I think Felix perhaps brought it up
-the question of stopping and starting,
which had been touted previously-
and the question of crossing the line
Comment by sol — August 3, 2008 @ 7:27 am
and now this sign of pleasure and the imaginary
Comment by sol — August 3, 2008 @ 7:28 am
I am trying to run the number of the messageboard up, and above, that of the symposium
I wonder: is this a superstitious act?
I separate my comments
and post, 1, 2, 3,
the message board gives me a message
“you are trying to post your messages too quickly. Slow down!’
It tells me - anxiety!
Comment by sol — August 3, 2008 @ 7:30 am
Hope everybody is well. Josefina doesn’t like us to tell you all we love you even if ALL love is the love of TRUTH.Has anybody drawn the link between Schoppenheur’s sub-biotic force (will) and the scopic and vocative drives ? Has anybody considered the link between theoretical physics the wave-particle phenomenon (big Other) and the search/desire for object petite(a)?
Comment by Terry1 — August 7, 2008 @ 5:12 am
Comment by sol — August 11, 2008 @ 6:46 am
So Terry 1, how are we to read in “the link between Schoppenheur’s sub-biotic force (will) and the scopic and vocative drives… and the link between theoretical physics - the wave-particle phenomenon (big Other) and the search/desire for object petite(a)”?
Comment by violet — August 14, 2008 @ 10:18 am
On the London Society of NLS some very interesting interviews re. effects of ‘audit culture’ http://www.londonsociety-nls.org.uk/
Comment by Chris Sands — August 23, 2008 @ 4:04 am
To find the above, go to ‘Rally of the Impossible Professions’ to left of screen
Comment by Chris Sands — August 23, 2008 @ 4:06 am
I just read all of the conversations on the rally page-
Comment by Sol — August 25, 2008 @ 10:51 am
Yeah, I think some of the work going on in France and now in England is quite important.
Not yet a defining moment perhaps, but a moment when a hundred years amounts to a ‘thinking barricade’.
Comment by Chris Sands — August 25, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
Thanks for the imago Sol. Just wondering whether an imago can represent the sub-biotic ‘will’ that Schoppnehaur alludes to. He beleived only music could do this. He developes an ethics of compassion and argues that this cannot be taught or learnt the only true ethics is the sympathetic resonance of compassion. Some of us have it and some of us don’t. His philosophy has been ‘linked’ to Budhism which can be syncronised with Lacan and the search for the other and indeed the impossibility of knowing the ‘golaith reality’ of Object A.
Comment by Terry1 — August 28, 2008 @ 4:20 pm
Terry1, the picture was by way of a friendly gesture, or joke.
I haven’t read Schoppenheur but what you write reminds me of Levinas,
in the idea of the resonance of the (suffering of the) other - the ethic of care,
an ethic that must preceed politics, and, i think, by extension the authority of knowledge.
2. Does anyone recall the location of any of Lacan’s references to Winnicott?
Comment by Sol — August 31, 2008 @ 3:55 am
There’s a letter to Winnicott in Television I think, unless I’ve imagined it.
There are many references to Winnicott in Darian Leader’s new book, ‘the New Black’.
It’s a book that starts with Freud’s Mourning and Melancholy. It looks at two notions which are so important in the context of psychotherapy and psychoanalysis.
In the light of this book and in the light of an analyst who happily refers to non Lacanian analysts, in coming weeks I will have to look at the idea of ‘responsive-ness’ in the context of mourning and melancholy. Perhaps especially lack of a responsive. I have in mind ‘political silences’, Lacan’s notion of logical time and ‘having to eat words’, which could be turned into something Winnicott might say (?)
There is, it seems, a silence, which is the silence of art and sometimes this silence seems like the silence of the drives.
But there is another pervasive silence on a small troubled island, which is the silence of institutions and organizations etc. and this politicized silence is the silence of hegemony. In a place like the small island I refer to, ‘being sent to Coventry’ seems linked to preserving privilige, but in the light of Darian Leader’s new book, it might also be linked to the process of mourning. In this sense, being told to eat your own words can be linked to murderous impulses or to the need for scapegoats in small communities.
Here perhaps I’m linking Mourning and Melancholy and the context of Freud’s paper to processes which seem fixated in a political sense.
Comment by Chris Sands — August 31, 2008 @ 5:13 am
As to Winnicot, Lacan mentions him in Seminars 4, 6, 8, 10 15….
In Seminar 4 he says “What is an obsession? The imaginary triad.. Falicism and the imaginary. Reality and Wirklichkeit. Mr Winnicott’s transitional object.”
Of that, Lacan’s genital object, “…why not call it by its name?” that turns out to be woman
Comment by violet — September 2, 2008 @ 8:51 pm
In seminar 6 Lacan is talking of the moment that prcedes the ego - the subject questioning itself in concern with the other…, “it is the place through which the subject enters at the level of the symbolic, and brings about, at the start, because of his thought based on primary frustrations, the something Winicot calls ‘transitional object. The transitional object is the Fort-Da little ball.”
Comment by violet — September 2, 2008 @ 10:52 pm
In seminar 8 Lacan says:
“After all, Winnicot’s speculations over the transitional object are linked to the meditations over the kleinian circle”
Comment by violet — September 3, 2008 @ 11:23 am
ah, thankyou violet, cheers
Comment by Sol — September 3, 2008 @ 7:19 pm
If the object a is sometimes described as a ‘consistent’ object,
in Darian Leader’s book there is reference to ‘fort da’
not as a transitional object but rather as an object which is one moment there and another moment gone.
Here, perhaps, we have the consistency of an empty place, which is quite different to a transitional object, which implies
this shift towards the symbolic. In this sense, doesn’t Lacan slowly move away from a stabilization implied by the symbolic?
He becomes more ‘fort’ than ‘da’.
Comment by Chris Sands — September 4, 2008 @ 3:50 am
A seminar I haven’t read, no 4.
An interesting take on obsession there:
I can only figure it to say that in an obsessional act the desired substantive is warded off by the imaginary ritual, say; by the maintenance of the transitional object as transitional.
Never come back/come back
I am thinking of this as a symbolic fended off, neither unsymbolised nor symbolised.
I think it is interesting in terms of the elevation of the Mother one often comes across in obsession.
And the Woman, often, as the one who can be stolen away. There you have a kind of fort -da.
But then, wouldn’t the genital object be the object warded off, and partially symbolised, or symbolised by proxy, by the (slipping under) the transitional object?
I am only thinking it through, no final thoughts here...
Comment by Sol — September 4, 2008 @ 4:02 am
After the consistency of desire we have the ‘credit crunch’, but getting older, we might wonder what an empty place is.
I keep referring to a book which finds its bearings with Freud’s paper Mourning and Melancholy.
Fort da is a play but behind a play about loss and the object, there’s death and Leader’s book seems partly a meditation concerning social and cultural attitudes to death.
‘Residential homes’ are mostly filled with women and mothers, but we seem to have got no further than an institutional response to an ‘empty place’. An consistency in psychoanalysis, but a place that’s full and empty in our world.
Comment by Chris Sands — September 4, 2008 @ 5:15 am
but women figure highest among the euthanased as well..
Comment by Sol — September 4, 2008 @ 6:59 am
What I thinking of has to do with people giving up their homes and moving into some kind of set up where people are cared for in various ways. I do a little work in a setting which is very thought out, with high standards in every direction, but I so often hear this wanting to go home and this giving up of home shuts off all the resonances of a lifetime. So, this was, for me, one take on an empty place. A consistency full of inconsistencies, when we seem to have lost the function of old age.
Comment by Chris Sands — September 4, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
I wonder what the function of old age might be...
I think of an old man who I have coffee with once or twice a month who I visited yesterday. He, in turn, visits some very old people who live in a place for the dying. He says he visits them, ‘not for some goody-goody reason’ but to ‘have a bit of a laugh’
So I think of this laughing (and crying) over generations as a way of placing ourselves, insisting that we exist, in history...
But with the euthanasia, I think we are on the way to making an institution of an instrument, in a different way. I guess we continue to create our myths and rituals around it, but I wonder what they are.
Comment by Sol — September 4, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
By function I was thinking more of place, and just as attitudes to mourning and death have changed, so too attitudes to old age. If melancholy suggests some kind of living death and a dividing up of night and day, have we replaced mourning by melancholy in attitudes to the features of old age? In other words, are ‘residential homes’ (like melancholy) part of a segregation of day and night and part of an avoidance of the features of old age?
Here, we often associate a shifting from Nom de Pere to the names of the father (in Lacan’s work) - with many changing features of contemporary life - and more recently with the mania of an ‘audit culture’. In one of the interviews listed on the NLS site, exception is taken to the term ‘audit’ - which in fact implies a listening. If listening is not necessary part of the evaluation armory of CBT and the like, an avoidance of people in general seems symptomatic of a melancholy suggested by Freud in that important paper. Put another way, old age loses its place when the mortification of everyday life gets in the way of mourning.
One question might be: where do we begin to locate the object a in our ‘getting older’?
Sol, my avoidance of your reference to euthanasia, may be part of my something or other…
Comment by Chris Sands — September 5, 2008 @ 4:39 am
Comment by Sol — September 5, 2008 @ 6:25 am
Comment by Sol — September 14, 2008 @ 9:42 am
Comment by Sol — September 17, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Comment by Sol — September 21, 2008 @ 10:38 am
Does the unconscious have a middle?
Comment by Chris Sands — September 22, 2008 @ 4:31 am
Yoi mean a heart? Like in, Does the unconscious have a heart?
Comment by violet — September 22, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
My question had to do with something Sol says, but your question following my question seems better.
If you were asking me
Does the unconscious have a heart?
- I would have to say we will have to wait and see…
Comment by Chris Sands — September 23, 2008 @ 3:02 am
in the middle of two (coeval) questions is a rupture and in the middle of the heart there is too
the dream has the naval, which beats and to attend to it you are sometimes in the middle but afterwards or sometimes, continually
Comment by Sol — September 23, 2008 @ 11:07 am
there’s a wound that’s both rupture and rapture but I had to look for coeval.
How can something be equal in age and duration?
Comment by Chris Sands — September 23, 2008 @ 3:48 pm
How is 138 the same as 178?
Comment by Chris Sands — September 23, 2008 @ 3:50 pm
they are both determined by what comes before them...?
Comment by Sol — September 25, 2008 @ 2:29 am
Have been looking an old ‘Psychoanalytical Notebook’, which talks about time and duration re. short sessions, supervision etc. and came across the idea that chronological time corresponds to a discourse of mastery. In the context of ongoing discussion here about a push to ‘evaluate’ - state regulation of therapy is party to this discourse of the master. At the Impossible Professions Rally in London, (re. CBT etc) Miller referred to a foreclosing of the unconscious and how an effect of increasing regulation inevitably nourished the unconscious. In the context of ordinary and generalized psychosis, this may be a disconcerting idea.
There were many references during the day to ‘financial meltdown’. One speaker referred to regulation increasing in the early 1980’s (with Thatcher in the UK), with the effect that everything was subject to increasing regulation apart from ‘financial services’.
Comment by Chris Sands — September 25, 2008 @ 3:31 am
Hi Chris, I didn’t make it to the rally; what was the ‘mood’ amongst delegates, if that’s not too naive a question? I’ve heard psychoanalysts talk as if regulation is a foregone conclusion; was there still any hope of curbing the state’s enthusiasm for interference? Were strategies discussed? Was there a sense that this link between the insecurities of an unregulated capital and the demands placed on those in ‘impossible professions’ could be a point of leverage, or a way to shift the terms of the debate? I’d be very interested to hear of your impressions.
Comment by aidan — September 26, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
hello Aidan, the London Society website would be a good place to start with these questions or even the AMP site. JA Miller summing up talked about another rally (soon, I think, in London?) to include IPA analysts, psychotherapists etc. As analysts have traditionally worked outside statutory services, self regulation confronts an enthusiasm for regulation, but doesn’t psychoanalysis prompt discussion and a politicizing of ‘this moment’ in so many ways. In no sense, for example, can I talk in the name of psychoanalysis, but as an artist I’ve often wondered what Walter Benjamin meant by the term ‘aura’ - in the 1930’s when art already seemed inescapably effected by an age of ‘mechanical reproduction’.
Could it be that Miller (for one) prompts an interpretation of signifiers which can’t be deconstructed and reconstructed in a zeal to quantify and turn towards a discourse of mastery? Does Miller rediscover a term lost by art? Miller defends a profession seriously threatened by regulation, but due to the place of psychoanalysis, this defense has serious implications for other professions and so many other concerns. When a moment is politicized, a discussion or debate sometimes narrows, but in this instance it seems something else could happen…
Comment by Chris Sands — September 27, 2008 @ 5:05 am
Looking at the London Society page; are these interviews with ‘experts’, and, if so, do they construct a subject supposed to know about the fix analysts may find themselves in? In one of these interviews discussing the analysts’ ‘audition’, the analyst concerned did most of the talking, whilst the ‘expert’ interviewed did most of the listening! I wonder whether there isn’t already an answer here about the strategies analysts use in their consulting rooms to deal with the effects of a malevolent ‘auditing’?
I am not familiar enough with Miller…
Comment by aidan — September 27, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
Havn’t heard Levinas mentioned on here. Has anybody any views on Emanuel Levinas’s work. He did reject Heideggar.
Comment by Terry1 — September 27, 2008 @ 5:30 pm
Terry1 go to http://www.lacan.com/zizsmash.htm ……..it’s all about Levinas, Zizek about Levinas
Comment by violet — September 27, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
Hi aidan, I take your point, but I found some of the interviews really interesting as they approached the idea from outside and taken as a whole they presented a multi-dimensional take on ‘auditing’. I think the interdisciplinary perspective overall subverted the idea of a panel of experts or master discourse, and overall spoke about the possibility that psychoanalysis could speak out and speak with..a wider world. I think your question about the mood of the ‘rally’ is an interesting one...
Terry1, I like Levinas, but don’t know much of his work. I am going now to a reading group to discuss one of his papers. I think his ideas have something to offer social psychoanalysis, and me personally. I can’t recall the basis of his rejection of Heidegger.
In relation to auditing, I guess I could say that there is the assumption of a totalitarian and concrete ‘third’ which annihilates the idea of the necessary third in any encounter.
And you? Your take on him?
Comment by Sol — September 28, 2008 @ 12:17 am
Having met some clinicians from the US and Ireland at the recent Paris English language seminar, I’d like to hear their take on what seem important developments.
Comment by Chris Sands — September 28, 2008 @ 4:34 am
I am not an analyst, though you might say I have (made) a significant investment, and if an analysis was to become a ‘psychoanalytic service’ I would certainly decline to be ’serviced’. Chris, my apologies if I continue with questions answered elsewhere, but was there talk of the involvement of analysands? It’s difficult to imagine this involvement without supposing some awareness of the analyst’s work on the part of the analysand, and isn’t the analysand supposed not to know about this work?
Sol, for me, a connection with the work of teachers would be particularly interesting, but I wonder how the space would be prepared for such a connection, as many teachers do not theorise their practice (and are not encouraged to do so) in the way much psychoanalysis does, and may even be (highly) resistant to such a theorisation. The effects of an audit culture are fairly advanced in mainstream education, and I wonder what would need to be ‘retrieved’ before significant connections could be made? Many of the teachers I talk to complain about ‘paperwork’, but, if pressed, will say that constant monitoring, the production of ‘evidence’ etc. is probably a ‘good thing’ to ensure ‘quality’ and to weed out ‘bad teachers’.
Comment by aidan — September 28, 2008 @ 8:14 am
Aidan, I don’t think I understand the question addressed to me, unless you simply anticipate the effects of a lost battle. The reference to teaching is interesting, because this ‘good thing’ now seems linked to an imperative to succeed. In the UK, each year students are televised talking about a latest batch of improved exam results. We hear new superlatives but if a fear of failure lurks behind an anxiety, education may be linked to the (death) drive (if desire anticipates failure)… (?)
If psychoanalysis discovers a social bond beyond a discourse of mastery and persists with what may be the case, one by one - there are findings which will be relevant in the context of politics and education.
This issue is pressing but it surely pushes us in the direction of a personal response, In a note following the rally, Penny Georgiou writes ‘We will continue to entertain this question, ‘What do we do next?’, as a vector to help us remember that we can act. We can aim to do so in a precise way, responding not on the basis of a universal rule - that is really only an acting out - but according to how contingency instructs us.’
Comment by Chris Sands — September 28, 2008 @ 12:51 pm
Thanks for the quotation, involving something momentarily forgotten about acts and the instruction of contingency.
Comment by aidan — September 28, 2008 @ 6:55 pm
What was that about ‘momentarily forgotten’?
Comment by Chris Sands — September 29, 2008 @ 6:24 am
Something about reminders…
Comment by aidan — September 29, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
I think this was reference to a politics …
Comment by Chris Sands — September 29, 2008 @ 4:08 pm
I was reminded on a more personal level of the instruction of contingency (and the contingency of instruction?) - perhaps a level that relates to your politics of ‘personal response’?
Comment by aidan — September 29, 2008 @ 4:21 pm
hi, does anyone know how i could get a hold of the journal “critical texts” in which parts of lacans early texts are translated in english? web resources, publisher, etc?
Comment by Lars — September 30, 2008 @ 9:05 am
which early works do you know names?
Comment by Sol — September 30, 2008 @ 10:47 am
“Les complexes familiaux”, translated by Carolyn Asp, “Le Probleme du style…” by Jon Anderson, or any other articles published i the surrealist (or other) journals. I haven’t found any other official translations of his texts from the 30s… I’d be happy if anyone should be able to correct me on this. Neither have I found any information on the journal “Critical Texts”, in which the official translations were published…
Comment by Lars — September 30, 2008 @ 11:12 am
If you want “official” translations, then no. Karnac publish the Gallagher translations which I like (though the font is too small) I prefer that they are unedited and transcriptions of direct notes, though I have had many arguments about this. It is my point of view. For instance they publish:
Jacques Lacan : Family Complexes in the Formation of the Individual
Tr : Gallagher, Cormac.
From unedited French manuscripts (more…)
Comment by Sol — October 1, 2008 @ 4:59 am
Thanks a lot for the help, Sol, I was unaware of this publication. I would also prefer unedited texts. I plan to write a paper on his direct connections with the surrealist “movement” and then also looking for any good secondary literature on this intellectual dialogue. I have found f.ex. David Maceys “Lacan in contexts” of great help. If anyone should have any other advice on literature I’d happily receive them - unfortunately my french is limited, so it helps to have any translations alongside…
Comment by Lars — October 1, 2008 @ 9:17 am
Sol will get back to you on this. Levinas and resposibility is very interesting and refreshing. His work with the Other and ‘faces’ seems to attract ‘lawyers’ as they work with ‘technical langauge’Levinas seems to offer a connection for lawyers to another world that is not psychoanalytic. Wikpedia give a summary of his work BUT it was nice to hear recently an Australia lawyer talk about the ‘Other’ as Levinas constructs it. She suggests ‘erotica’ is an example of the impossibility of capturing the ‘other’. We can never escape the ‘face’ of the other.Faces are crucial in his model. Bearring in mind he was a humanist.
Comment by Terry1 — October 1, 2008 @ 5:24 pm
it is interesting that we haven’t seen some reproductions of these Surrealist journals...
Apparently Lacan published in Minotaure (1933 - 1939). For some great reproductions of the covers: http://thenonist.com/index.php/thenonist/permalink/minotaure/
it seems they have holdings of the journal - though perhaps not all of it - at the Harry Ransom Centre at The university of Texas at Austin: http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/collections/guide/publishing/
If you end up with an electronic copy perhaps you could share it.
Or point me in the direction of your search...
Best of Luck
Comment by Sol — October 2, 2008 @ 9:17 am
For the covers my vote goes to the Ernst and the Roux, but as a set they are quite fabulous I think.
Comment by Sol — October 2, 2008 @ 9:25 am
Minotaure, I take it… Not the easiest to get a hold of, those…
Comment by Lars — October 2, 2008 @ 12:09 pm
Sorry, I didn’t notice your second last post - hence my cryptic message… Thanks for the tip - I’ll definetely check it out, and let you know what I find… Been searching a lot for these, they’re quite unique - I might get a hold of some copies from the university of copenhagen which is a little closer for me… Amazing how many great characters who have contributed to these publications…
Comment by Lars — October 4, 2008 @ 5:58 am
Thanks Violet a good webpage on Levinas
Comment by terry1 — October 5, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
Has anyone heard Lacan’s talk on Lewis Carrol/Alice?
Has anyone ever seen an english transcription of it?
Comment by Sol — October 10, 2008 @ 10:28 pm
Sol - this is witchcraft!! I’ve been tortured for days with this Lewis Carrol version of * Alice Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll, which is going in LI together with a J-A Miller article, where he quotes Lewis Caroll… but when we got to Humpty Dumpty with: “All the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty in his place again” it freaked me out. How to conceive of something else than ” “All the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put Humpty DumptyTOGETHER again”? Finally we gave in but with a line that says, * From Alice Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll.
Comment by violet — October 11, 2008 @ 2:45 am
I guess it is zeitgeist violet, as I have been thinking of it.
but with Humpty, you have the part after, where Alice puzzles that she has recited it wrongly?
and the part before, where everything recedes, but the egg, which slips and looms?
Comment by Sol — October 11, 2008 @ 6:36 am
to the start again, is the bowler hat ‘a’ semblant (7, 8)?
articulated (17) said to be there (82) but fallen out of the frame?
If a semblant, and fallen out, in its place..
(how) does the sinthome relate to the objet a?
Comment by Sol — October 12, 2008 @ 6:54 pm
What is the problem with Mr Dumpty’s putting together?
The mosaic of his shell or the viscosity of his yolk/heart?
Is he hard boiled?
Comment by Sol — October 12, 2008 @ 6:57 pm
Comment by violet — October 13, 2008 @ 3:39 am
Violet, is the JAM paper accessible?
Sol, are you referring to it?
Comment by Chris Sands — October 13, 2008 @ 4:12 am
no CS I’m not referring to it,
I’m just srambling on..
Comment by Sol — October 13, 2008 @ 5:00 am
Comment by Sol — October 13, 2008 @ 5:01 am
I thought someone might be interested.
SAGE publications are providing free online access to over 500 journals until October 31st 2008.
With full unrestricted content available from 1999 until the present day (Usually $20 or so for one days access)
You can search the entire journal collection by keyword and you can download the articles you’re interested in.
For instance keyword search ‘Lacan’ and 1800 or so articles come up..and lots of philosophy journals...
All you have to do is to register, which you can do via the following link: https://online.sagepub.com/cgi/register?registration=FTOct2008-1
I don’t think there’s any catches - just a publicity campaign I’d say.
I’ve been downloading articles for the past few hours...
Comment by Sol — October 13, 2008 @ 9:11 am
How does the sinthome relate to the objet a?
Maybe sinthome is something written (Freud’s agieren) in the place of objet a?…
Comment by Ann — October 14, 2008 @ 3:22 am
Lacan said in his seminar on Sinthome: At the level of the sinthome there is thus no equivalence in the relations between green and red [in the Borromean knot]; there is no sexual equivalence – in other words there is a relation. Effectively, if we say that non-relation is a function of equivalence, it is to the extent that there is no equivalence that the relation is structured. There is no relation except where there is sinthome. It is the sinthome which supports the other sex. I would go so far as to say that the sinthome is the sex which I don’t belong to, that is, a woman. A woman is a sinthome for every man. Another name must be found for for whatever man is for a woman, as the sinthome is characterised by non-equivalence. Man is anything you like for a woman, an affliction worse than a sinthome, a devastation even. ( S.23)
Comment by Ann — October 14, 2008 @ 5:01 am
Lovely quote Ann, am sure Admin can delete failed posts
Comment by Chris Sands — October 14, 2008 @ 5:36 pm
Ann, I can help you with the image you want to put up but I need an address in the internet
Comment by admin — October 14, 2008 @ 7:21 pm
like repetition act?
to structure the lack?
to be there, when it all falls,
so as to know that there is nothing
but that there is this...
Comment by Sol — October 14, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
Yes, that’s the notion I have… a guess, that sinthome could be This ‘STOPS NOT BEING WRITTEN’…:
in Lacan’s words:
“There’s no such a thing as a sexual relationship because one’s jouissance of the Other taken as a body is always inadequate – perverse, on the one hand, insofar as the Other is reduced to object a, and crazy and enigmatic, on the other, I would say.
Isn’t it on the basis of the confrontation with this impasse, with this impossibility by which the real is defined, that love is put to the test?
Regarding one’s partner, love can only actualize what, in a sort, of poetic flight, in order to make myself understood, I called courage – courage with respect to this fatal destiny.
But is it courage that is at stake or pathways of recognition?
That recognition is nothing other than the way in which the relationship said to be sexual – that has now become a subject-to-subject relationship, the subject being but the effect of unconscious knowledge – stops not being written.”
Lacan, “The Rat in the Maze”.
Comment by Ann — October 15, 2008 @ 4:18 am
Ann, is the picture you put up in the Forum - it is called Wings of Love - the one you were trying to put up here - on the messageboard?
Comment by admin — October 15, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
Thanks for the quote Ann, and an interesting idea.
Well it is, this month, the 101st anniversary of the beginning of Freud’s treatment of the Viennese Lawyer, Lanzer, known as the Rat Man.
When Freud was trying to write up the case of Lanzer for the first time, he wrote to Jung (30/6/1909):
“How bungling are our attempts to reproduce an analysis;
how pitifully we tear to pieces these great works of art nature
had created in the mental sphere”
another kind of ‘love put to the test’; another kind of ‘courage with respect to this fatal destiny’
Comment by Sol — October 15, 2008 @ 6:59 pm
CS - The JAM paper is accessible in French: “polémique-mort-aux-psy-par-j-miller” at http://www.lnaglobal.org/. It’s translation will appear in LI32 early November. I’m introducing it with:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall:
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the King’s horses and all the King’s men
Couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty in his place again
—That last line is much too long for the poetry, she added, almost out loud, forgetting that Humpty Dumpty would hear her.
—Don’t stand there chattering to yourself like that, Humpty Dumpty said, looking at her for the first time, but tell me your name and your business.
—My name is Alice but…
—It’s a stupid name enough! Humpty Dumpty interrupted impatiently. What does it mean?
—Must a name mean something? Alice asked doubtfully.
—Of course it must, Humpty Dumpty said with a short laugh; my name means the shape I am , and a good handsome shape it is, too With a name like yours, you might be any shape, almost.
—Why do you sit out here all alone? said Alice, not wishing to begin an argument.
—Why, because there’s nobody with me! cried Humpty Dumpty. Did you think I didn’t know the answer to that? Ask another.
—Don’t you think you’d be safer down on the ground? Alice went on, not with any idea of making another riddle, but simply in her good-natured anxiety for the queer creature. That wall is so very narrow!
—What tremendously easy riddles you ask! Humpty Dumpty growled out. Of course I don’t think so! Why, if ever I did fall off, which there’s no chance of, but if I did. Here he pursed his lips and looked so solemn and grand that Alice could hardly help laughing. If I did fall, he went on, the King has promised me, with his very own mouth, to, to…
—To send all his horses and all his men, Alice interrupted, rather unwisely.
Comment by violet — October 16, 2008 @ 12:19 am
Alice thought to herself “Then there’s no use in speaking.”
The voices didn’t join in, ~ this time, as she hadn’t spoken, but to her great surprise, they all ~thought in chorus (I hope you understand what `thinking ~ in ~ chorus means - for I must confess that I don’t).
“Better say nothing at all. Language is worth a thousand pounds a word!”
“I shall dream about a thousand pounds to-night, I know I shall!”
Comment by Sol — October 16, 2008 @ 8:11 am
thanks a lot, another time…
I would highly appreciate if you would tell me what I did wrong, so that I can post a picture next time. I typed full internet address of the image between “” as said: type.
Why it didn’t work, please?
My email address is firstname.lastname@example.org
Comment by Ann — October 16, 2008 @ 10:02 am
You say “An interesting idea”? – More the question…
For Lacan, “There is no relation except where there is sinthome. It is the sinthome which supports…”
What it says about me, an analyst? To be a semblant of a?
Of course, not. To think of myself as BEING A SEMBLANT leeds to the culdesac…, I think, never – to sinthome.
What is my, analyst’s, input, support in analytic ‘subject-to-subject relationship’… which “stops not being written”?:
– “Is it courage that is at stake, or pathways of recognition…”,
– Or ”another kind of ‘love put to the test’”? …
Comment by Ann — October 16, 2008 @ 10:54 am
Ann so a woman’s partner is solitude?
Comment by Terry1 — October 16, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
Its impossible to understand feminine jouissance, but its possible to share it.
I think, woman has a choice: to be lonely…, in graceful solitude…, or in intimate at-one-ment with the one she loves. In that sense, she creates her partner…
When it happens in analysis, silence becomes pregnant and leads to the transformation in the real.
Comment by Ann — October 16, 2008 @ 8:15 pm
Comment by violet — October 17, 2008 @ 12:08 am
Ann, it has to be an image that is in the internet, and use great care in writing every detail… for instance the quotes, curled or reclined won’t work, it took me forever to find that out… often it just doesn’t come up so I do it with Shack, which Sol recommended
Comment by admin — October 17, 2008 @ 12:14 am
Ann, The interesting idea, for me to be thinking on, is agieren-sinthome
“What it says about me, an analyst? To be a semblant of a?
Of course, not. To think of myself as BEING A SEMBLANT leeds to the culdesac…, I think, never – to sinthome.”
I agree..for the analalyst to conflate themself with objet a ~ they resist paying with their ego, then things get crazy. This might be a cul de sac and recoverable, it might be an impasse, only a retreat or termination will solve. And more, I think, isn’t it only the analyst as part of a school that can circulate on the ground of the law, that can support the analyst to (possibly) keep work going?
Not the analyst alone, not as a person practicing analysis. Because without a school it is easy for the work to be submerged in a subject to subject relation. It is easy for it to be crazy, and not that enigmatic.
What is my, analyst’s, input, support in analytic ‘subject-to-subject relationship’… which “stops not being written”?:
– “Is it courage that is at stake, or pathways of recognition…”,
– Or ”another kind of ‘love put to the test’”? …
Mightn’t your input, as Lacan notes, be something that you are utterly unaware of: it might be the shine on your nose? And on the other hand isn’t it only a speech act, and one that is not a repetition?
I don’t know. The different kind of love risk...
For me, thinking with Freud, it seems always a risk for him that he fails, and over time, between the text and the footnotes, it is more a risk that he might have failed to fail. In which case I think there would be no psychoanalysis.
It failed to fall. Then as you wrote above, there may be no place for the sinthome to take?
I think I can give nothing, and what is given is that it will be given none the less, or not, and i might never know of it, but might know that something happened.
But I think I am on different tracks. I would like to hear more of your question.
I have another question though, and it might relate.
Agieren: it is mostly used in ‘Remembering, repeating and working through’.
I think, though I may be wrong. This title and this paper isn’t a mistake, that these three should be together.
What then of agieren in relation to ‘working through’? Which approaches your question for me.
Comment by Sol — October 17, 2008 @ 1:07 am
I think there may be questions here but are these questions simply bound up in a shift from knowledge to jouissance and if so what can I know of these questions?
Is there a ‘remit’ with sessions when one says to the other, I know something about this but not about that - and is some ‘knowledge’ so exclusive that it remains untested - as a jouissance that listens without being heard?
With sessions there are clearly limits and I came across an interesting take on session ‘endings’ in a paper by Monique Kusierek and Alfredo Zenoni called ‘THE SESSION AS A ‘UNIT OF SATISFACTION” in Psychoanalytic Notebooks 10. It seems my question involves a jouissance which looks for limits and how this links to a sinthome question.
‘On leaving each session the subject is, after all is said and done, confronted with a loss of jouissance. And in consequence the mode of leaving is indicative of the relation the subject maintains with the object that embodies this loss. Jacques Alain Miller has proposed a little phenomenology on this point, all the while specifying that a topology that would apply a mode of the analyst’s transformation into a drive object to each clinical structure would be ill advised, since this valency of transformation is wont to vary. But in the end, one can nevertheless differentiate the mode of transformation into shit, for the subject just out of the quick and tidy session, from the transformation into beast object for the subject with some difficulty tearing himself away from it. And if the analyst is transformed into a voice, well, he carries on speaking to him’. (p.142)
Comment by Chris Sands — October 17, 2008 @ 6:05 am
190 is beautiful picture, but wishing pic came with comment is a complicated difficulty I have … (see 189)
Comment by Chris Sands — October 17, 2008 @ 6:20 am
Thank you, violet, for lovely photo, and you, Sol for such a long elaboration of my thoughts…
You say: The interesting idea, for me to be thinking on, is agieren-sinthome.
Let me think…
My notion of agieren, repetition in act(ion), is not so much a oure repetition than a source of novelty of the mind…
Yes, hand-in-hand with remembering and working through…
an act of creation in transference of something new brought into presence in the analytic situation, out of the material which was outside of psychic elaboration before…
close to the notion of psychoanalytic act which addresses something in the Real, what has not been or otherwise cannot be processed psychically.
That’s how I link it with sinthome of RSI.
Comment by Ann — October 17, 2008 @ 9:10 am
CS - of 189 - feminine jouissance, and the impossibility to understand it and the possibility to share it…
it could relate to the story of the virgin mary alone in her cubicle visited by the angel announcing she will be pregnant by the dove/the holy spirit and that she will be giving birth to the son of god… here the dove/the holy spirit standing for the phallus, or the WORD “when it happens in analysis as silence becomes pregnant and leads to the transformation in the real…”
Comment by violet — October 18, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
that’s really quite remarkable photograph violet...
Comment by Sol — October 19, 2008 @ 12:09 am
yes Sol — indeed quite an image to conceive of feminine jouissance, the impossibility to understand it, the possibility to share it, and so...
Comment by admin — October 19, 2008 @ 1:44 am
the notion of ’sharing’ in this context is interesting, or startlng.
I know that many people, from Lacan, have made this connection of feminine jouissance, with mystic -al experiences.
But I think this image provokes a super-natural reaction. Uncanny)
Sometimes, it happens that something occurs and I ask ‘but how..’ ‘and what..’ ?? (and we don’t need to tie an idea of feminine jouissance to a biological woman) and these are really some moments that it is difficult to speak of in supervision, say, for they conjure up the possibility of a personal madness...
Comment by Sol — October 19, 2008 @ 5:45 am
of the image — do you think the ineffable pleasure she seems to be experiencing comes from the rays of sun going through the window, hitting on her shoulders… and is your super-natural reaction linked to the intensity reflected on her face?
Comment by violet — October 19, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
It’s a remarkable picture of Humpty. I must’ve thought he was just surface with no yolk!
Comment by lucky — October 20, 2008 @ 3:44 am
It seems, the work of art is sometimes an act that comes close to this moment of madness and in the paper ‘The Sinthome, a Mixture of Symptom and Fantasy’ Miller compares a ’subject of the signifier’ and a ’subject of jouissance’. I think Miller suggests that if the ideal complements the subject of the signifier, fantasy complements the subject of jouissance (as with the matheme for the subject’s fantasy which always fails when I try to write it here!).
There are possibly many ingredients of this play between signifier and jouissance in Tarkovsky’s ‘Nostalgia’. We’ve referred before to the opening sequence, which introduces the main characters and leads to an extraordinary moment in a chapel, when birds are released from a Madonna. This is so much a Tarkovsky moment that the rest of this film remains a bit of an anti climax, but in a sense an anti climax within an anti climax. We are never far away from an encounter with death or, in fact, death as anti climax. If the phallus implies a small death, does the jouissance of ‘Encore’ imply a jouissance beyond the small death of the phallus?
Comment by Chris Sands — October 20, 2008 @ 4:04 am
I remember you talking about that film before Chris, I will have to search it out.
So Freud writes in The Economic Problem of Masochism:
“This masochism would thus be evidence of, and a remainder from, the phase of development in which the coalescence, which is so important for life, between the death instinct and Eros took place”
I wonder about sublimation
Comment by Sol — October 20, 2008 @ 8:24 am
Do you think it comes from the light she almost touches with her hand with a strange ring violet?
I think of how it seems there is no one looking at her, but as if she is speaking or singing to someone very quietly, completely absorbed and intensely, and I know it is not me
Comment by Sol — October 20, 2008 @ 8:28 am