1. Comment by violet — February 18, 2010 @ 6:52 am

  2. my glass? fill it up…before i get cranky
  3. Comment by jampa — February 18, 2010

  4. violet i dont get it. You bandy the psychotic word around like any…
    Please tell me a bit of what you understand this to be
    Sophies Choice is HELL on screen
  5. Comment by jampa — February 18, 2010

  6. of the glass… did you see it has Nø100? that’s how I thought of offering a toast…
    of the psychotic word… I think this is the case with Sophie’s boyfriend, Nathan, very jealous of Stingo, however very sweet, she says of him that he is mentally ill, though a good person… what can you make of that, how does mentally ill translate? then comes the horrible “choice,” of course she is broken hearted, very sad, crazed. Sophie and Stingo make love, but while Stingo is sleeping Sophie returns to Nathan. Sophie and Nathan take cyanide…

    Comment by violet — February 18, 2010

  7. cure. treatment. practice.
    a cure by lOoOve
    (psychoanalysis or cyanide?)
    but not love how we think it
    love full of holes
    or crossed out
    but not crosses and noughts how we think them.
    not how we think.
    A toast to where we are not.

    Comment by sol — February 19, 2010 @ 9:37 pm

  8. “love full of holes or crossed…” may well fill up the half empty of the glass, jampa
    don’t get cranky, you can still drink it, like the anorexic, not that she doesn’t eat,drink… she eats, drinks nothing — right?

    Comment by violet — February 20, 2010 @ 2:12 am

  9. My troubles lately have caused me to take some time out (or so it seems)
    and it’s also time out from frames of reference like the word ‘psychotic’.
    The notion of clinical structure seemingly keeps alive a rapport where certain terms can be used despite the one by oneness of psychoanalysis. The Dalai Lama in an interview in the US proposes the emergence of the feminine in politics, when women are more likely to feel the suffering of others. He privileges this possibility and might read Encore, but the shift towards free clinics in France in the Lacanian world suggests compassion and a similar drift … ?

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 20, 2010 @ 9:46 am

  10. bugger me dead Chris… thank you.Am glad for your surrender of the word to the vernacular,
    am glad for you testifying to feminine empathy
    HHDL will not read Encore until translated into Tibetan
    and the drift towards compassion… can we believe in such a thing?

    Comment by jampa — February 20, 2010 @ 10:14 am

  11. love crossed out? what is effective love? it may be mastery of the gaps and lures

    Comment by jampa — February 20, 2010 @ 10:22 am

  12. it is for sol to say — what is love crossed out, sol… full of holes???????????

    Comment by rupert — February 20, 2010 @ 4:23 pm

  13. well what is it – when someone wants a treatment, or a psychoanalysis,
    a lover or a lovers’ pact – what do they anticipate?
    or when they think they are having it – uncensored, unbarred, full
    and fulfilling illuminating and true – ‘the real thing!’
    I’m not denying love not at all. But to take the idea away from it
    (to empty it out).

    Comment by sol — February 21, 2010 @ 2:09 am

  14. I started working last year in such a free clinic Chris. It’s very difficult
    for people to come along when there’s nothing symbolic to mark it
    as valuable for them. But it’s moving along.
    It was Dolto wasn’t it who used to
    ask children to pay for psychoanalysis? Some of their pocket money.
    To make it their own, and their own investment.

    Comment by sol — February 21, 2010 @ 2:11 am

  15. Sol, yes me too, but more recently we entertain some kind of sliding fee that can be out aside from time to time. In these circumstances it’s not hard to imagine all kinds of tinkering with the symbolic to make the work seem less prescriptive, less like some kind of set-up. But what was Dolto trying to do and what would Walt Disney have made of this ‘disavowal’ of childhood? Children’s work goes mostly unpaid in the western world, but why not a minimum wage to attend school or put up with a residential home in later life?

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 21, 2010 @ 11:41 am

  16. If so called called ‘productivity’ generally comes wrapped up with the superego (working to pay a mortgage etc), then some version of the ‘pass’ could work in relation to a minimum or more than minimal wage, whether premature or mature …?

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 21, 2010 @ 11:53 am

  17. Can you see the gravatars again Chris?
    I mean the tiny photos to the right here?

    Comment by sol — February 21, 2010 @ 9:25 pm

  18. There are many responses to this question Rupert (110)
    here is another:

    The holes, the noughts in love
    are the lack of response to the demand
    the 1’s (100’s) are sideways bars
    and the particular lack that the subject
    speaks in between his words.

    And do you have a response to it?

    Comment by sol — February 21, 2010 @ 11:01 pm

  19. Sol yes the little pictures have come back.
    Thought I’d changed mine on wordpress!

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 22, 2010 @ 2:33 am

  20. sol – chris – Sol – there is no little pictures on the messageboard, neither in the symposia — only when I log in to the admin site and hit dashboard I can see them… I’ll find out if it is me that has to alter them and how…

    Comment by admin — February 22, 2010 @ 3:22 am

  21. there are little pictures on the messageboard,I see them now…! What I know is that there is a way to eliminate them… I’ll find the way.

    Comment by admin — February 22, 2010 @ 10:48 am

  22. please check that the little pictures are gone – I think they are gone

    Comment by admin — February 23, 2010 @ 5:35 am

  23. There’s only holes there now admin!
    (no, there’s nothing)

    Comment by sol — February 23, 2010 @ 7:46 am

  24. there is no such thing as nothing

    Comment by jampa — February 23, 2010 @ 12:22 pm

  25. Are you sure?

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 23, 2010 @ 2:50 pm

  26. There are plenty of not-things supposed to exist and there is a void where they are subjectively determined to never have existed but there is never nothing anywhere Chris

    Comment by jampa — February 24, 2010 @ 2:29 am

  27. well what does the anorectic eat?

    Comment by sol — February 24, 2010 @ 3:25 am

  28. having been anorectic/bullimic, the stomach eats itself. But there are no figuratives here. As Lacan said, ‘there are no gaps in the real’
    Sadly, as usual, you will all misapprehend the real

    Comment by jampa — February 24, 2010 @ 6:49 am

  29. Without disagreeing with your experience Jampa
    for many there are ‘figuratives’ and they do
    ‘eat nothing’ – which is something

    But earlier – I was making a joke about ‘nothing’ being there
    in the white to the right – because there is
    obviously something there – nothing.

    Comment by sol — February 24, 2010 @ 10:51 am

  30. a kiss is also a nothing with sometimes surprising effects xx

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 24, 2010 @ 4:08 pm

  31. Got your joke dear sol
    puuurlease…. an absence of the imputed is not nothing….
    and i can insist this until the plenum come home
    so glad your kisses have meaning Chris
    i am content to be mistaken if i am but what might be
    true taking of ‘there are are no gaps in the real?’

    Comment by jampa — February 25, 2010 @ 2:28 am

  32. ‘an absence of the imputed is not nothing….’
    but it is, it is assumed to be something when it is nothing
    and the basis of sexual difference which is why
    we keep plugging it up – so there’s no gaps.

    Comment by sol — February 25, 2010 @ 6:11 pm

  33. and precisely why no-nothing entails a sexual revolution!

    Comment by jampa — February 26, 2010 @ 12:03 am

  34. best of luck with that!

    Comment by sol — February 26, 2010 @ 4:17 am

  35. dear absence what do you want but the flushing of every capillary until engorged twice the blood of your average cock and making nonsense of space….

    Comment by jampa — February 27, 2010 @ 12:47 pm

  36. neurosis is a myth of flaccid cumts

    Comment by jampa — February 27, 2010 @ 12:50 pm

  37. ‘I was famously in love with a woman who had no time to spare, not even a breath, for she dwelled in a place beyond time or the reach of anyone’s Rolodex, her every breath measured out of tanks of recycled air.’ (p7 Chronic City Jonathan Lethem)

    Comment by Chris Sands — February 27, 2010 @ 12:56 pm

  38. not breathing, dwelling

    Comment by jampa — February 27, 2010 @ 1:14 pm

  39. lets check
    you over Chris as i thought
    riddled with cunts
    find a suppurating, full one

    Comment by jampa — February 27, 2010 @ 1:47 pm

  40. it’s only the difference between one word and another-
    which ever ones you chose they’re yours jampa and
    I wonder why you get so reactive with me,
    i find it quite rude sometimes. But maybe, just
    as we are talking about, its the absence of
    the imputed other – I respond and violet doesn’t?

    Comment by sol — February 27, 2010 @ 10:50 pm

  41. often sol dear no-one replies but you are there!
    i apolgize to you and all
    I was last night very drunk,,,,,, and lonely
    why do i spoil for a fight when I’m most vulnerable?
    and sorry Chris especially
    you have taught me so much
    and yes, i have a huge crush on Violet

    Comment by jampa — February 28, 2010 @ 4:13 am

  42. well I am very fluttered, Sol calling me in, and Jampa calling me in, however what a scandal jampa, drunk and itemizing each one of your doings in solitude, did it have to do with my cup, the 100. one ? You didn’t have to fill it, see what it says… Half Empty — Half Full, of champagne… it was all about a toast — what did you pour in there, if I may ask?
    Chris, Sol, the little pictures came back with the updating of the message board, and they left – gone, like the holes in the real

    Comment by violet — February 28, 2010 @ 8:28 am

  43. Chris – of “the kiss that is also a nothing with sometimes surprising effects xx” how relevant is it to Freud’s mouth kissing itself, to Lacan’s clap of the one hand starting a count, 0=1…?
    Again, do the surprising effects remit to the Other —yourself?

    Comment by violet — February 28, 2010 @ 4:26 pm

  44. Is Merleau Ponty’s flesh of the world— here everything touches everything else— correspond directly to the real? much as, I’m quoting jampa “As Lacan said, there are no gaps in the real’?

    Comment by violet — March 1, 2010 @ 2:26 am

  45. thank you dearest yes yes yes
    flesh of the world
    i am not alone

    Comment by jampa — March 1, 2010 @ 3:00 am

  46. thanks Jampa,
    I like this board for that sometimes too-
    there’s someone here

    Comment by sol — March 1, 2010 @ 10:06 am

  47. Violet-
    like a butterfly
    I just read -
    the sign of the thief!

    Comment by sol — March 1, 2010 @ 10:07 am

  48. Well Sol, a lack of response to the demand means a lack of interest, so when you get bored words are “de trop”… as to the lack that the subject speaks in between words… “non solum” tedious “sed etiam” commonplace.
    What about getting physical? Sometimes it works…

    Comment by rupert — March 1, 2010 @ 10:17 pm

  49. Sol— I am fluttered, yes, and I am flattered, both things, like a butterfly and like Kantun: Phantom Thief

    Comment by violet — March 1, 2010 @ 10:31 pm

  50. words are often too much I think rupert. and what does it mean ‘works’?

    Comment by sol — March 3, 2010 @ 1:20 am

  51. Actually “works” is a pragmatic concept meaning a realistic approach to life, you know the “american way”.
    “Are you OK?” “Yes, sure, I’m OK…” or “Me OK, you OK?” I wonder where OK originates, ego ideal or ideal ego?
    So so Sol…

    Comment by rupert — March 3, 2010 @ 5:05 am

  52. When there’s reference to work or works 9or it works), we might sometimes stand back a little from any kind of pragmatism and consider where we stand with ‘work’. With contemporary art, ‘the work of art’ is at once a gestalt, implying both the function of art and an object (or what seems to stand in for an object); with Walter Benjamin on one side and Adorno on the other, insisting, following a history no longer bound to pragmatism that we take a break from the work of art and look at work in general. If contemporary art has a subject, it can only be
    stripped bare of pragmatism
    (by Duchamp and friends)

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 3, 2010 @ 8:24 am

  53. or the superego ?
    (you’d better be okay)
    (whereas I am more so so)

    Comment by sol — March 4, 2010 @ 2:43 am

  54. So so?
    Should we defend the superego by saying that it’s not always pragmatic or that pragmatism is sometimes so so without being so-so-Sol

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 4, 2010 @ 5:12 am

  55. ps I wish Josefina could supply lozenges (between M and ? on mac keyboard),
    they’re everywhere in Lacanian texts, but we can’t do them
    and have to suffer Lacanian sore throats!

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 4, 2010 @ 5:16 am

  56. à-propos lozenges
    Between less than ( ) is equality ( = )
    Identical symbols but carry a different name and meaning when embedded in a different language.

    Comment by K — March 4, 2010 @ 5:31 pm

  57. What do lozenges signify in Lacanian text ?

    Comment by K — March 4, 2010 @ 5:35 pm

  58. lozenges stand for, are a representation of the fantasm $<>a
    the fantasm you traverse

    Comment by violet — March 4, 2010 @ 8:32 pm

  59. Chris — why that you cannot do the lozenges, they ceratinly are there, in Macs, between (M) and (?)
    < (on tpo of a comma)
    >(on top of a period)

    Comment by violet — March 5, 2010 @ 2:02 am

  60. violet – are you using a mac computer ?

    in mathematical language,
    lozenge, point at left opening out to right symbol spoken as greater than

    I understand Lacan used symbols borrowed from maths to explain some of his ideas ?

    Comment by K — March 5, 2010 @ 8:33 am

  61. It’s that when I do the said lozenge disappears when I submit comment

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 5, 2010 @ 9:03 am

  62. You see there should be a lozenge between ‘do’ and ‘the’ above, but I don’t know why you can do it and I can’t.

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 5, 2010 @ 9:05 am

  63. this lozenge may work, < if so, I' ll try to explain

    Comment by K — March 5, 2010 @ 10:19 am

  64. I have nothing other than Macs — there are 3 Macs in this house

    K – your lozenge works, indeed, I can see it [< ]?

    Comment by violet — March 5, 2010 @ 6:38 pm

  65. can the 2 lozenges now appear ?

    Comment by K — March 5, 2010 @ 8:03 pmComment by K — March 5, 2010 @ 8:16 pm

  66. <><> <> <>

    Comment by rupert — March 6, 2010 @ 5:05 am

  67. Comment by Chris Sands — March 6, 2010 @ 11:39 am
  68. Well this mac is unique, cos as you can see above nothing happens when I do it!
    It’s there prior to submitting comment, then it vanishes.
    Such is life!

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 6, 2010 @ 11:41 am

  69. Chris — such is life! because a lozenge that doesn’t write itself? did you try looking into the preferences? and do you have leopard, and snow leopard…? I would suggest try again and again , like rupert did, make one lozenge and another one, do them many times, if you do too many admin will erase them , maybe the button needs to be trained, used………

    Comment by violet — March 6, 2010 @ 12:26 pm

  70. If I remember correctly, the opening lozenge was both visible on my home screen as I was typing and later appeared as the intended sign on the Lacan messageboard by

    Choose the System Preferences menu choose International choose Input Menu
    choose French Roman and choose SHOW INPUT MENU ON MENU BAR a small flag should show top right on the menu bar select the flag choose show keyboard viewer On the keyboard picture you will see the opening lozenge second row up second in from left That key on my computer is marked with a z for zebra but with the French keyboard viewer in operation allows the opening lozenge to appear on the website ? < < < < < I can t produce the closing lozenge as I do n t see it on the French keyboard viewer

    Comment by K — March 6, 2010 @ 1:05 pm

  71. >>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<
    Chris, what if you try writing, without the parenthesis [ & g t ; ] tight together
    or [ & l t ; ]
    you should be getting < which is >or <
    (I am not writing them tight together because I would be writing a lozenge

    Comment by violet — March 6, 2010 @ 1:33 pm

  72. will this work using the British Keyboard viewer ?

    Comment by K — March 6, 2010 @ 5:06 pm

  73. U.S. Extended keyboard

    Comment by K — March 6, 2010 @ 5:22 pm

  74. Sol, actually OK is not enough. You see I’m kind of Freudian, superego is old, sounds, ego-psychology (Zen and the art of motorcycle), now it’s cognitive psycho.
    Yes, pragmatism gave way to happy consumerism, pragmatism is dead, long live Google

    Comment by rupert — March 7, 2010 @ 1:44 am

  75. just wondering

    Comment by jampa — March 7, 2010 @ 3:47 pm

  76. wintel everything
    doesn’t like the lozzege either… as before

    Comment by jampa — March 7, 2010 @ 3:50 pm

  77. google lozzege Rupert lol

    Comment by jampa — March 7, 2010 @ 3:52 pm

  78. wintel everything, jampa? what is wintel?

    Comment by violet — March 10, 2010 @ 8:12 pm

  79. rupert lolles/

    Comment by rupert — March 11, 2010 @ 1:02 am

  80. K — I wonder if this can help——- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_and_American_keyboards

    Comment by violet — March 11, 2010 @ 3:13 pm

  81. violet – thanks

    Comment by K — March 11, 2010 @ 5:05 pm

  82. rupert the ’superego’ may be old
    but it still interrupts and is one
    of the first fields of the object as voice

    Comment by sol — March 12, 2010 @ 9:31 am

  83. the ‘greater than’ lozenges disappear
    when I submit them also Chris, it
    must be..something..I run OSX.
    So (K, 58) the fantasy traversed (violet, 56)
    here is greater than the subject and
    greater than a

    Comment by sol — March 12, 2010 @ 9:39 am

  84. the symbol of the sender with it’s intended meaning is deciphered as a different symbol by the receiver ? there are two different systems operating ? hidden our (direct) view ?

    Comment by K — March 13, 2010 @ 5:28 am

  85. Sol – how is the fantasm (fantasy) traversed… greater than the subject and greater than a……?
    let’s say that we have $<>a, ….through the traversing we will get to a<>$

    Comment by violet — March 13, 2010 @ 1:58 pm

  86. Yes mixed readings K, may be profitable, thankyou.
    violet – or that psychoanalysis in practice
    (wherein one might traverse) is greater than
    in theory.
    The a, having to be posed (theoretically)
    is delimited over the traverse..
    and the $ shifts..

    Comment by sol — March 14, 2010 @ 2:24 am

  87. Yes, sol – psychoanalysis in practice is better than in theory. However you need both, provided you want to be an analyst– not if you only want to be a patient
    The shifting of the $ and the a, happens close to the end of analysis, right?

    Comment by violet — March 21, 2010 @ 1:50 am

  88. I agree violet. Theory is very important
    but it is something less than, without a practice. I think this shifting has something to
    do with Lacan’s phrase ‘don’t give up on your desire’
    (maybe I am misquoting) The a is behind you, still with you,
    but you no longer blindly chase it like
    some unknown quarry. Which is the quarry, you or it?
    Sometimes that is unclear.
    Later, maybe it is near the end,
    there is it in a position (sic)
    ! best regards to all

    Comment by sol — March 22, 2010 @ 2:15 am

  89. So theory suddenly arrives, as an idea (like not giving up on desire) but as fresh as a daisy?

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 22, 2010 @ 5:38 am

  90. There’s a request for musical inspiration on symposium!

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 23, 2010 @ 4:56 am

  91. “Which is the quarry, you or it?” good question sol… … if desire is the basis of the action, much as desire is always the desire of an Other it will seek recognition by the Other’s desire — by the subject arising in the Other… “it” in “you” (it, for the subject of the ucs. you for the Other
    a question of being in the Other –

    Comment by violet — March 23, 2010 @ 3:13 pm

  92. ‘Quarry.. you or it?’ There’s something in the Upanishads about desire being like hanging over a precipice to lick honey off a razor blade!
    ‘A question of being in the Other’ somewhere Lacan uses the phrase ‘… when the subject realizes himself in the Other.’ Oh so suggestive… of a meditation leading to an affect. Or the experience of the analyst… Which for me is the puzzle of theory- so often suggestive of affect without quite delivering. But without these theoretical solicitations to affect would there be an appetite for analysis? Fondest regards to all

    Comment by jampa — March 25, 2010 @ 3:05 am

  93. with Lacan the subject is the subject of unconscious, right jampa? “whoever is talking” as Lacan described it – IT speaks in the Other, always
    desire as the basis for action it is the sactual path to the overcoming of narcissism, since desire is always the desire of the Other, because desire seeks recognition by the Other’s desire…
    As for the analyst, Lacan says in The Dir. of Treatment, “the analyst cures not so much by what he says and does than by what he is”…
    now you tell me what it is that we are, as such, an analyst – an Other, an objet a… semblance

    Comment by violet — March 26, 2010 @ 12:57 am

  94. Wow!
    I think you’re asking the wrong person… maybe Rupert has some answers
    As Peter Shaffer said “mam is a reed but a drinking reed…”
    i just hope anyone wanting to know Lacan is reading you Violet
    i don’t believe he meant half of what he said

    Comment by jampa — March 29, 2010 @ 2:57 am

  95. i am vacancy
    i am compassion or nothing

    Comment by jampa — March 29, 2010 @ 6:37 am

  96. jouissance is a substance… i concur and that is again
    jouissance is the stuff of love
    “the milk of human kindness”
    gotta defer to genius

    Comment by jampa — March 29, 2010 @ 6:43 am

  97. but then if jouissance is linked to pleasure and sometimes the other’s pleasure, there is surely what can’t be linked to pleasure also. There are times when suffering and jouissance can be separate
    so if suffering sometimes involves a jouissance
    suffering jouissance
    is sometimes
    suffering >< jouissance (above lozenges might not work but am trying out use of US keyboard)

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 30, 2010 @ 3:44 am

  98. How strange it lets me write >< but not
    and fourth line down in 96 should have had lozenge between suffering and jouissance

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 30, 2010 @ 3:47 am

  99. dear Admin please delete 98 and 99
    which are attempts to overcome keyboard disparity.
    Could you find out which keyboard Wordpress uses?

    Comment by Chris Sands — March 30, 2010 @ 6:12 am

  100. rupert (65) might have a clue towards effective lozenges

    Comment by K — March 30, 2010 @ 2:54 pm

  101. the jouissance of suffering… i am still alive… fuck knows how
    great word fuck…. means everything

    Comment by jampa — March 31, 2010 @ 1:49 am

  102. dear Chris, I erased 98 and 99… there’s a change in numbers though. hope it’s alright with you

    Comment by admin — April 1, 2010 @ 1:29 am

  103. yes jampa, you got #100……! so we toss again

    Comment by violet — April 1, 2010 @ 9:33 am

  104. tossed on the waves of the messages..
    here, in this place.
    Chris used to ask what kind of place this is.
    What do you think now chris with the new vision
    of your new mortality?

    Comment by sol — April 3, 2010 @ 12:28 am

  105. Sol I remember suggesting we all meet up, so despite Gerard Wajcman’s thoughts in latest journal , I think there is still a divide between this world and the next! Have made a few reference to the ‘Universal Eye’ on symposium

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 3, 2010 @ 2:31 am

  106. Ps Gerard Wajcman misses this point in an analysis of diminished boundaries in the contemporary world. The thought that we are all mortal seems Lacanian in the context of the Freudian

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 3, 2010 @ 2:38 am

  107. Chris I would love us to all meet up Your place? I remember a dinner party…. Could get wild

    Comment by jampa — April 3, 2010 @ 6:02 am

  108. can’t wait to see you at Chris’s party violet

    Comment by jampa — April 3, 2010 @ 1:09 pm

  109. Yes jampa, I’ll wear a white georgette dress and a flower, black, and high heel shoes as if I wasn’t tall enough, I love to wear heels

    Comment by violet — April 3, 2010 @ 11:10 pm

  110. I’ll wear a look of surprise!

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 4, 2010 @ 3:10 am

  111. date? time? Directions?

    Comment by sol — April 4, 2010 @ 3:24 am

  112. I think the premise for this party is Gerard Wajcman’s disolving boundaries

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 4, 2010 @ 8:34 am

  113. It could be at his place?

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 4, 2010 @ 8:35 am

  114. haha
    you love heels violet?? me too somehow they forestall the dying life

    Comment by jampa — April 4, 2010 @ 11:41 am

  115. someone once said, do you know why women wear heels… ? women wear heels for men to protect them

    Comment by violet — April 5, 2010 @ 12:28 am

  116. Chris, Wajcman is arriving the 16th, he’ll love to read of his new book being talked about in here

    Comment by violet — April 5, 2010 @ 12:30 am

  117. I know his English isn’t good, but it would be nice to hear what he has to say here as some of us are, alas, far from NY

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 5, 2010 @ 1:41 pm

  118. what is the black flower violet?
    what flower is black?
    a very dark violet..or?

    Comment by sol — April 6, 2010 @ 7:13 am

  119. could it be that sometimes a flower is just a flower, sol? I bought it a few days ago — of very light silk, it is so light you blow the petals and they move. I also see now it is not black, it is blue marine.

    Comment by violet — April 6, 2010 @ 11:59 am

  120. against white georgette in your elevated state? As i recline on the sofa drunk as a skunk… i can taste it

    Comment by jampa — April 7, 2010 @ 3:40 am

  121. Oh! I assumed it a fantasy outfit but it’s an actual one.
    Yes violet like gertrude stein said..a (flower) is a (flower) x 3.
    But I don’t know that she meant quite that.

    Comment by sol — April 7, 2010 @ 4:02 am

  122. Est-ce que il y a de personne qui a l’article”Donc”de Jacques-Alain Miller?
    Merci beaucoup!

    Comment by Nicolas — April 8, 2010 @ 8:09 am

  123. Have put something new on symposium, I hope not toooooo wordy!

    Comment by Chris Sands — April 9, 2010 @ 10:21 am

  124. What did Gertrude Stein mean…?
    And we also have Freud’s “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…” what did he actually mean?

    Comment by violet — April 10, 2010 @ 1:19 am

  125. “Donc” (Therefore) is a Jacques-Alain Miller whole course, Nicolas, unpublished, from 1993-1994.
    In Paris ask Bernard Cremniter, he used to send them.

    Comment by admin — April 10, 2010 @ 8:43 pm

  126. well in your case violet it was a flower with the name flower,
    in Gertrude’s I think it was about the surface of things
    and in Freud’s, he was probably just due for a holiday..
    I read him saying it with a sigh..

    Comment by sol — April 11, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

  127. What a lovely configuration Sol… I can only conceive of doing such an appealing act through “in you more than you”
    I don’t know about the others

    Comment by violet — April 12, 2010 @ 1:22 am

  128. ‘For we are where we are not’ (Pierre-Jean Jouve, Lyrique)

    Comment by sol — April 13, 2010 @ 8:14 am

  129. So it wasn’t Lacan that said that… Sol?

    Comment by violet — April 16, 2010 @ 2:04 am

  130. It was a rewording of Freud wasn’t it,
    and yes Lacan said it, but according to
    Bachellard Jouve wrote this down prior. But it all circulates,
    because of what
    it says doesnt it?

    Comment by sol — April 16, 2010 @ 6:50 pm

  131. beautiful, sol… and it gives so much sense to the subject being IT

    Comment by violet — April 17, 2010 @ 10:30 am

  132. and where is jampa? if he kept his promise he should be reclined on the sofa drunk as a skunk…

    Comment by violet — April 19, 2010 @ 9:16 pm

  133. still! That would be 12 days now.
    how is it Jampa?

    Comment by sol — April 20, 2010 @ 7:16 am

  134. and where and how is lucky?

    Comment by sol — April 21, 2010 @ 7:39 am

  135. lucky was insisting with the forum, putting up images, I’m glad that they are there, but at a certain point he stopped, and , well… that’s what I know
    I am on my way to the WAP Congress and to The Paris-NY Lacan Seminar, going through the ASHES.

    Comment by violet — April 22, 2010 @ 7:36 pm

  136. good travels violet

    Comment by sol — April 22, 2010 @ 11:48 pm

  137. Thank you Sol!

    Comment by violet — April 23, 2010 @ 3:26 am

  138. I made it through the ashes — coming back from Paris was 9.40 hours — we flew over Spain and Portugal to cross the Atlantic from there

    Comment by violet — May 9, 2010 @ 3:58 am

  139. Good news, and the congress and seminar violet, what were your impressions, thoughts, ideas?

    Comment by sol — May 9, 2010 @ 9:43 am

  140. The Congress consisted of a lot of friends talking in different rooms at the same time, so you are a bit here, a bit there, and while you go from here to there many people say hello – too many – so much the social thing, the papers were good, and I liked the Paris-USA Seminar.

    Comment by violet — May 14, 2010 @ 6:47 pm

  141. And the party………? and jampa? where is he, setting up a party and running away? I remember now, he is reclining on the sofa drunk as a skunk

    Comment by violet — May 16, 2010 @ 9:56 pm

  142. a party as a fiction
    at the heart of truth..
    what is our favorite fictions of the night?

    Comment by sol — May 19, 2010 @ 5:14 am