Problem of the ‘Author’ - application of Jacque Lacan’s “schema” to a tryout literature analysis

Lacan’s thesis “Schema S-A, a-a’ “, in other words, unconsciousness has already been
determined by language, that is covered by ordinary consciousness and never system. For unusual such a case as schizophrenia shows that unconscious language is to be revealed,unconsciousness shall appear as a symptom of brain malfunction. We never know the “Reality”, what nerve system constructs.
Now, turn to the application to literature. Literature appears from phenomenologically point of view to be sets of conditional branches. Such as storytelling is usually to be logically and consistently built, etc. No one can understand inconsistency and illogical story, if so, goes to mess. Officially, in common, such a pulp should be excluded as a delusion.
Yes, that is absolutely accepted in scope of literature definition. Exceptionally accepted cases still exist. That shows “existential investigation” can be admitted as a manner of literature try out. “For ‘a writer’, the most important thing is ‘writing itself,’ not the content.” according to a famous sarcasm, Derrida, Barthes, Foucault, etc. My argument is far from sophisticated nonsense disguise such as “texture of literature”, even if I still admit Barthes personally.
Unconsciousness shall be free from logically consistency and be full of profound image series like dream. Dream is ordinally inconsistent and illogical, and that is harmless and immediately forgettable. But some text shows that bad dream exists as reality. Unconsciousness appears directly to the surface consciousness covered by language.
Turning to the thesis, I ask if the bad dream can make reality by awesome image series which seem to be baroque construction of psychoanalytic misinformation. In truth, I admit that such kind of literature is inevitably is attracting us, and no one can avert his eyes. Edgar Allan Poe starts this kind. In other words, no work is attracting us unless that implies essentially factor of dream. My thesis goes to show outlook and investigate to Franz Kafka’s works.
“Verwandlung”, in short, the man wakes up and find him a worm. That is all.
Phenomenologically, two point of view are congested. Self-consciousness belongs assertively to the human being and the storyteller crudely describe him as a worm.
Telling the truth, inconsistency of “Verwandlung” are pointed out. In reality, no worm
appears after carefully reading in detail, assessed in terms of bad taste harassment for readers, nasty worst joke for Flaubert’s works. Yes, those sarcasms are in terms of literature analysis
all true. I have already known that.
I am not such a person as naïve to believe this kind of existential experience.
In short, the author exits along his texting lines. If making this kind of story in flat tone
reasoning and proving the evidence, that is psychologically interesting. Indeed, his text is
mixed with contradicting viewpoint simultaneously. The author, narrator, the actor, named as Samsa are the same person. No distinction exists. Literally, that is horrible. Not the content, the mixing of three point of view makes bad dream image series to reality, so to say, complex labyrinth.
Concerning delusion, narrator and actor are completely different state of mind even for
schizophrenia. But Kafka is Gregor Samsa, narrator, and the Author are coexisting and
changing their roles consistently and simultaneously. Kafka makes himself as 3 roles, perhaps more. That is awful. And the unconsciousness and the consciousness seem to be appearing simultaneously. The Author are supervising the situation and always are there in this text. I recall that, according to Lacan’s schema,” S” cannot be appeared and is only observed as a symptom, so that my question goes to the psychoanalysis area in which simultaneously coexisting unconscious bad dream and mind state of reason can be. That is impossible for Lacan’s theory. But Kafka apparently made it by consistent story and the author seems to be controlling all things. That means reason and dream can coexist.
In short, Kafka shows that his works, ”Das schloss” or “Verwandlung”, etc., makes bad dream come to reality. I think that consistency is sticked with the author’s Ego. The Ego may be originally different from function of unconsciousness and consciousness. I am just pointing out that the “author” is mysterious existence, Ego itself. Myths belong to the author’s name and contribute every impression to the “author’s private story”. But “the Author”, Ego, is thinkable as coworking with language activity mixed with actors and narrators but Ego function is independently working in and along his text. That is my short conclusion.
Thank you for reading,