Antonia - 06/12/03 12:04:15 EDT
with "suffering" it is the stars, the eyes, the tears...
with "Aha" it is the clouds, the eyes, the tears...

oho - 06/12/03 07:17:37 EDT
tears are like clouds they pass and they are gone but they are just a symptom

Lucy - 06/12/03 04:49:41 EDT
Paul - we are talking metaphorically

Paul - 06/12/03 04:48:52 EDT
are we talking metaphors in here?

Aha... - 06/12/03 01:13:40 EDT
tears are like clouds they pass and they are gone

suffering - 06/11/03 06:53:13 EDT
He lay on the couch and looked at the sky of a million years as tears sprinkled from above cleansing his soul perhaps his form. Mixing with the own rivulets from his eyes, the stream became a torture almost impossible to bare

Antonia - 06/10/03 22:07:47 EDT
so we have christophe's (isles de la manche) formal complain in a very poetic envelope

christophe (isles de la manche) - 06/10/03 16:31:15 EDT
he lay down just as he would
on a couch
and imagined
an envelope of tears
on a sky of a million years

chris (uk) - 06/10/03 02:57:41 EDT
Aha ...

Antonia - 06/09/03 23:04:39 EDT
chris (uk) - the formal envelope of the symptom is an expression of Lacan which refers to the way you lodge your complain in analysis... now let's say that to lodge your complain is already a step further than to complain.

chris (Uk) - 06/09/03 02:36:27 EDT
Antonia, As in the letter always arrives or as in, the unconscious ex-ists between thought and being? Milan Dolar writes: 'The unconscious is to be situated at the intersection, the lost intersection of being and sense, whereas the part of being, as an impossible choice, is an empty set'. If I recall last nights reading correctly (!), Dolar locates the subject with the empty set. So, a formal envelope between sense and subject ... ...??

Antonia - 06/08/03 17:44:43 EDT
chris (uk) - indeed that's a nice message... as to suffering and taking responsibility for that suffering - can we relate the instance to " the formal envelope of the symptom?"

chris (uk) - 06/08/03 04:37:02 EDT
A Lacanian website relies on semblances and sometimes, approximations of the real thing, without the person of the analyst. If there's a leaning towards 'idle intellectualism', it's surely because psychoanalysis (which depends on the presence of the analyst) has to do with suffering and taking responsibility for that suffering.
However, in 'the real world', psychoanalysis may only be accessible through literature and websites. In the Uk. (eg.), most analysts seem to preside close to Hamstead in London and the ghost of Freud. In India, some people become Sadhu's when they retire from family life and perhaps, affording a training analysis depends on good fortune or retirement, when psychoanalysis depends on person to person transmission. I'm not proposing virtual analysis, but 'idle intellectualism' seems like a sad refrain which falls short of suffering or taking resonsibility for it.

Lucy - 06/08/03 01:47:11 EDT
a veil clouds your vision, but at once starts your mind

life ain't all that - 06/06/03 21:16:25 EDT
such idle intellectualism...a veil is just something that clouds your vision

Antonia - 06/06/03 15:31:23 EDT
Stéphane ------ all that listing to conclude that a veil is more tranparent than a veil?

Stéphane - 06/03/03 17:10:09 EDT
A veil is less opaque than a mirror itself less opaque than a wall itself less opaque than a van Gogh's painting itself less opaque than our macula itself more transparent than a veil. Where is the ply ?

Looking for permission - 06/03/03 11:25:05 EDT
I need Slavoj Zizek's permission for publishing a translated chapter of 'Love without mercy' in an Icelandic publication. Sent email to perfume, already, got no reply. Did you know the book is not to be found on Can anyone help me?

Yardy - 06/03/03 06:29:26 EDT
hello perfume.
has it really been that long...

chris (uk) - 06/02/03 18:32:27 EDT
Somewhere in the world, right now, a pretty bug is crawling across one of Van Gogh's canvases. Not far away, a short sighted bug is looking, but only sees a precious stone falling out of the sky. Bug one is the analyst, as agalma and bug two, is a male preying mantis searching for his glasses ...

lifeless inuendo cum Real - 06/02/03 13:34:07 EDT
the veil says Lacan is much more important to the (hu)man than the truth. What is the veil? a metaphorical BRIDGE at the point of discourse, when the speaker would normally come back to the HEAD. Instead, the speaker remains TRADING FOURS with the rythmn section in Reptition's minor key. language is the veil which catches up the would-be knower of truth. which truth? subjective truth. van Gogh's paintings take the place of the analyst in the self-reflexive discourse of a viewer's auto-analysis, not in virtue of a given painter's state of mind or his/her intentions. The message of the perceiver is, in this way, reversed by the content of his own interpretation/set of associations etc and not those of the artist/analyst. The "artist" as phenomenon and not transcendental signifier ought to be located as a signifier, placed in that self-reflexive discourse and understood therefore in its capacity as constituting force (essentially absent as drive, or, the gaze which maintains it, Objet a), and its constituted presence as such. SOmeone else said it better.

Antonia - 06/01/03 22:23:26 EDT
Stéphane - I never thought of agalma as a place, and neither as something material to the point that it could be located... in the look of "the knack" , like in the movie "the nack and how to get it"... or the Spanish "tiene angel"

Stéphane - 05/31/03 13:32:51 EDT
Chris said that agalma is everywhere and the desire nowhere in a van Gogh's painting. Antonia, do you locate the "eveywhere" and the "nowhere" in the space between the transparency of the veil and the opaqueness of the wall ?

Antonia - 05/30/03 21:23:14 EDT
The veil that hides the real tricked the birds - with Zeuxis - as the birds started picking at the grapes... Again, the veil that hides the real tricked the human eye - with Parrasios:
Lacan often evokes the classical tale of the contest between the two Greek painters, Zeuxis and Parrhasios: victory goes to Parrhasios who paints on the wall a veil, so that Zeuxis turns to him and says: "Well, and now show us what you have painted behind it."

Stéphane - 05/30/03 17:34:21 EDT
Antonia, yes, tell me the story who make a ply in the Story

Antonia - 05/30/03 10:55:09 EDT
The veil that hides the real tricked the birds - shall I tell the story?

Stéphane - 05/30/03 02:38:42 EDT
I knew but I had not seen the little theater on Lacan dot com. Thank you Paul.
I think that the wood panel by André Masson is as a veil on the Courbet's Painting who is maybe itself a veil ont he real. My question is : Which real behind the veil of the painting ? Do you agree that this mechanical system adjusted as a rite teaches us many things on the When i want as i want-open/close of Jacques Lacan and widely on the painting ?

lucas - 05/29/03 20:02:40 EDT
cloning may be asexual but you still need an initial cell that has undergone meiosis

Paul - 05/29/03 18:44:53 EDT
Stéphane - did you see the little theater with the wood panel by André Masson on the Origine du monde at ?

Lucy - 05/29/03 15:22:11 EDT
cloning is asexual - she can generate a hand, brain or foot without the man's semen

lucas - 05/28/03 20:40:18 EDT
does not make a difference if she is one or two...the second does not occupy space in the bus and therefore does not pay

lucas - 05/28/03 20:37:47 EDT
however without the man's semen she cannot autogenerate a hand, brain or perhaps they are sending rockets to the uterus LOL

Stéphane - 05/28/03 18:18:25 EDT
The painting (Le Tableau) as a piece of real, when it is not looked For artists the real is unthinkable(?), unshowable(?), inénarrable(?), unloveable(?), undreamable(?)... Maybe artists recovers the real more and more and indicates us that the real is never given in advance in a work-of-art. I think at the little theater with the wood panel by Masson on the Origine du monde. In this case is not it a mecanic system as swiss's coucou open/close? But the little bird (petit oiseau)who appears is rather different.

Terry1 - 05/28/03 17:00:48 EDT
Is a pregnant wo/man one or two? If she gets on a bus she buys one ticket but is she one?

Terry1 - 05/28/03 16:58:46 EDT
A woman can make a hand , a brain or a can only send rockets to the moon.

chris (uk) - 05/28/03 16:58:29 EDT
When Lacan was young, many artists were pe-occupied with dreamwork, but if art now aims at a severed condition, then art has nothing left to do with dreams. Is this why art courts the real??? But in a Courtil paper, Elizabeth Doisneau writes: 'Lacan says it is the scopic drive 'that most completely eludes the term castration'. (paper is called, 'Cecilia; or No Name for the Worst' p.8)

Terry 1 - 05/28/03 16:57:07 EDT
'Never refuse the love of a woman because she loves from a lack'..There is only one sex and it's male. What does this mean for a wo/man?

Lucy - 05/28/03 11:16:43 EDT
Stéphane - the artist doesn't exist, thereof it doesn't matter whether it is a man or a woman
the artist and the work-of-art should both come up in the discourse - like the patient and the analyst do

Stéphane - 05/28/03 05:41:44 EDT
Lucy, Woman does not exist + Art does not exist = Woman's Art exists ?

Antonia - 05/28/03 05:31:13 EDT
And life, is it a woman's Art?

Lucy - 05/28/03 05:26:20 EDT
Art as a symptom aims at the severed condition which Lacan wants to cross out - bar.
Woman does not exist... Art does not exist.

Terry1 - 05/27/03 15:24:51 EDT
A woman's life is Art as she is the NOT-ONE.

chris (uk) - 05/27/03 14:00:36 EDT
But we'd arrived via Vincent at the gaze of the art object, as objet a, consequently, Terry1's reference to the art object taking the position of the analyst ... which I think is reference to Sem. X1. It concerns the place of the objet a in a particular discourse concening analysis and art

Stéphane - 05/27/03 03:54:06 EDT
I dompte know really maybe in a vacant place

Rupert - 05/27/03 01:53:16 EDT
Hey Richard! Maybe yes or maybe not! Who knows for sure with the uncanny...

Richard - 05/26/03 22:26:54 EDT
Objet petit a ought to be a partial object that solicits the gaze of the Other, thus bringing forth the uncanny effect that haunts the subject. It is a materialization of desire that points to the direct truth of the internal beyond (or radical otherness) within the subject. Am I right?

chris (uk) - 05/26/03 17:27:53 EDT
peut etre, comme objet petit a ou petite a?

Terry1 - 05/26/03 15:37:05 EDT
So Object petite (a) is the gaze.

chris (uk) - 05/26/03 14:35:13 EDT
If Van Gogh pics involve both viewer and the gaze of the Other, Stephane's question and Terry1's point of order, can be, where do we locate the Other, if Van Gogh was psychotic. In the gaze of the Other or in the viewer? Through metaphor or metonymy?

Stéphane - 05/26/03 13:33:41 EDT
yes, because in a selfportrait, Van gogh does not represent his face, mainly he uses himself.

Terry1 - 05/26/03 12:42:48 EDT
So Van Gogh's paintings take the position of the analyst. They become the cause.

Stéphane - 05/26/03 11:04:24 EDT
Chris, you said that Lacan equates the position of the psychotic with the position of the mystic. Considering these two categories (psychotic & mystic), do you think that van Gogh's experience could be a third category, original and not completely explored who could be a reference so wide ?

chris (uk) - 05/26/03 06:24:38 EDT
Stephane, Van Gogh's pictures are filled with intensities, but, perhaps, these intensities preclude any distance between subject and 'the Thing'. So, the agalma is everywhere and the space of desire, nowhere. Lacan equates the position of the psychotic with the position of the mystic.
Rupert, in clinical work this is surely how it might seem, but doesn't Lacan say that the subject's clinical structure is determined by the relation to the 'Name-of-the-Father'? Which suggests something fixed.
I was equating scansion with symbolic castration, so, my question was, how is scanding (castration) in any way appropriate to work with a psychotic subject, when there is the danger of something more than symbolic castration in the real.

Antonia - 05/25/03 16:02:32 EDT
Rick - I think the meaning of the word in Greek is "precious stones," and it certainly extends to a precious object, like Chris puts it, throught Lacan's signification: objet a, in you more than you, the surplus X... The agalma aims at the impossible real, at what is in an object more than the object, at the surplus produced by the signifying operation.

Stéphane - 05/25/03 15:54:33 EDT
Why are Van Gogh's paintings increasing the real until today ?

Rupert Murdoch - 05/25/03 15:50:58 EDT
What is the severity of the psychosis? This question is not to imply a scale of magnitude, or question the concept of structure, but rather as in any real analysis, certain symptoms evidence themselves at certain times. A psychotic may conceivably in some kind of classic neurotic denial at a given moment that the analyst, in a constant attempt to situate himself in some way -- in any way -- in regards to the analysand must deal with. A psychotic may display a perverse symptom or a hysterical fear. It almost certainly varies session to session with no set rule. If the psychosis is full blown and the ongoing work of the analyst is to stabilize the patient, then perhaps fixed-length sessions appear as a rule. But until either the psychotic symptom collapses the patient from within or is clarified through and as the result of analysis, all bets are off.

chris (uk) - 05/25/03 14:25:03 EDT
Agalma is Greek for a precious object and Lacan uses it as another name for the 'object a'.
The object a is the cause of desire in neurosis and in psychosis, the agalma can be everywhere. This everywhere agalma is perhaps apparent in Van Gogh's paintings.

Rick - 05/25/03 09:41:40 EDT
Yes Antonia Agalma. What does the Greek word mean and what did Lacan mean by it?

chris (uk) - 05/25/03 06:38:02 EDT
(extending my question)
If analysts use fixed duration sessions with psychotic analysands (my guess), does the psychotic analysand sometimes 'scand' the session? And can this 'cut' be associated with what Kleinians call 'projective identification' and with what Lacanians call 'imaginary identification'?

Paul - 05/25/03 06:07:23 EDT
the agalmas could be the precious: objet a - in you more than you -

chris (uk) - 05/25/03 06:03:33 EDT
Now seriously chaps!
Apart from the Courtil papers, I've found few translated clinical Lacanian papers. When an analyst assesses he or she is working with a psychotic subject, the approach to the work will differ from an approach to work with a neurotic subject. But, my question is, will the analyst scand sessions with a psychotic analysand or is scansion reserved for neurotic (and perverse) analysands? In one of the Courtil papers, there is reference to an analyst using fixed duration sessions with autistic children.

lucas - 05/24/03 21:27:15 EDT
everything one enjoys...perhaps even witches

Antonia - 05/24/03 17:31:18 EDT
Rick - do you mean agalma?

Rick - 05/24/03 16:27:51 EDT
What is Agelma?

- 05/24/03 10:48:59 EDT
it is in the WITCH place (real)

- 05/23/03 20:54:18 EDT
i would say the latter Lucas

Stéphane - 05/23/03 05:31:14 EDT
The landscape, when it begins to be looked
The landscape, when it is looked
The landscape, when it is'nt looked
In these 3 sentences, witch place (real) for the viewer ?

Money Shot - 05/22/03 22:55:06 EDT
The crucial dimension here is the dialectical. When the signifier loses its dialectical dimension as something that can be given and exchanged with/within the Other, and ceases to encompass the individual (the result is called 'subject'), then it becomes inert.
Its not enough to say that the Unconscious is (the discourse of) the Other. Lacan works it over from many different angles. For example, by saying that the Unconscious is Real. The Imaginary has some part to play in sustaining the Other as a site or locus wherein the discourse of the Other can take root.
Another point: the Symbolic is also the Real. Not only in a dialectical sense, but also in a kind of zero-point topological identity. When the two-year old girl wants to both read a book AND eat her dinner at the same time even though she is physically unable to do so, the simultaneity of the two aims bespeaks the level of the drive, but a drive that is only the result of a desire sustained by a symbolic experience that has temporalized and committed to memory the distinctiveness of both pursuits.

lucas - 05/22/03 21:23:09 EDT
has anyone here ever worked with schizophrenics or just read about it?

Stéphane - 05/22/03 16:55:57 EDT
Does the shizophrenic look for ever the landscape through a show case ?

chris (uk) - 05/22/03 14:17:48 EDT
To say the symbolic is real in psychosis implies a topology. For Lacan, perhaps, the unconscious is made up of metaphor and metonymy, which are condensation and displacement in Freud's dreamwork. But is metaphor the territory of neurosis and interpretation, if metonymy can be the terrain of psychosis and post-interpretative psychoanalysis? If metaphor is foreclosed, does metonymy exhaust the work of the imaginary, or have I arrived back at the fugitive figure of manic depression?

Stéphane - 05/22/03 05:59:05 EDT
And the landscape for the schizophrenic ?

Behrooz - 05/22/03 02:46:49 EDT
But i think psychotic means that one who does not look at the world through symbolic, his mind is free of symbols, and in schizophrenia everything is symbol!

Lucy - 05/21/03 12:44:13 EDT
with Lacan there aren't degrees of psychosis - it is or it isn't.

lucas - 05/21/03 07:16:17 EDT
schizophrenia is psychosis...why advanced type? psychosis is psychosis

Behrooz - 05/21/03 05:36:01 EDT
According to Lacan, for schizophrenic all the real is symbol. On the other side in psychoanalysis only three structures exist psychosis,neurosis and perversion. So can we assum schizophrenia as advanced type of psychosis?

Paul - 05/21/03 03:44:29 EDT
the unconscious is ALWAYS the discourse of the Other because it depends on language...
there is no unconscious with animals.

Antonia - 05/20/03 18:13:45 EDT
the unconscious is always the discourse of the Other, the subject only arises in the Other: there is what you utter and what you say - the subject of the unconscious is "whoever speaks," according to Lacan.

Mike - 05/20/03 15:47:28 EDT
Why is the unconscious ALWAYS the discourse of the other?

Antonia - 05/20/03 13:46:51 EDT
Jamie - I can think of applying to "the five images" and their visibility at one glance the principle of the analyst's floating attention. You look... if something pulls your attention you pay attention to this something and so on

chris (uk) - 05/16/03 04:58:34 EDT
Jamie, when you first asked that question, I had in mind a reply which included the imaginary, the symbolic and the real, plus two others, the viewer and the gaze, but the question is interesting, and deserves a response beyond some kind of unlikely academic plausibility.
If art takes fantasy for a walk, the question could prompt research into film funding and a film shot with an actor carrying ŒWinter Trees‚ and Seminar X1. through some museum of contempory art, with the voice over of Jacques-Alain Miller. Funding for a film in search of paternity, could come from Lacanian Ink and Sylvia Plath‚s estate, but conflating the discourse of psychoanalysis and art might be a little obscene!

Jamie - 05/15/03 19:35:02 EDT
Referring to question of "the five images" and their visibility at one glance,I simply meant physical images... as an artist myself the connotations and imaginary are very real for me, but that is an another issue... Here the question was more about human's physical ability to confront a special number of e.g. paintings, photographs etc. I've been told (very vaguely)that Lacan has a theory of this matter. Perhaps somebody can help me here??? (first inquiry 05/08/03...)I can later help categorize magnificent Sylvia Plath's state of mind and "statements" of her in general...

chris (uk) - 05/15/03 18:55:18 EDT
Antonia, there has to be some danger 'catergorising' psychosis this way when Lacanians avoid the borderline at all costs. Hence reference to 'generalised foreclosure' and 'universal symptom of delirium' and Lacan's late emphasis on jouissance (and anOther jouissance). If there's any chance someone like Sylvia Plath had manic depression, we surely need to question assumptions, such as 'absence of an unconscious', when this writer, for example, must have written some of the most beautiful poetry ever written. For reasons like this, I refer to a fugitive figure within Psychosis. But the 'subject which pulled your attention Chris, at some point' was quite astute.

chris (uk) - 05/15/03 18:13:13 EDT
Sorry Lucy, it seems someone's stolen my chatroom name! And I guess it could have been a worse day, but, it looks like my Alta Ego's confusing symbolic and real, which is no way of trading insults!

Antonia - 05/15/03 04:44:09 EDT
I'm afraid it all comes down to the maiac depressive - psychotic - not having an unconscious - no Other, no objet a, no subject - see how he remained tied to the voices of the mother, a subject which pulled your attention Chris, at some point.

chris (uk) - 05/13/03 16:09:07 EDT
Mania in manic depression sometimes leads to the construction of a delusional metaphor and sometimes not, but my question has to do with what Antonia calls the major figures of schizophrenia and paranoia, in an attempt to locate a more fugitive one. Perhaps, I'm somehow linking a psychiatric association and clinical structure. My reference is to Jacques-Alain Miller's paper in Symptom 2. and what follows is a lengthy quote from a paper which is about both clinical and 'generalised' foreclosure. :
'Let us note, again, that what one calls mania in the psychiatric clinic is the case in which the object a does not function; that is to say, a case of inconsistent logic, which goes together with the perceived inexistence of the Other. That is, it is a question of a maxim which does not set itself up as truth. And why not put in opposition to mania, as a formula of depression, the a-logical consistency of the object, of an object which is no longer the cause of the desire of the Other. The lack-in-being of the subject is no longer there except as a being-in-excess of being wanted.'

lucas - 05/13/03 08:13:30 EDT
Does mania necessarily have psychotic features? I seem to believe not.

chris (uk) - 05/13/03 02:49:47 EDT
If so called manic depression can't be confused with schizophenia or paranoia, are we talking about 'a condition' which doesn't quite fit the clinical structure of psychosis, in the depressive phase? Beyond which, at times, Lacanian clinical structure seems at odds with Jacques-Alain Miller's reference to 'generalised foreclosure' and a 'universal delirium'. But perhaps, I'm conflating clinical Lacan and the Lacan of analytic philosophy.

Antonia - 05/12/03 20:42:01 EDT
mania in itself is not the psychotic figure. Let's say mania is a psychotic symptom of a major psychotic figure lying behind it - schizofrenia, paranoia... I think.

Chris (uk) - 05/12/03 16:37:47 EDT

- 05/12/03 16:35:36 EDT
A question addressed to the chatroom with regard to 'manias': Reading the 'Courtil papers', there's reference to schizophrenia and paranoia as psychoses, but no mention of mania. In an early Symptom paper, I think, Jacques-Alain Miller describes mania as a failure of the 'object a'. But this failure implies the partial existence of desire in psychosis, in which case, does that glimmering have to do with 'a depressive pole'? I

chris (uk) - 05/08/03 14:25:01 EDT
Perhaps, we have to begin with what is meant by the word 'image'? When Lacan talks about 'the image' in Sem. 11, psychoanalytic discourse is the discourse of science and art. For artists, the term constitutes a difficult 'readymade'. But despite a connotation linking 'image' and the imaginary, the 'difficult readymade' may have as much to do with the symbolic and the real. I seem to be skirting a question which suggests a plausible and scientific response.

Jamie - 05/08/03 11:21:56 EDT
I'm having a blackout... meaning perhaps blind spot... anyway, can anybody help me to get more information about Lacan's theory of seeing only five images per one time (or was it 3+2 ???) naturally if the images are front of you on the wall...

Lucy - 05/06/03 04:26:56 EDT
that was a typo - I meant to say "provide the patient with a fetish."

lucas - 05/05/03 20:08:06 EDT
whatever she provides them with or they are deprived of or not deprived of..she is getting $200 bucks an hour...either creative or totally lacking in ethics or maybe has ethics for a ....

Lucy - 05/05/03 15:33:45 EDT
A fetish analyst? a real fetishist who "knows the ways and means" doesn't want to be deprived of his fetish ever. Maybe what the woman does is provide the patient with...a

sera - 05/05/03 00:39:00 EDT my lord. I don't know if this is a scam, a joke, ignorance, or some sort of purposeful/allegorical reversal (Though it would be amusing... I would bet against the latter), all of the above, what have you, but this is quite amusing. Les non-dupes errant, bien sur! This woman gets paid $200 a session (albeit the sessions are loooonnngg - see "sessions" link). fascinating.

Paul - 05/04/03 18:48:21 EDT
I don't know of Lacan doing any thinking/writing specifically about non-phonetic written languages like Chinese... I do remember though some Chinese girl writing about the many strokes she needed in the Chinese language to say the word "I" - three or four - contrary to the English language where "I" only takes one stroke, and you capitalize the word.

lucas - 05/01/03 21:54:53 EDT
Agreed in theory...perfectly rational and selfless argument...but Jesus Christ so daunting...I do not know that I am so saintly LOL

Bonni - 05/01/03 13:38:43 EDT
Hi. Any one know if Lacan or any one after him did any thinking/writing about non-phonetic written languages like Chinese?

chris (uk) - 04/30/03 16:13:19 EDT
If, Lacan supposes there's no such thing as sexual rapport, to help us locate the real: the Pope prefers metonyme to metaphor, because interpretation is the unconscious, as Jacques- Alain Miller says in 'Interpretation in Reverse'. Then, desiring, habit forming interpretation tends towards the real. Would Zizek say, towards the body of Christ, including or excluding metaphor?

Paul - 04/30/03 04:54:35 EDT
vodoo wants to change our habits...
- the messageboard
- zizek
Rupert - 04/30/03 02:30:22 EDT
Voodoo read the Pope's line in the New Yorker. Well, the challenge is whether Voodoo is also against safe sex.

- 04/29/03 23:52:45 EDT
Whether Zizek said it or not, he's right.

Lucy - 04/29/03 19:37:28 EDT
Although I read and hear Zizek a lot, I never heard nor read his geniuos line about the pope.

vowho_cuts_the_moon - 04/29/03 15:03:12 EDT
this is a very lame message board. there are any number of free software-linux based message boards out there. get some savvy and maybe we can really chat. until then you'll have to satisfy yourself with Zizek repeating himself over and over again. let him cut and past that ridiculous line about how the pope is a genuine religious figure because he is against safe sex.

perfume - 04/26/03 19:03:31 EDT
Terry1 - Bravo!
we don't have a clue though with regard to what we did right.....

Terry1 - 04/26/03 16:21:49 EDT
For some reason I have a full screen now. Back to 'normal'.

lucas - 04/25/03 19:33:41 EDT
whoever you are needed relief ...LOL

Antonia - 04/25/03 19:08:52 EDT
whoever you are - I'm still laughing...

- 04/25/03 16:12:05 EDT
The long awaited and very satisfying Sequel - less substance made up for by more sensationalism, in this case Big Names filling an almost totally formulaic plot - to the joke about Franjo Tudjman quoted in Zizek, The Fragil Absolute pg. 53. Maybe you've already heard it:
An aircraft is about to crash. There are five passengers on board, but unfortunately there are only 4 parachutes. The first passenger says "I'm Shaquile O'Neill, the best NBA basketball player. The Lakers need me, it would be unfair to them if I died." So he takes the first parachute and jumps.
The second passenger, Hilary Clinton, says "I'm the wife of the former President of the United States. I am also the most dedicated woman in the world, a Senator in New York and America's potential future President." She takes one of the parachutes and jumps.
The third passenger, George W. Bush, says "I am the Presidant of the United States of America. I have a huge responcability in world politics. And apart from that, I am the most intelligint President in the history of the country and I have a responcebility to my people not to die." So he takes a parachute and jumps.
The fourth passenger, the Pope, says to the fifth passenger, a ten year old schoolboy, "I am already old. I have already lived my life, as a good person and a priest. I will give you the last parachute."
The boy replies "No problem, there is also a parachute for you. America's most intelligent President has taken my schoolbag."

Antonia - 04/25/03 14:01:34 EDT
chris (uk) I was in fact looking at the 'Courtil papers' downloading them... I went though directly to the Belgium site. What the London Circle has is a link to them. Le Courtil is an institution for psychotic and pathologic neurotic children and young adults... the site belongs to La champ freudien in Beligum: ch-freudien-org/Papers/Txt

chris (uk) - 04/22/03 13:48:38 EDT
During a gap when nobody spoke, I thought everybody was reading the 'Courtil papers', which can be downloaded from the London Circle's website (see links). Translated from the French, these are Lacanian clinical papers, mainly describing work with psychotic children. I only discovered them recently, but have found them truely a revelation!!!!!