carolina - 11/19/02 17:39:48 EST
hello, this is carolina from california, i was wondering what lacan says on Electra?I know a lot about Oedipus complex but what about electra?Can someone help me with that?

Terry1 - 11/18/02 07:28:09 EST
Thank-you Rupert.
Have you come across the Shankacharya.I'm interested in this as a form of a belief system that inserts the power of the word not as symbolic but as real. The seduction of language and its majical powers. The problem with these belief systems is they accept no other rendering of the word, like all religions or cults I suppose.

Rupert - 11/18/02 01:05:20 EST
Terry1 - I was referring to the correspondence of the sacred monosyllable AUM and its elements with Atma, AUM being the support for attaining the knowledge of Atma.
The waking state is represented by A; it is said that he who verily knows this obtains the realization of all his desires.

The dream state is represented by U; it is said that he who knows this in truth advances along the path of Connaissance by being identified with Hiranyagarbha, the Golden Embryo.
Deep sleep is represented by M; it is said that he who knows this measures this whole, the Eternal Word.
He who knows the "Fourth" enters into his own Self by means of that same Self.
All this is written in tha Mândûkya Upanishad

Terry1 - 11/15/02 16:04:28 EST
Chris CFAR is a lacanian based research organisation. The London Circle of the European School had an afternoon workshop on : 'Training effects in the formation of the analyst' guest speaker was Rose-Paule Vinciguerra (ECF) I believe some fo these questions wwere raised there.

Chris (uk) - 11/14/02 17:38:57 EST
A problem I have with therapy and being a therapist has to do with organisations which house and support this work and of course the relationship between therapist and an organisation which pays wages is bound to be problematic. I think Lacan highlighted problematic psychoanalytic organisations in ŒTelevision‚.
But if transference comes about because of that someone who is supposed to know, when is the transference addressed to the therapist and when to the organisation, when the work is set in the context of an organisation?
If the therapist Œhas‚ the objet a (as Saphouan might suggest) and fundamental fantasy is sometimes seen as Cause, can organisations as well as therapeutic settings accomodate a fundamental fantasy? What kind of primal scene might there be, when therapists have responsibilities to both client and organisation? Clearly, I'm digressing a little in the direction of the 'aum' of fundamental fantasy

Terry1 - 11/14/02 08:34:43 EST
Rupert expand on that. I cannot get past the symbolic. words are little pictures not sounds

hum - 11/13/02 20:56:46 EST
also, i'm struck by association. The AA/NA questions are realized I beleive in David Foster Wallace's , Infinite jest...It's the only non-fiction that I've been truly interested in that's come close to lacanian.

hum - 11/13/02 20:48:43 EST
is that jess from florida?

Rupert - 11/13/02 20:15:48 EST
A is the complete deployment of manifestation, U is the state of envelopment relative to this deployment, and M represents the return to non-manifestation.
A is represented by a straight line, U by a spiral, M by a point. The whole should serve to achieve Atma.

Terry1 - 11/13/02 17:27:59 EST
The word AUM is NOT a mantra...It is the practice of the vibrating repetition that nakes the mantra go supposedly beyond words. Mantra is vibration.

Terry1 - 11/13/02 17:25:02 EST
Antonia how is a mantra an imago?. How does an imago re-present the physical vibration of a mantra/sound in the body
Chris come into the London CFAR.

Chris (uk) - 11/13/02 17:05:22 EST
I have in mind the personal aspect of this swallowed mantra and equating this with paternal function and the point de capiton, which is sewn up best no doubt by a good analyst, parent or friend. Antonia, when I referred to a fundamental fantasy (in relation to a notion of an addiction to an opening to the real), I had in mind Freud's primal scene. When you introduced me to 'fantasme', I used the net to relocate the word and got something less than primal (in French). Can you say more about the use of this term. I live on a small island off mainland UK. and despite psychotherapy training, have to make use of Lacanian literature (and this chat room) to contain my excitment for Lacanian ideas

Antonia - 11/13/02 16:05:21 EST
A mantra is a sound, and it is also an image - this makes it a signifier. Again, is AUM a word ? AUM are initials. much as I know the letters mean:
(a) the point - condensation, (u) the start out , (m) manifestation In the cabalistic rituals the names of god are inhaled through the nostrils, and cried out - the image of the word drawing itself in the air.. I think these words are as well initials.

Terry1 - 11/13/02 04:54:07 EST
A personal emergency mantra. A mantra is a sound not a word? The swallowing of the symblic re-presentation of the sound is interesting. It's interesting to look at how 'sounds' are used in Indian/Budhist philosophy. The Shankacharya says : 'When you see a word written by me it is as if I had spoken that word to you'

Antonia - 11/12/02 22:28:17 EST
Chris (uk)- the fundamental fantasy is another name for what lacanians call the fantasme.
thus you can also say the fundamental fantasme. $ <> a (barred S, losange, objet a).

chris (uk) - 11/12/02 10:52:33 EST
ps. fundamental fantasy surely involves an interplay of the imaginary and symbolic orders, close up to the real

Chris (uk) - 11/12/02 09:57:06 EST
In the UK. weekend press there was an article about a Buddhist monastery (Tham Krabok) used for detox. and rehab. and favourable comparisons made with regimes here. In the description a patient is given a personal emergency matra, which he or she must remember before literally swallowing a piece of paper with it on. But (in Lacanian terms), instead of this being seen as imposing the symbolic order, is this not rather dialogue with disavowal of the 'Name of the Father': magical words put in place to help memorise paternal function.

Terry1 - 11/12/02 09:20:00 EST
Is the fundamental phantasy really an 'operation' of the symblic order?...Yes of course and all we have is the magical power of words. And we know we can never know the 'thing-in-itself' Lacan DOES offer a way of conceptualising trauma and addiction. Loose demontrates this.

Jess - 11/11/02 22:41:16 EST
Hi. I'm very very new to Lacanian theory and I am trying to write an essay on his conceptualisation of subjectivity. However, there are a few things that I find confusing. What exactly is the unconscious, for Lacan? What is its relationship to the real? He seems to say that the real, the unattainable, resists symbolisation. It is found between the gaps of signifiers. Isn't this also the case for unconscious processes as well, though? To get to the unconscious, we need to read 'between the lines'. The unconscious is what isn't conscious i.e. it isn't (usually) articulated (except through slips of the tongue etc). So what is the difference between the two, for Lacan?
Also, how can the symptom be a metaphor?? I would have thought the two are fundamentally opposed. Isn't metaphor a trick that allows us to get a glimpse of the real (i.e. it allows us to access something beyond words by substituting one word for another), where a symptom is something that 'covers over' the truth, disguises it? I know there is something I'm not quite getting here...any help would be appreciated

Chris (uk) - 11/11/02 18:33:21 EST
I'm not convinced. I have in mind the experience constitutes a fundamental fantasy, with the experience of noises in the night a barrier to any notion of 'there's no such thing as sexual rapport'. How can we say that some experience constitutes an experiencing of the real?

Terry1 - 11/11/02 17:56:12 EST
When Freud noted that Cocaine addicts survived and non-cocaine addicts perished in a South American siege he could see that something happened to the drugged individual. The 'expereince' of the drug is the encounter with the real. The 'addict' has no choice EVEN when s/he knows that the real calls her. The way out is to impose the symbolic order . Be it in prayer or religious form.The supremecy of the 'word' has to be imposed to enable a withdrawl from the 'real'

chris (uk) - 11/11/02 16:19:44 EST
I wonder about the notion of 'an addiction to the opening to the real' despite not having read Nik Loose's piece: I wonder what trauma is being referred to and what real.
If the real is sometimes described as something that 'happens to us', in what sense can this be equated with addiction.
Here I refer to and quote Alenka Zupancic's Ethics of the Real (p235): 'According to Lacan, the Real is impossible, and the fact that 'it' happens (to us) does not refute its basic 'impossibility': the Real happens to us (we encounter it) as impossible, as the 'impossible thing' that turns our symbolic universe upside down and leads to a reconfiguration of this universe'.
If the Real is something that 'happens to us', in what sense can this real be equated with addiction, which must somewhere involve some kind of choosing?

Katja - 11/10/02 15:39:41 EST
thats funny...Rik's my teacher

Terry1 - 11/10/02 14:56:36 EST
Rik Loose calls 'drug addiction' Toxicomania. At least that's how he referred to it to me? He made th point about some drugs being 'cut' by talcum powder. In some cases to 90% so its not the drug that we get addicted to. Its an addiction to the 'opening' to the 'real'.A trauma.

carole - 11/10/02 11:07:33 EST
need info on seminar 2 ,dream of irmas injection.......... any help

Rupert - 11/09/02 23:08:00 EST
Antonia - So after all an erection is what elevates it to the "level" of signifier... Mon Dieu! As the old Canonical Law says: erectio - introductio - ejaculatio
By the way I heard that Terry1 owns a signifier...

Elliott - 11/09/02 21:49:28 EST
katja - the question you seem to be looking at, which is interresting in itself, is: what is it in the subject that abstenance from drugs and alcohol can be achieved on the basis of an identification with the ideal. the AA/NA seems to provide large communities with the common ideal object into which that portion of the drive, that at one time manifested an uncurtailed jouissance, can reinvest and sustain abstinence. Looking at a 'disease concept' of symptomatology from a psychoanalytic perspective is a frustrating thesis to embark upon. see Freud & Bullit, 1966 'Determination which springs from the superego is often as powerless as the determination of the habitual drunkard to abandon drink'. Rik Loose equates this determination, springing from the superego, with the death drive, as it implies terminus, a final solution, a total satisfaction of desire. He suggests that will power alone does not suffice for the addict to abstain, that 'the renunciations of lack, caused by the demand of the superego, often require an ego ideal or idealization'; hense, the toxic transference; in that case are AA/NA the real drug dealers?

Terry1 - 11/09/02 16:48:27 EST
The ONLY time we lose desire is when we are DEAD.

Terry1 - 11/09/02 16:42:42 EST
The AA/NA community belief system takes the subject out of the real. It establishes the dominance of the symbolic order with the 'word' The prayer or the commitment...Adam : 'We sieze the word'. The majical power of words.

Terry1 - 11/09/02 16:37:52 EST
Yes, Rik Loose sees drug addiction as an addiction to the opening to the 'real'. The addict is addicted to the 'real' Pharmicomania. The drug being like a pharmacon ( poison) which allows access to trauma.

Terry1 - 11/09/02 16:30:05 EST
'To have and to own' is to be complete. Parmenides: 'The one is one'

chris (uk) - 11/09/02 13:46:35 EST
Antonia, what you say leads me in the direction of thoughtful silence ... but something still troubles me: something (in what you say) propels me beyond a retroactive process.
It could be 'a process of transformation' or 'at the point of lack', but I'm led to so many mis-readings of desire and so many POINTS de capiton, when I'm not too careful and find I'm giving up on my desire

Antonia - 11/09/02 12:39:25 EST
Chris (uk) - I am not being clear enough. let me try again. With Lacan we have that the phallus results from an uplifting of the male sexual organ to the dignity of a signifier, right? But a signifier of what? The desire in play is sexual desire, more precisely the desire of the Other. The phallus will be the signifier of this desire.
A process of transformation... castration.
The desire of the Other, correlative to castration, the phallus will mark the objet a with meaning and further promote it as object of desire ... at the point of lack it indicates in the subject.

Chris (uk) - 11/08/02 17:14:50 EST
Antonia, I 'm not sure I know what you mean by 'the point of lack ...'. What worries me is collapsing these terms ... and what I interpret as Saphouan's attempt to indicate non-rapport, despite the sometimes association of phallus and objet a.
In which case ... you bring me to non-rapport and Lacan's sometimes antidote - Love (in Encore), which Katja seems to have noticed.

Antonia - 11/08/02 00:28:25 EST
Chris (uk) - Aha. And does the signifier that is lacking, at the point of lack that it indicates in the subject, become a signifier of lack?

Elliott - 11/07/02 03:56:12 EST
Katja, have a look at 'The Subject of Addiction' (by Rik Loose, lacanian psa). He looks at the dangers of that 'ideal' ID;

Chris (uk) - 11/07/02 03:11:23 EST
Antonia, there's an interesting distinction made between phallus and objet a in Safouan's Seminar (Other Press) which may in part describe a context. Asked to describe the relation of the two terms, Safouan says (p.11): 'There is a difference between a signifier that is lacking and a signifier of lack'.

Rupert - 11/06/02 23:23:24 EST
Could it be that "man is not without having it and woman is without having it?" For you don't own what you have...

Antonia - 11/06/02 18:11:06 EST
chris (uk) - the phallus: with Lacan the man wants to 'have it' and the woman wants to 'be it.'
and you can call the phallus an objet a, still we should know in what context MS is choosing to call it so.

chris (uk) - 11/06/02 14:24:27 EST
Moustapha Safouan says the subject is either in the position of 'being' the phallus or 'having' the objet a

Lucy - 11/06/02 04:08:27 EST
Terry 1 - How different is To Have from To Own?
Isn't To Have more or less the same thing as To Own?

Katja - 11/05/02 14:51:43 EST
Hmmm..alright then :( Rupert, by the way, I'm doing my Masters in Addiction and psychoanalysis (Lacanian) - and I have to come up with a thesis proposal...I was thinking of looking at the religous transference demanded of such instituations as AA/NA as creating that 'ideal' identification (also found in certain theraputic techniques) with which the 'addict' invariably becomes bound - meaning that recovery depends on sustaining a false identification be it a higher power, a thapist, a recovered addict etc.. - i suppose my question would lead to; what is it with this whole community/cult (AA/NA) and the society of addicted people that this technique works so well and has, lets face it, proven to help so many addicts recover? is the unresolved 'higher power' transference indicative of (a) no actual recovery taking place (b) a missed encounter between treatment and symptom. Psychoanalysis would obviously regard this 'ideal' transference as an impasse, destined to create relapse in the absence of maintaining that transference, and yet in a way it works. The NA/AA environment seems toxic in itself, hoards of people hypnotised by a common ideal...Clearly i'm muddled! do you have any suggestions as to how i could develope these ideas? or do you think it's all a lot of garble?

Rupert - 11/05/02 13:20:02 EST
Sorry girl, I'm already committed...

Katja - 11/05/02 05:08:48 EST
Marry me Rupert...

Rupert - 11/05/02 02:43:59 EST
Katja, Lacan's reference is to Plato's Symposium, to the love triangle Socrates-Alcibiades-Agathon, but it deals with transfert, love transfert

Rupert - 11/05/02 02:30:41 EST
Katja, "I am not here for his Good, but for him to love me, and for me to disappoint him," lack, transference, love, Séminaire VIII: Le transfert.

Skytte - 11/04/02 16:57:01 EST
Hi fellows! I'm diving into the oceans of philosophy of irony, and wondered if anyone had any enlighting points or could guide my readings to any lacanian texts. Sofar I've covered Kierkegaard, Wayne C. Booth and Paul de Man (more or less).

Katja - 11/04/02 09:27:01 EST
anybody???? Rupert?

Elliott - 11/04/02 09:14:14 EST
I See...

Rupert - 11/04/02 03:48:56 EST
Après-coup is the Other Press

Katja - 11/03/02 12:03:44 EST
I can't find the source of the quote - 'I am not here for his good, but for him to love me, and for me to dissappoint him' - somebody help ASAP Pleeease!

Elliott - 11/03/02 08:00:48 EST
yeah, thanks Lucy/Rina, I actually discovered an orginization called Apres Coup - which seems to have alot going on, It's based at University Place NY 10003 - Has anyone ever attended seminars here?? In Ireland we have the APPI and a journal called The Letter but seminars seem few and far between these days...I found this web site accidently and i'm really impressed - i thought nobody cared...

Rupert - 11/03/02 03:57:27 EST
The Other Press is the real Other...

a - 11/03/02 01:03:38 EST
Slavoj Zizek is not the Other Press

Lucy - 11/03/02 00:47:17 EST
Jacques-Alain Miller is not Other Press

Rina - 11/03/02 00:25:49 EST
Other Press is also located in Manhattan.

Lucy - 11/03/02 00:17:50 EST
Elliot - much as I know lacanian ink - the journal - is based in Manhattan.

- 11/02/02 21:35:04 EST
thanks for your messages on lacan and fashion but could you please expand that

lacanian ink (stuff) - 11/02/02 01:10:33 EST
mark (UK) - you can buy lacanian ink (with a k) at Karnac Books: 118 Finchley Road, London NW3 5HT - UK, and you can also purchase it at (US)

Elliott - 11/01/02 19:52:27 EST
hello all, I was wondering if anybody knows of any Lacanian organizations based in Manhattan...I've been studying Lacan for years now (in Ireland) and plan to move over to NY...I guess i'm a little anxious that may not be any??? the fear!

culture and analisys - 11/01/02 18:24:53 EST
hello, I heard about that some lacanian were doing in Paris I wandered if someone here could help me to some reference of their or similar work. They were treating people from a other culture, and to do so, bringing into the treatment, elements from their culture (like to treat someone from africa, they would take together a african healer of shamman). I would be very greatfull to any reference on this subject. my adres is claudia

mark (UK) - 11/01/02 18:20:03 EST
Does anyone know where you can purchase Lacanian inc in the UK (preferably London)

Chris (uk) - 11/01/02 05:05:21 EST
Moustapha Saphouan says either you 'are' the phallus or 'have' the object a.
But what's important is what happens to desire in psychosis, when someone 'remains tied to the mother's voices'. In a clinical setting the therapist may be aware of a delusional metaphor in the absence of the name of the father, but what happens after that ... if I ask what happens to the therapist's desire, am I moving out of something Lacanian towards Kleinian notions, which concern the survival of the therapist subject to extreme projective identification in psychosis??

Terry1 - 10/31/02 17:57:09 EST
yes when you have it............Its gone!!....and desire starts again.

Chris (uk) - 10/31/02 13:42:06 EST
Antonia, clearly its not a 'phallic jouissance', but one associated with an 'Other jouissance' (psychotic jouissance). In the light of 'there being no such thing as a sexual relationship', and in the Encore Seminar I think, Lacan suggests that a woman only encounters a man in psychosis. Perhaps this is Lacanian humour too!

Halle - 10/31/02 09:42:34 EST
To Have and To Own, and therefore the pleasure is coupled always with suffering because of the fleetness. Am I in the correct lane here?

Antonia - 10/31/02 02:21:14 EST
Chris (uk) - with psychosis the notion of the Other is already altered to a point that we can hardly adress it as such. The paternal metaphor being foreclosed the psychotic remains tied to the mother's voices - there isn't the Law - words fail to symbolise - the quality of language completely changing meaning is obviously affected. So what desire are we talking here, and what jouissance - the unconscious itself is put into question.

Terry1 - 10/30/02 17:31:26 EST
The word Jouissance was in the English language up to two hundred years ago. Then it disappears.

Terry1 - 10/30/02 17:29:59 EST
Well spotted Chris. I'm offering a Lacanian DEFINITION of Joissance, as 'To have and to own' not the French crude sexual definition of sexual joy. The human being and experience CAN be understoond.

chris (uk) - 10/30/02 17:13:02 EST
I'm surprised by a desire to lend jouissance meaning ... I set out from what I thought was a discussion in search of meaning towards a notion that late Lacan has more to do with the opposition of jouissance and desire (instead of meaning) ... but after messaging, I remembered the equation of James Joyce and meaning (Joyce-sens). There's a bit in Moustapha Saphouan's Seminar which prompts my messaging in some way. I'll add these few lines of quote without comment:
'Freud insisted on the wishes, and fantasies. And the fact that we don‚t use the dreams as he used it is precisely due to what I have just said, that the point is not to tell the subject his or her wishes, but to make use of the dream interpretation in order to liberate desire'. (p.80)

Terry1 - 10/29/02 17:35:45 EST
Joissance means 'to have and to own' desire is not jouissance. We desire to be complete............but we can only be complete 'fleetingly' This fleeting completeness is experenced as momentary completeness. When you have it it's GONE.

Chris (uk) - 10/28/02 14:59:59 EST
Antonia, certainly the conceptionalisation of jouissance suggests an eternal something, but instead of the discourse of the hysteric, the discussion seems to concern psychotic jouissance. What then of desire and psychotic jouissance (in the light of jouissance and desire's opposition)? Does an imaginary desire creep out of an unimagined real?

Antonia - 10/28/02 02:04:08 EST
chris (uk) - as for desire being the same as jouissance... would you say the hysteric, caught up in eternal unsatisfaction to the point of unsatisfaction becoming her desire, is the case?

Antonia - 10/28/02 00:28:19 EST
Hayley - you didn't have to tell everybody what I did...

FBC - 10/27/02 21:15:28 EST
Atta doesn't exist. The only thing that exists is the symbolic matrix which creates him, bush and the folks at WTC as well as those watching at home. These all have meaning only in relation to one another.

me - 10/27/02 17:32:23 EST
Rupert - meaning is what precludes psychosis - have to wonder on what it is you intend to say

chris (uk) - 10/27/02 04:44:31 EST
Lacan seems to avoid an interplay of signifier and signified, which would subject therapy to an endless search for meaning. Instead late Lacan aims to 'liberate desire', when desire is not the same as jouissance. This would certainly imply direction

Rupert - 10/27/02 02:46:17 EST
If a signifier functions in conjunction with another signifier, and then the subject, and the subject creates meaning, and meaning is what precludes psychosis, then: was Atta a psychotic in deliberately destroying WTC and killing thousands? Did he have a meaning (sens) of his own? Are we perceiving psychosis (madness) as something other? Or is it something Other? Is really the letter reaching its destination? Look at the cover of Tariq Ali's book where Bush becomes Osama...Psychosis is not something behind bars, and meaning is sometimes direction

Antonia - 10/27/02 01:17:37 EDT
Hayley......what did I do?

Antonia - 10/26/02 21:58:02 EDT
A signifier functions in conjunction with another signifier, and this is how we have a subject, right? What other than meaning, new meaning, does this subject - Freud's other scene - imply?

Hayley - 10/26/02 21:18:01 EDT
You did.

Terry1 - 10/26/02 20:29:44 EDT
Antonia; A subject creates meaning?

Antonia - 10/26/02 02:58:39 EDT
Terry - We create meaning --- a letter has arrived (in our head) Is this meaning what we call a subject?

Antonia - 10/26/02 02:40:53 EDT
Hayley - who told you one always desires the desire of an Other?

Paul - 10/26/02 00:30:04 EDT
Hayley - analysis doesn't change the symbolic structure, but what of the change that aims at the cause of the desire? Insofar as the cause - object a - is bound to shift, the subject will eventually identify with the symptom: tie up the ciphered real inside a word... An imaginary spell in the sense of this word spelling the being "You are...," in the sense of desire giving way, object a trascends the Other. I say the subject doesn't need the Other's recognition to act on this word.

Terry1 - 10/25/02 17:48:57 EDT
Jessica the agency of the letter. Read Edgar Allen Poe's : 'The Purloined Letter' what you will notice is that as the letter changes hands so does the character's behaviour who has the letter. The letter is in our head........A letter always arrives in our head. If it didn't we would be psychotic (unable to create meaning). Whenever we create meaning a letter has arrived (in our head).

Sebastian - 10/25/02 09:04:18 EDT
Lacan's says that the letter always reaches its destination.

jessica - 10/24/02 11:40:12 EDT
can anyone explain the agency of the letter in the unconcious? or perhaps point me to a site that does?

Hayley - 10/24/02 08:32:12 EDT
In agreement with Rina, Analysis doesn't change the symbolic structure. Imagine if it did that. As I've been told, one always desires the desire of an Other. Analysis ideally allows the analysand to become free of the words that unconsciously have her /him bound.

Rina - 10/23/02 20:19:54 EDT
Paul-- As far as my knowledge goes...the Other still exists does he not? It's only that through traversing the fundamental fantasy, the analyst falls from idealization..analysand briefly desubjectifies and the Other is re-constituted freeing the subject to desire again?

Paul - 10/23/02 16:06:39 EDT
Hayley - so what makes for the difference when at the end of analysis there isn't the Other anymore?

Lucy - 10/20/02 18:08:10 EDT
that was so clear Hayley, thank you

Hayley - 10/19/02 21:31:19 EDT
The big Other doesn't exist in the positive sense, It holds a place, it serves a function, it is an absence, and hence can not be equated to God or to atheism.

Bonni Brooke - 10/18/02 23:16:54 EDT
Does atheism affirm the same thing affirmed in saying that the big other doesn't exist?

Lucy - 10/18/02 10:48:24 EDT
there is no English translation of Lacan's seminar on Joyce (1975-6?).

Matt - 10/18/02 09:28:58 EDT
I am in desperate need of an English translation of Lacan's seminar on Joyce (1975-6?). Does anyone know of one (no matter how "authoritative")?

Antonia - 10/18/02 01:47:46 EDT
names, please

- 10/17/02 22:26:37 EDT
in order to secure the symbolic..

- 10/17/02 19:04:05 EDT
the big Other does not exist

- 10/16/02 22:09:01 EDT
"Is the paranoid fear of others related to a basic fear that the big Other does not exist?" Yes, ask not for whom the bell tolls and that.

raphael - 10/16/02 19:39:30 EDT
Do you think the new obsession with terrorism and the Middle East is simply a way of diverting attention from the real economic contradictions present in the US?
Is the paranoid fear of others related to a basic fear that the big Other does not exist?

Terry1 - 10/16/02 14:00:20 EDT
Interesting Antonia

Paul - 10/16/02 13:57:03 EDT
Daithi - go to

Daithi - 10/16/02 08:48:26 EDT
Hello. I'm wondering if anybody could suggest any good texts on addiction and criminality, super-ego etc etc, must be related to addiction and preferably Lacanian or Freudin! Thank You!

Antonia - 10/16/02 04:01:53 EDT
Terry1 - did you read about Argentina putting the judges on trial?

Terry1 - 10/15/02 18:28:29 EDT
A lawyer friend of mine has just finished a Phd on practical Law. Her thesis is that the law as is prosecuted by practitoners, at any time, is represented by 'What is in the head of Judges at any given time' It is the judges that create the practical law AS THEY SEE IT. It is an enlightening thought to consider that judges are walking arbiters of our lives as they THINK they should be lived.

Babich - 10/15/02 17:49:28 EDT
Borderline Personality - Lacanian reading of the symptom and desire that this 'woman' claims (and her connection with the Hysteric) - And her therapist's 'desire'? Why such epidemic aversion in the mental health system to treatment of this patient? Any thoughts or resources available that speak to this?

Bonni - 10/15/02 15:41:28 EDT
The good of the absence calls for a law to replace the one who left it. He is the one who ruptures the maternal body and who makes the cut. He is outside the law but calls forth it presence by his absence. It is a painful pleasure to try to fill this space. A painful pleasure because it is a space which can not be filled. He would fill it is her were here but is only known by his used-to-be, he is "dead". The law is that it can not be fullfilled.

Halle - 10/15/02 09:29:57 EDT
If the law attempts to suture the space, Who is the He that causes the place to be healed. When I read it like that, with the He who caused the wound to be healed, in other words, to personify the maker of the absence, it makes for a painful pleasure. As if there is someone to blame for the pain. And what good is the law if the absence is always there.

Bonni - 10/14/02 17:40:27 EDT
He left behind a place which I must fill, to heal or suture with stitches, this is law. Law attempts to close the space, the absence left by unremembered trauma.

Antonia - 10/14/02 00:15:27 EDT
I don't know of Lacan writing on fashion, but what he says of marks could be useful. The mark, a name, can go as far as to account for a rigid designator - the sign mimus (-) of metonymy marking the irreducible that accounts for the resistance of signification in the signifier/signified rapport. Though it is not about fashion a good example is the word Xerox, which is a name and a mark, together with use making it a verb the meaning changes into photocopying.

- 10/13/02 18:50:47 EDT
sorry a question to the board: I was wondering if Lacan wrote anything on fashion?

- 10/13/02 18:49:43 EDT
did lacan write anything on fashion

Antonia - 10/12/02 21:15:38 EDT
The formula of the metaphor applies to the name of the father as follows:

Name of the father Desire of the Mother A
----------------- -------------- --- Name of the Father ------
Desire of the mother signified to the subject phallus

Rina - 10/12/02 17:18:29 EDT
Antonia--It seems to me that there are two phalluses--an imaginary and a symbolic. Where is the paternal metaphor situated?

Antonia - 10/10/02 19:36:10 EDT
Bonni Brooke - the "name of the father" supports the symbolic function. It is a signifier. Much as it has no signification it is a representation of the real, it symbolizes it. The symbolic father, since it implies the law, is the dead father. The signification of the phallus should be evoked in the imaginary of the subject by the paternal metaphor.

Antonia - 10/10/02 13:49:41 EDT
Rupert - S1, the master signifier is in the position of agent in the master/slave discourse. In this case he is the agent, but not for the other three structures (hysteria, analysis, university).

Bonni Brooke - 10/10/02 07:42:48 EDT
What might be the relation of the "name of the father" to that which it is the name of, or, is the father also a part of the Real given that we only know him by his name? Or again, does the father belong to the symbolic, just a signifier which points, somewhat ascue, at something that it misses (again making the father part of the real [where the signifier is not pointing])? Where is the imaginary in this.

Rupert - 10/10/02 01:07:29 EDT
The master signifier is just that: a signifier. However one is tempted to answer in the affirmative, what about the hysteric? I mean the one for whom jouissance is other jouissance, the mystic woman that is beyond castration (the mother?)...she seems appalling...In any case, in the discourses, S1 is the master signifier because of his position as agent...

Rina - 10/09/02 23:50:40 EDT
a question to the board: is s1=phallus?

Rina - 10/09/02 23:48:15 EDT
Bonni, I think that might precisely be the point; also especially interesting when understood alongside Lacan's Encore where he elucidates his conception of feminine sexuality as being "not-all." Woman's jouissance is other jouissance: she is a mystic, beyond if we read castration as tantamout to the onset of the Law-of-the-father, language, desire, etc...then indeed you conceive that our speaking of the Real, is a mystical act of faith. Because we always miss it...we always speak of it (kinda like how the sexual relation keeps not not being written).

Bonni Brooke - 10/09/02 16:20:16 EDT
If the Real escapes signification do we not enguage an excercise in faith in speaking of it?

Tom - 10/09/02 12:51:29 EDT
All clear now, Bea?

Green - 10/09/02 08:23:21 EDT
Once again the concepts get tangled. The Real for Lacan is that which escapes signification. When words are said, it is that which is there but is not said. The object a is also this odd concept that stands for something which is not really itself. It holds the place of the Other's desire which can never been said. And the Void. The object a holds the place of the Void. THe only way to understand these concepts is to put them into my own words. But they start to overlap when I do so.

Rupert - 10/07/02 23:33:36 EDT
1. The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I (1949), where the function of the I appears as opposed to the ego. The child constructs his/her unity around the image of the "body proper" as seen in the mirror and at the same time is also divided between this somehow reified image of him/herself (ego) and what he/she can perceive as "his/her own reality" (the I).
2. In The function and field of speech and language in psychoanalysis (1953), Lacan asserts the "absolute power of language" whereby the symbolic order and the-name-of-the-father. So it may be inferred that the progressive preclusion of the ego in favor of the I signals the passage from language to speech, that is the assumption of the subject.

Hayley - 10/07/02 09:45:08 EDT
Bea, The mirror, imaginary and symbolic is not a linear development for the child. The baby is born into the symbolic universe, and its effects are there throughout. The mirror identification marks an identification that Lacan calls the imaginary. But the child is always bound to the symbolic, bound to its image by words and names. However, Lacan did formulate the imaginary register before the symbolic, which he began to stress in the 1950s.
Yes, I wish I went to your high school.

bonpland - 10/06/02 14:59:45 EDT
Bea, Pardon my curiosity, but what's a highschool student doing writing on Lacan? You must be from somewhere other than Kansas. The child moves from Imaginary to Symbolic. I would suggest the Real is not a phase, but more a quasi-phase we have never passed through but to which we are repeatedly on the verge of relapsing back into. Talk to us.

friend of a yogi - 10/04/02 06:40:25 EDT
When you repeat a mantra or chant, the speakers understanding of the meaning, say in sanskrit, is not the point. You can repeat a mantra without knowing its meaning to the same effect. It is the vibrations, the sound, and the point of concentration that do the work here. To know what you intone seems to be in the realm of excess, surplus. Does this relate to Terry1's comment about object a and Kant?

Bea - 10/03/02 00:26:59 EDT
This is a very basic question. I'm in high school writing a paper on Lacanian literary criticism, and I am a bit perplexed about the order and periods of transition from the mirror to imaginary to symbolic phases. What order do they occur in, if any? Are they generally simultaneous? Are there addition names for these phases? Any help is greatly appreciated.

Antonia - 10/02/02 22:05:54 EDT
Terry 1 - What I have for AUM is that, A: is the complete development of manifestation, U: is the relative envelopment of that manifestation, M: is non - manifestation. Letters have meaning, still they're not words... NOT been split from the sound and the meaning in mantra?

bonpland - 09/29/02 15:29:51 EDT
OK, OK, OK, More reading lists. Tommy, I would highly encourage you to look at Yves-Alain Bois' The Informe, a User's Guide. It's very current and and a highly intellectual fun read and the footnotes and bibliography will be invaluable to you. The art images will intrigue. What you'll want to do is comb over this book carefully and then go back and read Michael Fried's landmark essay Art and Objecthood. Perhaps some of Fried's work on Diderot and Courbet. You'll find the whole theatricality debate encapulsated in the encounter of those two sources. The psychoanalytic background is just that, background, everywhere implied though not always overtly invoked. Keep the questions coming. Let us know if you want more.

tommy - 09/27/02 10:21:24 EDT
i'm beginning to work on a project regarding the theatricality of the abject body in modern drama/performance. of course, artaud will play a large role as will beckett, ionesco, and orlan. at this point i'm collecting readings just to give me a sense of the debates on 'the body' within psychoanalysis. i've read 'pouvours de l'horreur' and parveen adams' "emptiness of the image." any suggestions that i may be missing? i know this seems very general but this project is in the nascent stages. still, any suggestions would helpful.

Bonpland - 09/25/02 21:56:07 EDT
The reading list begins.

Rina - 09/25/02 17:58:44 EDT
Laura, you might do well to look at some Kristeva...she has done provocative and interesting work on the concepts you will bring up for your thesis.

Bonpland - 09/25/02 14:15:39 EDT
Laura-- Let's hear just few more specifics regarding your project, you photographic. Otherwise all you'll get from us is another annoyingly long reading list. The topics you mention are so general. A precise description of even one photograph would bring to mind a variety of more precise and useful (i.e. generative) themes. What makes your photography different from anyone else's?

laura church - 09/25/02 13:17:03 EDT
please help!!!... i am currently writing a thesis for the final year of my fine art degree in england... my concepts surrounding my practical photography work involve notions of 'self/other/stranger/neighbour' would be really great to hear from anyone that is intereted in what i am doing, since you could say i am a novice in this area!! if anyone has any info that you think i might find benificial, you can get hold of me on - thanks heaps...

Terry1 - 09/24/02 16:48:33 EDT
Is object (a) a small part of 'The Thing in itself' Is the word Kant's 'Thing in itself'? Because the word is split between sound and meaning so the subject is split by language.BUT in a mantra the word is NOT split from the sound and the meaninng. The sound of a mantra is represented by no words just a sound. Any thoughts on this?

reason - 09/20/02 05:42:41 EDT
A cornerstone of Lacan's approach to Freud is that the dynamics of the unconscious are indeed partially formalizable to the point of being expressable in mathematical terms. Would strongly recommend reading Bruce Fink's Appendixes to "The Lacanian Subject" for anyone genuinely interested in understanding this - the maths involved here isn't particularly difficult.

Antonia - 09/19/02 23:27:45 EDT
problem with the sceptics is that they can be in turn such believers... and this is how they need to make a master that balks at their amorous servitude, at the idolatry the master must satisfy with an exhausting and forever disappointing production of knowledge. I don't know that this is the case with our messageboard skeptic but, to follow the train of my thoughts, he appears to be torn between idolization and censure - either he keeps detached, indifferent, from the controverted hero, or he ultimately concedes that he alone instructs you on the determinant where "truth" commands that knowledge be produced.

Terry1 - 09/19/02 15:29:52 EDT
Oh dear!.......those critics who come on here really need to understand the sweep and complexity of Lacan's project. Lacan's whole oeuvre offers a complete understanding of the human being. So far in this room of those who make their criticisms it is possible to see their limited grasp of the complexity of Lacan's thought. They fail to comprehend the strength of the classical foundations of his thought. Parmenides builds the base ( The One is One) Socrates being wrong: 'He conflated the ego-ideal with the lost object' The Cogito is wrong: 'I think where I am not therefore I am where I do not think' His use of Spinoza : 'We are a substance and we must become what we were meant to be' The use of Semiotics ( simeon meaning sign) Peirce's work concerning meaning: 'All meaning is variable and based on reference back. Meaning is created by metaphor, metonymy, diacrony and sycrony, condensation and displacement. Meaning is always slipping like a broach on a blouse, it is never fixed. His use of 'object realations' we desire an object ...'What are we looking for'? he asks. The ....lost object, the thing that we lost when we were born. His use of Aristotle as cause, 'efficient cause' I could go on..........Those who adopt Lacan have foundations of stone.

Rupert - 09/19/02 09:57:26 EDT
I cannot but agree with Paul and Antoni...

Paul - 09/19/02 08:59:57 EDT
Moreover, Sokal, what he did, is a joke

Antoni - 09/18/02 23:00:49 EDT
This Sokal topic is just so old, and to what avail....?

aa - 09/18/02 20:44:56 EDT
"Sokal quotes quite a bit of what Lacan actually said." Like hell he does. Lacan wrote the Écrits, a number of other works now collected in the Autres Écrits, and held a Seminar for more than 20 years, which is reflected in 24 Seminars, only some of which have been published. What Sokal quotes in less than 60 pages are bits taken out of context and parodied (something which, I admit, is pretty easy to do with Lacan. The man was just asking for it). "he illustrates that Lacan used terminology and some ideas from mathematics and attempted to enlist them to illustrate his points about the nature of truth, the human mind, etc." I think Jacques-Alain Miller's son (and therefore, Lacan's grandson) is a mathematician himself. It would be interesting to find out his point of view on his grandfather's use (or misuse) of mathematical concepts.

skeptic - 09/18/02 16:32:58 EDT
"One thing is what Lacan actually said"
Well, Sokal quotes quite a bit of what Lacan actually said. It was intent to go after the "big game" rather than the many professors and grad students doing work in cultural studies and the philosophy of science. It was of more value to expose the charlatanism of the "masters" than that of their disciples.

skeptic - 09/18/02 16:28:57 EDT
"Is the real a TRUE master discourse with no escape?"
Boy, it's so frustrating to wake up every morning to that old master discourse. A stiff cup of joe makes it a little more bearable. Well, when you die, I suppose you'll find out the answer to your question.

skeptic - 09/18/02 16:27:15 EDT
"Is Lacan considered apostasy in Islam."
I wonder if scholars writing in Arabic routinely abuse syntax as Lacan does. It's an interesting question.

skeptic - 09/18/02 16:25:26 EDT
If lacan's obscure language can be likened to the obscure language of physics, then what dividends has the former paid? Remember, we are talking about academic writing here, not art.
"His criticism of Lacan implies that Lacan would be attempting to actually do mathematics" No, he illustrates that Lacan used terminology and some ideas from mathematics and attempted to enlist them to illustrate his points about the nature of truth, the human mind, etc. Of course such concepts are only translatable via metaphor--and what is the usefulness of such metaphor when the readers will not understand the mathematical concepts employed? Well, of course that doesn't much matter when your main rhetorical tactic is obfuscation and obscurity. Notably Lacan slips between admitting he is speaking in metaphor and making the more preposterous assertion that terminology and (parts of) concepts from math and the sciences can be successfully grafted onto the terminology of post-Freudian psychanalysis and what have you. Did Lacan even believe in what he was writing? Was he just so addicted to his own prestige and his reputation as a profound thinker that he never cared to write clearly-- was he aware that his prestige by and large depended upon this unwillingness or inability to write clearly? Sometimes I think his entire ouevre is just a big joke, a Joycean parody of academic writing. It's not so funny that so many poeple take it seriously.

Rupert - 09/17/02 23:17:10 EDT
I wonder if Terry1 has some personal feud with Moustapha Safouan...As to the real being the true master discourse as well as obscene Islam accouting for the real of the world, it seems that Fundamentalist discourse is somehow derivative from CNN and of the real we can only perceive, through mediaton, something called "reality."

Antonia - 09/17/02 22:29:22 EDT
Is the real a TRUE master discourse with no escape?

Lucy - 09/17/02 22:20:07 EDT
How does Islam - much as it gives away to such an obscene peak of despotism, insofar as the mind is hampered to follow the logics of it - account for the real in global culture?

Terry1 - 09/17/02 17:04:32 EDT
Rupert I didn't even start the Quran. I was just pointing out CNN is an irritant compared to Islam. What good work Lacanians could do in Islam?. How would a Lacanian begin in Islam? Is Lacan considered apostasy in Islam. Would a lacanian analyst be shot in Islam? Who said the only way out of analysis is to shoot the analyst?

Rupert - 09/17/02 13:38:33 EDT
Terry1, did you finish with the Quran?

Terry1 - 09/15/02 09:14:07 EDT
I offer the text of the Quran to show the totalising effets of some beleif systems

Terry1 - 09/15/02 09:12:35 EDT
In Islam the master and the slave on the pain of death have no choice other than Islam.

Terry1 - 09/15/02 09:07:17 EDT
In Islam there is no choice other than submission.

Rupert - 09/14/02 23:37:30 EDT
Sorry, in truth the slave joins the chosen "cultural" race, a.k.a. White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant by way of the "hypnotic fascination of the symbolical injunction."

Terry1 - 09/14/02 17:07:19 EDT
The Holy Koran
'Kill those who join other Gods' (Koran 6: 5-6)
'Slay or crucify or cut the hands or the feet of the unbeliever' (Koran 5:34)
'From them (the unbeliever) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their head a boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods' (Koran 22:19.22)

Terry1 - 09/14/02 17:02:23 EDT
Not patriotic but REAL.

Rupert - 09/14/02 14:35:51 EDT
Did I touch a patriotic vein? Interesting... Pursuing with Hegel, the slave at some point learns that good is not always rewarded and evil not always punished and that hard work is often exploited (Marx's surplus-value and Lacan's plus-de-jouir). He/she becomes skeptic and develops an "unhappy self-consciousness" (disbelief, cynicism and resignation). How does the slave sublate the barrier of class and attain the truth of Free Will? Through self-sacrifice and alienation, which is the extra effort that only a few can achieve. He/she then joins the chosen race...

Terry1 - 09/13/02 14:31:36 EDT
Lucy it is the duty of the slave to kill the master if he converts to Christianity. It is the duty of every Muslim to kill a Muslim who is guily of apostasy. The Muslim/Islamic discourse is the real Master discourse that operates a nightmare scenario with no escape route.

Antonia - 09/13/02 02:47:12 EDT
Not to talk of the women in Muslim culture, and their irrevocable slavery...

Lucy - 09/13/02 02:37:30 EDT
Does the DUTY correspond in turn to the slave? Say it is the master who converts to christanity or rejects the teachings of the Koran, is the slave endowed with the same responsibility?

Terry1 - 09/12/02 13:57:37 EDT
The Islamist/Muslim cultural form needs a Reformation a Luther.

Terry1 - 09/12/02 13:56:07 EDT
A Master discourse is the Muslim credo. There truly is no escape for the slave or the master in this cultural form . In western culture the slave can become a master because when the slave works for the master it 'educates' itself and knows it is not useless. The relationship is always unstable. However in Muslim systems it is the DUTY of a Muslim to kill a slave who converts to christanity or tries to reject the teachings of the Koran. The Islamist belief system is a TRUE master discourse with no escape. CNN is like an irritant fly in comparison to the Islamist/Moslem master discourse.

Rupert - 09/11/02 19:55:08 EDT
Well, as far as The Phenomenology of the Mind is concerned, the master brings demand and fear to daily life, as an incentive to progress. But the master doesn't progress, otherwise he wouldn't be master. All development belongs to the slave, who not only elaborates new technologies to serve the master but also must endure hardships. So if inventions are for the workplace, at home the slave philosophically rationalizes his/her position: a consciousness of honesty and virtue thus emerges. And so on...One paradigm of the master would be "double-vé" as Bush the younger is called in France (note that Harold Bloom labelled him an illiterate fascist). As for the master discourse, please switch to CNN, any time of the day.

Lucy - 09/11/02 18:29:41 EDT
What do you mean with there being "no way out to Hegel's master-slave rapport... and who wants to get out?

Antonia - 09/11/02 13:41:24 EDT
Lacan drew the master discourse from Hegel - via Kojeve

alexandra - 09/11/02 04:16:18 EDT
Is Hegel's master-slave discourse the same as Lacan's?

Rupert - 09/11/02 00:38:51 EDT
Lucy - it seems to me that there is no way out, at least as to Hegel's master-slave rapport...

Lucy - 09/10/02 21:44:00 EDT
Rupert - how do you write the capitalist discourse, provided you do not write it like the discourse of the master?

Rupert - 09/10/02 00:12:41 EDT
There is the story of the three Congolese analyzed by Lacan after WWII: "Their unconscious functioned according to the rules of the Oedipus complex, it was the unconscious that had been sold to them at the same time as the laws of colonization, an exotic form of the discourse of the Master, a regression before imperialist capitalism." Is the capitalist discourse, in this case the official discoure of academe, a cover of the discourse of the Master?