That is to say, why was Madame Bovary dragged to court? Not, as it is usually claimed, because it portrays the irresistible charm of adultery and thus undermines the fundamentals of bourgeois sexual morality. Madame Bovary rather inverts the standard formula of the popular novel in which the adulterous lovers are at the end punished for their transgressive enjoyment: in this kind of novel, of course, the final punishment (mortal illness, exclusion from society) only enhances the fatal attraction of the adulterous affair, at the same time allowing the reader to indulge in this attraction without penalty. What is so profoundly disturbing and depressing about Madame Bovary is that it takes away from us even this last refuge—it depicts adultery in all its misery, as a false escape, an inherent moment of the dull and gray bourgeois universe. This is the reason why Madame Bovary had to be brought to trial: it deprives the bourgeois individual of the last hope that an escape is possible from the constraints of meaningless everyday life. A passionate extramarital liaison not only does not pose a threat to the conjugal love, it rather functions as a kind of inherent transgression that provides the direct phantasmatic support to the conjugal link and thus participates in what it purports to subvert. It is this very belief that, outside the constraints of marriage, in the adulterous transgression, we can really obtain “that,” the full satisfaction, which is questioned by the hysterical attitude: hysteria involves the apprehension that the “real thing” behind the mask of social etiquette is itself void, a mere mirage.
(”there is no sexual relationship” în lucrarea gaze and voice as love objects, renata salecl & slavoj žižek, editori)
în aceeași cheie, a sterilității fanteziei, citește žižek și eyes wide shut al lui kubrick. dar despre asta într-un episod viitor.