the parents, but they adroitly ask from whom children heard these words
andredefinewithrecognizedsignifiersintoradicallydifferentsignifieds.
¡°Each unsomething thus becomes a something: the flowers one has already picked from the garden; the
well-worn seating in the living room. In other words, these critical efforts to read the new language argue
foraparentalstrategyofbridging,oracollapsingofthedistancebetween,theknownandunknownworld,a
coming-closeroflanguage-itsliteraldomestication-andonethatsuggestsasufficiencytolanguage:itnames
whatthechildrenalreadyknow,nameswhattheyhavealreadyseen,¡±elucidatesEugenieBrinkemaofMIT.
ThisisparticularlytiedtoLacan¡¯spointaboutlanguageshapingthegrowthofthechild.Lacaninherited
Freud¡¯s discovery of the Unconscious and it shows that there is always another meaning or interpretation
thatcomesfromtheUnconsciouswetrytorepress.ThatiswhyLacanvaluedthesignifieroverthesignified,
showingtheroleofmetonymyandmetaphorinanyactofspeech.Hebelievedthatwearebornintothe¡°bath
oflanguage,¡±whichmeansthatourparentsspeakaboutusbeforeweareevenborn-aspaceismadeforus
in language. We do not grasp the language enough to challenge the limits of this space until we reach the
ageofthechildreninDogtooth.
15
MAY 2019

17ÆäÀÌÁö º»¹®³¡



ÇöÀç Æ÷Ä¿½ºÀÇ ¾Æ·¡³»¿ëµéÀº µ¿ÀÏÇÑ ÄÁÅÙÃ÷¸¦ °¡Áö°í ÆäÀÌÁö³Ñ±è È¿°ú¹× ½Ã°¢Àû È¿°ú¸¦ Á¦°øÇÏ´Â ÆäÀÌÁöÀ̹ǷΠ½ºÅ©¸°¸®´õ »ç¿ëÀÚ´Â ¿©±â±îÁö¸¸ ³¶µ¶ÇϽðí À§ÀÇ ÆäÀÌÁöÀ̵¿ ¸µÅ©¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½ÆäÀÌÁö·Î À̵¿ÇϽñ⠹ٶø´Ï´Ù.
»ó´Ü¸Þ´º ¹Ù·Î°¡±â ´ÜÃàÅ°¾È³» : ÀÌÀüÆäÀÌÁö´Â ÁÂÃø¹æÇâÅ°, ´ÙÀ½ÆäÀÌÁö´Â ¿ìÃø¹æÇâÅ°, ùÆäÀÌÁö´Â »ó´Ü¹æÇâÅ°, ¸¶Áö¸·ÆäÀÌÁö´Â ÇϴܹæÇâÅ°, ÁÂÃøÈ®´ëÃà¼Ò´Â insertÅ°, ¿ìÃøÈ®´ëÃà¼Ò´Â deleteÅ°