ABSTRACT
The question thus arises as to how one should respond to desire. In this chapter, four preliminary possibilities emerge: Firstly, one can choose to ignore the issue of desire entirely and continue working as a pre- or post-desire researcher and teacher. Secondly, one can respond to the Real in a passive manner, accepting desire as an inherent quality or emotional state. This entails acknowledging the world as enigmatic and enjoyable, yet recognising that one's actions will not alter this fundamental aspect. Thirdly, there is the concept of “active desire”, which can be defined as a potential force that may evoke desire and facilitate emancipation and a revolution of everyday life. Such a longing for radical emancipation, history-making, and revolution can manifest in various forms. These include apocalyptic Heideggerianism (there are other Heideggerian interpretations), the neo-Nietzschean obliteration of the concept of “Man”, or utopianism, as evidenced in certain forms of terrorism. A fourth response to desire can be identified, which draws heavily on the second and third responses. This fourth response does not merely entail overcoming and embracing desire in a border sphere and crossing pedagogy (cf. Giroux, 1994), history-making, and the dialogical approach and skills of revolution (Freire, 2010). Such an understanding could, however, result in a further entrenchment in the very logic that this text is attempting to transcend. Rather than attempting to overcome desire, it is more productive to focus on sensitising it and dwelling in its presence.
