“With Lacan angels are often words, so this could be the case even if they are not pronounceable words _ they get to stop the killing”
(from violet, before)
killing being killed=/ (different to/not the same as) death

Comment by Sol — October 20, 2008 @ 9:39 am

…just surface with no yolk!
lucky is back…….. and this is how we know Humpty is fat free, cholesterol free, 100% liquid egg white, perfectly pasteurized

Comment by violet — October 20, 2008 @ 10:07 am

There is something a little disturbing about her eyes; like the time Sylvia Plath tried to wake up under the house and couldn’t open her eyes like a worm

Comment by lucky — October 20, 2008 @ 11:00 am

I think the disturbing about the eyes - like a worm - is that you cannot see the eyelashes…
and her enjoyment related to the sun rays is embarrassing because the sun will hurt her - she doesn’t have the necessary pigments to change color

Comment by violet — October 20, 2008 @ 12:08 pm

She’s in at-one-ment with sunlight…

Comment by Ann — October 20, 2008 @ 4:41 pm

jouissance is of the One–now she appears in Aristophanes speech as the double or circled one– She and the sun/son, they are One.

Comment by violet — October 21, 2008 @ 2:52 am

…now she appears in Humpty’s speech - She and the sun/son….

Comment by alice — October 21, 2008 @ 7:21 pm

she doesn’t need her eyes, the sunone is all over and through.
is she conceiving?
Sylvia’s worms remind me of some
sea snakes I saw washed up on a beach once
they had thin membranes where you think their eyes would be,
they didn’t need them because they live deep under the sea
where it is completely dark.

Hi Lucky! Is that from a poem, the worms?

Comment by Sol — October 21, 2008 @ 8:20 pm

Hi..No it’s from Under The Bell Jar, and I think she really said a caterpillar trying to push it’s head up.

Comment by lucky — October 22, 2008 @ 2:21 am

Violet, “Righty O!”: who said that?

Comment by lucky — October 22, 2008 @ 2:23 am

not “that” but she talk of WORMS — “The Fearful,” by Syilvia Plath:
This man makes a pseudonym
And crawls behind it like a WORM.
This woman on the telephone
Says she is a man, not a woman.
The mask increases, eats the WORM,
Stripes for mouth and eyes and nose,
The voice of the woman hollows—
More and more like a dead one,
WORMS in the glottal stops.
She hates
The thought of a baby—
Stealer of cells, stealer of beauty—
She would rather be dead than fat

Comment by violet — October 22, 2008 @ 4:34 am

Violet, the surface i was thinking of with Mr. Dumpty is maybe this kind,”the body as the inconsistent composite of erogenous zones, the body as the surface of the inscription of the traces of traumas and excessive enjoyments, the body through which the unconscious speaks.”

Comment by lucky — October 23, 2008 @ 10:13 pm

“… Mr Dumpty through which the unconscious speaks (slips of the tongue, errors…) is a body of words

Comment by violet — October 24, 2008 @ 1:57 am

Comment by alphonse — October 29, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

in SEm XIII - Lacan - Humpty is Maese Adan, comparable to the public thing - a body, a social body and the effects this body provokes : the excessive swelling of the prince abusive richness lead to images of deformity… The prince is a member of this body… It becomes a kind of monster, excessively inflated, inflated in detriment of the rest of the body, that is th community…

Comment by violet — November 3, 2008 @ 4:56 am

What do we know of Maese Adan………apart from it being Lacan’s name for Humpty???

Comment by alice — November 3, 2008 @ 3:05 pm

nothing

Comment by Sol — November 3, 2008 @ 9:50 pm

Maese stands for Master, and Adán, is the first man… what I can make of it

Comment by alice — November 4, 2008 @ 12:05 am

oh that’s funny, I read it naively as Mr first man..

and then in Christian terms the fall of the first man is to do with the woman’s supposing/biting knowledge of the snake and the apple from the bible the snake used to walk upright until then

Comment by Sol — November 4, 2008 @ 1:12 am

Just to say hello!

Comment by Majid — November 4, 2008 @ 4:22 am

Hi Majid

Comment by Sol — November 4, 2008 @ 7:09 pm

it’s kind of fantastic to visualize the snake walking upright, and it adds intrigue to the curse

Comment by alice — November 4, 2008 @ 9:01 pm

yes it is isn’t it alice..
at the cost of being a tad melancholic
would the person (admin?) who posted
Felix consider re-posting him?
If not, I may visit him in the archives : )

Comment by Sol — November 5, 2008 @ 5:32 am

like the idea of a ‘tad melancholic’…
Have been looking at some stunning papers in Psychoanalytic Notebooks 10 (Formation of the Analyst)
and in ‘Paradoxical Effects of the Pass’, Dominique Laurent (p.147) refers to a ‘clean cut pass’ and a ’saviour-y-faire pass’, which seems more problematic.
I was wondering, being a foreigner, whether events last night in US signal the return of the object cause and what Laurent calls ‘the perfect pass’ - but in politics?

Comment by Chris Sands — November 5, 2008 @ 6:32 am

Chris Sands, how did you do it…..? I’ve been trying since ever that the little square takes in an image, and it never worked…… tell me, tell me

Comment by admin — November 5, 2008 @ 5:51 pm

Well …
it just happened.
As you know, I’ve a wordpress blog and either my laptop or wordpress saw some compatibility and suddenly there it was (a wordpress profile). It probably won’t happen again (unless someone gets a wordpress blog)

Comment by Chris Sands — November 5, 2008 @ 6:35 pm

wow, good old wordpress!

Comment by Chris Sands — November 5, 2008 @ 6:36 pm

Chris, it looks like your face, or a face, on a pillow.

The social geographer Tuan talks about the bed and the bedroom as personal geography, and Perec, in Species of Spaces goes right into the details and space of his bed and his bedroom. I love how both of them write about that place.
When reading them, I think of the bed being the first place and the grave being the last bed, and I think of the couch..

Comment by Sol — November 6, 2008 @ 12:13 am>/

I was thinking of Tracey Emin at the time, wondering whether Lacan’s theory of a message returned in inverted form could be the case in the art world as well …

Comment by Chris Sands — November 6, 2008 @ 5:09 am

I started a wordpress blog to see if the avatar translates here..

Comment by Sol — November 6, 2008 @ 10:58 am

ha! it worked: http://solutations.wordpress.com/

Comment by Sol — November 6, 2008 @ 11:33 am

You are a shady character Sol, all we need now is a built-in wardrobe

Comment by Chris Sands — November 6, 2008 @ 12:42 pm

Comment by admin — November 6, 2008 @ 6:53 pm

what do you mean CS?!! (laugh out loud)
it’s not me it’s a lamp?
Hi again Felix

Comment by Sol — November 6, 2008 @ 9:26 pm

what DO you mean?
now I think wordpress is like a linen press a kind of wardrobe?
Whatever you mean, it’s very funny

Comment by Sol — November 6, 2008 @ 9:28 pm

Chris my avatar is a crooked lamp maybe you don’t like it it was a fairly random pragmatic choice (apparently, though one must wonder)
ava·tar (av′ə tär′) noun HINDUISM a god appearing on earth in bodily form; incarnation of a god any incarnation or embodiment, as of a quality or concept in a person Etymology: Sans avatāra < ava-, down + base of tarati, (he) crosses over:
(from symposium to messageboard among other crossings) but anyway I have changed it to avoid being shot cheers

Comment by Sol — November 8, 2008 @ 12:16 pm

(shot) only in the nicest possible way, but liked lampshade

Comment by Chris Sands — November 8, 2008 @ 3:14 pm

good, because I can’t change it.
i am condemmed to being a lampshade for the rest of my life on earth - if this is earth..

Comment by Sol — November 12, 2008 @ 12:37 am

Am still thinking about a forum based art mag. In a text called ‘Free Association, a Practice of Contingency’, Pierre Malengreau writes: ‘In order for something new to be initiated (s’amorcer), something contingent has to be established.’
A long time ago, I kept trying to refer to a phrase of Alain Badiou, which seemed to challenge artists faced by some of the facts of existence in late capitalism. Badiou’s text is at http://www.lacan.com/frameXXIV5.htm and the sentence is ‘It is better to do nothing than to work officially in the visibility of what the West declares to exist.’
The sentence sticks (for me) like a dream, but to address what a sticky sentence might mean I’d like to deploy what Pierre Malengreau says about contingency and make the case for a forum art mag. What better place to challenge to art world? I wonder if wordpress profile images work in the forum?

Comment by Chris Sands — November 12, 2008 @ 5:08 am

It sounds good. I guess the challenge would be getting people to contribute, possibly a lot of work..?? i don’t go into Forum as it has too many steps and choices, and this is enough for me, but when i have had a look I have noticed large numbers of viewers (and low numbers of entries)..

Comment by Sol — November 12, 2008 @ 7:53 am

I know what you mean Sol, with the many steps and choices in the forum, too many indeed, the other forum was better, but they started a lot of advertising so I left it as an archive

Comment by violet — November 14, 2008 @ 4:33 am

Remember the idea of the cartel?
Although we seem to be few, did we drop this idea?
Do we want to select a text and idea, and stick with it for a while? It is difficult, I know.

Comment by Sol — November 14, 2008 @ 7:58 am

I think we got stuck with contingencies.
Something very special happens when we look after intimacies and with an ordinary wordpress blog you can set it up so that only people with a password can see it.

Comment by Chris Sands — November 14, 2008 @ 12:48 pm

Auu!
Is anybody there?
Were are you…
All in cartels?…
cheers,
Ann

Comment by Ann — November 20, 2008 @ 5:18 pm

Hi again Ann,
here am I!
I’m not sure of why the cartel should be private..
or password protected..?

Comment by Sol — November 20, 2008 @ 6:13 pm

If you look at the forum from time to time you’ll see that people still use it to dump spam etc.
but we could try using it for a while.
Personally, I feel lack of privacy limits what we talk about.

Comment by Chris Sands — November 21, 2008 @ 6:11 am

Hi,
happy to meet you again…
Messageboard sounds like fee float of reflections, almost free associations, while Lacanian cartel is quite a focused, serious collaborative work in a group about up to five aiming at exchange of experiential knowledge and search, and production of S1 rather than S2, and confidentiality and privacy is necessary for this.
I like both, they don’t exclude, but complement each other…
Surely, I’d like to participate in one of your cartels, and the question I’m looking at present, is ‘How to act with one’s being’.
It follows directly from what we reflected at: analyst as semblant… as sinthome…
This question, raised by Lacan in his quite early paper “The Direction of the Treatment and the Principles of its Power”(1958), is as old as psychoanalysis itself.
I just found today in Lacan’s “Directions”: “The question of the analyst’s being arose very early in the history of analysis”, says Lacan, “and was introduced by the analyst most tormented by the problem of analytic action”. He means Sandor Ferenczi.
For Lacan, Ferenczi’s article “Introjection and Transference,” dating back to 1909, “was inaugural here and that it anticipated by many years all the themes later developed on the basis of the second topography.
Although Ferenczi conceives of transference as the introjection of the doctor’s person into the patient’s subjective economy, it is not introjection of this person as a prop for a repetitive compulsion or ill-adapted behaviour, or as a fantasy figure.
What he means is the absorption into the subject’s economy of everything the psychoanalyst makes present in the duo as the here and now of an incarnated problematic.
Doesn’t Ferenczi reach the extreme conclusion that the treatment can only be complete if the doctor avows to the patient the sense of abandonment the doctor himself is liable to suffer?
?…

Comment by Ann — November 21, 2008 @ 8:14 pm

“The feeling of gratitude that I owe you for your kind assistance will—I hope—permeate me more and more. For the moment the break in our doctor-patient relations was too sudden not to have caused a certain shock effect. Theoretically, it is very interesting to learn why the Ψα. patient cannot be grateful to his doctor. The doctor has certainly made him “healthy,” i.e., taught him to comply with the real demands of life. But he took away the pleasure which in the ucs. accompanied all his still so uncomfortable, indeed, perhaps lethal, symptoms. Analysis suddenly makes out of a man who has remained childish, therefore basically carefree, another who really becomes conscious of all responsibilities. This confession is parallel to the one I made to Frau G. It means: to ask forgiveness of people of both sexes if I don’t love them from now on quite so much as before. Instead, what remains will be free of the shadow that fell from the ucs. onto all impulses of feeling.
So, we shall see. I won’t make up my mind to do anything and will wait and see what comes. Many cordial and heartfelt greetings from your—indeed very grateful Ferenczi”
(letter to Freud July 10, 1916)

Comment by Sol — November 21, 2008 @ 10:32 pm

Thank, you Sol!
I feel relief from hearing that I’m not the only one who had to handle such a shock…
Have you, please, come across the following Ferenczi’s idea:
Lacan somewhere around 1953 mentioned that Ferenczi suggested for trainee analysts an “exhaustive preliminary analysis”, during which the future analyst will seek to acquire a “a mobility of his libido”. I’m very curious to hear more about it…
I red in Ph. Julien’s book “Lacan’s return to Freud”: For himself Ferenczi chooses an altogether different path: an “exhausive “ preliminary analysis, during which the future analyst will seek to acquire “a mobility of his libido.”
Here Lacan begins with the question: how does the mobility of the place occupied by the analyst depend on the mobility of the analyst’s libido?
Have you, Sol, any idea what’s there about?
Why,Ferenczi sugggests, that analyst needs this “mobility of libido” and for what?
Is there any parallels with Lacan’s desire-of-the-analyst as cause of the transference - metaphor of eros to be accomplished in analysis(Seminar 8)?
Maybe, by chance, you have at hand and find something in Ferenczi’s paper “The Elasticity of Psychoanalytic Technique”(1928), in: Final Contributions to the Problems & Methods of Psycho-Analysis. H. Karnack Books, Ltd., 1994; (original 1955).
Many thanks,
Ann

Comment by Ann — November 22, 2008 @ 12:24 pm

Probably the other side of the coin of having this “mobility of libodo” is what Ferenczi confesses to Freud: …to ask forgiveness of people of both sexes if I don’t love them from now on quite so much as before…
We pay for everything…

Comment by Ann — November 22, 2008 @ 12:33 pm

What questions Ann,
very welcome. I read some Ferenczi a few years ago and have wanted to return to him. Unfortunately I don’t have ‘Further contributions..’ and the ‘elasticity..’ paper is not available on PEP archives.
I do recall reading Ferenczi’s suggestion to Freud that analysts should have a thorough=going personal analysis prior to a training analysis, neither of which was standard at the time. This is in one of the letters, which I will take some time to locate. Personally, I think it was also tied in with Ferenczi’s analysis with Freud, which both struggled with. Freud refers to Ferenczi’s analysis in ‘Analysis terminable..’
Ferenczi was a very careful reader of Freud. I think that when he speaks of the mobility of desire, which he refers to in several places, he does something very important and something that has been very neglected.
I’ll try to say it like this: I think he refers to Freud’s very early idea, which continues throughout his work but is introduced in ‘Aphasia’. That is, in his development of the concept of assymbolic aphasia in which he develops the idea of the ‘word’ and the ‘thing’, and the possibility for new ideas through ‘the chain of associations’ (He also introduces a perspective on the ‘functionless gap’ in associative pathways, which he takes beyond the contemporary physiological conception of ‘lesion’)
I think this is the beginning of the idea of psychic mobility, its connections with speech, and so, a part of the ideational basis of free association.
His topographical conception of the trieb as the boundary or intersection of the body and the psyche is also, structurally, present in this paper. Though the ‘body’ here is sensory, rather than sexual.
Ferenczi took Freud’s formulation of the place of sexuality very seriously and continued to return to it while others at the time (and currently) fled from it.
Alongside Ferenczis idea that psychoanalysis served the analyst, foremost, and also the patient, and his struggle and work on the personal analysis, and in his work, I think that we can see Ferenczi’s insistence on the place of sexuality, the trieb and the body (of the analyst) in the transference, and in the work of the analyst in his phrase ‘mobility of libido’
We can also see the idea of displacement/metonomy - desire
Sometimes he refers to this as affect, but I think he makes an early connection between the signifier and the body, in the work, not just in theory, for instance here, where he speaks rather of metaphor:
“I desired with these examples to point out the overwhelming significance of affective factors in the production of true symbols. It is they that have to be taken into consideration in the first place when one wishes to distinguish symbols from other psychical products (metaphors, similes, etc.), which are also the result of condensation. One-sided consideration of formal and rational conditions in the explanation of psychical processes can easily lead one astray.
For instance, one was formerly inclined to believe that things are confounded because they are similar; nowadays we know that a thing is confounded with another only because certain motives for this are present; similarity merely provides the opportunity for these motives to function. In the same way it must be said that apperceptive insufficiency alone, without consideration of the motives impelling towards analogy-formation, do not adequately explain the creation of symbols”
Symbolism
III. The Ontogenesis of Symbols
By ‘motives’ I think he speaks of sexuality. I think he is arguing for the place of the analyst’s body in the work, (the experience of the work, alongside the theoretical elaboration of the work) and the necessity for the personal analysis to allow the mobility of desire, the associative chains which are made at the intersection of the body and the psyche.
While in other letters and diary entries, he acknowledges the importance of practicing ‘restraint’ Something he learnt with difficulty!
I have made something of a lengthy and clumsy start to responding to your questions Ann.
I am convinced of the importance of the place of Ferenczi in Psychoanalysis and have something of a ‘passion’ (to use his word) for his work. I haven’t responded to your question of Lacan’s about the mobility of place of the analyst.. what are your ideas about this?

Comment by Sol — November 22, 2008 @ 11:25 pm

fascinating and just like family life or some that is..

Comment by lucky — November 23, 2008 @ 2:23 am

it’s very hard to look after small intimacies
they skip around
for instance Chris’s small pic could be me
but thats not possible unless he’s connected in a very high tec ring

Comment by lucky — November 23, 2008 @ 2:56 am

And no one ever answered my question…
who said righty O as his chorus?

Comment by lucky — November 23, 2008 @ 2:59 am

These are my lucubrations that get hazier as they go on-
The analyst must let his libido move about to follow the hysteric or intersect in what an empty set?
or where the object a is moving or stationary even though its only a cause od desire. no it’s a trauma too

Comment by lucky — November 23, 2008 @ 3:29 am

Hi Lucky,
was it the white knight?

Comment by Sol — November 23, 2008 @ 4:42 am

Ann, I hear your references to free floating reflections, the seriousness of cartels and the need for privacy, but your S1’s rather than S2’s (in comment 47) tie in (for me) to a conversation here or next door (symposium) a few weeks ago. It was a conversation which led to references to historization and hystorization (with a y), but had to do with the stories we tell. When something is foreclosed, repressed or left out in a story, telling it never quite makes sense.
Perhaps unwisely (next door even), I would like to make sense of a transference to art or the desire of the artist and see Badiou’s insistence or persistence with contemporary art as a call for contingencies or something like a school, where contemporary art is concerned. A swarm of S1’s beyond the privacy of a cartel leads to the suggestion that it will take 300 years to work Joyce out - or there is no transference to art in what remains of the art world.
So, what I see as your take on the desire of the analyst seems to have some bearing on a question I want to articulate, which somehow concerns a transference to art

Comment by Chris Sands — November 23, 2008 @ 6:13 am

Nooo it wasn’t the White Knight though it could’ve beeen ….

Comment by lucky — November 23, 2008 @ 12:32 pm

Well, am I warm?
am I in the right volume or even book?

Comment by Sol — November 24, 2008 @ 7:21 am

a savior of sorts so you are warm but a character who appeared on Tv

Comment by lucky — November 24, 2008 @ 2:57 pm

hm, does the speaker have an accent?
like batman’s butler?
Is it an animal like a moose?

Comment by sol — November 24, 2008 @ 4:13 pm

it is an animal and it does have it’s own accent

Comment by lucky — November 24, 2008 @ 5:36 pm

I would like to read a Lacanian interpretation of Melville’s Moby Dick.
deborah

Comment by deborah — November 24, 2008 @ 8:11 pm

Ratty from Wind in the Willows?

Comment by Sol — November 24, 2008 @ 11:06 pm

nope, he had a cartoon show

Comment by lucky — November 25, 2008 @ 1:49 pm

Thank you Sol, for sharing your passion and thoughts.
They inspired me and made thinking…
But when I came back to continue the talk, I found it difficult to tune in your ongoing conversation.
I felt my talk about Ferenczi would interrupt the playful mood shared by you and lucky…
So I just enjoyed it in silence…
Thank you,
Ann

Comment by Ann — November 25, 2008 @ 5:12 pm

Hi Chris,
You say: what I see as your take on the desire of the analyst seems to have some bearing on a question I want to articulate, which somehow concerns a transference to art.
I’m glad to hear, and share your notion about the powe of art.
One of my first teachers of psychoanalysis told us:
Listen to your patient as an orchestra, in which speech is the melody… listen to all…
Other person, a compositor, said: being in music is being almost in love…
Yes, art can help us a lot…

Comment by Ann — November 25, 2008 @ 5:41 pm

I give up Lucky..I don’t know who said ‘righty o’
defeatedly yours,
sol

Comment by Sol — November 27, 2008 @ 2:54 am

‘O’ is a powerful archaic letter-word loved by both Lacan and Bion…

Comment by Ann — November 27, 2008 @ 7:25 am

Comment by violet — November 27, 2008 @ 12:17 pm

O!
(righty oh)

Comment by Sol — November 27, 2008 @ 6:02 pm

The Indian mathematician Brahmagupta (17C) is believed to have first used zero as a number, rather than as a placeholder.
As a placeholder, like a comma, 0 helps us read
The letter ‘H’ is important to Cixous - she writes that it is the ladder of writing, and the only letter that can be feminine, and a letter that is breathed, or ‘out of breath’ A letter of two ‘I’s with a line between, joining the 1’s and helping writing ‘vibrate’
reading, and writing - - - counting and breathing - - -
0 H

Comment by Sol — November 27, 2008 @ 6:10 pm

In what way H is feminine? -
- When she growls at to protect herself and her kids?
- Or when she in ecstasy enjoys two men fighting unto the death for her sake?
Powerful sound.
Aa… In wikipedia corresponding hieroglyph to H is a figure of a man!
- That’s where ‘Homo’ comes from?…
- S1 for a man created by a woman?

Comment by Ann — November 28, 2008 @ 7:45 am

Magod:Proto-semiticE-01.png

Comment by Ann — November 28, 2008 @ 7:48 am

In Egypt hieroglyphs H is a spiral…
I’m trying to manage posting pictures of them from wikipedia, but failed
Cheers
Please, may I ask for directions how to do that?

Comment by Ann — November 28, 2008 @ 8:10 am

Egyptian hieroglyph
fence Proto-Semitic
ħ Phoenician
ħ Etruscan
H Greek
eta
in my wikipedia egyptian H is a fence
but I can’t post it either

Comment by Sol — November 28, 2008 @ 8:16 am

But Cisoux, in the Ladder of writing says the h is a ladder, and that it joins, by a little line, two 1’s - the ones for her, being two languages.
I think I agree, thinking for instance of yiddish, that it can be a feminine place to be speaking between but I like your example of feminine H Ann

Comment by Sol — November 28, 2008 @ 8:19 am

Cisoux (Cixous) - is climbing down the ladder when I write her backwards like this..

Comment by Sol — November 28, 2008 @ 8:20 am

Backwards?…

Comment by Ann — November 28, 2008 @ 2:31 pm

a typo - I replaced the s with the x..and the x with the s..
it is a problem with spelling her name that she says led to a series of questions about her language and roots.. and to her finding a position between..

Comment by Sol — November 28, 2008 @ 10:40 pm

I very much love summer
Someone very much loves winter
I Wish to know whom more
For what you love winter?
For what you love summer? Let’s argue

Comment by wintervssummer — November 30, 2008 @ 9:14 am

re. a conversation about letters: was in London last week for (Lacanian) conference and beforehand someone mentioned the word ‘psyche’ is made up of two Greek letters … On the journey home looked at Luce Irigaray ‘Sharing the World’ and found the sentence ‘Language would exist as a substitute for the mother or rather as a substitute for the relation with the mother’…

Comment by Chris Sands — December 1, 2008 @ 5:38 am

summer is really too much
i would happily attack you now w-vs-s,
but i have a toothache

Comment by Sol — December 2, 2008 @ 3:20 am

there are reports on Uk tv of locusts in your part of the world,
I suppose toasted they might be a bit crunchy …

Comment by Chris Sands — December 2, 2008 @ 5:24 am

dipped in chocolate they are quite disgusting..do they look good on film?

Comment by Sol — December 2, 2008 @ 6:04 am

welcome back cs

Comment by Sol — December 2, 2008 @ 6:05 am

Nice comment Chris……. The ties that bind. Where was the conference in London?

Comment by Terry1 — December 2, 2008 @ 6:51 pm

yes, the first of three on ‘Classic/Contemporary Psychosis and Social Inclusion’ co-ordinated by Gabriela van den Hoven.
The next is in Feb.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 3, 2008 @ 3:26 am

What was it about?

Comment by Sol — December 3, 2008 @ 10:20 pm

It looked at the psychosis of seminar 3 and later sessions will look at ‘ordinary psychosis’. Will say more in a bit … We were talking of late re. using a (forum) password to explore what can’t be explored in a very public setting and it looks as if someone’s been using or trying to use my username to access the forum, as my username’s now banned.
Something like this happened once before, some time ago.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 4, 2008 @ 4:09 am

CS - also I am banned, believe or not, tomorrow I am getting the expert that did t to fix the desaster

Comment by admin — December 4, 2008 @ 6:07 am

i wonder if anyone who already saw the film Zizek! can discuss this with me. In the film, he contradicts himself at least at these 2 points:
1. (the scene at 00:07:23) “…I’m not human being; I’m a monster, I claim. It’s not that i have a mask of a theoretician, and beneath, i’m a warm human person… i like chocolate cake, i like this and that which makes me human. i’d rather prefer myself as somebody who - not to offend others - pretends, plays that he’s human.
2. (the scene at 00:22:10) “what i appreciate is the inversion, reversal of the role between public image and private. this total disappearance of this warm, human person. for me, this is the idea of ideology. the central idea of ideology, for me, is not these ideas determine you - you’re a Christian, you’re a Marxist or whatever… but the idea is precisely that ideological propositions do not determine us totally. We cannot be reduced to our public image. there is a warm human being behind. i think this is ideology at its purest. the most horrible and ideological act is to fully identify with the ideological image. The ultimate act is what we think is our true self. There is a true acting there, and usually our truth, to that which we are really committed existentially, is in our acts, more than importance supposed to be behind the act.”
So many times, he claims that himself prefers to be honest, clear, and that there’s nothing behind the acts, blah,blah. and from the 2nd quote, this is because to hide in the mask, and have another persona back there, is an ideological act. and he’s a monster and claims so. but then why would he “pretends, plays that he’s human”? Why this necessity to pretend if he so disgusts with pretension? if he claims to be a monster, and so proud about it, why revert to the mask of human?
Secondly, he claims that “ideological propositions do not determine us totally. We cannot be reduced to our public image. there is a warm human being behind. i think this is ideology at its purest.” In other words, ideology, for Zizek, has something to do with hypocrisy, the double-faced, pretenders, posers. But then the next sentence he said, “the most horrible and ideological act is to fully identify with the ideological image.” So what, for him, is actually ideology? Is it to fully or half-heartedly identify oneself with ideological image? Which is it? somebody tell me. because i simply don’t follow.
Someone in Wikipedia kindly points out, in defense of Zizek, that “One of the problems in outlining Žižek’s work and ideas is that for the layperson he seems to change his theoretical position (for instance, on the question of whether Lacan is a structuralist or poststructuralist) between books and sometimes even within the pages of one book.” But no, this is from one sentence to the next, and i think his inconsistency is too much for someone who claims to be (also in the film) “Enlightenment person”, believing in “clear statements”, and whose project is to “translate Lacan into clear terms.” At least in these 2 quotes, he fails to be so, absolutely. And this is not someone who “with all his inconsistencies, is trying to make us think much harder about what we are willing to believe and accept from a single writer”, but rather someone who’s, yes, fun, powerful, wonderful in polemics, rhetoric, but can’t be taken seriously???

Comment by traces — December 4, 2008 @ 1:20 pm

Well, at some point, Lacan (or was it Miller) warns analysts about taking themselves too seriously, but isn’t the gap between polemic and subject also somehow the gap of castration?
As subjects we come and go … and when we don’t, too much certainty can be the mark of another subjectivity …
(Sol) I discovered the term ‘xenopathy’ at last weeks conference, which, I think, means ‘illness of the Other’ … and came away thinking Lacan really does tilt psychoanalysis towards psychosis. Again, I thought, some Lacanians trip over Joyce, which takes little away from the sinthome (concept) … while (the working hypothesis) ‘ordinary psychosis’ seems to open up a new way of looking at contemporary practice. I can’t put any of this into meaningful sentences tonight, but the conference led me to surprising dreams, which will take their time too, like the conference.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 4, 2008 @ 6:58 pm

CS — I fixed the FORUM. You now have unmovable rights, and so we all came back to life in there

Comment by admin — December 5, 2008 @ 12:43 am

Hi traces,
welcome.
I have never read Zizek
Hi Chris and admin, glad you’re back, unbanned and sorted out.
Every time Chris I ask again what is this ordinary psychosis?
and what makes it so ordinary..
is it like the everyday-ness of the so called ‘new’ pathologies, where they are psychotic- the personlaity disorders, dissociation, alexthymia, drug addiction.. is it Freud’s neuroasthenia..but why necessarily psychotic?

Comment by Sol — December 5, 2008 @ 1:44 am

Why indeed, with that last question. but there is an emerging literature that talks very well (I think) about this ‘working hypothesis’ … psychosis when its not extraordinary or evidently delusional and sometimes catastrophic. In this sense, the N de P, the sinthome or science (for CBT) can one of the names of the father, but doesn’t a ‘question preliminary to any possible treatment’ pose a sometimes baffling question at the start of sessions - or when work gets stuck? There are too many questions here and we enter the stuff of supervision and many descriptions I heard have been tied carefully to case presentations, but always posed as a question.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 5, 2008 @ 6:17 am

LADIES AND GENTLEMAN,
OUR FORUM HAS BEEN RESTORED.
THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

Comment by admin — December 7, 2008 @ 3:45 pm

A good example of “ordinary psychosis” could be “Mr Ripley”, I think, “ordinary”in the sense that he lives in the world like anybody else, behaves, yet don’t let anybody get in the way of him being the somebody he wants to impersonate, and so… did somebody see the movie?

Comment by violet — December 10, 2008 @ 2:54 am

let the term “ordinary” address a symptom which is not having the distinctive qualities of a characteristic psychosis…it resembles a neurosis? — the problem is the treatment may not go well should the psychosis be missed.
It could be an untriggered psychosis—pre-psychotic? Lacan deals with the issue in Seminar III, where he comments Maurits Katan. An adolescent grows to be psychotic: now he imitates an older friend.. The actual imaginary identification—akin to Hélène Deutsch’s “as if” phenomena—forms an imaginary compensation for what is lacking in the symbolic. An early stage of psychosis, the imaginary compensation, prior to the triggering, takes place after the foreclosure of the Name-of-the-Father and prior to the encounter with the One-Father…

Comment by violet — December 11, 2008 @ 6:47 am

I had problems with Ripley as a case of ‘ordinary psychosis’, because there seemed too much irony attached to the notion …
With ‘Preliminary Questions …’ Lacan supposes diagnosis is possible prior to treatment, but in this sense, isn’t ‘ordinary psychosis’ mostly linked to the Lacan of the sinthome and a way of proceeding which somehow accommodates an uncertain diagnosis?

Comment by Chris Sands — December 11, 2008 @ 9:06 am

From Zizek: Ripley sees two flies on his kitchen table and, upon looking at them closely and observing that they are copulating, squashes them with disgust……. he is disconnected from the reality of flesh, disgusted at the Real of life, of its cycle of generation and corruption. Says Marge, Dickie’s girlfriend, “All right, he may not be queer. He’s just a nothing, which is worse. He isn’t normal enough to have any kind of sex life.” Insofar as such coldness characterizes a certain radical lesbian stance, one is tempted to claim that, rather than being a closet gay, the paradox of Ripley is that he is a male lesbian..the disengaged coldness that persists beneath all possible shifting identities gets somehow lost in the film. The true enigma of Ripley is why he persists in this shuddering coldness, retaining a psychotic disengagement from any passionate human attachment, even after he reaches his goal and recreates himself as the respectable art-dealer living in the rich Paris suburb.

Comment by violet — December 11, 2008 @ 3:36 pm

I suppose its the distance Ripley has to go to stabilize his symptom that makes it difficult for me to think this may be a case of ‘ordinary psychosis’. My assumption might be that an ‘extraordinary psychosis’ has been triggered at some stage and is linked to a delusion, while an ordinary psychosis is not (necessarily) triggered, but is somehow stabilized by the symptom or sinthome. What interests me particularly is ‘ordinary psychosis’ as this working hypothesis and the implications when psychosis is only a possibility. Implications when, for example, anti depressants have been prescribed and they don’t seem to help.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 12, 2008 @ 5:32 am

CS - how is James Joyce fitting the case you describe - ordinary psychosis?

Comment by violet — December 12, 2008 @ 6:09 am

I’ve just watched the talented Mr Ripley, thankyou for the suggestion- and am tempted to read the novel for Highsmith’s character.
Certainly he would fit Deutsch’s ‘as if’ personality, with the imitation rather than learning for one..and then some..
I think the question of his ‘goal’ is questionable, because isn’t it that rather than attaining a particular lifestyle-identikit, later his goal is more that any incongruence remains undiscovered?

Comment by Sol — December 12, 2008 @ 6:29 am

I heard the novel is quite different, and very good
I think Mr. Ripley’s goal is “be” the other, the one he killed, which is reaching far as CS, says. There is quite many examples with ordinary psychosis where identification helps with the foreclosed name of the father, and patients don’t go to the point of killing the other.

Comment by violet — December 12, 2008 @ 12:43 pm

Don’t some analysts look at Lacan’s second clinic from the perspective of the first clinic -or if not, doesn’t the second seem radical, in some way a reworking of psychoanalysis for the twentieth first century?
For example, I’ve found much in MASSIMO RECALCATI’s texts which is exciting, but these texts somehow seem written from the perspective of the first Lacan. This might include a strong reiteration of the continuing importance of clinical structure based on the N de P.
However, doesn’t the notion of ‘ordinary psychosis’ mostly have to do with the second Lacan and a way of looking at what might be the case when diagnosis is difficult or its not clearly a question of the sinthome? I have in mind texts like ‘Interpretation in Reverse’, which see the analyst functioning in a different way, as ‘editor’, ’secretary’ or ‘assistant’ to an analysand. If psychoanalysis leans towards a stabilizing effect, there is also the question of Miller’s generalized foreclosure’. At the Paris English language seminar during the summer, the radical side of ‘ordinary psychosis’ (as an hypothesis) prompted a humorous but interesting question. Someone in the audience asked Miller if it were possible that some analysts suffered from an ‘ordinary psychosis’.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 13, 2008 @ 12:57 pm

When would you, or where is it usual, to place the line between the first and second Lacan Chris?
Chronologically I mean, or by seminar.
I would think there is no reason why many analysts do not suffer from a potential psychosis, or more… but i do not see what is humourous about the idea..?

Comment by Sol — December 13, 2008 @ 10:32 pm

Blimey what a question Sol!
JA Miller and others have spent so much time looking at what happens to a development of terms like the unconscious, the object a, jouissance etc. because Lacan’s work is so complex, but looking back and in a very narrow way, all I can say (in my ignorance) is that something seems to happen between an oedipal Lacan of the N de P and a late Lacan of the knotting of RSI.
We talked a few weeks back about Miller’s text, the ‘Pass Bis’ which looks at two processes, one that moves towards the real and jouissance and another that accounts for desire (in a surprising way). A preoccupation with jouissance seems so appropriate at the moment … in so many ways, but despite contemporary discontents and symptoms, it seems we have psychoanalysis to look after the place of desire. Or at least, the term, I believe, has legal status in the Uk until 2011.
Re. psychosis, humour and the analyst: Was there humour in this question, I don’t know, but if there is, perhaps it has to do with re-inventing paternal function (in some way) … ?
My question now is, what does the analyst do when he or she acts as ’secretary’ or ‘editor’ to the analysand’s text?
Will ‘interpretation in reverse’ look any different to interpretation on the side of the analysand?

Comment by Chris Sands — December 14, 2008 @ 5:19 am

ps last sentence should be:
”Will ‘interpretation in reverse’ look any different to interpretation on the side of the analyst”

Comment by Chris Sands — December 14, 2008 @ 5:29 am

interpretation on the side of the analysand is interpretation in reverse…. I would say.

Comment by violet — December 15, 2008 @ 1:11 am

as a secretary - someone who assists in putting a narrative in order - assists in transcribing a history..over time..this then that, him then me, repeated and ordered, thus ordering, by the by, something of the uncontained drive, and noting significance.
Not as any kind of absolute other, but as a quiet and humble assistant who acknowledges their own mistakes.
this is often my job.

Comment by Sol — December 15, 2008 @ 3:27 am

From Miller’s “Interpretation in reverse”
“…the unconscious stands in between what I want to say and what I do say — as if the signifier was deflecting the programmed trajectory of the signified, and this is what gives ground to interpretation — as if the signifier was interpreting, in its own fashion, what I want to say. In this discrepancy Freud situated the ‘unconscious’ — as if for this wanting-to-say of mine, which is my ‘intention of signification’, another wanting-to-say was substituted, which would be that of the signifier itself and which Lacan designated as ‘the desire of the Other’.”

Comment by violet — December 15, 2008 @ 5:28 am

Violet, yes, re 109, had written ‘analyst’ instead of ‘analysand’, and had continued on the symposium, but I’ve a question, I think, which has to do with what might sometimes look like a convergence of two positions when ‘ordinary psychosis’ is a possibility.
Let’s say, the ’secretary’ or ‘editor’ busies himself or herself (sometimes) with practical concerns, and there may be much information to work on.
In a sense the information determines what kind of Other, but there may be some ‘punctuation’ which also looks (and feels) like interpretation, when this punctuation is interpreted.
In the summer seminar in Paris, there was much talk of something new offered by the CPCT’s in France. When what is offered is a brief intervention, in some way Lacanians seem to be offering part time secretarial skills. Despite this, huge emphasis was put on the analyst’s ‘know how’ and perhaps this work has to do with what practically can be offered and how this is linked to endings in sessions and with the work.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 15, 2008 @ 5:34 am

Violet, re. 112, then the unconscious stands in between what I intend and what happens in this instance. That is, was writing 113 while you wrote 112

Comment by Chris Sands — December 15, 2008 @ 5:42 am

indeed, whose unconscious is it…….. between 112 & 113? From an Other to an other, like in Seminar XVI?

Comment by violet — December 15, 2008 @ 8:18 am

from an Other to the other and viceversa

Comment by violet — December 15, 2008 @ 3:46 pm

Have been looking at JA Miller’s ongoing text in LacInk, are there plans to publish the seminar?

Comment by Chris Sands — December 16, 2008 @ 4:00 am

CS - Seminar XVI has been published, in French - the date is March 2006. And it may be in Spanish by now. Not in English.

Comment by admin — December 16, 2008 @ 11:05 am

and..?

Comment by Sol — December 19, 2008 @ 8:38 am

oh yes, christmas. I have a christmas tree up, it is at an angle, sloping towards the wall, and I’m happy for it.
I have the ingredients for gingerbread, for gifts for children, and, I’ll give you the menu (it’s brunch):
brandy snaps on a summer (though I’m freezing right now) fruit platter - blue/rasp/black/straw/berries, white peaches, nectarines, pomegranates, white (green) grapes, mangoes, nashi, passionfruit..s- goats cheese and roasted red capsicum and olive tarts; nori rolls; black (red) or green tea, or champagne.
A few people are dropping in at 11, later, after midday, we’ll be going down to the lake, and taking leftovers, and maybe swimming, or rugging up under a big tree.
Oh, christmas, god, language, woman, and food. Why, even when one tries to be relaxed about it, does it come on with its stressful effect?

Comment by Sol — December 19, 2008 @ 8:56 am

Denouncer believes in what s/he denounces more stronger than the believer!

Comment by Majid — December 20, 2008 @ 4:11 am

I can’t imagine what a sunny Christmas would be like and each year forget just how poor the light is this time of the year. Here, most days, we are living in the dark. Thanks to Violet, have started to look more closely at JAM’s ongoing ‘From an Other to the other’ text. I begin to see how this might be linked to references to ‘the Pass Bis’, but what I’ve noticed so far is the connection this seminar has with the ’subversion of the subject’ text. That is, I’ve got as far as an articulation of the graph of desire.

Comment by Chris Sands — December 20, 2008 @ 5:45 am

A Merry Christmas and a Very Happy New Year to all in the messageboard and to all in the Symposium - may all your wishes come true

Comment by perfume — December 21, 2008 @ 6:49 pm

Wonderful tree perfume!
Best wishes everyone

Comment by Sol — December 21, 2008 @ 10:04 pm

Thank you Sol!

Comment by perfume — December 22, 2008 @ 12:20 pm

Comment by alice — December 22, 2008 @ 1:29 pm

felizydads all

Comment by lucky — December 22, 2008 @ 11:09 pm

happy Christmas, Perfume, Sol, Lucky and Alice xxxx

Comment by Chris Sands — December 24, 2008 @ 5:52 pm

Message 118. Sol, is answering CS’ 117. about “JA Miller’s ongoing text in LacInk, are there plans to publish the seminar?”

Comment by admin — December 28, 2008 @ 4:47 pm

Yes, thankyou admin, if I recall, I was a bit drunk at the time, and wanted to ask..’and, what else have we to write?’
Hello everyone,
I’ve been reading seminar vii (at the lake) over the last few days.
I wonder what others make of this passage:
“It is on the level of good and bad will, indeed of the preference for the bad at the level of the negative therapeutic reaction, that Freud at the end of his thinking discovers once again the field of das Ding, and points out to us the space beyond the pleasure principle. It is an ethical paradox that the field of das Ding is rediscovered at the end, and that Freud suggests there that which in life might prefer death..”
(p. 104 Routledge)

Especially, where in Freud?
What do others think about the reference here to the negative therapeutic reaction?
(I think the paragraph prior to this, saying that bad will, rather than hate, informs ambivalence is important here..)
and how do others think about the posing of the ethical ‘paradox’ in terms of the late rediscovery?
And (as a footnote?!)..
Happy New Year Chris, Violet, Lucky, Alice, Majid, terry1, admin, ann, et al and thankyou for the conversations, over time and space.

Comment by sol — December 29, 2008 @ 2:45 am

hello Sol,
- by the lake sounds nice, but it’s all very fluey here!
I want to know what come before and after your passage, but think ‘negative therapeutic reactions’ pose such complex questions.
I know your question is more specific and asks where in Freud …
but what pops up for me are questions surrounding the pace of things.
With my own work, such as it is, I might see a ‘working through’ or a ‘working around’ some thing, but the proximity of flu sometimes seems to force another question.
I suppose psychoanalysis has to do with living, but the drive ’sees this’ as an ‘ethical paradox’.
Sorry, I think this is a poor response to good questions …

Comment by Chris Sands — December 30, 2008 @ 5:36 am

Hope you recuperate quickly and enjoy what you can of the rest..

Comment by sol — December 30, 2008 @ 8:39 am

‘In headaches and in worries,
vaguely life leaks away;
and Time will have his fancy,
to-morrow or to-day.’ -W.H. Auden
Haaaaappppppy Neeeeew Year for aaaaaaaaaaaall!

Comment by Majid — December 31, 2008 @ 3:21 am

A Very Happy New Year 2009 for Chris, Sol, Lucky, Alice, terry1, ann, et Majid!!!!!!

Comment by admin — December 31, 2008 @ 5:15 pm

Yes a happy new year to all. Was scrolling through ‘Lacan’ by Zizek in a bookshop at Christmas in London’s Trafalgar Square and saw a nice attribute to the ‘Idefatigable Josefina Ayerza’ as the last reference in the book. Well done Josefina your work is recognised. Others also think it’s the best website on the net.

Comment by Terry1 — January 5, 2009 @ 6:08 pm

Good on you Josefina.
Does anyone know if the Courtel clinic still exists?
I haven’t been able to find anything about it.
Or does anyone know how I could find out?
Alternatively does anyone know of any other inpatient clinics run from a psychoanalytic, and particularly Lacanian position, anywhere in the world?

Comment by sol — January 7, 2009 @ 4:40 am

as to impatient clinics run from a psychoanalytic, and particularly Lacanian position in the world, there is one in Canada run by Willy Apolon. Lacanians though, what they tend to do is schools - in London, in Paris, in Rome, in Madrid, in Argentina, in Brasil, in Venezuela…

Comment by violet — January 7, 2009 @ 12:45 pm

Thanks Violet,
I have read about the 388 clinic in Quebec, with Apollon aand Beregon (sp?) for psychotic young adults.
Do you know of any public clinics anywhere- not ‘live-in’ ones?
There is one in Australia - the practitioners come from a range of psychoanalytic perspectives, including some Lacanian, some Kleinian, some other..

Comment by sol — January 7, 2009 @ 10:26 pm

There is info about the CPCT’s in France on the WAP website and elsewhere I think.
Quite different because I’m not an analyst working alongside other analysts, but have had a little experience helping to set up independent projects in a hostile environment.
Being constantly under siege, it’s never enough to suggest this work is mainly authorized by people using the projects, but worse still, the work is easily isolated. Zizek sets up in opposition, subjective and objective violence, in his new book called ‘Violence’ and the ’subjective violence’ that these projects face amount to a segregation. Beneath a surface which calls itself ‘care in the community’ lurks a spectre of asylums, but we encounter opposition in the form of indifference and an insistence on protocol: ‘Where are your committees?’ …

Comment by Chris Sands — January 8, 2009 @ 5:09 am

Oh, thanks CS, what does CPCT stand for?
I am actually writing a grant proposal to go and visit some such places (if they exist), but they need to be english speaking, or I guess I could put in for some translator costs - difficult though.
Anyway it will probably come to nothing. I am just asking around.

Comment by sol — January 8, 2009 @ 9:03 am

Sol, les CPCT= Centres for Psychoanalytic Treatment and Consultation.
In the summer seminar in Paris there were presentations on the CPCT’s in English and I’d guess at least half the analysts working in these clinics speak English.
There would be addresses on the WAP online site that you could write to

Comment by Chris Sands — January 8, 2009 @ 9:21 am

Clarice Lispector anyone?

Comment by sol — January 25, 2009 @ 6:18 am

Clarice Lispector “My love, you don’t believe in the God, because we made a mistake when we humanized Him. We humanized Him because we did not understand Him, then it didn’t work out. I’m certain that He is not human. But although He’s not human, He sometimes makes us divine. Do you think –”

Comment by violet — January 25, 2009 @ 1:03 pm

I have fallen in love with the woman formally known as Clarice Lispector

Comment by sol — January 26, 2009 @ 4:45 am

oh my god, sol, so much love is dangerous

Comment by violet — January 26, 2009 @ 3:05 pm

aha!

Comment by sol — January 27, 2009 @ 6:05 am

Gosh Sol, Violet, I’ve ordered the books …

Comment by Chris Sands — January 27, 2009 @ 6:12 am

aha! x 2!
(short stories better than novels I think)

Comment by sol — January 27, 2009 @ 12:44 pm

i was thinking of humpty dumpty as god

Comment by lucky — February 3, 2009 @ 9:22 pm

intellectual copyrights

Comment by lucky — February 3, 2009 @ 9:24 pm

ha!

Comment by sol — February 5, 2009 @ 12:40 am

we are in a heat wave
our house is uninsulated and faces west
it’s quite unbearable.
We had to move out for a few days
and I have had a big project
and have been ill
(nothing compared to CS, hope you’re feeling better each day chris))
but want to say “i’m still here”

Comment by sol — February 5, 2009 @ 12:43 am

(Sol) Have been hearing about your heatwave on BBC.
I keep wondering about the effect of having to take time out on my work.
Now working in an isolated setting really is a problem, but in this instance all I can do is check this and that out without doing much.
I remember something Ann said, a while ago now, about work involving the analyst’s being and sometimes worry about this.

Comment by Chris Sands — February 5, 2009 @ 3:56 am

well maybe beyond being and I don’t know if worry can be there, and only some work.
Half of our state is on fire, the morgues are full and bodies are being stored in hospitals with lots of people missing and lots of people waiting and wanting to hear from them.
We are safe here, though the town is surrounded by forest and it’s frightening and grim for many.
It was 46 degrees this weekend - animals and frail people died from heat.

Comment by sol — February 8, 2009 @ 9:02 am

Just realized how bad it is from BBC news reports today.
It sounds quite dreadful, keep safe Sol

Comment by Chris Sands — February 8, 2009 @ 1:07 pm

Yes Sol, I also watch the horrible news wishing you are safe and sound in midst of such discomfort…
My family and friends in Argentina - Argentina shares a latitude with Australia - have been having a hard time — temperatures raising to 37/38 centigrades… no rain, the cows die and so… just frightening to realize how bad it could get

Comment by violet — February 8, 2009 @ 2:05 pm

cheers

Comment by sol — February 9, 2009 @ 6:18 am

Comment by violet — February 14, 2009 @ 9:30 pm

Where in the map. Sol? The red standing for more than 40º, the blue for colder, the white for in between

Comment by violet — February 14, 2009 @ 9:38 pm

oh, what a map!
I am down in the bottom right hand corner in Victoria.
But we just had the first bush-fire free weekend, and not so hot today.
I didn’t realise that Argentina was on the same latitude.
I think the fires and careening earth make the degrees of seperation between us all more material

Comment by sol — February 15, 2009 @ 6:23 pm

Sol, in the very red spot……..! the temperature in Argentina is being very warm this summer , as it reaches 37º, 38º.. it didn’t reach 40º, but there was no rain so the earth is extremely dry, the crops suffered and the animals - the famous cows that live in the fields, walk and eat grass, and this is how the meat is quite delicious…

Comment by violet — February 15, 2009 @ 8:26 pm

Aren’t farmers in Argentina now turning to soya?
It’s a vegetarian response, even if soya is most likely used as bulk food for cattle elsewhere

Comment by Chris Sands — February 16, 2009 @ 4:44 am

ps. mine was vegetarian response, no doubt farmers in Argentina have other things in mind

Comment by Chris Sands — February 16, 2009 @ 5:02 am

soya in Argentinian was the new thing, farmers did extremely well with soya, so the resented president punished them - raised the taxes to a point that they are loosing money - that’s a huge problem right now together with the wave of heat and the drought

Comment by violet — February 16, 2009 @ 11:26 am

We took away the avatars because they are too tiny… and the little images inside could not be seen And we stopped the messages in the forum because we cannot control the SPAM

Comment by admin — February 19, 2009 @ 7:20 pm