Lacan’s Big Other and Goycho Saib

Lacan speaks of the big Other. It is very close to Foucault’s pan-opticon. 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 pan-opticon 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 stand-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 one that provides ‘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 begin to use language. 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 have 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, it 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. This has layers of sonemes from the Arabic and Persian which means companion and master. It came to India via Mughal’s usage where Persian was the court language. Sahib then came to stand for a respectable person. It is from this usage, we are told that Sahib also became honorific title. Even Before the Portuguese could arrive , Arabs traded in Goa and perhaps the title Sahib may have been already in use as there appears to be some deep cultural roots between Goa and middle east traders.

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, that the religious Goans, Catholics as well as Hindus and others think of St. Francis Xavier 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 quite unjustifiably as a traitor responsible for ills of conversion and inquisition. This means Goycho Saib becomes a symbolic signifier anchoring religious and cultural identity of Goans and perhaps it is precisely for this reason his locus as Goycho Saib is being questioned by some right-wing elements in Goa. 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 to them as Lacan teaches us. This is why it is difficult to change people who think differently about St. Francis Xavier. St. Francis Xavier remains a point de capiton of cultural cohesion to Goans everywhere. Maybe St. Francis Xavier has become part of the big Other of the reining symbolic order in Goa. The Saint has come to be revered as a protector of Goa by all and sundry over the centuries. In fact the honorific meaning of Goycho Saib draws this status as a protector of Goa and Goans.

The big Other shapes our identities and desires. 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. With the Saint as part of the big Other of Goa, we can trace the acceptance of this space as protector of Goa by majority of Goans while there is also significant minority belonging to the right-wing that sees him a continuation of colonial legacy, perpetrator of conversion and notorious inquisition. When one critically considers the legacy of St. Francis Xavier, one can see that it remains way beyond Goa. In fact, St. Francis Xavier’s heritage is big in South Asian if not in the entire Globe. Unfortunately, he seems to be dwarfed in the imagination of the right-wing forces who seems to be hell bent on politicising him by localising his legacy to Goa. The fact that the Saint is set aside for a special attack by the right-wing forces, it appears that the right-wing forces seem to convert him into a stick to beat the Christian minorities in Goa and India. This reverse weaponizing St. Francis Xavier has become a tool for political mobilization of the majority to justify political agenda as well as garner votes for the fundamentalist parties. This bashing of the Saint easily attacks media attention and reinforce a sense of victimhood of the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

GREETINGS

Attention is a generous gift we can give others.

Attention is love.

- Fr Victor Ferrao