José Luiz Aidar Prado 148 Beividas, the semiotization of drives from tensive semiotics, examining “their pathological destinies and their passionate con- sequences” (ibid., p. 21). When the enunciator-summoner of consumption questionstheenunciator,heappealstoadrivecircuitanditsgrammars, with the resulting passionate regimes, to offer the metonymic object6 to the consumer who seeks satisfaction/enjoyment (jouissance). It interests us to link circulation/production of sign/meaning value with the generation of economic surplus value, from the call for attention and the multidirectional interactions that emerge from it, as well as drive circuits, linked to poly-sensory enjoyment, involving the visual, olfactory, tactile, and auditory dimensions, without considering one sense at a time but seeking to understand how sensitive fields contribute to the semiotic efficiency, reaching sensitive bodies7. This drive circulation seeks an imaginary fullness of jouissance, which is not realized, producing a remainder, a bal- ance of dissatisfaction: “the drive is always bypassing an un- reachable object, configured as a remnant of jouissance to be recovered [...]; it is the symbolic instance that bars jouissance, and thus allows the emergence of the subject of desire, maintaining the imaginary coherence of the self. In other words, to desire, it is necessary to accept a loss of enjoyment” (FONTENELLE, 2020, p. 302). This structural dissatisfaction is what drives the circuit of demands and the search for surplus value. There is an important part in this process of activat- ing the network of desires based on technological agencement, which can be understood “as a form of summoning to the enjoyment that contemporary consumer culture has been promoting” (ibid., p. 301). The interpellations of the enunciator-summoner are linked to broader discourses of the brand and discourses semanticism directly linked to the perception that man has of his own body. It articulates as euphoria and dysphoria. 6 Lacan (1999, p. 20) is the one who speaks of the metonymic object, which is always a parcel and never the whole object of satisfaction. The consumer slides from object to object, which is always partial, and places itself as metonymic in relation to the object of desire, which is always impossible. 7 On the semiotics of the body, see FONTANILLE (2017).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz