The Mirror Stage

The “Mirror Stage” is a moment in childhood when the infant first recognizes their reflection as an image of the “self.” This recognition brings a sense of coherence but also alienation: the child identifies with an external image that is separate from their lived experience. This moment sets the stage for the creation of the “I”—a fragmented, incomplete identity that is forever isolated from the wholeness it imagines. The Mirror Stage marks the entry into the Imaginary Order (see below), a realm of illusions and identification.

Orders of Experience: The Imaginary, the Symbolic, and the Real

The Imaginary: Rooted in early relationships (often symbolized by the mother; it can be a figurative 'mother'), this is the realm of images, fantasies, and a sense of safety or wholeness. The Imaginary offers temporary coherence but is ultimately an illusion. Lacan describes it as “the locus of narcissistic identification,” where the self sees itself reflected in an idealized way.

The Symbolic (Order): Governed by language and cultural norms, the Symbolic is the structure through which we navigate reality; think social constructs. It introduces rules and roles but also reinforces our sense of lack by separating us from unmediated experience. Lacan famously remarked, "Man speaks, but it is because the symbol has made him man" (The Function and Field of Speech and Language in Psychoanalysis). The Symbolic Order is both liberating and confining, providing a framework for understanding while simultaneously distancing us from the Real. A parallel can be drawn to Buddhist philosophy, which also distinguishes between conventional reality (shaped by language and societal constructs) and ultimate reality (the unconditioned truth). As the Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh writes, "Our notions of self, person, living being, and lifespan are all illusions, creations of the mind" (The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching). Both perspectives highlight how the systems we rely on for meaning also obscure a deeper, unattainable truth.

The Real: Beyond language and representation, the Real is what cannot be symbolized or fully understood. Encounters with the Real are traumatic because they reveal the inadequacy of our systems of meaning. Lacan writes, “The Real is that which is always in its place. It carries with it the impossible” (Seminar XI: The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis). The Real confronts us with the limits of our ability to comprehend the world, leaving us unsettled and disoriented.

Objet Petit a

Central to Lacan’s theory of desire is the “objet petit a” (the object cause of desire). This elusive object represents what we believe will make us whole but is, in fact, unattainable. Whether it manifests as a person, an achievement, or a fantasy, the objet petit a keeps us yearning, perpetually seeking fulfillment that remains out of reach.

Deferred Meaning of Language

For Lacan, language is both essential and deceptive. It shapes our understanding of the world, but its meaning is inherently deferred: no word can fully encapsulate what it represents, as its meaning depends on other words. Lacan draws on linguistic concepts like metaphor (substitution of one thing for another) and metonymy (association through proximity) to explain how language structures thought and desire. Yet, language always falls short, leaving us trapped in its inadequacies. I highly recommend learning and reading about Derrida's deconstruction, if you haven't already, as their ideas overlap and work well together. Derrida's concepts are more linguistic, while Lacan's concepts are more psychological.

The Trauma of the Real

Occasionally, we are confronted with the limits of our symbolic systems—moments when the comforting illusions of order, meaning, and identity collapse. This is the trauma of the Real: an encounter with the raw, unmediated reality that defies understanding. These experiences strip away the symbolic frameworks that provide coherence, exposing us to the disorienting truth of our existence beyond language or cultural constructs. Lacan’s concept of the Real aligns with Freud’s insights into the human psyche, particularly his exploration of the "uncanny" (Das Unheimliche), which he described as the moment when the familiar becomes eerily unfamiliar. Freud’s analysis of the uncanny draws heavily from literature, especially E.T.A. Hoffmann’s "The Sandman," a story that epitomizes the unsettling collapse of reality. Freud noted, "An uncanny effect is often and easily produced when the distinction between imagination and reality is effaced…” (The Uncanny). Such encounters destabilize our sense of identity, yet they also highlight the fragility and constructed nature of the systems we rely on to navigate life. Both Freud and Lacan underscore how moments of disorientation expose the precarious balance between symbolic order and the uncharted territory of the Real.

Lacan is one of my personal favorite psychologists. However, I found that applying him is an act of temporary insanity or a deprivation of consciousness. This is my personal opinion section, so I will speak frankly: I do my best to understand him but the more I think about him, the less he makes sense. My typical application of Lacan looks like this: learn the terms and concepts, set a timer and write, black out, revive from my literary analysis coma surprised how awesome my ideas sound.

What I'm trying to say is this: Lacan is something you feel and intuitively apply, not something with a clear and structured guide. For this reason, I love it, for better and worse, for it is the destabilization of language and the structures that language creates. But as we write about literature, we are creating structures. This is the paradoxical nature of Lacan, and one that I feel fits literature and the human condition beautifully.

My final suggestion is this: emphasize lack, longing, and the inability to ever feel complete. This is 'The Cure' or 'Radiohead' version of psychoanalytic expression, where the melancholy tones of human existence march in disillusion. We all desperately want something. Sadly, when we get it, we'll realize that it fails to fill that void we desperately are trying to fill. Success, under the Lacanian model of psychological existence, is the abandonment of fulfillment and the ultimate realization that we are incomplete beings that need, above all, acceptance of our own incompleteness.