On writing too much about The Monstrosity of Christ

Since the release of Zizek and Milbank’s Monstrosity of Christ, I have written the following pieces either about it or significantly discussing it, all but the first by invitation:

  • A short review for Political Theology
  • A piece for a special issue of The International Journal of Zizek Studies, assessing whether Zizek’s writings since The Parallax View confirm the interpretation I put forward in Zizek and Theology; obviously Monstrosity is the focus of most of my attention (forthcoming)
  • A response to a contribution to the annual Barth Blog Conference, which puts Barth in dialogue with Monstrosity (forthcoming)
  • A contribution to a “roundtable discussion” on the book at the online journal Expositions (forthcoming)

As you might expect, I’m starting to run out of things to say about it. All this is in addition to an article on Zizek that is supposed to be coming out in La revue internationale de philosophie (in a special issue on Zizek) and an AAR paper discussing the concept of the “body of Christ” in light of Zizek’s work. Though I appreciate the writing opportunities that come with being a go-to “Zizek guy” — and though I also definitely feel a responsibility to be part of the ongoing conversation since Zizek is so often misunderstood — hopefully the publication of Politics of Redemption and Awkwardness will lead to more invitations to write on non-Zizek topics.

5 thoughts on “On writing too much about The Monstrosity of Christ

  1. If Zizek is going to be abstaining from political/pop culture interventions in order to dedicate the rest of his time to some sort of Summa Lacaniana/massive philosophical tome, maybe he’ll need a ghost writer? I bet Verso would pay well for such a position. Then again, they could probably just mix together different sections from all of his already-published books and generate an infinite number of new Zizek books, without anyone the wiser.

Comments are closed.