ABSTRACT
This double movement of theory is necessitated by an attempt to sustain the radical potentiality of the encounter of psychoanalysis and Marxism. As with Marxist theories, the discoveries of psychoanalysis are often taken up in a way that ignores their contribution to a revolutionary understanding of the subject in sociality. Such interpretations tend to emphasise the structural aspects of Lacan's work: symbolic relations are stressed as somehow pre-existing the work of ideology and specific social relations. Kristeva aims at an analysis which establishes the inseparability and mutual dependency of these two aspects in the positioning of the subject, but without either being submerged in the other. In this way, she can sustain an analysis of practice at the same time as observing the limitations of sociality and the work of ideology.
