Schnauze - 04/19/03 10:15:20 EDT
The reason this all interested me in the first place is that the place of the analyst in Lacan's four discourses seems to match up to the place of the working class in Weber's four "handelnde [trafficking]" social classes. There are some potentially radical conclusions to be drawn about the relationship of surplus enjoyment and Mehrwert [surplus value], naimean? I.e. productive labor might be recognizable precisely because it delivers a certain (amount of) analysis at the right place and the right time--regardless of whether this occurs in an industrial economy or the "service" sector. Likewise, analysis is precisely work. That is to say, the analyst produces a certain excess that cannot be equalized by the compensation of wage.

Schnauze - 04/15/03 07:38:34 EDT
Terry1, thanks for your message about Weber. I have had the feeling for sometime to be shadowing is not a feeling I particularly like, but certainly one worthy of analysis. "Goliath Reality" seems a term so redolent with symptoms (do you know where it is from?)...perhaps also of a denial on the part of the author of his own genuine relationship towards and dependence on Marx, whom Weber (on some level) must have assumed could access this same reality in some more genuine way(?). After all, why take up the Marxist discourse at all, if only to deny it? Or is that an unfair interpretation of W's behaviour?
As to the direct comparison to Lacan, there seems to be some important difference between "big Other object a" and "Goliath Reality"--i.e. between the logical form of {[MajorObject](minorobject)} and, in the latter case, what seems to be written simply as {[MajorObject]}. Do you see a difference there worth discussing?

chris (uk) - 04/15/03 02:53:15 EDT
Sarah, the paper comes from a journal called Psychoanalytic Notebooks, but can be downloaded from the London Circle (of the European School's) website. The Courtil papers are incredibly interesting too and are on same site

sarah - 04/14/03 18:45:49 EDT
chris the web page address keeps going to "error"...i'm writing a thesis on Freud's 'actual neurosis' which has recently been called 'actual pathology' by various's very difficult to find material written in english. Paul Verhaeghe wrote an artical in 1993 although it's in dutch...if anyone has come across anything written on the actual neuroses please let me know.

Tom Kellerman - 04/14/03 13:24:41 EDT

chris (uk) - 04/14/03 05:47:38 EDT
I want to recommend what I think is some very challenging reading. Its an online paper called FOUR PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS TO A RENEWAL OF THE CLINIC written by Serge Cottet and translated by Richard Klein ( Cottet Renewal.htm). In it, the author makes the case that Lacan re-interpretes the symptom, describing the clinical structure of psychosis as opposed to Freud's description of psychosis via neurosis.
According to Cottet, (Lacan) 'describes the symptom more like a solution than a problem or an enigma, admitting that we take up the symptom more as a construction of the real, not limiting it to the symbolic'.
However, the paper concludes with the sub-heading - 'Anticipating the act' - which is disconcerting for any reader accustomed to gentle bedtime analytic reading. 'Anticipating the act', and quoting a Clerambault vignette, Cottet suggests, 'as soon as a delusional suffers from altruistic anxiety, one is correct to consider altruistc homicide'. The last sentence reads: 'For us who are not police, the indication to be followed: do not back off from psychosis but with all the means of a psychiatric team'. There is too much abbreviation here, but I want to recommend this paper, as much as I have difficulty with Cottet's last sentence, which seems incomplete.

perfume - 04/12/03 21:08:15 EDT
Terry1 - please talk to Thomas Mediodia about your problems in the messageboard...

Terry1 - 04/12/03 14:18:49 EDT
Schnaize, yes Weber seems to outline what Lacan answers. Weber talks about the 'Goliath Reality' as Lacan's big other object A. Weber also notes : ' Reality is extensively and intensively infinite. We distil from reality to make theories, if we beleive the theories they become religions, therefor Marxism is a religion' Weber was the first person to teach Marxism in a university - he said ' We must worship Marx as a scholar but I teach Marx to prove he is flawed' Of course Weber's own life was interesting as he was married for 32 years to Marainne Weber and never consummated the marriage. Also the argument with his father led to a breakdown, that was only lifted when he went to America and began to write again. Weber denied that there was a science of human behaviour as he said: ' because human beings can change their minds. We must use science to move towards truth but it isn't truth' I believe Weber may have thought of himself as a neo-Kantian. He was offered a chair in Sociology but denied the discipline existed. On his death like Lacan he dissolved his own school, saying there were no answers only questions' I believe.

Tom Kellerman - 04/11/03 10:15:52 EDT
I am looking for any information on a Lacanian interpretation of William Faulkner's, The Sound and The Fury. Any suggestions?

DAVID HAYMAN - 04/10/03 18:55:09 EDT

Thomas Mediodia - 04/10/03 13:35:24 EDT
Terry 1, we haven't changed the settings for over a year. Can you please write me at:
Is anybody else having a problem reading/submitting messages?

Edward Nilges - 04/10/03 04:14:15 EDT
Let me be the first to herald the Zizekian image of the Iraqi liberation, such as it is:
Just saw live footage of a Saddam statue that cranes were apparently unable to pull down. The Iraqi crowd would not disperse, so explosive charges were placed. Videophone feed shows the silhouette of a waving Saddam suddenly disappear in a PUFF OF SMOKE, only to emerge moments later, still standing, with one important difference: there is a LARGE IRREGULAR HOLE IN SADDAM'S GROIN AND HIP AREA, the overcast sky a white void breaking through, with the top half of the statue supported by what is apparently the frame at each side of the hole.
Was it castration I was sensing in the footage of Iraqis overzealously shouting "America! George Bush! Yes!"?

Terry1 - 04/09/03 18:11:12 EDT
Pefume please restore your old settings it's becoming impossible to partake/read your board?

Grar - 04/09/03 16:22:00 EDT
Well lacan's most important contribution might be this: all the drive (pulsionel) charged signifiers, whether they are religious (such as the miraculous Koran, Jesus, Moses, etc..)or personal/moral (the sovereign HAPPINESS, TRUTH, & GOOD) they are but symbolic combination that do not, in any way, measure up to their pretence of justifying reality, the Thing, or whatsover. Let's be tolerant and play the discourse (disque qui cours)

yammer - 04/09/03 16:02:29 EDT
Which is what Derrida is getting at in White Mythologies, the Sun as privileded metaphor.
Blazing tablet in the sky.
Hence his interest in how it blinds us, both founds and eclipses out sight, and in the alarming effect of its own eclipse.

Maria - 04/09/03 00:22:11 EDT
nothing is relevant before you talk

- 04/08/03 22:12:49 EDT
why talk if nothing is relevant?

cera - 04/08/03 21:37:49 EDT
so THAT'S what that's for. *looks at bucket*

John H - 04/08/03 05:48:01 EDT
Some people kneel before the image of Christ, others face Mecca; but for us there is Lacan. Take care.

chris (uk) - 04/07/03 16:44:04 EDT
The first stage involves floating in the middle of the Pacific holding onto a large bucket

johnlowther - 04/07/03 15:12:58 EDT
What are the geographical/financial requirements to becoming an Lacanian Analyst?

Maria - 04/06/03 13:45:36 EDT
In today's NYTimes there is some psychiatrists telling the soldiers with anxiety war problems to inhale and then retain the air and when they blow it out think they are blowing the anxiety out... had to think of the placebo issue in here

yammer - 04/03/03 18:07:33 EST
And the problem with signs, signifiers, is they all tend to be Great, Big and White.
So you see the problem you're up against.

yammer - 04/03/03 18:06:37 EST
I meant to say, "Great big white sign."
Sorry. Change in priviledged signifier can register as different synthesis of the manifold, though symptoms can reassert themselves uncannily. With a placebo it's the same body that's simply being read otherwise. Efficacy of placebo will depend upon the strength of the subject's new interpretation of her world, what old images and ideas are worth clinging to, which others are simply forgotten. And how soon we can forget! With an actual drug, though, the bodily is actually being altered. Something has intruded into the manifold.

Bridgette... - 04/03/03 14:10:05 EST
Thanks for the help. I knew that if I caused a stir then people would respond to me. You can not get anywhere in this world with out making others focus on you. Again thankyou with your help, it was very usefull

yammer - 04/03/03 01:12:52 EST
With an attitude like that, when can I buy you coffee? BTW, Lacan would most likely say placebos potentially do much good. Chemical efficacy aside, it's all about operating under the aegis of a great big with sign--

lucas - 04/02/03 22:09:10 EST
oh bridgette I would have helped if I knew what a placebo was...the only placebos I know are those used in double blind research studies on meds LOL

Brid - 04/02/03 17:16:39 EST
Bridgette - go spill your mighty depression somewhere else.....

Bridgette... - 04/02/03 13:06:57 EST
Thanks for all the help... brat... everyone who gets onto this website has no intelligence whatsoever. Please learn to live your life for yourself and not dumb stupid dead lacan. I did not capitalize that because he does not deserve to be. And again, thanks for helping someone who NEEDED it instead of just ignoring them. Go back to your latte moca whatever.

Schnauze - 04/02/03 08:43:00 EST
I am wondering if anyone has worked on a comparison of Lacan and Max Weber--or looked to see if and when Lacan ever mentioned Weber. There is a similarity between Lacan's four discourses in Sem. xiv and Weber's four capitalist social classes in Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft that has been haunting me for some time. The congruences would line up like this:
"Big Other"/Capital
Hysteric/Petit Bourgeois
I haven't been able to get my hands on a copy of Sem. xiv for some time, but from what I remember, Lacan spends a lot of it very obliquely poking fun at "the prophet" Marx. Could it be that Lacan was actually reading Weber at some point, the latter whose tortured relationship to Marx is itself rarely explored? Where, in fact, do these four discourses come from? Did Lacan ever say how they occured to him?

paul - 04/02/03 00:58:59 EST
------ placebos?

bridgette... - 04/01/03 15:15:14 EST
I am not sure if any of my messages are reaching the message board, and if they are, sorry for the over abundance of them. I am trying to find a insight on the Lacanian perspective reguarding placebos. If there is anyone who would like to help me please either post a responce or email me @ anything at all would be greatly appreciated.

Lucy - 03/31/03 12:56:24 EST
yes Maria, and now you have a point of view, but this is a different logic...

Maria - 03/30/03 17:02:22 EST
from a little bit of cabala I know, you go backwards. ain: 1. there isn't, 2. there is no space, 3.there is no time...

yammer - 03/29/03 15:33:30 EST
Re Allen: Someone speak about the relationship between the future and humor.

chris (uk) - 03/27/03 19:35:12 EST
Sucked into equating 'time' with 'space' ... what worries me, is 'logical time' somehow equated with 'logical space', and session time set in the foyer of a Woody Allen film. When the IPA objected to Lacanian 'transgression', were they already objecting to a virtual clinic? If Jacques Alain Miller objects to a virtual clinic, because a live clinic evidences the non-rapport of the sexual relationship, is Miller interpreting the IPA's resistance? If psychoanalysis began with dreamwork, with 'the couch' designating psychoanalytic space, can there now be a 'logical' explication of psychoanalytic territory?

Terry1 - 03/27/03 17:56:29 EST
'Time is NOT what is counted but that by which we count' Aristotle

Terry1 - 03/27/03 17:55:14 EST
'Subtle is the Lord. Malicious he is not' Einstein

Antonia - 03/26/03 17:15:04 EST
chris (uk)- your first point is what worries me.
We don't want it to be "ordinary time," but are't we getting there?

lucas - 03/25/03 22:29:20 EST
"The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of thinking...A.Einstein

chris (uk) - 03/25/03 18:00:22 EST
This is no ordinary time, even for people sitting safely at computers. Some of us, will be watching too much live (life and death) TV. And if we have time to use a Lacanian chatroom, then, we're probably not watching TV. (or ducking and diving). Andy Warhol permits us each 15 seconds of fame and in the vein of Neo Conceptual Art, this site could ex-ist (for very brief moments) as a virtual antidote to saturation life and death TV. So, I'm proposing a series of virtual Guernica statements, which could be based on Zizek's supposition that nobody really can put up with 'interpassivity'.
So, the proposition is, we use the site (from to time) to deflect a 'critical' interpassivity, in the name of (virtual) art. As a virtual curator, my question would be: what are we doing with 'interpassivity', at a time like this?

Antonia - 03/25/03 02:25:35 EST
robert - Lacan's theory of psychosis is different to anyone else ever: the name of the father that won't get inscribed.

robert - 03/24/03 22:29:09 EST
im a critical theory student in manchester england. im doing an essay on lacan at the moment and i really need your help!! due to an oversight on my behalf, namely that this essay has to be in tomorrow and not friday, and due to the fact that i have been extremely politically active, for obvious reasons, in the last few days, i am really struggling. i dont, of course, expect you to give me all the answers, as this would be unfair on other students, but i was wondering if you could quickly give me a couple of pointers? namely, what is lacan's major contribution to the debate about identity? this is with, though limited to, particular emphasis on 'the mirror stage'. what was lacan saying that was so different to anyone else at that time?
if you can see fit to help me, i would appreciate it greatly. excellent website, by the way!!

Terry1 - 03/24/03 18:05:25 EST
Perfume your 'form' is still too wide fffffor my and many other's browser? Internet Explorer 6

lucas - 03/23/03 08:53:53 EST
that is impressive but...given the total instability of the world scene and the perhaps so, perhaps not distorted perceptions (and psyop?) we are my dear friends...oh how can i say this without cussing...democracy? I think survival as the human species is more likely what is at stake her

Qusay Hussein - 03/22/03 23:49:54 EST
On Zizek's recent article on Iraq, one must ask how it is possible to get out of the mess, the pure mess of a dialectical quandary. The only authentic attitude is that of the rustic outsider aloof to nuanced arguments and moral ambiguities, but equally distrustful of action -- to see the war only in terms of the removal of a tyrant. The outsider has the proper attitude of the sceptic: one can know nothing. But the true outsider can never ascend to a position of leadership, not because of superior virtue but because of the formal requirements of his position.
The failure of the U.S. position is the failure of the American system to maintain the strictest dimensions of democracy, whose crucial aspect is not expression for a majority or the protection of expression for a minority, but the very endeavor of the Law. Power must be self-limiting to escape the excesses of jouissance. American democracy is not the negation of the King, but the re-investment of the King in every individual. Thus the idea that for democracy to work, individuals must occupy the symbolic place of Citizen. A homology exists between the Law/Superego couplet on one hand and the Democracy/Mob Rule couplet on the other. One never knows when the Law is going to turn into superego, when democracy is going to fall into dissemblance and chaos. A logic of institutions seems to inevitably isolate power (and therefore responsibility) in the practices of a political class. This tendency is a function of time and historical contingency. But its result is to degrade democracy into excess and chaos.
So it seems that a politics of opposing institutions is necessary to open up the space for democracy again.

perfume - 03/22/03 00:58:32 EST
chris (uk) - I can imagine you don't get to see the writing in the perfume page - read the columns - but you can see the fly, right? and open up the links?
about Terry1's problems, I don't know that he is talking of the perfume page...

Maria - 03/22/03 00:50:15 EST
what do we have here, a tomb desecrater?

Morris Shirley - 03/21/03 19:30:55 EST
American bombs will be dropped on Jacques Lacan's grave very soon. Together with a combination of Czech, Angolan, and Nicaraguan troops, American forces will then ransack the grave and revel in the Dead Father's remains.

chris (uk) - 03/21/03 16:15:54 EST
Unfortunately, my mac is three years old (8.51), so have no access to Perfume's pages as I can't download flashplayer 6

perfume - 03/21/03 10:25:11 EST
Is anybody else having the problem Terry1 is telling us about?

perfume - 03/19/03 19:35:07 EST
Terry 1 - which pages are you referring to? and what browser are you using? I cheked the pages on Internet Explorer, Netscape Communicator 4.9, and Netscape 7.1

Terry1 - 03/19/03 19:00:20 EST
Perfume you have changed the structure of your 'form' or layout of your pages and I lose a little bit of text from the screen. Pehaps I was meant to. If you can 'reset' it to its old settings I would be greatful. Thankyou

chris (uk) - 03/19/03 16:17:56 EST
Zizek's position would seem to imply the spirit of reconciliation (and love), which must be a timely gesture at the moment

chris (uk) - 03/19/03 16:07:15 EST
Antonia, betraying the real of desire, as a writing in the real and a writing in the real as the act of betrayal (???) But despite, Lacan's non-rapport, Alain Badiou suspects treachery in THE act of betrayal, contrary to Zizek's position and his reference to Sophie's choice and Judas's position. But I wasn't at the recent talk and haven't yet seen issue 21 of Lacanian Ink and am feeling my way in the dark with complex ideas.

Sarah - 03/19/03 12:42:47 EST
In Howard Briton‚s Paper on Contemporary Symptom he notes that „the contemporary symptom acknowledges that there are subjects who are de-identified with the Ideals of the big Other,‰ to the extent that the „Other no longer affects the relationship between subject and jouissance‰. Rik Loose talks about addiction as being an administration of enjoyment or jouissance that is independent of the Other which implies a „severance or stepping away from the Other‰. He states that „the severance of the Other in addiction does not affect the structural dependence of the subject on the signifier of the Other: it only concerns the independent administration of particular distributions of jouissance which come as a result of this structural dependence‰. This implies that addiction functions outside of the Law of the symbolic pact that would structure the subject-other (as in social other) relationship. Could we say that this peculiar relationship between subject and big Other would then affect the dynamics of desire that would normally structure the subject-other (as in social other) bond? Or can this severance of the big Other be paralleled with a sort of exclusion of the social-other when addiction is defined as an „independent admin of jouissance‰? I‚m getting confused between the concepts associated with the big Other and the other „in the social bond‰ ˆ can anybody shed light?? I'm obviously trying to work out how addiction affects the social bond - i.e. the bond between two people. Chris (UK)? Any thoughts?

Paul - 03/18/03 20:23:04 EST
Jason - in Lacanian Ink 2 you have an article on that subject: "The Uses of Fantasy," by Eric Laurent.

Jason - 03/18/03 16:47:27 EST
Does anybody know where I can find some good literature on Lancan's theory of Fantasy...."as soon as you get what you want, you don't want it anymore"

Antonia - 03/18/03 10:46:45 EST
That's a great question,chris (uk), about fidelity betraying the real of desire... does it? and can you betray the real? And about Alain Badiou's quote, "betrayal in oneself" is a very different thing than betrayal versus an other," right?

lucas - 03/17/03 19:24:24 EST
In the same vein, if we look at the whole argument of Fear and Trembling , the idea is that if faith were easy it would not mean much.
There is the plain and simple and I would venture to say the complicated. The movie to which is referred below, gives us a piece of story within a moment. There is no rest of the story. The movie ends. Love is love we all know it. But I think now of the ethics of psychoanalysis. Isn't the transference/countertransference spoken of as love but a false connection....and here my speaking leaves off as I leave the rest of the people here to associate and think.

FBC - 03/17/03 18:19:24 EST
Lucas says:
"love is a thought and faithfullness is an ethical choice which by the way is not always easy"
Yes and I would say the lack of ease in it is the measure of its worth. Look at it this way, if fidelity (this should realy be defined)was easy it wouldn't mean much. To act with purpose requires fidelity, whether in love, way, art or any thing at all. I doesn't in the ultimate sense "matter" whether one acts with purpose, with fidelity, or not but really there isn't much to say about infidelity, (in love, war, art etc.).
BTW, didn't Lacan claim to be an "orthodox Freudian". Was this a declairation of some kind of fidelity?
Fidelity is aimed at the real of desire and tries to swallow it whole. This is a doomed task and in that sense alone is fidelity a betrayal. Infidelity, on the other hand is simply an evasion of the impossibility of fidelity and is therefore worse than betrayal.

perfume - 03/17/03 15:41:58 EST
We have The Iraq War, the latest, by Slavok Zizek - in the contents page....

chris (uk) - 03/17/03 03:14:53 EST
Doesn't fidelity betray the real of desire?
However, (what seems to be) Alain Badiou's position worries me, when he writes: 'to fail to live up to a fidelity is Evil in the sense of betrayal, betrayal in oneself of the Immortal that you are'. (Ethics, 2001.71)

Lucy - 03/17/03 00:40:32 EST
question is: why do you want to be faithful if you are in love?

lucas - 03/16/03 16:29:55 EST
love is a thought and faithfullness is an ethical choice which by the way is not always easy

chris (uk) - 03/16/03 16:18:37 EST
imaginary love and thoughtful Badiou, but in Sem. 20, Lacan supposes love as a remedy for sexual non-rapport

Rupert - 03/16/03 14:16:31 EST
This talk about fidelity reminds me of a French film from the early '60s called "Le bonheur," directed by a Agnes Varda I think, where a young carpenter, happily married to a nice wife with two children, meets a beautiful nurse and falls in love with her. He tells his wife arguing that it's as if two more arms have grown out of his body (if I remember correctly). They made love and then the wife jumps into a river and dies. After a period of mourn the young carpenter marries the nurse and they live ... happily. Lacan says that love is something happening at the level of the Imaginary; Badiou quotes Pessoa: "love is a thought."

chris (uk) - 03/16/03 13:19:29 EST
the word, ocain, is nevertheless interesting, Freudian snow white depths ...

Bonni - 03/16/03 09:32:03 EST
Sorry Lucy, ocean, magma, all excited, didn't check for spelling/typos. Lacanian geology that bit.

chris (uk) - 03/16/03 05:09:00 EST
ps. Is Ayerza commenting on Badiou's assertion of 'fidelity to a truth-process', which Badiou links to Lacan's 'ne pas ceder sur son desir'?
In 'Ethics' (2001.47), Badiou writes: 'But since the truth-process is fidelity, then if 'Do not give up' is the maxim of consistency - and thus of the ethic of a truth - we might well say that it is a matter, for 'some-one', of being faithful to a fidelity. And he can only manage this by adhering to his own principle of continuity, the perseverence in being what he is. By linking (for such, precisely, is consistency) the known by the not-known'.

chris (uk) - 03/16/03 03:25:56 EST
Wow! what are we to make of Virginia Wolf in a Helmut Lang outfit, followed by Hitchcock's gaze, on top of Bonni's 'hot stuff'? Zizek says: 'in the opposition between dream and reality, fantasy is on the side of reality ...'
But can someone take further the supposition that, 'fidelity is the utmost betrayal'? Can fidelity lead beyond betrayal or is fidelity an impossible condition?

Lucy - 03/16/03 03:11:41 EST
Bonni, excuse me for my ignorance... what does "ocain mean? what is "magme" just that I would like to better understand the story of the plate...

Rupert - 03/15/03 23:42:08 EST
Terry1 - I was there and yes, her intro was good, and she is a stylish sort of Virginia Wolf in a Helmut Lang outfit. She spoke about "love" in Lacanian Ink 21... and the best line was that "fidelity is the utmost betrayal." That keeps me wondering... There is that story by Borges about Judas being the real Christ, and then Lacan as analyzing Freud's unconscious, as betraying the Master (so then was he the true Founding Father?). One thing was clear to me though: the unconscious as experience of the real through the analytical cure.
As to Zizek, he pointed out that what is relevant now is not so much whether the UN or the US will prevail, but basic assumptions like the acceptance of torture, as exposed in newspapers, as something "normal," something that not long ago would have been unthinkable. We just see the surface of facts. And he gave a good example in a clip from Vertigo, it's the scene after James Stewart saves Kim Novak from drowning in Frisco bay. He takes her to his place and waits for her to awaken. It seems that censorship didn't want Hitchcock to show feminine underwear, so Hitchcock just shows Kim Novak's skirt, blouse and sweater, and forever the audience assumes that what we are looking at is her underwear. Always the gaze...

Bonni - 03/15/03 18:29:24 EST
The real, the symbolic, the imaginary.
An ocain plate lays above a particularly hot magme zone below. The heat ruptures the plate and deposits a cone of cooled lava (a volcanic island, e.g. Hawaii). The plate in motion brings a new section of plate over the hot spot, a new rupture, a new island. And so on, and so on.

chris (uk) - 03/14/03 13:00:20 EST
Paul, I'm trying to prompt comment from people who were at very recent Zizek talk, as I wish I'd been there!

Terry1 - 03/13/03 19:24:41 EST
Antonia was J. Ayerza good? Some say she has style?

Terry1 - 03/13/03 19:22:33 EST
I've just seen a Kevin Spacey movie. He plays a Lacanian prof.............We see Lacan's graph of Desire on his board. The film ends in true Lacanian style with the only truly moral act a human being can do, commit suicide. I would be interested in anybody's take on this remarkable Lacanian film. The Life of John Gale.

Paul - 03/13/03 17:54:03 EST
it seems...?

chris (uk) - 03/13/03 03:05:25 EST
The 'analyst as pervert', as imaginary father in the transference, would destroy his clients, but someday, when blind, rediscover he'd been sleeping with his mother: but, then, Zizek takes such an analysis further, it seems ...

Rupert - 03/13/03 00:32:05 EST
You were right Chris, the pervert corralled himself in the representation of a non-symbolized lack: "disavowal" (désaveu) being his recusation of symbolic castration. Now, would that mean that the pervert, as the analyst, "is only authorized by himself"?

Antonia - 03/12/03 16:10:46 EST
We all went to the Zizek talk, so much so that the crowd exceeded the fire safety limit - 400 people - and the people left outside were drumming on the gallery windows to get in.
at some point the police came "you have to leave, you are ilegal," the blue and red lights whirling while brightening up the inside of the gallery... M.Abreu introduced the event, then J.Ayerza read a paper, and then S.Zisek read a paper. I think it was a great event.

chris (uk) - 03/12/03 13:35:46 EST
If the aim of language is to return to its source, then the body politic seems to have arrived at the edge of a deadly 'writing in the real'. How often do we hear that 'words are the death of things'?
Did anybody go to the Zizek talk?