- 10/21/06 11:22:30 EDT
a new Art + Lacan symposia is now available, a little slower but spam free

- 10/21/06 03:56:55 EDT
are you Australian?

- 10/20/06 02:03:12 EDT
yeah sure, after publishing 'Anti-Oedipus' in '74, rather than return to the Seminar themselves to hear Lacan's reaction, Deleuze and Guattari sent the latter's wife(!) to garner the rejoinder. There was none, when asked why, said reply, recounted by Schneidermann in 'Death of a an Intellectual Hero' (i think- haven't seen the book for years). Who dares guess why! Its a shame really, I'd love to know what the man thought of the book, that in the 80's, started a fire under the little black duck, as we say aprpos 'I' in Australia

- 10/19/06 12:36:58 EDT
"Despite Lacan's refusal to 'communicate via proxy' according to Schneidermann..." can you explain some more abour Schneiderman saying this? in what context, etc.?

- 10/17/06 07:13:39 EDT"No rescuing of desire when there's no assuption of desire and lack" restates firmly Lackanian lacklessness. There's a lot of space given here to Zizek who as a Lacan derivative, surely needs to be forgiven his appropriating of psycho-analysis to politics as much as we applaud his absorbtion of Lacan's givens. Despite Lacan's refusal to 'communicate via proxy' according to Schneidermann, is it impossible to imagine a Lacan who was impressed by the formulation of 'desiring-production' as offered by Deleuze and Guattari? A joissance of the harvesting of each moment of... work- with use value or not- atemporal or not-? Forgive me if I'm patently unaware of how D+G's work has been roundly discredited...

- 10/16/06 17:22:29 EDT
(Nash) There's been some reference to the Encore seminar in past weeks on the messageboard. It's available and the translation is good and the text full of extraordinary material. There's even a published commentary on the text

Nash - 10/16/06 17:02:38 EDT
i will be gratefull if anyone guide me understanding lacan's concept about feminine jouissance and his referance to mystical poetry by st. John of the cross & st. teresa of Avilla THanks

- 10/16/06 05:25:37 EDT
At the level of the individual capitalist the spectre which fascinates, the lure which drives him, one supposes, is the lack of lack, an impregnable secuity and the consumption of art that might threaten the aspirant only confirms the hegemony of the mogul.
At the level of the corporation, that of the "impersonal... self-reproduction", the drive is taken to be autonomic and while, (if the corporation is analagous to an asymptomatic psyche- egoless, 'freed to love and work'- free of neurotic symptoms- but not psychotic ones!- isn't that the appeal of investing in the market a foreclosed- removable- head, a polymorphous body, and a univocal unconscious, the shareholders?)... This sentence is out of my control! Perhaps the psychotic corporation saturates the zeitgeist for the investor, even in his appetite for impotence? I'm sure someone out there can talk of this coherently. Personally i'm going to re-read Deleuze and Guattari..

- 10/16/06 03:27:18 EDT
In the text mentiioned below, Zizek (p.117) refers to a distinction between two object a's. Desire and the drive as lack and hole, but of course no rescueing of desire, when there's no assumptiion of desire and lack. Zizek writes: '... even if it (capitalism) already manipulates desire in a way that takes into account the fact that the most elementary desire is the desire to reproduce itself as desire (and not to find satisfaction), at this level, we do not reach the drive. The drive adheres to capitalism at a more fundamental, systemic level: drive propels the entire capitalist machinery; it is the impersonal compulsion to engage in the endless circular movement of expanded self-reproduction'. Of course, this is not accounting for the part contemporary art plays or 'spectral fascination', but can it be a start?

- 10/14/06 21:02:36 EDT
Can you elaborate on "..some way of re-inventing desire"? Rather than deriding Western capitalism's axiomatizing of threat or perversity -ala 'Anti-Oedipus'- you seem to be suggesting that the gobbling of the margins can divest the world of objet 'a', at least culturally, and somehow restore desire, rescue it from spectral fascination. Of course i may have misunderstood completely...

- 10/14/06 16:07:43 EDT
Some might say, representations first occur as misrepreseentations in the wake of a 'mirror stage'. The Zizek I had in mind concerns Lacan's four discourses, with two discourses, the discourses of hysteric and university at odds or complicit with mastery. A confusion arises re. the discouse of the analyst and JA Miller's notion that late capitalism can be equated to a discourse which priviledges desire.
If the western world is in accord with the discourse of the analyst, we might see 'co-option' and gobbling up the margins as some way of re-inventing desire. Zizek ('Object a in Social Links' in 'JL. and the Other Side of Psychoanalysis') asks whether psychoanalysis has to do with cohesion (knotting) or separateness (difference). Act or retroaction.

Ross - 10/14/06 15:29:01 EDT
in response to your understanding of Badiou: i think the artist is often co-opted, as is the artwork, but given that representations can be unstable, there is always a chance that the situation can be turned around. i would hope that some artworks would neither distance us nor create coherence with a questionable Other, if i understand the concept correctly. Can you elaborate Zizek's position?

Ross Birdwise - 10/14/06 14:49:31 EDT
the experts would be interpreting the work as something that functions so as to resist coherency, but once interpreted this way, they no longer have to contend with the work. i can't speak for the artist, i'm talking about the other people in the artist's milieu. perhaps i'm being too cynical, but it seems like the theory which they use to circumscibe the work ends up distancing them from fully experiencing the incoherency. the work itself circulates in a fairly closed world...i'm not sure where i'm going with this exactly. it was clearer in my mind yesterday...

- 10/14/06 04:23:47 EDT
(RB) Is this a questiion about interpretation or the coherence of contemporay art?
Badiou has somethiing to say concerning art and democracy and a recording of a recent talk can be found on 'the Symptom' (this site). What he might be saying suggests an incompatibility of art and democracy/late capitalism. Zizek's analysis is useful here. When capitalism absorbs (co-opts) the margins, the artist through 'the work of art' re-discovers margins and a curious compatibility - of art and Lacan!! Conversations here in the last couple of weeks seem to skirt the discourse of the hysteric (the Other jouissance, barred JA) and in a political sense, there's the figure of the unacceptible
Other. So, the artist re-discovers a coherence out there with a questionable Other or we distance ourselves. In the last of his theses on contemporary work, Badiou writes: 'It is better to do nothing than to contribute to the invention of formal ways of rendering visible that which Empire already recognizes as existent'.
So, I would say, there's 'possible' coherence out there with the figure of an 'unacceptible Other' (Zizek) or we contend with the figure from inner space (Badiou's last point).

Ross Birdwise - 10/13/06 19:33:05 EDT
something i've noticed about contemporary art:
experts/professors/people in the scene sometimes pay lip service to the idea of an art object that resists interpretation, and therefore has to make no appeal to a general public understanding or coherency. the artwork would seemingly reject the notion of stable, fixed, coherent representation. nonetheless, the experts are in a position to judge this "unfixed-ness", to give it value in its negativity, its excessive quality. sometimes it seems like a justification for the elites, as i don't think they are really that affected by this supposedly unfixed object. for them, i believe its rather stable and circumscibed actually.

- 10/11/06 04:01:06 EDT
I think Lorenzo Chiesa in chapter in 'LACAN, THE SILENT PARTNERS' refers to a barred Other jouissance, equating it with the sinthome ...

- 10/11/06 00:33:25 EDT
..but this Other 'feminine' beyond phallic jouissance - it is not barred

- 10/10/06 17:56:45 EDT
... and for a while I'll go on imagining, the 'symposia next door' is made of 'spam and chips' ...

- 10/10/06 17:41:11 EDT
We seem to have the hysteriic, the Other jouissance, barred JA and the notion of a sick mind ...?
Some time ago (on this site), there was reference to a paaper by Jean-Claude Maleval called 'WHY SO MANY BORDERLINES?' - in an early (online) edition of 'PSYCHOANALYTIC NOTEBOOKS'. The paper links the hysteric to so called 'borderline personality disorders', but if Maleval makes the case that the hysteric renews herself (as 'borderline'), I wonder what to do with the notion of 'sick minds' on an analytically ortientated site(?)
I want to defend to defend the Other jouissance too: can't the concept of the Other jouissance have to do with an exception to phallic jouissance and what Lacan calls the 'not-all'? Doesn't Lacan keep alive the hysteric (and psychoanalysis) in 'Encore'? I must be dreaming it seems and dreaming have arrived at barred JA. But if the sinthome (equated with barred JA) is a knot that ties through foreclosure, we are left with walls made of spam and the fact that Monty Python is also contemporary with 'Encore'(?)

- 10/10/06 01:32:33 EDT
And what of the jouissance that misses the object but bears its mark -- with Lacan the plus-de-jouir, an aditional jouissance (en plus), which fills in the loss...... plus-de-jouir or recuperated jouissance in the Other... in the analyst?

- 10/09/06 23:16:37 EDT
the barred Other jouissance may refer to the jouissance that would destroy you. It is barred by castration in the case of neurosis, and is projected in the case of psychosis, or disavowed
(barred but not barred) in perversion.
but also, the barred Other jouissance may be barred by an ethical decision one makes at the end of an analysis, to give up some jouissance for the sake of living and speaking one's desire.
This jouissance might be seen as what sustains the repetition or death drive, and is characterised by overwhelming feelings. One might become 'addicted' but it is neither sustainable nor social - and displaces the self from the position as a speaking subject whose desire might involve more freedom.

- 10/09/06 22:10:29 EDT
I guess if a subject is divided there must be a subject of the unconscious to begin with.
I appreciate the clarity and mystery of this message:

- 10/04/06 02:35:00 EDT
Hysterics have problems with being named. More than often they use many names. As to the father relation, they will of course turn him into a Master, hysterics make masters, but only to find the way to master them
the hysteric starts out with her "I am what you say," and ends with her "All of what I am you cannot say."

- 10/09/06 01:33:28 EDT
I tend to think the 'Partitions made of spam' in the symposia next door, if something, what they reproduce is the dispenser's sick mind

admin - 10/08/06 21:57:42 EDT
I clean up of spam in the A+L Symposia at least 2 or 3 times a day... in hopes that the problem will stop. In the meantime I've looked over quite a lot of other models of messageboards - the safer ones require a password... but do we want that?

- 10/08/06 10:33:32 EDT
From time to time in past weeks I've thought about saying somethiing (next door, A+L symposia) and every time it's not available. It's 'blocked' and the disruption seems aimed at a site which makes occasional reference to a 'conceptual sinthome'. IF a bar is somehow problematic in the context of the sinthome, how do we describe recent events next door?
'Partitions made of spam' turn the site into some kind of no-go area, but what are they? If art's vanity claims a response of the real, are these partitions made of 'foreclosure'?

- 10/08/06 10:07:36 EDT
No, my (present) predicament has to do with what miight be meant by the 'barred Other jouissance'. With Encore, it seems Lacan avoids substantiating 'JA', hence a difficulty equating barred JA and sinthome. If the bar normally indicates a divide, whaat kind of divide can be be associated with the sinthome, when the sinthome ties symbolic and real. Is the Encore proposition (JA) beyond the sinthome?

- 10/07/06 17:19:04 EDT
I don't completly understand your question, but I guess it is addressing our previous conversation where somebody wrote
"the sinthome becomes (like a woman) it is not a priori."
As to the master becoming through the hysteric - the case is the hysteric needs to "make" masters in order to master them... "la maiîtresse du maître"

- 10/07/06 02:50:44 EDT
And so the sinthome as the barred Other jouiissance implies a work or act - as if master and hysteric are one?

- 10/06/06 02:40:24 EDT
How do we know the Other jouissance is not the jouissance of the hysteric?
With mystiics - who says they are not hysteric? --- it is the "Other jouissance" to sustain the jouissance of the One that is God, to the point of "her" becoming One in that jouissance.

- 10/04/06 04:00:05 EDT
At the end of the chaapter referred to below, Lorenzo Chiesa compares a jouissance in SemXX. to a jouissance of the sinthome seminar. The 'Other jouiissance' may not be the jouissance of the hysteric, but in 'Encore', Lacan proposes a jouissance which is not bound up with phallic jouiissance. LC makes the point, I think, that (perhaps) JA (the Other jouissance) is barred when it comes to the sinthome. This may have little bearing on the master/hysteric dynamic at first sight, but seventy years after Freud's first discoveries, it seems to me that Lacan (partly) reworks an original dynamic in two late seminars.

- 10/04/06 02:35:00 EDT
Hysterics have problems with being named. More than often they use many names. As to the father relation, they will of course turn him into a Master, hysterics make masters, but only to find the way to master them
the hysteric starts out with her "I am what you say," and ends with her "All of what I am you cannot say,"

... - 10/03/06 19:55:15 EDT
I find it easy to think about the name of the father in psychosis, but harder to understand in hysteria. Can anyone talk about their ideas about this?

- 10/01/06 18:40:46 EDT
Lorenzo Chiesa ('Lacan, The Silent Partners') makes the case that Artaud comes very close.
But with art structured like a language, we can see contemporary art as a text. So, not only Artaud, but Bueys and most recently, a preoccupation in contemporary work with video based installations and a confluence based on apparitions and somethiing heard. 'Art in an Age of Mechanical Reproduction' surely moves away from a writing and perhaps so too the sinthome(?)
But, the 'Art and Lacan Symposia' is stiill filled many times each day with 'a writing'. At the end of the recent 'Guiding Principles for any Psychoanalytic Act', Eric Laurent writes, 'A psychoanalyst is not autistic'.

- 10/01/06 03:54:41 EDT
I tend to think the two most famous examples with regard to "the act of making something which writes a subject," are Schreber's and Joyce's writings.

- 09/30/06 02:30:13 EDT
Can we have an example of the act of making something which writes a subject?

name: - 09/29/06 18:48:24 EDT
anybody there?

- 09/29/06 13:12:22 EDT
I love these 2 posts... have to wonder if it is the same person that wrote the two posts.

>>> - 09/26/06 10:32:10 EDT
An act of making something which writes a subject, which acts as if the name-of-the-father, the fourth knot, as if a signifying chain.

- 09/24/06 20:13:48 EDT
sinthome comes to act as the fourth, it can't be foreclosed because it becomes (like a woman), it is not a priori ; if it is not, and there is collapse, then perhaps there was foreclosure of the name of the father.
Sinthome visible? retroactively? - perhaps rather you could say 'named, after' visible may suggest imaginary? it ties together real symbolic imaginary and moves between and perhaps beyond <<<<<

- 09/28/06 04:48:36 EDT
what wonderful ideas

- 09/27/06 17:50:30 EDT
'As if a signifying chain' is interesting. This reference to the sinthome remiinds me that Bion wrote a paper around the time of the Joyce seminar called 'Attacks On Linking' (written from a Kleinian perspective). I wonder also to what extent the term 'reconciliation' could be synonomous with the sinthome - at a political level. I've had to do some thiinking in the past few weeks about the place I live and work in. It seems curiously resistant to the unconscious (and any kind of praxis informed by psychoanalysis). It was occupied during the second world war and the impact of a devasting period on a small community is still felt. So, my interest in a term which comes up for me at the moment.
If psychoanalysis comes late to France, should we see Lacan's work in relation to a country torn by war and collaboration?

- 09/26/06 10:40:59 EDT
thank you...

- 09/26/06 10:32:10 EDT
An act of making something which writes a subject, which acts as if the name-of-the-father, the fourth knot, as if a signifying chain.

- 09/26/06 09:05:34 EDT
How is it act in Schrebers (or Joyce's) writing? Could you please explain...

- 09/26/06 00:36:29 EDT
act as in Schrebers (or Joyce's) writing?

- 09/25/06 23:36:59 EDT
I think the sinthome is something of an act, which acts to hold the structure together,
so in contemporary culture many things could be seen as a sinthome, or prosthesis..television for instance (the box, not the text) as a thing to be done which might hold
the family in everyday life. That is, if it be invested with the drive.

- 09/25/06 17:16:06 EDT
I'm not familiar with Fassbinder's film, but assume there's reference to compulsive repetition, to whaat Badiou calls 'radical evil' (I think) and to perversion as a clinical structure - where the symptom somehow prompts arrest (punishment, castration). It certainly cuts through the notion that the sinthome (symptom) can have universal appeal.
The response to 'the sinthome beyond psychosis' confuses me. 'Enjoying it' seems too close to 'jouit-sens', but beyond jouissance ... some way that the unconscious enjoys itself? ... With the shadow of Fassbinder' plot, surely we can only dream of unconscious pleasures. I know Zizek refers to a 'perveerse subjectivity'.

- 09/25/06 10:16:53 EDT
of the symptom in that it would take on meaning beyond a clinical approach to psychosiis... when you start enjoying it, I guess

- 09/25/06 04:46:35 EDT
of the symptom in that it becomes, in that it is not a priori… where else than in analysis is it prompted to appear? In the Fassbinder movie which is a good example - the guy kills little girls - now he is the nice person the neighbors like, till he goes back into the monster -- at this point a little music sounds and the word MAUDIT gets written over his back...
the pattern keeps comes back, but does he know it?

- 09/25/06 02:29:40 EDT
So, does the siinthome take on meaning beyond a clinical approach to psychosis?

- 09/25/06 02:26:00 EDT
Some time ago, there was an interestiing ongoing conversation here re. confusion that sometimes arises between psychosis and hysteria. In the sense that the hysteric responds to the discourse of the master and there is an a priori conceptualization of a very important concept, surely the hysteric will do all s/he can to disrupt the effect of the sinthome. This is stretching the sinthome beyond Lacan and Joyce, but I have in mind, what is sometimes meant by 'generalized foreclosure'; 'names of the father' alongside globalisation of the pleasure principle (and what Badiou calls Empire).

- 09/24/06 20:13:48 EDT
sinthome comes to act as the fourth, it can't be foreclosed because it becomes (like a woman), it is not a priori ; if it is not, and there is collapse, then perhaps there was foreclosure of the name of the father.
Sinthome visible? retroactively? - perhaps rather you could say 'named, after'
visible may suggest imaginary? it ties together real symbolic imaginary and moves between and perhaps beyond

- 09/24/06 15:36:28 EDT

- 09/24/06 14:52:43 EDT
I don't think so - that we can talk of foreclosure of the sinthome. The sinthome is hidden, not foreclosed. Throughout the work of analysis the different symptoms make their appearance, till you reach the one you will not alter, how do you deal with it? This is the one that gets a name - Mr or Mrs so and so here he is again doing the same old silly thing...

- 09/24/06 05:39:08 EDT
Three questions re. name of symptom: If Lacan refers to the 'names of the father' (after 1963?) and the sinthome can be another one of the names of the father, can we ever talk of foreclosure of the sinthome? Is the sinthome beyond foreclosure and visible only retroactively? Am I confusing something at the end with something at the beginning? This may seem spurious, but by now a conceptualizing of the sinthome has taken place and the term has currency in psychoanalysis and in the art world.

- 09/23/06 23:38:35 EDT
throughout analysis there can be many fantasies, yet the fundamental fantasy is what you want to reach - you want to go through it. From there "the name of Symptom." This issue concerns the end of analysis

- 09/23/06 03:31:25 EDT
With Dolar and the child listening to noises in the night there is surely reference to the scene of many 'fundamental fantasies', if the moment is somehow reconstituted in therapy (or art) With the two films in question, whaat transpires seems to concern the director's symptom. The storylines suggest the possibility of resolution (moving on). At the end of TALK TO HER, the dancer who's been in a coma comes to life - and perhaps the surviving male figure will get to know her! With VOLVER, there are only women and to a certain extent perhaps, we see a director's (temporary) resolution. For that moment, for Almodovar perhaps, there is no father, but there is the possibility of a mother.
Are you are saying that a 'fundamental fantasy' is so specifiic, it needs to be seen in the context of an analysis?

- 09/23/06 01:28:43 EDT
"...in the possibility of a fundamental fantasy" What does the fundamental phantasy imply in this context?
In analysis the fundamental fantasy is, in some cases, revealed, and we are supposed to go through it. Then we'll give ourselves names, finally a name till which is the name of the symptom... and from then on starts another story, whiich is another fantasy, let's say

- 09/22/06 17:27:19 EDT
Yes, in the past few days have looked at VOLVER then again at TALK TO HER. Wiith this second film, there is the title and listening subjects who are both in comas. We are left wiith two figures at the end. The film ends with a moment of optimism, too tenuous to be part of a narrative. VOLVER opens with an extraordinary sequence, when the camera pans a cemetry populated by women tidying graves. It sets the tone for a film about a group of women (survivors) - who work through 'family secrets' - and achieve a resolution. With Almodovar, there are survivors, it seems, and delight (sometimes) in the possibility of a fundamental fantasy.

- 09/22/06 02:51:18 EDT
Thank u people. You've accepted my belligerent, mal-informed interjections with analytical detachment; almost a grace. Its had some impact on my hysterical symptoms! C u further into my analysis interminable. Love 2 u all, Rich

- 09/21/06 22:08:50 EDT
about Almodovar that had somethiing to say about listening in the film "Volver", could you tell me more?

- 09/21/06 09:58:23 EDT
Vedantic, pedantic, ego, subject- beyond obliterating ego, there remains disinvesting the subject. i'm sorry i made you edgy. Thanks for the welcome. No onion peeler here. Lacan, 'There's no such thing as dialectical mastery'.
Where's that oracular interlocutor when u need him?
But i've walked into somone's loungeroom and they're twitchy about the state of the furniture...

- 09/21/06 09:35:00 EDT
What 'realignment'? unless there's a hyphen in there, anywhere... As one who has begun analysis, what does Technique produce, a collapse of cathexes and nothing else?

- 09/21/06 09:17:26 EDT
never left!

unanalyzed sophist - 09/21/06 05:37:31 EDT
i enjoy populating this messageboard, because we enjoy self-contradicting positions/pretensions of the Ego, namely:
"What is psy. technique but disinvestment of the subject?" since I am feeling a bit edgy, I would ask that maybe you incl yourself amongst the "unanalyzed sophists"? If so, welcome. I would suggest that another term would fit "the subject" better. I would ask, timely question, if that self-same "relaignment" of the ego investments, strike anyone as blatantly Vedantic ( not Pedantic, no typos here), sort of reminiscent of the unpeeling of layers of onion (ego)-skin... hari om tatsat ($< Oa)

- 09/20/06 14:14:29 EDT
it's funny how some people keep coming back!

- 09/20/06 10:51:03 EDT
4D installations intersecting politics-- like a new kid in the classroom? An axiom by the weekend? What about love (with wrath)- the temper of Lacan's dicourse? The new kid is always pre-digidested but expelled, vomitted back to the analysand who knows

- 09/20/06 09:39:40 EDT
Sweeteer times- aren't there conclusions to be drawn from that drawing of the 3D body? Who's gaze to construct with, view with? A dog's? A dead man's? But of course there's already too much dessicated discourse here pretending to nous. And yes if the Other is corrupt then spatial relations are as confounded as everything else. What if the gaze is of a god who loves and adores you,not as a peer but as more yet divine, a superior? The 3D body collapses and you are all heart, decentered nobody love. Just for a minute or two

- 09/20/06 08:54:13 EDT
Subjectivities hard won sure and who denies the courage of such...abandonment? What is psy. technique but disinvestment of the subject? Whatever that really means is this- the imaginary produces the ego, obsessional or hysterical, the 'i', the precious me/myself/I, whatever the level of our dialectical sophistication, Lacan knows analysis will deliver us to what he elides. His seminars weren't populated by unalayzed sophists but this forum is...

- 09/19/06 17:25:51 EDT
... aand the director ALMODOVAR has something to say about listening. I'm thinking of his recent film 'Volver' especially

- 09/19/06 17:18:46 EDT
Disinvesting the subject may be fine, whatever this really means, but some subjectivities are hard won, if at all ...

- 09/19/06 09:51:23 EDT
some women's clothing resembles barbed-wire: it protects the property without spoiling the view

- 09/19/06 08:41:18 EDT
This Dolar seems good value. The heartbeat as giant's steps down the hall, the dissonance of conflict, barely audible, which recurs as pre-psychotic auditory confabulation- isn't there always one question, one answer, 'who, in truth, is listening?'. Doesn't Lacan ask always, how to disinvest the subject?

Joey Greathouse - 09/18/06 14:24:22 EDT
This Freudian shit rocks!!!

- 09/18/06 05:52:02 EDT
one woman asked the psychiatrist what to do about her husband's delusions of being a refrigerator. "that's a quite common phenomenon, not too serious, and should disappear shortly" Yes, I know, she replied, I'm not so worried for him, it's just that he sleeps with his mouth open and all night the little light keeps me awake."

- 09/18/06 03:30:22 EDT
(With Dolar's text in mind) If contemporary art comes to politiics with all the force of four dimensional installations linking sonorous and visual, can it bring with it (sometimes) the 'force' of a fundamental fantasy?
Reference to 'four dimensions' can be reference to Parveen Adam's (challenging) sentences, discussed recently in sweeter messageboard times. She wrote: 'Lacan claims that the three dimensionality of the subject is achieved only by entering the field of the Other. So the subject’s relation to space is bound up with the subject’s relation to the Other’.

- 09/18/06 03:11:02 EDT
Dolar seems to want to keep something sonorous and visual apart, a 'bar' between liistening and an apparition (?)

- 09/17/06 01:19:26 EDT
have to wonder about the sonorous formed fantasy if it walks into the dream, now the sonorous would turn into the visual - do the different sounds have distinct shapes and distiinct colors? It is more difficult to imagen the viceversa process

- 09/12/06 17:08:00 EDT
The listener is the child who becomes a womaan who hears a sound in the middle of a clinch, then hears it again (in a paranoid moment) rushiing away from 'being discovered'.
On the subject of things 'which go bump in the night, Dolar writes (p.135):
'... the voice, the noise, things heard are at the core of the formation of fantasy; a fantasy of confabulation built around the sonorous kernel, it has a priviledged relationship to the voice, as opposed to dreams which are, supposedly visual, as if the two modes of psychic functioning required two different types of object'.

- 09/12/06 14:32:48 EDT
would it be cunfusing to know who's is who's voice and whether or not later it is the mother or father occupying which position so therefor who would be apt to be the absent law?

- 09/11/06 18:03:04 EDT
There's some interesting material in Mladen Dolar's 'A VOICE AND NOTHING MORE', which makes reference to Freuud's 'A CASE OF PARANOIA RUNNING COUNTER TO THE PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY OF THE DISEASE' (1915). Accordiing to Dolar (p.130), in this case, paranoia crops in a fundamental fantasy as something heard in the 'primal scene'. Something heard resounds with a listening.

- 09/11/06 00:18:53 EDT
is the certain obsession that operates with the hysterical different from the obsession that operates in the obsessive?

- 09/10/06 00:45:44 EDT
sure, there is the certain obsession which belongs to the hysterical, and viceversa, there is the hysteria that operates in the obsessive

- 09/09/06 18:33:05 EDT
can they operate at the same time in one person?

- 09/09/06 00:03:51 EDT
when it comes to couples they do... nothing seems to work better than an hysterical for an obsessive and viceversa,
but the hysterical hearing voices - and the obsessive talikng to himself.. you tell me

- 09/08/06 15:56:00 EDT
so they don't compliment one another?

- 09/07/06 02:02:54 EDT
and what would be the conclusion with regard to who is talking, in the case of an hysterical that could be a psychotic...
in the case of an obssessive that talks to himself?

- 09/05/06 17:23:21 EDT
with an hysterical that could be a psychotic... hystericals sometimes hear voices - who is talking?
with obssessives that talk to themseelves - who are they addressing?

- 09/04/06 10:18:49 EDT
can anyone say what it is that you need to discern with in an hysterical that could be a psychotic, with an obssessive that could be a psychotic... with a pervert that could be a psychotic...?

- 09/03/06 18:19:28 EDT
to the person interested in Willy Appollon's work goo to
http://www.gifric.com, http://www.gifric.com/babillard-clinicalseminar.htm,

- 09/03/06 10:40:37 EDT
Can anyone say something about Willy Appollon's work? Reference in English on the net seems to be reference to books availaable.

- 09/02/06 09:57:59 EDT
well that sounds so much more enticing about psychotics potentially expanding their quality of life...

- 09/02/06 06:14:52 EDT
you mean Willy Appollon's clinic in Canada? I don't agree that they would say that the psychotic recovers, but potentially expands their quality of life..

- 09/01/06 22:00:35 EDT
in any case Joyce, according to Lacan, had the name of the symptom

- 09/01/06 15:32:49 EDT
was Joyce a borderline, an un-triggered psychosis, or was he a psychotic that found a way to control the crisis with his writing?

- 09/01/06 10:00:26 EDT
skills lacking in a health service is something so frightening... what I think happens quite a lot is doctors say they will cure the patient, and it's easy to do so because psychotics do get much better, also them as much as the family want to beliieve it... so comes the doctor with the magical formula... in Canada there is a famous clinic where psychotics patients spend some time before they get "well"... oh well.

- 08/31/06 15:20:23 EDT
It would be worth while looking at the text that this is taken from, but I think it refers to skills lacking in a health service, for example.

- 08/31/06 13:08:36 EDT
What does "economy" with regard to a rigorous approach to the structure of neuroosis and psychosis stand for? lack of knowledge, fear to fail....?

suchislife - 08/30/06 07:00:24 EDT
la femme n'existe pas.... someone told me that contrary to the fact that for a woman the illusion/ fantasy of the IDEAL MAN does exist (so she can submit to a Master or Father), but for a man the illusion/ fantasy is to have many women, none of them "Ideal" (so he can dominate them all and be a Master). that's part one. if the hypothesis is wrong please amend.
Part two is that if this is true, then the male/female relationship works out on the illusory level perfectly. Problems in couples seem then to be when the Truth of the Subject emerges and no longer corresponds to the schematic (fixed) fantasy projections described in the hypothesis of part one of this questioning.
Part three: a possible solution would be to recognize the fixed fantasy roles and play them without getting stuck, being flexible to allow the excesses of desire/Truth to change the roles, but then when all that settles to go back into the basic fantasy of the other (m and f)...

- 08/30/06 03:47:52 EDT
'Un-triggered' and 'loaded' seem likely companions ...
In a paaper called 'Why So Many Borderlines?', Jean-Claude Maleval writes: '...the borderline syndrome constituted a junk room in which undiagnosed patients could be assembled. We would add that this happens when one economises on a rigorous approach to the structure of neurosis and that of psychosis'.
The paper can be downloaded from 'Psychoanalytic Notebooks 4', on the site of the 'London Society of the NLS'.

- 08/29/06 21:57:46 EDT
such a good way of putting it, whoever wrote "the structure doesn't go away, but the symptoms come baack."
I can think of borderline as a perfect word to say un-triggered psychosis, yet it doesn't come from the same source... then it is tricky because it is already loaded...

- 08/29/06 20:24:46 EDT
it could be seen like this..the structure doesnt go away, but the symptoms come back.
but is 'borderline' a collection of defences/symptoms around a particular stucture, maybe neurotic maybe psychotic maybe perverse?
Does anyone get cured?

- 08/29/06 18:51:15 EDT
Now, I'm confused. Doesn't Lacan insist on a particular structure and how can wee talk of a structure returning? (Paul Klee's marching viaducts comes to mind!) Recalcatti refers to ways of managing a foreclosed 'N de P', to 'imaginary compensation' and to 'substitution' of the 'N de P'.

- 08/29/06 09:31:19 EDT
question is, are borderlines psychotics, are they un-triggered psychosis? someone in this other field should know. Again, what gets cured? psychotics in anaalysis can feel better, you attend to their neurosis - - - though it doesn't mean the psychosis won't come back, it will come back

- 08/29/06 01:50:57 EDT
do borderlines get cured?

- 08/24/06 20:14:41 EDT

- 08/23/06 09:18:28 EDT
- 0 - Massimo Recalcati "The Empty Subject: Un-Triggered Psychoses" in the New Forms of the Symptom" - Lacanian Ink 26

- 0 - 08/23/06 02:41:18 EDT
Could you please give me the full name of Recalcatti, and possibly the title of any of his work?

...... - 08/22/06 19:49:08 EDT
The term 'borderline' could well characterize the cases of hysteria where the patient goes so far as to hear voices... or the obssessive to talk to himself… at the extreme these cases are difficullt to distinguish from psychosis, where do you draw the line? Again you better draw the right line at the right moment or the patient will suffer from your lack of awareness - here supervision gets to be very useful

- 08/22/06 17:35:11 EDT
Isn't it more the case that the term 'borderline' is seen as (the therapist's) inability to distinguish between different clinical structures? The term is sometimes seen as a new name or variant of hysteria, but Recalcatti has in mind a clinical structural characterised by foreclosure of the 'Nom de Pere'. Recalcatti refers to a process that 'substitutes' this 'N de P'.
... Lacan may or may not be right about Joyce, but at the same time, I 've a suspicion that what Wajman calls 'the work of art', now inevitably involves this shift from the real towards a subjectivity. This movement away from a jouissance seems more visible with contemporary art

gal - 08/22/06 16:19:16 EDT
this is what Joyce had/was?

- 08/22/06 14:11:13 EDT
are you saying we can equate un-triggered psychosis to borderline? Well I guess you are not saying that, yet, it is a good question, right?

- 08/22/06 09:27:10 EDT
Recalcatti is who opens up new lines with his un-triggered psychoses. And so he talks of an imaginary compensation and of substitution, both shaped as specific forms of subjective soldering of the psychotic hole.
Substitution is characterized as a subjective form of psychosis stabilization much more articulated than the imaginary compensation. In fact, Lacan introduced the concept of substitution in the 70s with Joyce - a paradigm of this concept.

- 08/22/06 01:33:18 EDT
there isn't a borderline diagnosis with Lacan, in any case not under the actual name.

Lela - 08/21/06 01:26:04 EDT
Oh yes, and do Hegelian Lacanians accept the notion of anaclitic depression as a unbound signifier or the place where babies come from?

Lela - 08/20/06 19:37:39 EDT
Do Miller-ian Lacanians accept the borderline diagnosis
or must there always be an underlying structure the practitioner/analyst has not yet recognised in language?
Or are there different opinions? I would appreciate your ideas.

MIN HTET MOE - 08/18/06 17:18:00 EDT
YE MYO HEIN - 08/18/06 17:16:07 EDT

- 08/18/06 11:26:51 EDT
the community is taking a brake because "the site was disrupted by someone 'taking on' the identities of people using the site... then, a spam attack and now philibusting…"

- 08/17/06 18:49:40 EDT
A surprisingly small community appear to be looking back!

B - 08/17/06 18:13:44 EDT
the more I looked at the bush it started shaking, and two birds made a jaggedy swoop mimicking exaCt di stance. However the big Magnolia Said NO.

- 08/17/06 10:46:12 EDT
no more looking through the window?

- 08/16/06 13:07:14 EDT
"manic depressive changes of humor" belongs in everyday language

- 08/16/06 12:53:04 EDT
so what are you saying when you say "maniac"?

- 08/15/06 22:22:10 EDT
of the term MANIA in Lacanian theory. Though with another component, Lacan uses it quite often:
manicdepressive psychosis, megalomaniac, erotomaniac... and he may applie it like in "manic depressive changes of humor"

- 08/15/06 21:36:32 EDT
maybe the (C) has been removed.
maybe the oceanic (feeling) asks (as Freud's poet did)
is it (not) possible to fall out of this world?

- 08/15/06 18:00:35 EDT
A moment ago, a cat with big eyes and a silly name was sitting in front of blinds that keep out the street. I take a look. Across the way, a granite wall with one steet light, with a school beyond. I could be somewhere in Ireland, but it's not. It's nightime, nothing stirs. The air is still and I haven't heard the sea (not far from here) for months.

b - 08/15/06 17:39:35 EDT
a donkey. passing by clip clop. should I make call he wonders how far to the nearest...cell.

- 08/15/06 16:09:33 EDT
to - call is the psychotic truth

- 08/15/06 14:22:36 EDT
thanks last messager

- 08/15/06 13:21:14 EDT
I didn't mean to be pejorative, just following up on a problem that affects us all in this board -- and about the term mania, you are right it is not necessarily lacanian, with Lacan it would be psychosis

- 08/15/06 12:36:53 EDT
This mimicking (last message) is perjorative, and I've not seen the term mania is used in (Lacanian) psychoanalyis

- 08/15/06 10:43:36 EDT
Oh well, I don't think zc will ever have a new idea... it's all about "maniac"

- 08/14/06 20:26:48 EDT
out the window is half a window, one bisected by mine.. then another window, both office orifices..galvanised iron roof triangulated with sun, a stripe of clear blue. All striped by micro venetians on the inside of my window.
thanks for this idea.

- 08/14/06 16:55:11 EDT
(b) You seem to be looking out and looking in at the same time!?

b - 08/13/06 14:08:23 EDT
a clump of cobwebs with dead or alive leaves, a monster to the neigbor. dangling earring before you asked. Now it's musi c proffessionalized

- 08/13/06 12:51:56 EDT
dear Admin, thanks, you are overworked!
I wanted to say thank you to A (I thought) for posting a response to the window suggestion. After posting the suggestion, I remembered the passage from the Baltimore lecture. As well, realized that Gerard Wajman talked about looking in through a window and was referring to contemporary art as an intimate space. The window idea shifts things for a moment away from ideas, to a community who may or may not be sitting by their computers near a view (onto the world) - which may be surprising or not.

admin - 08/13/06 12:19:24 EDT
- to the person that posted the very nice lines talking to the one that came up with the first response to LOOKING OUT OF THE NEAREST WINDOW
I made a bad mistake, sorry for that! in my rush of erasing the latest zachi choen immense boring post of the day I erased yours. Could you please put it back? It started with a question to the person being A.

- 08/13/06 00:18:38 EDT
LOOKING OUT OF THE NEAREST WINDOW there is the sky, a deep blue sky, and there is the moon, at its half, the contours are blurred - I think it means that tomorrow it will rain… a plain roars its way across the skies, underneath there is the water - though this is a guess because right now I cannot see the water… and there are buildings, light coming out of the many windows… "the function played by the subjects is not completely obvious," (from Lacan's speech while overlooking Baltimore)… finally there is the balcony with its pretty red, pink, lilac flowers…

CS. - 08/12/06 15:41:44 EDT
I'd like to steal the best paragraphs for the 'art and Lacan symposia'

one paragraph please ... - 08/12/06 15:36:55 EDT
I think we should 'clear the air'. In the first place, the messageboard couldn't be used because the site was disrupted by someone 'taking on' the identities of people using the site. Then, a spam attack and now philibusting. I'd like to suggest a breather. If there are people out there doing their best to block (or fill up) this site, PLEASE take a break!
To move things on a little, I'd like to suggest, we take turns to provide a paragraph.
My suggestion, inspired by Gerard Wajman, has to do with what we see when we look out of the window, nearest us. I am being literal and my question is: What do you see when you look out of the nearest window?