Difference between revisions of "Seminar V"
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
{{V}} | {{V}} | ||
− | The | + | The [[formation]]s of the [[unconscious]] are those circumstances in which the [[law]]s of the [[unconscious]] are most discernible: the [[joke]], the [[dream]], the [[symptom]], the [[lapsus]] ([[parapraxis]]). [[Freud]] referred to the fundamental mechanisms involved in the [[formation]]s of the [[unconscious]] as [[condensation]] and [[displacement]], which [[Lacan]] redefines as [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]]. With the former, the play of [[signifier]]s creates sense in nonsense in relation to [[truth]]. The latter reveals the [[lack]] of a [word]], "an item of waste sent like a ball between [[code]] and [[message]]." In this [[lack]] [[substitute]] [[word]]s appear and function like "the [[metonymic]] ruins of the [[object]]." |
− | |||
− | The subject is dependent on the recognition of the Other who embodies "the legitimacy of the code," he alone can ratify a word as a joke, as stupidity or as madness. With the Other, Lacan moves on to the analysis of the Oedipus complex. Three stages structure the constitution of the subject. First, the paternal metaphor acts intrinsically on account of the primacy given to the phallus by culture. Then, the father intervenes as the one who deprives the mother: to her he addresses the message "You will not reintegrate your product" - the child as phallic object. The child receives "a message on the message," in the form of "You will not sleep with your mother" that liberates and deprives him of the object of his desire. From the alternative "To be or not to be the phallus," he can move to the alternative "To have it or not to have it." The third moment - the exit out of the Oedipus complex - requires the intervention of the permissive and generous father who, preferred over the mother, gives birth to the idea of the ego. It is in this context that the problems of becoming boy or girl - of the inverted Oedipus complex are raised. | + | At the junction between [[psychoanalysis]] and [[linguistics]], [[Lacan]] wants to [[formalize]] the primordial [[law]]s of the [[unconscious]] that [[Freud]] had uncovered. His project is to define a [[topology]] of the levels of functioning of the signifier in the subject by elaborating the [[graph]]s that, under the generic name of [[Graph of Desire]], will be at the core of "[[The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious]]" written in 1960 and published in 1966 in <i>[[Écrits]]</i>. Here the key concept is that of [[desire]], and [[Lacan]]'s [[dialectic]] of [[desire]] is quite distinct from [[Hegel]]'s. The Graph of Desire will serve as a [[topology]] of the different steps constitutive of the [[subject]]. "It is precisely because desire is articulated that it is not articulable" in a [[signifying chain]]. [[Slavoj Zizek]] commenting on this formulation argues that [[subject]] is not substance, "it has not substantial positive being in itself, being caught between 'not yet' and 'no longer'. The [[subject]] never is, it will have been - either it is not yet here or it is no longer here, since there is only a trace of its absence." |
− | Lacan plays with the term "insistence" in order to recall repetition, the characteristic of the signifying chain in the unconscious. "The unconscious is neither primordial nor instinctual; what it knows about the elementary is but the elements of the signifier." In a previous writing, "The Agency of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason since Freud," he defines the unconscious as a memory that can be compared to that of modern thinking-machines where the chain that insists on reproducing itself in the transference can be found, and which is the chain of dead desire. | + | |
− | In "The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious," written in 1960, Lacan states that "it is not the law that bars the subject's access to <i>jouissance</i> but pleasure." In 1966 he will add a final sentence: "Castration means that <i>jouissance</i> must be refused, so that it can be reached on the inverted ladder (<i>échelle inversée</i>) of the Law of desire." | + | The [[subject]] is dependent on the recognition of the [[Other]] who embodies "the legitimacy of the code," he alone can ratify a word as a [[joke]], as stupidity or as madness. With the [[Other]], [[Lacan]] moves on to the [[analysis]] of the [[Oedipus complex]]. Three stages [[structure]] the constitution of the [[subject]]. First, the paternal metaphor acts intrinsically on account of the primacy given to the [[phallus]] by [[culture]]. Then, the father intervenes as the one who deprives the [[mother]]: to her he addresses the [[message]] "You will not reintegrate your product" - the [[child]] as [[phallic]] [[object]]. The [[child]] receives "a [[message]] on the [[message]]," in the form of "You will not sleep with your mother" that liberates and deprives him of the object of his [[desire]]. From the alternative "To be or not to be the [[phallus]]," he can move to the alternative "To have it or not to have it." The third moment - the exit out of the [[Oedipus complex]] - requires the intervention of the permissive and generous father who, preferred over the [[mother]], gives birth to the idea of the [[ego]]. It is in this context that the problems of becoming boy or girl - of the inverted [[Oedipus complex]] are raised. |
+ | |||
+ | [[Lacan]] plays with the term "[[insistence]]" in order to recall repetition, the characteristic of the [[signifying chain]] in the [[unconscious]]. "The unconscious is neither primordial nor instinctual; what it knows about the elementary is but the elements of the signifier." In a previous writing, "[[The Agency of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason since Freud]]," he defines the unconscious as a memory that can be compared to that of modern thinking-machines where the chain that insists on reproducing itself in the [[transference]] can be found, and which is the [[chain]] of [[dead]] [[desire]]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | In "[[The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious]]," written in 1960, [[Lacan]] states that "it is not the law that bars the [[subject]]'s access to <i>[[jouissance]]</i> but [[pleasure]]." In 1966 he will add a final sentence: "[[Castration]] means that <i>[[jouissance]]</i> must be refused, so that it can be reached on the inverted ladder (<i>échelle inversée</i>) of the [[Law]] of [[desire]]." | ||
"The signification of the phallus" (<i>Écrits: A Selection</i>) is a lecture given at the Max Planck Institute in Munich in 1958. All the research accomplished during <i>La relation d'objet</i> and <i>Les formations de l'inconscient</i> culminates here, and serves as an introduction to <i>Le désir et son interpretation</i><br> | "The signification of the phallus" (<i>Écrits: A Selection</i>) is a lecture given at the Max Planck Institute in Munich in 1958. All the research accomplished during <i>La relation d'objet</i> and <i>Les formations de l'inconscient</i> culminates here, and serves as an introduction to <i>Le désir et son interpretation</i><br> | ||
− | The alternative seems ineluctable: either the Mother or the Father. To choose the Mother means to be condemned to the dependency of demand, while the Father constitutes the access to desire, hence to salvation. If the Father must be preferred to the Mother, if the Father is the origin and the representative of culture (and of the Law), it is because he possesses the phallus that he can give or refuse. The absolute primacy of the phallus - the single emblem of Man - has become a real doctrinal (perhaps dogmatic) basis of Lacanian theory: "The phallus is the signifier of | + | The alternative seems ineluctable: either the [[Mother]] or the [[Father]]. To choose the [[Mother]] means to be condemned to the dependency of [[demand]], while the [[Father]] constitutes the access to [[desire]], hence to salvation. If the [[Father]] must be preferred to the [[Mother]], if the [[Father]] is the origin and the representative of [[culture]] (and of the [[Law]]), it is because he possesses the [[phallus]] that he can give or refuse. The absolute primacy of the [[phallus]] - the single emblem of Man - has become a real doctrinal (perhaps dogmatic) basis of Lacanian theory: "The [[phallus]] is the [[signifier]] of [[signifier]]s, the privileged signifier of that mark in which the role of the logos is joined with the advent of [[desire]]," its function "touches on its most profound rapport: that in which the Ancients embodied the <i>Nous</i>, the Mind, and the <i>Logos</i>, discourse, reason." Why such a privilege? "This [[signifier]] is chosen as the most tangible element in the real of sexual copulation; it is the most symbolic in the literal sense," since "it is equivalent to the logical copula." Moreover, "by virtue of its turgidity, it epitomizes the image of the vital flow as it is transmitted in generation." [[Freud]] says, there is only one libido, masculine in nature. Later, [[Lacan]] will assert that "[[there is no such thing as sexual rapport]]," <i>[[il n'y a pas de rapport sexuel]]</i>, in the sense of proportion or relation: one sex counts for both sexes. Thus the [[phallus]] can only appear as veiled. |
1957-1958 | 1957-1958 |
Revision as of 21:56, 21 June 2007
<slides12> name=Seminar hideAll=true fontsize=100% hideFooter=false showButtons=true hideMenu=false hideHeading=false
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII XIII XIV XV XVI XVII XVIII XIX XX XXI XXII XXIII XXIV XXV XXVI XXVII Index
</slides12>
|