Lacan speaks of the big Other. It is very close to Foucault’s panopticon. For Lacan, the big Other is a hypothetical observer watching over our actions and conversations. Lacan says that we obey the big Other while for Foucault’s panopticon produces self-policing that is seeking for an opportunity to rebel. Lacan’s big Other is about what is permissible and what is not permissible. It is controlling and directing our action and ultimately remains the other and is impenetrable but informs our desire. For Lacan, the big Other is the universal sand-in authority, the Freudian father of Oedipus Complex who takes upon a surveillance function.
The big Other structures our desire not as a source of fear and punishment but as mode of being a ‘ subject’ or imperatives of being . This means it becomes a source of recognition. It makes us feel that we are faithful and hence, we feel satisfied. Thus, for instance, we may take an analogy of a big Other: for the actors in a theatre, the big Other is the audience. The actors are being watched over by this big Other and their performance and the roles that they play are being recognized by the audience. It is in the recognition of the audience that the actors feel satisfied and content. Thus, the big Other appears as fantasy and nightmare, intimately linked to the subjects from the moment they began to use language. Thus, the big Other is the mOther that shapes each of us. There is always a gap between the self and the big Other opening the road for growth or regress.
Within the horizon of the big Other, the several orders of sounds come to build a pan-audicon, and we as speaking and listening subjects begin to validate our modes of being in a soundful world. It is by reference to the big Other, we come to recognize ourselves. Thus, as the soundful signifiers slide, we find the point de capiton that opens us to our world of signification and we feel that we belong to it. Thus, for instance, Goycho Saib, title given to St. Francis Xavier in Goa, before it comes to pass into language, belongs to the orders of sounds which stay between languages. Its Arabic origins and its reverberations in Hindi and other Indian languages remain within its soundful pan-audicon.
But to Goans when the soundful signifiers slide, the signifier Goycho Saib becomes point de capiton or anchor point that opens us to layers of meanings that are linked to the big Other(s) of the Goans. It is in this context, the religious Goans, Catholics as well as Hindus and others think of him as one in whose hands Goa is safe while the politically oriented especially from the right wing swing to the other end of the spectrum and think of him as a traitor responsible for ills of conversion and inquisition. Although, the positions of the right wing are contestable yet as they flow from the big Other, they become ways of drawing recognition and satisfaction as Lacan teaches us. This is why it is difficult to change people who think differently about St. Francis Xavier.
For Lacan, a subject always asks the big Other : what do you want? Actually it is asking what do I want ? This is because, one seeks recognition from the big Other. Hence, it seems that in only becoming aware of our need of validation from the big Other that we can free ourselves from its clutches. This does not mean that we will be fully free. We might walk into another big Other. Perhaps, we cannot live without the big Other. What we need is awareness. Such an awareness is freedom.
