The paper examines the way Vermes’s bestseller and its cinematic adaptation, Look Who’s Back, are structured in analogy to Lacan’s notion of the fundamental fantasy, i. e., the framework within which subjects organize their desire in relation to the Other or to the Other’s desire. Employing mainly Adam Kotsko’s terms of awkwardness and sociopathy, I argue that the characters in the novel and the film and the implied and actual audiences constitute Hitler, the narrator and protagonist, as a fantasmatic awkward-sociopath big Other. Hitler is portrayed both as a ludicrous representation of an unsettling and awkward social order, that cannot implement clear and definite norms, and as a cynical sociopath who is incapable not only of overcoming this order but also of fixing it by making it ‘whole’ and consistent again. Discussing major differences between the novel and the film, I examine the ways audiences may fall and avoid falling into the trap of the novel’s and the film’s fantasy. This interpretation contributes simultaneously to the assessment of Hitler’s specific portrayal in Look Who’s Back and the critical exploration of his emblematic representation in our contemporary culture as well as its reasons and effects.

中文翻译：

---

尴尬时代的幻想及其悬念：帖木儿·维尔姆斯的《谁回来了》

本文考察了Vermes的畅销书及其电影改编作品《 Look Who's Back》的构建方式，类似于拉康的基本幻想概念，即主体在框架内相对于他人或他人的欲望组织其欲望的框架。我认为主要采用亚当·科茨科的尴尬和社会病术语，我认为小说和电影中的人物以及暗示的和实际的观众构成了希特勒，是叙事者和主角，是一个幻想中的尴尬社会交往者。希特勒被描绘成无法实现清晰明确的规范的荒谬而尴尬的社会秩序的荒唐表现，也被描绘成愤世嫉俗的社会变态者，他不仅不能克服这一秩序，而且也无法通过使其成为“整体”来解决问题。再次一致。在讨论小说和电影之间的主要差异时，我研究了观众可能跌入并避免陷入小说和电影幻想的陷阱的方式。这种解释同时有助于评估希特勒在《看谁回来》中的特定写照，以及对他在我们当代文化中的象征性表现及其原因和影响的批判性探索。