Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 313

THESEMINAROFJACQUESLACAN

BOOKX

ANXIETY

19621963

TranslatedbyCormacGallagherfromuneditedFrenchtypescripts

FORPRIVATEUSEONLY

14.11.62 Seminar1:Wednesday14November1962

Iamgoingtospeaktoyouthisyearaboutanxiety.Someonewho isnotatalldistantfrommeinourcircle,neverthelessletme seetheotherdayhissurpriseatthefactthatIchosethis subjectwhichdidnotseemtohimtobesomethingthathadall thatmuchtooffer.ImustsaythatIwillhavenotroublein provingthecontrarytohim.Inthemassofquestionsthatare proposedtousonthissubject,Iwillhavetomakeverysevere choices.ThatiswhyIwilltryfromtodaytothrowyouintothe work.Butalreadythisquestionseemedtometopreservethe traceofsomenaivetyorotherwhichhasneverbeenchecked becauseitseemedtoindicateabeliefthatitisbychoicethat eachyearIpickonasubject,likethat,whichappears interestingtometocontinueonsomesortofidlechatter.No. Asyouwillsee,Ithink,anxietyisverypreciselythemeeting pointwhereyouwillfindwaitingeverythingthatwasinvolvedin mypreviousdiscourseandwhere,together,thereawaitacertain numberoftermswhichmayappearnottohavebeensufficiently connectedupforyouuptothepresent.Youwillseeonthis terrainofanxietyhow,bybeingmorecloselyknottedtogether, eachonewilltakeitsplacestillbetter.Iamsayingstill better,becauserecentlyitbecamecleartome,inconnection withwhatwassaidaboutphantasyatoneofthesesocalled provincialmeetingsofourSociety,thatsomethingconcerning thisveryessentialstructurecalledphantasy,hadeffectively (2)takenitsplaceinyourminds.Youwillseethatthatof anxietyisnotfarfromit,becauseitiswellandtrulythe same.Ihaveputontheblackboardforyoueventhough,after all,ablackboardisnotverybigafewlittlesignifiersto guideyouortohelpyourmemory:perhapsnotalltheonesthatI wouldhavewanted,butafterallitisjustaswellnottooverdo theschemas. Youwillseethisbecomingclearerinalittlewhile.Theyform twogroups,thisoneandthatonethisonewhichIwill complete.Ontheright,thisgraphwhichIapologisefor pesteringyouwithforsolong,butwhichitisallthesame necessarybecauseitsvalueasareferencepointwillIthink appearevermoreefficaciousforyouformetorecallthe structurethatitoughttoevoketoyoureyes.

Moreoveritschokepearshapewhichperhapshasneverstruckyou isnotperhapsevokedherebychanceontheotherhand,even thoughlastyearinconnectionwiththelittletopological

whichImadesomuchof,somepeoplecouldseebeingsuggestedto theirmindssomeformsofthefoldingbackofembryological leaves,eventhelayersofthecortex,nobody,inconnectionwith theatoncebilateralandinterlinkedarrangementoforientated intercommunicationofthisgraph,nobodyhaseverevokedinthis connectionthesolarplexus.OfcourseIamnotclaimingbythat todeliveritssecretsto _____you,butthiscuriouslittle homology is perhaps not as external as one might think and deserved to be recalled at the beginning of a discourse on anxiety. Anxiety,Iwouldsay,uptoacertainpointtheremarkbywhichI introducedmydiscoursealittleearlier,theonemadebyoneof thepeopleclosetome,ImeaninourSociety,anxietydoesnot seemtobewhatstiflesyou,Imeanaspsychoanalysts. And nevertheless,itisnottoomuchtosaythatitoughttoin,what Imightcall,thelogicofthings,namelyoftherelationship thatyouhavewithyourpatient.Afteralltosensewhatthe subjectcantolerate,intermsofanxiety,issomethingthatputs youtothetestateveryinstant.Itmustthereforebesupposed that,atleastforthoseamongyouwhoareformedinthe technique,thethinghasendedupbyslippingintoyour wayofregulatingmattersinthemostimperceptibleway,itmust besaid.Itisnotexcluded,andthankGodforit,thatthe analyst,providedheisalreadydisposedtoit,Imeanbyvery gooddispositionstobeananalyst,thattheanalystatthe beginningofhispracticeshouldexperiencesomeanxietyfromhis firstrelationswiththepatientonthecouch. Againitwouldbewelltotouchinthisconnectiononthe questionofthecommunicationofanxiety.Isthisanxietythat youareable,itappears,toregulatesowellinyourselves,to dampdownthefactthatitguidesyou,isitthesameasthatof thepatient? Whynot?ItisaquestionthatIamleavingopenforthemoment, (4)perhapsnotforverylong,butwhichitisworthwhileopening upfromthebeginning,evenifitisnecessarytohaverecourse toouressentialarticulationsinordertogiveitavalid response,thereforetowaitforamomentatleast,inthe distances,inthedetoursthatIamgoingtoproposetoyouand whicharenotabsolutelybeyondthecapacityofthosewhoaremy

14.11.62

listenerstoforecast.Becauseifyouremember,already preciselyinconnectionwithanotherseriesofsocalled Journesprovincialeswhichwerefarfromhavinggivenmeasmuch satisfaction,inconnectionwithwhichinasortofinclusion, parenthesis,anticipation,inmydiscourseoflastyearIthought Ishouldwarnyouandprojectaheadaformulaindicatingthe relationbetweenessentialanxietyandthedesireoftheOther. Forthosewhowerenotthere,Irecallthefable,theapologue, theamusingimageofitwhichIthoughtIoughttopresentbefore youforamoment:puttingontheanimalmaskwhichthewizardof thegrottoofthethreebrotherscovershimselfwith,Iimagined myselfbeforeyouconfrontedwithanotheranimal,thisonereal andsupposedtobegiganticonthisoccasion,thatofthepraying mantis.AndmoreoversinceIdidnotknowwhatkindofmaskI waswearingyoucaneasilyimaginethatIhadsomereasonnotto bereassured,inthecasewherebychancethismaskwouldnot havebeenunsuitablefordrawingmypartnerintosomeerrorabout (5) myidentity,thethingbeingwellunderlinedbythefactthat Ihadaddedthatintheenigmaticmirroroftheocularglobeof theinsectIdidnotseemyownimage.Thismetaphorpreserves allitsvaluetodayanditiswhatjustifiesthefactthatatthe centreofthesignifiersthatIputonthisblackboard,yousee thequestionwhichIintroducedalongtimeagoasbeingthe hingebetweenthetwolevelsofthegraphinsofarasthey structurethisrelationshipofthesubjecttothesignifierwhich asregardssubjectivityappearstometobethekeyofwhat introducesintoFreudiandoctrinetheChevuoi?,"Whatdoyou want?".Pushalittlebitmorethefunctioning,theinsertionof thekey,andyouhave"Whatdoeshewantofme?.Quemeveutil?, withtheambiguityaboutthemethatFrenchpermitsbetweenthe indirectanddirectcomplement:notjustonly"Whatdoeshewant fromme?,Queveutilmoi?",butsomethinginsuspensewhich directlyconcernsthemoiwhichisnotlike"Howdoeshewant me?,Commentmeveutil?",butwhichis"Whatdoeshewantwith respecttothisplaceoftheego?Queveutilconcernantcette placedumoi?",whichissomethinginsuspensebetweenthetwo levels,$o)dandei(o),thetwopointsofreturnwhich ineachonedesignatesthecharacteristiceffectandthedistance whichissoessentialtoconstructatthesourceofeverything intowhichwearenowgoingtoadvance,adistancewhichrenders atoncehomologousandsodistincttherelationbetweendesire andnarcissisticidentification.Itisintheoperationofthe dialecticwhichlinksthesetwolevelssocloselythatweare goingtoseetherebeingintroducedthefunctionofanxiety,not thatitisinitselfthemainspringofit,butthatitisbythe (6) phasesofitsappearancewhatallowsustoorientate ourselvesinit.SothereforewhenIposedthequestionofyour relationsasananalysttoanxiety,aquestionwhichprecisely leavesinsuspensethisone:whoareyousparing?Theother,no doubt,butalsojustasmuchyourselfandeventhoughthesetwo sparingsoverlaptheyshouldnotbeallowedtobecomeconfused. Thisisevenoneoftheaimswhichattheendofthisdiscourse willbeproposedtoyou. ForthemomentIamintroducingthis indicationofmethodthatwhatwearegoingtohavetodrawin termsofateachingfromthisresearchonanxiety,istoseethe privilegedpointatwhichitemerges.Itistobemodelledonan

14.11.62

orographyofanxietywhichleadsusdirectlytoareliefwhichis thatofthetermtotermrelationshipswhichisconstitutedby thismorethancondensedstructuralattemptwhichIthoughtI shouldmaketheguideofourdiscourseforyou. Ifyouknowthenhowtocometotermswithanxiety,itwill alreadymakeusadvancetotrytoseehow,andmoreover,Imyself wouldnotbeabletointroduceitwithoutcomingtotermswithit insomewayorotherandthatisthedangerperhaps:Imustnot cometotermswithittooquickly:thisdoesnotmeaneitherthat inanywaywhatsoever,bysomepsychodramaticgameorother,my goaloughttobetothrowyou(vousjeter)intoanxietywiththe playonwordsthatIalreadymadeaboutthisjeofthejeter. EveryoneknowsthatthisprojectionoftheIintoanintroduction toanxietyisforsometimetheambitionofaphilosophy describedasexistentialisttogiveititsname.Thereareno (7) lackofreferencessincethetimeofKierkegaard,Gabriel Marcel,Chestov,Berdiaefandsomeothersnotallofthemhave thesameplacenoraretheyallasusable.Butatthebeginning ofthisdiscourse,Iwouldliketosaythatitseemstomethat thisphilosophyinsofaras,fromitspatron,thefirstnamed, tothosewhosenamesIadvancedlater,itisundoubtedlymarked byacertaindegradation.ItseemstomethatIseethis philosophymarked,Iwouldsay,bysomesortofhaste unrecognisedbyitself,marked,Iwouldsay,byacertain disarraywithrespecttoareferencewhichistheonetowhichat thesameepochthemovementofthoughtwasverycloseto,the referencetohistory.Itisfromadisarray(dsarroi),inthe etymologicalsenseofthisterm,withrespecttothisreference thatthereisbornandisprecipitatedexistentialistreflection.

Thehorseofthought,Iwouldsay,toborrowfromlittleHansthe objectofhisphobia,thehorseofthoughtwhichimaginesitself foratimetobetheonepullingthecoachofhistory,bucksall ofasudden,goesmad,collapsesandgivesitselfovertothis greatKrawallmachentoreferourselvesagaintolittleHanswho givesoneoftheseimagestohisfavouritefear.This,isindeed whatIamcallingherethemovementofhasteinthebadsenseof theterm,thatofdisarray.Anditisforthatreasonthatitis farfrombeingwhatinterestsusmostinthelineofdescendance, thelineofdescendanceofthoughtthatwehavepinpointedjust now,likeeveryoneelsemoreover,bythetermexistentialism.

(8) Moreoveronecouldremarkthatthelatestcomer,andnotone oftheleastgreat,MonsieurSartre,exertshimselfquite explicitlynotsimplytogetthishorsebackonhisfeet,butco puthimagainbetweentheshaftsofhistory.Itispreciselyin functionofthisthatMonsieurSartrehasbusiedhimselfagood deal,hasquestionedhimselfagooddeal,aboutthefunctionof seriousness(dusrieux).ThereisalsosomeonewhomIdidnot putintheseriesandtherefore,becauseIamsimplyapproaching, andtouchingatthestartonwhatisinthebackgroundofthe picture,thephilosopherswhotakenoteofthepointthatwehave gotto:"Willtheanalystsbeabletomeasureuptowhatwesay aboutanxiety?",thereisHeidegger.Itisquitecertainthat withtheusethatImadeaboveofthepunonthewordjeter,it

14.11.62 wasindeedtohim,tohisoriginalderelictionthatIwas closest.

Thebeingfordeath,tocallitbyitsname,whichistheaccess pathbywhichHeidegger,inhisbrokenoffdiscourse,leadsusto hispresent,enigmaticinterrogationonthebeingofthe existent,Ibelieve,doesnotreallypassbywayofanxiety.He hasnamedthelivingreferenceoftheHeideggerianquestion:it isfundamental,itisabouteverything,itisabouttheone,it isabouttheomnitudeofthehumaneveryday:itisconcern(le souci).Ofcourse,fromthispointofviewitcouldnotbe foreigntous,anymorethanconcernitself.AndsinceIhave calledheretwowitnessesSartreandHeidegger,Iwillnot deprivemyselffromcallingonathird,insofarasIdonot believehimunworthytorepresentthosewhoarehereinthe (9) processalsoofobservingwhatheisgoingtosay,anditis myself..ImeanthatafterallfromthetestimoniesthatIhad againinrecenthours,ofwhatIwouldcalltheexpectation itisnotjustyour'sthatIamspeakingaboutinthiscase thereforeundoubtedly,Ihadthesetestimonies,butthatthere cametomelasteveningaworkwhosetextIhadaskedoneofyou for,indeedtoorientatemyselfinconnectionwithaquestion thathehimselfhadposedme,aworkwhichIhadtoldhimIwas waitingforbeforebeginningmydiscoursehere. Thefactthatitwasthusbroughttomeinawayontime,evenif Ihavenotbeenabletogettoknowitintheinterval, since afterallIalsocomehereontimetorespondtoyour expectation,isthisamovementthatislikelyinitselftogive risetoanxiety?Withouthavingquestionedthepersonconcerned, Idonotbelieveitwithregardtomyself.Indeed,Ican respond,inthefaceofthisexpectationwhichisnevertheless designedtoweighmedownwithsomesortofweight,thatthisis not,IbelieveIcansayitfromexperience,thedimensionwhich initselfgivesrisetoanxiety.Iwouldevensayonthe contrarythatIwantedtomakethislastreference,whichisso closethatitmayappearproblematictoyou,inordertoindicate toyouhowIintendtoputyoutowhatismyquestionfromthe beginning,atwhatdistancetospeaktoyouaboutitwithout puttingitimmediatelyintoacupboard,withoutleavingitina crazystateeither,atwhatdistanceisthisanxietytobeput? (10) Wellthen,faith,attherightdistance,Imeantheone whichdoesnotinanycaseplaceustooclosetoanyone,at preciselythisfamiliardistancewhichIevokedforyoubytaking theselastreferences,theonetomyinterlocutorwhobroughtme mypaperatthelastminuteandtheonetomyselfwhomusthere takeariskinmydiscourseonanxiety. Wearegoingtotrytotuckthisanxietyunderourarms.Itwill notbeanymoreindiscreetforallthat.Thiswillreallyleave usattheopaquedistance,believeme,whichseparatesusfrom thosewhoareclosesttous.Sothen,betweenthisconcernand thisseriousnessandthisexpectation,areyougoingtobelieve thatthisisthewaythatIwantedtocircumscribeit,tocorner it?Wellthen,disabuseyourselves.IfItracedoutinthe

middleofthreetermsalittlecirclewithits separatedarrows,itistotellyouthatifitis therethatyoulookforit,youwillquicklysee thatthebirdhasflownifindeeditwasever there.Itisnottobesoughtinthemiddle. Inhibitions, symptoms and anxiety,such the is title, the slogan beneathwhichfortheanalystthereappearsinhismemory,there remainsmarkedthefinaltermofwhatFreudarticulatedonthis subject. TodayIamnotgoingtogointothetextofInhibitions,symptoms andanxietybecauseasyouhaveseenfromthebeginningIhave decidedtodaytoworkwithoutanet,andthereisnosubject wherethenetoftheFreudiandiscourseiscloser,inshort,to givingusafalsesenseofsecuritybecauseprecisely,whenwe (11)gointothistext,youwillseewhatistobeseenin connectionwithanxiety,thatthereisnonet,becauseprecisely asregardsanxiety,eachmesh,asImightappropriatelyputit, hasnomeaningexceptpreciselybyleavingthevoidinwhich anxietyis. Inthediscourse,thankGod,ofInhibitions,symptomsand anxiety,everythingisspokenaboutexceptanxiety.Doesthat meanthatonecannotspeakaboutit?Workingwithoutanet evokesatightropewalker.Iamtakingasaropeonlythetitle Inhibitions,symptomsandanxiety.Itleaps,asImightsay,to understandingthatthesethreetermsarenotatthesamelevel. TheylookirregularandthatiswhyIhavewrittentheminthis wayonthreelinesandstaggered.
/tvdonee**./)

Inorderforittowork,foronetobeabletounderstandthemas aseries,itisreallynecessarytoseethemasIhaveputthem there,onadiagonal,whichimpliesthattheemptysquareshave tobefilledin.Iamnotgoingtodelayinprovingtoyou somethingwhichisimmediatelyobvious,thedifferencebetween thestructureofthesethreetermswhicheach,ifwewishto situatethem,haveabsolutelynotthesametermsascontext,as entourage.Inhibition,issomethingwhichis,inthebroadest senseofthisterm,inthedimensionofmovementand,whatis more,Freudspeaksaboutlocomotionwhenheintroducesit.

Iamnotgoingtogointothetext.Allthesameyouremember enoughaboutit,toseethathecannotdootherwisethanspeak aboutlocomotionwhenheintroducesthisterm.Inabroader (12)sense,thismovementtowhichIrefer,movementexistsin everyfunction,evenifitisnotlocomotory.Itexistsatleast metaphorically,andininhibition,itisthestoppingofmovement

14.11.62 thatisinvolved.

I8

Stopping:doesthatmeanthatthisisallinhibitionisdesigned tosuggesttous.Youwilleasilyobject,brakingtoo,andwhy not,Igrantittoyou.Idonotseewhyweshouldnotputinto amatrixwhichoughttoallowustodistinguishthedimensions involvedinanotionsofamiliartous,whyweshouldnotputon onelinethenotionofdifficulty,and,onanothercoordinate axis,theonethatIhavecalledthatofmovement.Thisiseven whatisgoingtoallowustoseemoreclearly,becauseitisalso whatisgoingtoallowustocomedowntoearth,totheearthof whatisnotveiledbythelearnedword,bythenotion,indeedthe conceptwithwhichonecanalwayscometotermswith.

Whyshouldonenotusetheword"toimpede,empcher",thatis afterallwhatisinvolved.Oursubjectsareinhibitedwhenthey speaktousabouttheirinhibitionandwhenwespeakaboutitat scientificcongressesandeveryday,theyareimpeded.Tobe impeded,isasymptomandinhibited,isasymptomthathasbeen putinthemuseumifonelooksatwhatthatmeans,tobe impededbeveryclearaboutitdoesnotimplyany superstitionfromtheetymologicalpointofviewImakeuseof itwhenitisofusetomeimpedicareallthesamemeanstobe caughtinatrap.Andthatisanextremelypreciousnotion, (13) becauseitimpliestherelationshipofadimensionto somethingdifferentwhichcomestointerferewithitandwhich entangles(emptre)whatinterestsus,whichbringsuscloserco whatwearetryingtoknow:notatallthefunction,thetermof referenceofdifficultmovement,butthesubject,namelywhat happensundertheform,underthenameofanxiety. IfIputimpediment(empchement)here,asyousee:Iaminthe symptomcolumnandrightawayIpointouttoyouwhatwewillof coursebeledtoarticulateaboutitmuchfurtheron,namelythat thetrapisnarcissisticcapture.Ithinkthatyouarenolonger altogetheratarudimentarylevelaboutnarcissisticcapture,I meanthatyourememberwhatIarticulatedaboutitatthefinal term,namelytheverypreciselimitthatitintroducesasregards whatcanbeinvestedintheobject,andthattheresidue,the brokenfragment,whatdoesnotmanagetoinvestitself,isgoing tobeproperlywhatgivesitssupport,itsmaterial,tothe signifyingarticulationthatisgoingtobecalledontheother planethesymboliconecastration.Theimpedimentwhichhas comeaboutislinkedtothiscirclewhichmeansthatinthesame movementbywhichthesubjectadvancestowardsjouissance,namely towardswhatisfarthestfromhim,heencountersthisintimate breakverycloseathand,andwhy?Becauseofallowinghimself tobecapturedenroutebyhisownimage,bythespecularimage. Thatisthetrap. Butletustrytogofurther,becausewearestillhereatthe (14) levelofthesymptom.Asregardsthesubject,whatterm shouldbebroughtforwardhereinthethirdcolumn?Ifwepush furtherthequestioningaboutthemeaningofthewordinhibition (inhibition,impediment),thethirdtermwhichIproposetoyou, stillinthesenseofbringingyoubacktothegroundoflived

14.11.62

experience,tothederisoryseriousnessofthequestion,I proposetoyouthebeautifultermofembarrassment(embarras).

Itwillbeallthemorepreciousforusbecausetodaythe etymologysatisfiesmetothefullobviouslyIhavethewindto myback,ifyouseethatembarrasisveryexactlythesubjectS investedwiththebar,thattheetymologyimbarrare (imbarricare?)makesproperlyspeakingthemostdirectallusion tothebar(bara)assuchandthatmoreoverthisistheimageof whatiscalledthemostdirectlivedexperienceofembarrassment. Whenyounolongerknowwhattodowithyourself,whenyoudonot findanythingbehindwhichtobarricadeyourself,whatisindeed involvedistheexperienceofthebarandmoreoverthisbarcan takeonmorethanoneform.Thecuriousreferencesthatone finds,ifwhatIhavebeentoldiscorrect,innumerousdialects wheretheembarrassedperson,theembarazadathereareno Spaniardshere,itdoesnotmatterbecauseIhavebeentoldthat theembarazada,withouthavingrecoursetodialect,meansa pregnantwomaninSpanish.Whichisanotherquitesignificant formofthebarinitsplace.

Sothereweareforthedimensionofdifficulty.Itculminates atthissortofslightformofanxietywhichiscalled embarrassment.Intheotherdimension,thatofmovement,what arethetermsthatwearegoingtoseesketchedout?Descending (15)towardsthesymptomitisemotion.Emotionyouwill forgivemeforcontinuingtotrustinanetymologywhichhasbeen sofavourabletomeuptonowemotionfromanetymological pointofviewreferstomovement,exceptthatwewillgiveita littlepushbyputtingintoittheGoldsteinianmeaningof throwingout,ex,ofthelineofmovement,themovementwhich disintegrates,thereactionwhichisdescribedascatastrophic. Itisusefulformetoindicatetoyoutheplacewhereitshould beput,becauseafterall,therehavebeenpeoplewhohavetold usthatthecatastrophicreactionwasanxiety.Ibelieveof coursethatitisnotunrelated.Whatisnotrelatedtoanxiety? Itisamatterpreciselyofknowingwhenitreallyisanxiety. Thefactforexamplethatthesamereferencehasbeenmadeand thatwithoutanyscrupletothecatastrophicreactionto designatethehystericalcrisisassuch,oragainangerinother cases,sufficientlyprovesallthesamethatitcouldnotbe enoughtodistinguish,topinpoint,tohighlightwhereanxiety is.Letustakethenextstep:wealwaysremainatthesame respectfuldistancefromtwogreattraitsofanxiety,butis

14.11.62

10

thereinthedimensionofmovementsomethingwhichrespondsmore preciselytothestageofanxiety?Iamgoingtocallitbyits namewhichIhaveheldinreserveforalongtime,inyour interest,asadelicacy.PerhapsIhavemadeafleetingallusion toit,butonlyparticularlysharpearswereabletopickitup: itisthewordmoi(dismay).Hereetymologyfavoursmeina literally, _____fabulousway.Itdelightsme.ThatiswhyIwill ^ nothesitate,whenIhavetoldyoufirsteverythingthatit bringsme,tofurtherabuseit.Inanycase,let'sgo. Linguisticsensibility,asitisputbyMessrsBlochandVon WartburgtowhosearticleIamexpresslyaskingyoutoreferI apologiseifitduplicateswhatIamgoingtotellyounow, duplicatesitallthemorebecausewhatIamgoingtotellyouis aliteralquotationfromit,ItakethingswhereIfindthem,and IhopenobodymindsMessrsBlochandVonWartburgsaythenthat linguisticsensibilityhaslinkedthistermtothecorrectword, tothewordmouvoir(tomove,toaffect).Butdisabuse yourselves,thisisnotthecase. Emoihasnothingtodowith emotionforsomeonewhoknowshowtouseit.Inanycase, realiseIwillgoquicklythatthetermesmayer,thatbefore itesmaisandevenproperlyspeakingesmoiesmais,ifyouare interestedisalreadyattestedtointhethirteenthcentury onlyknew,toputitintheauthors'words,onlytriumphedinthe sixteenth.Thatesmayermeanstroubler(todisturb,tofrighten) andalsosetroubler(toshowdisturbance).Thatesmayeris effectivelystillusedindialectsandleadsustothepopular Latinexmagarewhichmeanstomakeloseone'spower,one's energy,andthatthis,thispopularLatin,islinkedtoa graftingofawesternGermanrootwhichreconstitutedgivesus maganandwhichonemoreoverhasnoneedtoreconstitutebecause inhighGermanandinGothic,itexistsinthissameform,^and that,providedyouareGermanspeakers,youcanrefertomogento theEnglishmaymogeninGerman.InItaliansmaqareexistsI hope?Notreally.ItcomesfromBlochandVonWartburgand means,accordingtothem,tobecomediscouraged.Adoubtexists therefore.SincetherearenoPortugesehere,Iwouldhaveno objectiontoaccepting,notwhatIamputtingforward,butBloch andVonWartburg,tobringingintoplayesmaqarwhichmeansto crush,whichuntilIlearnotherwiseIwillholdontoashaving forwhatfollowsaconsiderableinterest.Iwillpassover Provencal. Inanycase,itiscertainthatthetranslationwhichhasbeen accepted,ofTriebregungbymoipulsionnel(instinctualimpulse) isquiteincorrectandpreciselybecauseofthewholedistance thatthereisbetweenemotionandemoi.Emoiisperturbation, collapseofpower,Regungisstimulation,thecalltodisorder, eventoariot.Iwillfortifymyselfalsowiththis etymologicalquesttotellyouthatuptoacertaintime,moreor lessthesameastheonethatiscalledinBlochandVonWartburg thetriumphofmoi,meute(riot)preciselyhadthemeaningof emotionandonlytookonthesenseofpopularmovementmoreor lessfromtheseventeenthcenturyon. Allofthistomakeyouproperlysensethatherethenuances,

14.11.62

11

indeedthelinguisticversionsevoked,aredesignedtoguideus throughsomething,namely,thatifwewishtodefinebydismaya thirdplaceinthesenseofwhatismeantbyinhibitionifwetry toconnectitwithanxiety,dismay,perturbation,beingdisturbed assuch,indicatestoustheotherreferencewhichthoughit (18) corresponds,letussay,toalevelequaltothatof embarrassment,doesnotconcernthesameaspect.Dismayisthe mostprofoundformofbeingdisturbedinthedimensionof movement.Embarrassmentisthehighpointreachedby difficulty.Doesthismeanthatforallthatwehaverejoined anxiety?Theboxesofthislittletablearetheretoshowyou thatpreciselywearenotclaimingthat.Wehavefilledinhere emotion,dismay,thesetwoboxeshere,impediment,embarrassment, theseoneshere.Itremainsthatthisonehereandthatoneare empty.Howcantheybefilled?Itisasubjectwhichgreatly interestsusandIamgoingtoleaveitforyouforawhileasa riddle.Whatistobeputinthesetwoboxes?Thisisofthe greatestinterestasregardswhatisinvolvedinthehandlingof anxiety.Havingposedthislittlepreamblefromthereferenceto theFreudiantriadofinhibition,symptomandanxiety,theground hasbeenclearedtospeakaboutit,Iwouldsay,doctrinally. Havingbeenbroughtbackbytheseevocationstothelevelof experienceitself,letustrytosituateitinaconceptual framework.Whatisanxiety?Wehaveruledoutitsbeingan emotion.Andtointroduceit,Iwouldsay:itisanaffect.

Thosewhofollowthemovementsofaffinityorofaversionofmy discoursebyfrequentlylettingthemselvesbetakeninby appearances,thinknodoubtthatIamlessinterestedinaffects thaninanythingelse.Thisisquiteabsurd.Onoccasion,I havetriedtosaywhataffectisnot:itisnotBeinggivenin (19) itsimmediacy,norisitthesubjectinsomesortofraw form.Itisnot,tosaytheword,protopathic'inanycase.My occasionalremarksonaffectmeannothingotherthanthis.And thatispreciselywhyithasaclosestructuralrelationshipwith whatis,eventraditionally,asubjectandIhopetoarticulate itforyouinanindeliblefashionthenexttime.Whatonthe contraryIdidsayaboutaffect,isthatitisnotrepressedand thatissomethingthatFreudsaysjustlikeme.Itisunmoored, itgoeswiththedrift.Onefindsitdisplaced,mad,inverted, metabolised,butitisnotrepressed.Whatisrepressedarethe signifierswhichmoorit.Thisrelationshipbetweenaffectand signifierwouldrequireawholeyearonthetheoryofaffects.I alreadyallowedtheretoappearononeoccasionthewayinwhich Iunderstoodit.Isaidittoyouinconnectionwithanger. Anger,Itoldyou,iswhathappensinsubjectswhenthelittle pegsnolongergointothelittleholes.Whatdoesthatmean? AsregardstheleveloftheOther,ofthesignifier,italways concernsfaithandtrust,someoneisnotplayingthegame.This iswhatgivesrisetoanger.Andmoreovertoleaveyoutodayon somethingwhichpreoccupiesyou,Iamgoingtomakeasimple remark.WherebestdoesAristotledealwiththepassions?I thinkthatallthesamethereareacertainnumberofyouwho knowalready:itisinBookTwoofhisRhetoric.Thebestthing (20) aboutthepassionsiscaughtupinthereference,inthe net,inthenetworkoftheRhetoric.Itisnotbychance.This

14.11.62

I12

isthenet.ThisindeediswhyIspoketoyouaboutthenetin connectionwiththefirstlinguisticreferencesthatItriedto giveyou.Ididnottakethedogmaticpathofgivingageneral theoryofaffectsbeforewhatIhadtosaytoyouaboutanxiety. Why?Becauseherewearenotpsychologists,weare psychoanalysts.Iamnotdevelopingforyouadirectlogical psychosis,adiscourseaboutthisunrealrealitywhichiscalled thepsychebutapraxiswhichmeritsaname:erotology.Desire iswhatisinvolved,andtheaffectbywhichweareurgedperhaps tomakeemergeeverythingthatitinvolvesasauniversal,not general,consequenceonthetheoryofaffects,isanxiety.Itis onthecuttingedgeofanxietythatwehavetomaintainourselves anditisonthiscuttingedgethatIhopetoleadyoufurther thenexttime.

21.11.62 Seminar2:Wednesday21November1962

II1

AsIcontinuetodaytogetintomydiscourseonanxietyalittle more,Icanlegitimatelyposebeforeyouthequestionofwhat ateachingishere.

Thenotionthatwemayhaveofitoughtallthesametoundergo someeffectifhereweareinprinciple,letussay,analysts forthemostpart,iftheanalyticexperienceissupposedtobe myessentialreferencewhenIaddresstheaudiencecomposedof yourselvesfromthefactthatwecannotforgetthattheanalyst is,asImightsay,aninterpreter(uninterprtant).Heplays onthissoessentialmomentwhichIalreadyaccentuatedforyou onmanyoccasionsstartingfromseveralsubjectsof"hedidnot know","Ididnotknow"andtowhichwewillleavethereforean indeterminatesubjectbycollectingthemintoa"onedidnot know,onnesavaitpas". Asregardsthis"onedidnotknow",theanalystissupposedto knowsomething.Whynotevenadmitthatheknowsagooddeal? Thequestionisnottoknowitwouldbeatleastpremature whetherhecanteachitwecansay.thatuptoacertainpoint, thesimpleexistenceofaplacelikethisandoftherolethatI playinitforsometimenow,isawayofsettlingthequestion wellorbadly,butofsettlingitbuttoknow"whatisitto teachit?,qu^estcequeRenseigner?".

21.11.62

II14

What does teaching it mean when it involves precisely what it is a matter of teaching, to teach it not simply to the one who does notknow,butitmustbeadmittedthatuptoacertainpointwe (2) are all in the same boat here to. the one who, given what is involved,toonewhocannotknow. Observecarefullywhere,asImightsay,thefalsedoorleads. Ananalyticteaching,iftherewerenotthisfalsedoor,this seminaritselfcouldconceiveitselfasbeingintheline,inthe prolongationofwhathappensforexampleinasupervisionwhere itiswhatyouknow,whatyouaresupposedtoknow,thatis broughtalong,andwhereIwouldonlyintervenetogivewhatis analogoustointerpretation,namelythisadditionbymeansof whichsomothingappearswhichgivesmeaningtowhatyouthinkyou know,whichmakesappearinaflashwhatitispossibletograsp beyondthelimitsofknowledge.

Itisallthesameinthemeasurethataknowledgeexistsinthis workofdevelopmentofanalysisthatwedescribeascommunal ratherthancollectiveamongthosewhohaveexperienceofit,the analysts,thatthisknowledgeisconstituted,thataworkof puttingittogetherisconceivable,whichjustifiestheplace takenbyateachingliketheonewhichiscarriedouthere.It isbecause,ifyouwish,therehasalreadybeensecretedby analyticexperienceawholeliteraturewhichiscalledanalytic theorythatIamforcedoftenquiteagainstmywilltogive itheresomuchspace,anditiswhatnecessitatesmedoing somethingwhichhastogobeyondthispiecingtogether,and preciselyinthesenseofourgettingcloser,throughthis piecingtogetherofanalytictheory,towhatconstitutesits source,namelyexperience.

Here an ambiguity appears which depends not simply on the fact that here some nonanalysts are mixed in with us. There is no great inconvenience in this because moreover even the analysts come here with positions, postures, expectations which are not necessarily analytic, and already very sufficiently conditioned by the fact that in the theory that is constructed in analysis there are introduced references of every kind, and much more so than may appear at first sight, that one can qualify as extra analytic,aspsychologisingforexample.Bythesimplefactthen (3) thatIhavetodealwiththismaterial,thematerialofmy audience,thematerialofmyteachingobject,Iwillbeledto refertothiscommonexperiencewhichistheonethankstowhich thereisestablishedallcommunicationinteaching,namelynotto beabletoremaininthepurepositionthatIcalledearlier interpreting,buttopasstoabroadercommunicatingposition, namelytoengagemyselfontheterrainof"makingthings Vinderstood,fairecomprendre",toappealinyoutoanexperience whichgoeswellbeyondthatofstrictanalyticexperience. Thisisimportanttorecallbecause"makingthingsunderstood"is atthesametimethatwhich,inpsychologyinthebroadestsense, isreallythestumblingblock.Notsomuchbecausetheaccent oughttobeputonwhatatonetimeforexampleappearedtobe thegreatoriginalityofaworklikethatofBlondelonLa

21.11.62

II15

consciencemorbide,namelythattherearelimitsto understanding:letusnotimagineforexample,thatwe understand,aistheysay,therealauthenticlivedexperienceof thesick.Butitisnotthequestionofthislimitwhichis importantforusandatatimewhenIamspeakingtoyouabout anxiety,itisimportanttopointouttoyouthatitisoneof thequestionsthatwesuspend,becausethequestionismuch rathertoexplainwhy,bywhatrightwecanspeakaboutanxiety, whenwesubsumeunderthisrubrictheanxietyintowhichwecan introduceourselvesfollowingoneorothermeditationguidedby Kierkegaard,theanxietywhichcanlayholdofusatoneorother paranormalorevenfranklypathologicalmoment,asbeing ourselvessubjectsofanexperiencethatismoreorless situatablefromapsychopathologicalpointofview,theanxiety whichistheonewedealwithinourneurotics,theordinary materialofourexperience,andforthatmattertheanxietythat wecandescribeandlocaliseatthesourceofanexperiencethat ismoreperipheralforus,thatofthepervertforexample,even thatofthepsychotic.

Ifthishomologyisjustifiedbyakinshipofstructure,itcan (4)onlybesoattheexpenseoftheoriginalunderstandingwhich neverthelessisgoingnecessarilytoincreasewiththedangerof makingusforgetthatthisunderstandingisnotthatofalived experiencebutofamainspring,andofpresumingtoomuchabout whatwecanassumeabouttheexperiencestowhichitrefers, specificallythoseofthepervertorofthepsychotic.Inthis perspectiveitispreferabletowarnsomeonethatheshouldnot believetoomuchinwhathecanunderstand.Itishereindeed thatthesignifyingelementstakeontheirimportance,denudedas Itrytomakethembytheirnotationofunderstandablecontent andwhosestructuralrelationshipisthemeansbywhichItryto maintainvhelevelnecessaryforunderstandingnottobe deceptive,whileatthesametimeallowingtheretobelocated thediversesignificanttermsintowhichwemakeourway,and thisespeciallywhenwhatisinvolvedisanaffect.BecauseI havenotrefusedthiselementofclassification:anxietyisan affect.Weseethatthestyleofapproachofsuchatheme: "anxietyisanaffect"isproposedtousfromthepointofview oftheteacher,inaccordancewiththedifferentpathsthatone can,Ibelieve,rathersummarily,namelybyeffectivelysumming themupdefineunderthreeheadings,thoseofthecatalogue, namelyasregardsaffecttoworkoutnotsimplywhatitmeans, butwhatwasmeantinconstitutingsuchacategory,atermwhich undoubtedlyputsusinapositionofteachingsomethingaboutthe subjectofteachinginitsbroadestsense,andnecessarilyhere toharmonisewhatistaughtwithinanalysiswithwhatis contributedfromoutsideinthewidestsenseascategory,andwhy not?Veryconsiderablecontributionshavecometousfromthere and,youwillsee,totakeamedianreferencewhichwillcome intothefieldofourattention,thereisasregardswhat occupiesusthisyearifitistruethat,asIsaid,Iamfar fromrefusingtoinsertthiscentralobjectofanxietyintothe catalogueofaffects,intothedifferenttheorieswhichhavebeen producedaboutaffectwellthen,totakethings,Itoldyou,at <5)akindofmedianpointofthecut,atthelevelofSaint

21.11.62

II16

ThomasAquinastocallhimbyhisname,therearesomeverygood thingsconcerningadivisionwhichhedidnotinventconcerning affectbetween"theconcupiscentandtheirascible,andthelong discussionwithwhichheweighsup,inaccordancewiththe formulaofscholasticdebate,proposition,objection,response, namelywhichofthetwocategoriesisprimarywithrespecttothe other,andhowhesettlesitandwhy.Despitecertain appearances,certainreferences,theirascibleisinserted somewhereinthechainoftheconcupiscentwhichisalready there,whichconcupiscentthereforeisprimarywithrespectto it,thisissomethingwhichwillnotfailtobeofusetous becauseintruthmightitnotbeinthefinalanalysisentirely suspendedonasuppositionaboutaSovereignGood,againstwhich, asyouknow,wealreadyhavesubstantialobjectionstomakefor usitwouldbeveryacceptablewewillseewhatwecanpreserve ofit,whatitclarifiesforus.Thesimplefactisthatwecan IwouldaskyoutorefertoitIwillgiveyouthereferences attheappropriatetimewecanundoubtedlyfindherea considerableamountofmaterialtonourishourownreflection. More,paradoxically,thanwhatwecanfindinrecent,modern developmentsletuscallthingsbytheirname:thenineteenth centuryofapsychologywhichclaimedtobe,withoutnodoubt beingfullyentitledtodoso,moreexperimental.Thisagain, thispath,hastheinconvenienceofpushingusinthedirection, intothecategoryoftheclassificationofaffects,and experienceprovesthattoogreatanabandoninthisdirection onlyculminatesforusandevenhowevercentrallywemaybring it,withrespecttoourexperience,tothatparttowhicha littleearlierIgavethetrait,theaccentoftheoryin obviousimpassesalovelytestimonyofwhichforexampleisgiven bythisarticlewhichappearsinTome34,thethirdpartof1953 oftheInternationalJournal,whereMrDavidRapaportattemptsa psychoanalytictheoryofaffect. (6)Thisarticleisreallyexemplaryfortheproperlydismaying evaluation,atwhichasamatteroffactitculminates,without theauthordreamingofhidingit,namelytheastonishingresult thatanauthorwhoannouncesbythistitleanarticlewhichafter allcouldnotfailtoallowustohopeforsomethingnew, original,tocomeoutofitasregardswhattheanalystcanthink aboutaffect,shouldfinallyculminateonlyinhimalso,staying strictlywithinanalytictheory,givingacatalogueofthe acceptationsinwhichthistermhasbeenused,andseeingthat withintheverytheoryitselftheseacceptationsareirreducible tooneanother,thefirstbeingthatofaffectconceivedofas constitutingsubstantiallythedischargeofthedrive,thesecond withinthesametheory,and,togoevenfurther,supposedlyfrom theFreudiantextitself:affectbeingnothingbutthe connotationofatensionatitsdifferentphases,usually conflictual,affectconstitutingtheconnotationofthistension insofarasitvaries,aconnotationofthevariationof tension,andathirdtermequallymarkedasirreduciblein Freudiantheoryitself:affectconstitutinginaproperly topographicalreferencethesignalattheleveloftheego concerning'somethinghappeningelsewhere,thedangercomingfrora elsewhere.'Theimportantthingisthathenotesthatthere

21.11.62

II17

stillsubsists,inthedebatesofthemostrecentlyemerging authorsinanalyticdiscussion,divergentclaimsaboutthe primacyofeachoneofthesethreemeanings,sothatnothingcan beresolvedaboutit.Andthattheauthorinquestioncansayno moretousaboutit,isallthesameindeedthesignthathere themethoddescribedas"cataloguing"cannotherebemarked indeedbyanyprofoundgain,sinceitculminatesinimpasses, evenindeedinaveryspecialtypeofinfecundity. Thereis,differentiatingitselffromthismethodIapologise forgoingonsolongtodayaboutaquestionwhichisnevertheless ofgreatinterestasapreamble,asregardthetimelinessofwhat wearedoinghere,anditisnotfornothingthatIam (7) introducingit,asyouwillseeasregardsanxietythe methodthatIwouldcall,usinganeedforconsonancewiththe precedingterm,themethodofanalogy,whichwillleadusto discernwhatonecancalllevels.IsawinaworkwhichIwill nototherwisequotetoday,anattemptedgatheringtogetherof thiskind,whereonesees,inseparatechapters,anxiety conceivedasitisputitisanEnglishworkbiologically, thensocially,sociologically,thenasfarasIknowculturally, culturellement,asifitwereenoughinthiswaytoreveal,at supposedlyindependentlevels,analogicalpositions,tosucceed indoinganythingmorethanseparatingout,nolongerwhatI calledearlieraclassification,buthereasortoftype. Weknowwhatthismethodculminatesin:inwhatiscalledan anthropology.Anthropology,tooureyes,issomethingwhich,of allthepathstowhichwemightcommitourselves,involvesthe greatestnumberofthemosthazardouspresuppositions.Whatsuch amethodculminatesin,nomatterhoweclecticitis,isalways andnecessarilywhatwe,inourfamiliarvocabulary,andwithout makingofthisnameorofthistitletheindexofsomeonewhohas evenoccupiedsuchaneminentposition,iswhatwecall Jungianism.

Onthesubjectofanxiety,thiswillnecessarilyleadustothe themeofthiscentralcorewhichistheabsolutelynecessary thematicatwhichsuchapathculminates.Thismeansthatitis veryfarfromwhatisinvolvedinexperience.Experienceleads ustowhatIwouldcallherethethirdwaywhichIwouldplace undertheindex,undertheheadingofthefunctionofwhatI wouldcallthatofthekey.

Thekeyiswhatopens,andwhatfunctionsbecauseitopens.The (8) keyistheformaccordingtowhichthereshouldoperateor notoperatethesignifyingfunctionassuch,andwhatmakesit legitimateformetoannounceitandtodistinguishitanddare tointroduceitassomethingtowhichwecantrustourselves,is netsomethingwhichismarkedherebypresumption,forthereason thatIthinkthatitwillbeforyou,andforthoseherewho belongtotheteachingprofession,a'sufficientlyconvincing ireJIfrence,itisthatthisdimensionisabsolutelyconnaturalto anyteaching,analyticornot,forthereasonthatthereisno leaching,IwouldsayandIwouldsay,formypart,whatever astonishmentmayresultfromitamongsomepeopleasregardswhat

21.11.62

II18

Iteach,andneverthelessIwillsayitthereisnoteaching whichdoesnotreferitselftowhatIwouldcallanidealof simplicity. If,earlier,somethingwasenoughtogiveriseforustoan objectioninthefactthatacatliterallycannotfindher kittensasregardswhatwethink,weanalysts,bygoingtothe textsonaffect,thereissomethinghereprofoundlyunsatisfying, andthatitisnecessarythat,asregardsanytitlewhatsoever, weshouldsatisfyourselvesasregardsacertainidealofsimple reduction.Whatdoesthatmeanandwhy?Why,whyeversince peoplehavedonesciencebecausethesereflectionsare concernedwithsomethingquitedifferentandwithmuchvaster fieldsthatthatofourexperiencehasonerequiredthe greatestpossiblesimplicity?Whyshouldtherealbesimple? Whatcouldpermitusforasingleinstanttosupposeittobeso? Nothingindeed,nothingotherthanthissubjectiveinitiumon whichIputtheaccentherethroughoutthewholeofthefirst partofmyteachinglastyear,namelythatthereisno conceivableappearanceofasubjectassuchexceptfromthe primaryintroductionofasignifier,andfromthesimplest signifierwhichiscalledtheunarytrait. Theunarytraitcomesbeforethesubject."Inthebeginningwas theword",means:inthebeginningistheunarytrait. Everythingthatisteachableoughttopreservethestigmataof thisultrasimpleinitiumwhichistheonlythingwhichcan justifytooureyestheidealofsimplicity. (9)Simplicity,singularityofthetrait,thisiswhatwebring intothereal,whethertherealwantsitordoesnotwantit. Butonethingiscertain,itisthatitenters,thatithas alreadyenteredbeforeusbecausealreadyitisalongthispath thatallthesubjectswho,forsomecenturiesallthesame,have beenengagrdinadialogueandhavetocometotermsasbestthey canwiththisconditionpreciselythatthereisbetweenthemand therealthisfieldofthesignifieritisalreadybythis apparatusoftheunarytraitthattheyhaveconstituted themselvesassubjects.Howcouldweforourpartbeastonished atfindingitsmarkinourownfield,ifourfieldisthatofthe subject?

Inanalysis,thereissomethingwhichispriortoeverythingthat wecanelaborateorunderstand,andthisIwillcallthepresence oftheOther.Thereisnoselfanalysisevenwhenoneimagines it,theOtheristhere.Irecallitbecauseitisalreadyon thispathandonthesamepathofsimplicitythatIplacedwhatI hadtotellyou,whatIindicatedtoyou,whatIbeganto indicatetoyouaboutsomethingwhichgoesfurther,namelythat anxietyisthiscertainrelationshipwhichIhaveonlyimagedup tonow.Irecalledforyouthelast'timetheimage,withthe sketchIreevokedofmypresence,myverymodestandembarrassed presenceinthepresenceofthegiantprayingmantis,Ialready toldyoumorethereforeinsayingtoyou:thisisrelatedtothe desireoftheOther.

21.11.62

II19

ThisOther,beforeknowingwhatmyrelationshipwithitsdesire meanswhenIaminastateofanxiety,Ifirstofallputthe Otherthere.Togetclosertohisdesire,Iwilltake,God knows,pathsthatIhavealreadyopenedup.Itoldyou:the desireofmanisthedesireoftheOther.Iapologisefornot beingabletogoback,forexample,toagrammaticalanalysis thatImadeduringthelastJourneesProvincialesthatiswhyI amsokeenthatthistextshouldcometomeintact,sothatit canbedistributedatasuitabletimethegrammaticalanalysis ofwhatismeantbythedesireoftheOtherandthemeaningof this(objective)genitivebutafterallthosewhouptonowhave (10)beenatmyseminarmayallthesame,Ithink,haveenough elementstosituatethemselvessufficiently. Fromthepenofsomeone,whoispreciselytheauthorofthis littleworktowhichIalludedatthebeginningofthisyear's teachingthelasttime,whichhadbeenbroughttomethatvery morningo.iasubjectwhichwasnoneotherthantheonethat LviStraussapproaches,thatofthesuspendingofwhatonecould Calldialecticalreason,atthestructuralistlevelatwhich LviStraussplaceshimself,someonemakinguseofittoclarify thisdebate,toenterintoitsdetours,todisentangleitsskein fromtheanalyticpointofview,andreferringofcoursetowhat ISaidaboutphantasyassupportofdesire,doesnotinmy opiniontakeenoughnoticeofwhatIamsayingwhenIspeakabout thedesireofmanasdesireoftheOther. Whatprovesit,isthathebelieveshecancontenthimselfwith recallingthatthisisaHegelianformula.Nowifthereis,I think,someonewhomakesnomistakeaboutwhatThephenomenology ofthespirithasbroughtus,itismyself.Ifthereis neverthelessapointatwhichitisimportanttomarkthatitis tieirfethatImarkthedifferenceand,ifyouwish,toemploythe term,theprogressIwouldlikestillbettertheleapwhich isourswithrespecttoHegel,itispreciselyconcerningthis functionofdesire.Iamnotinaposition,giventhefieldthat Thavetocoverthisyear,totakeupagainwithyoustepbystep theHegeliantext.Iamalludingheretoanauthorwho,Ihope, willseethisarticlepublishedandwhoshowsaquitesensitive knowledgeofwhatHegelsaysonthispoint. Iamnotallthesamegoingtofollowhimontotheplaneofthe quiteoriginalpassagewhichheverywellrecalledonthis occasion.Butforthetotalityofthosewhoarelisteningtomo andwithwhathasalreadypassed,Ithink,tothecommonlevelof thisaudienceconcerningtheHegelianreference,Iwillsay immediately,inordertomakeyousensewhatisinvolved,thatin Hegel,asregardsthisdependenceofmydesirewithrespectto thedesirerwhoistheOther,Iamdealing,inthemostcertain J11)andmostarticulatedfashion,withtheOtheras consciousness.TheOtheristheonewhoseesmehowthat involvesmydesire,youknow,youalreadyglimpsesufficiently, butIwillcomebacktoitlater,forthemomentIammaking massiveoppositionstheOtheristheonewhoseesmeanditis onthisplane,onthisplanethatyouseethatthereislaunched allbyitself,accordingtothebasiswithwhichHegel

21.11.62

II20

inauguratesThephenomenologyofthespirit,thestruggleonthe planeofwhathecalls"pureprestige",andmydesireisinvolved inthis. ForLacan,becauseLacanisananalyst,theOtheristhereas unconsciousnessconstitutedassuch,andheinvolvesmydesirein themeasureofwhatheislackingandthathedoesnotknow.It isatthelevelofwhatheislackingandthathedoesnotknow thatIaminvolvedinthemostpregnantfashion,becauseforme thereisnootherdetour,tofindwhatIamlackingasobjectof mydesire. Thatiswhythereisformenotalonenoaccess,butnopossible sustentationofmydesirewhichispurereferencetoanobject, whateveritmaybe,unlessbycouplingit,bylinkingitwiththe followingwhichisexpressedbythewhichisthisnecessary dependenceontheOtherassuch.ThisOtherisofcoursetheone thatthroughouttheseyears,IthinkIhaveaccustomedyouto distinguishateveryinstantfromtheother,myfellow. Itis theOtheraslocusofthesignifier.Itismyfellowamong othersofcourse,butnotsimplythat,becauseofthefactthat itisalsothelocusassuchatwhichthereisestablishedthe orderofthesingulardifferenceofwhichIspoketoyouatthe beginning. AmInowgoingtointroducetheformulaewhichImarkedforyou ontherightwhichIdonotpretendfarfromit,givenwhatI saidtoyourightatthebeginningaregoingtosurrendertheir malicetoyouimmediately.Iwouldaskyoutoday,likethelast timethatiswhythisyearIamwritingthesethingsonthe blackboardtotakethemdown.Youwillseehowtheyfunction afterwards.Thedesireofdesire,intheHegeliansense,is thereforedesireofadesirewhichrespondstotheappealofthe subject. (12)Jtisdesireofadesirer.Whydoesheneedthisdesirer, whoistheOther?Itisbecausefromwhateverangleyouplace yourself,butinthemostarticulatedfashioninHegel,heneeds himinorderthattheOthershouldrecognisehim,inorderto receiverecognitionfromhim.Whatdoesthatmean?Thatthe Otherassuchisgoingtoestablishsomething,"o",whichis preciselywhatisinvolvedatthelevelofwhatdesiresthisis thewholeimpasseinrequiringtoberecognisedbyhim.There whereIamrecognisedasobject,becausethisobjectinits essenceisaconsciousness,aSelbstbewusstsein,thereisno mediationotherthanthatofviolence.IobtainwhatIdesire,I amobjectandIcannottoleratemyselfasobject,Icannot toleratemyselfunlessIamrecognisedinmyworld,theonlymode ofrecognitionthatIcanobtain,mustnecessarilythereforeat any,pricebesettledbetweenourtwoconsciousnesses.Thisis tfrer,f^te.PfdesireinHegel.Thedesireofdesireinthe Lajcnianoranalyticsense,isthedesireoftheOtherina ff^hipnthatismuchmorefundamentally(principiellement)open t$k#sortofmediation.Atleastthatisthewayitlooksat first,japproach.Becausedesirehereyouwillseeitinthe verybformula/thesignifier,thatIputhereontheblackboard,

21.11.62

II21

2,thatIamgoingratherfarinthesenseofgoingagainst,I meanofcontradictingwhatyoumaynowbeexpectingisdesire quasupportingimageofthisdesire,arelationshipthereforeof d.(>)towhatIwrite,towhatIdonothesitatetowrite:i(o), evenandpreciselybecausethatcreatesanambiguitywiththe notationthatIusuallydesignateofthespecularimage(herewe donotknowyet,when,howandwhythespecularimagecanbe,but itisundoubtedlyanimagethisisnotaspecularimage,itis oftheorderofimage,itisthephantasy,whichIdonot hesitateonoccasiontooverlapwiththisnotationofthe specularimage).Iamsayingthereforethatthisdesireis desireinsofarasitssupportingimageistheequivalentthat iswhythetwopoints(:)whichwereherearethereisthe equivalentofthedesireoftheOther.ButheretheOtheris (13)connotedbecauseitistheOtheratthepointwhereitis characterisedaslack.Thetwootherformulae3and4(because thereareonlytwo,thisoneandthenthesecondoneyousee includedinabracketforthesecond,twoformulaewhichareonly twowaysofwritingthesamething,inonedirection,theninthe palindromicdirectionbyreturningafterbeinglikethat,by returninginthiswaythatisallthatiswritteninthethird line). IdonotknowthenwhetherIwillhavethetimetodaytogetto thetranslationofthesetwofinalformulae.Youshouldknow alreadyhoweverthattheyareoneandtheotherconstructed,the firsttohighlightthatanxietyiswhatshowsthetruthofthe Hegelianformula,namelythatiftheHegelianformulaispartial andfalseandmakesafalsedoorofthewholebeginningofthe PhenomenologyoftheSpiritasIindicatedtoyouonseveral occasionsalreadybyshowingyoutheperversionwhichresults, whichgoesveryfarandevenintothepoliticaldomain,from thistoonarrowstartingpointcentredontheimaginarybecause itisallverywelltosaythattheservitudeoftheslaveis fullofconsequencesandleadstoAbsoluteKnowledge.Butit alsomeansthattheslavewillremainaslaveuntiltheendof time. ItisKierkegaardwhogivesthetruth. ItisnotHegel'struth, butthetruthoftheanxietywhichleadsustoourremarks aboutdesireintheanalyticsense. Remarks:inthetwoformulae,thatofHegelandmine,inthe firsttermoftheformulae(above,),howeverparadoxicalitmay appearritisanobjectwhichdesires.Althoughthereare differences,thereissomethingincommonbetweentheHegelian conceptofdesireandtheonethatIampromoting.Itisata moment,thepointofanunacceptableimpasseintheprocess.

{,14)SelbstbewusstseininHegel,isanobject,namelythis

somethingwherethesubject,beingthisobject,isirremediably markedbyfiniteness,itisthisobjectwhichisaffectedby desire.ThisisthewayinwhichwhatIamproducingbeforeyou hassomethingincommonwiththeHegeliantheory,exceptthatat puranalyticlevel,whichdoesnotrequirethetransparencyof Selbstbewusstseinitisadifficultyofcourse,butnotofa

21.11.62

II22

kindtomakeusretraceoursteps,norforthatmattertoengage ourselvesinafighttothedeathwiththeOtherbecauseofthe existenceoftheunconscious,wecanbethisobjectaffectedby desire. It.isevenquathusmarkedbyfinitenessthatforus,assubjects oftheunconscious,ourlackcanbedesire,finitedesire, indefiniteinappearance,sincethelack,alwaysinvolvingsome void,canbefilledinseveralwaysatfirst,eventhoughweknov* verywellbecauseweareanalysts,thatwedonotfillitin ninetyninedifferentways.Andwewillseewhyandwhichones. WhatIwouldcalltheclassical,moralistic,notsomuchthe theological,dimensionoftheinfinityofdesireisinthis perspectivetobecompletelyreduced.Becausethis pseudoinfinitydependsononlyonethingwhichluckilyacertain partofthetheoryofthesignifier,whichisnoneotherthan thatofwholenumbers,allowsustoimage.Thisfalseinfinity islinkedtothissortofmetonomywhich,asregardsthe definitionofintegers,iscalledrecurrence.Itisquitesimply thelawthatwehave,Ibelieve,powerfullyaccentuatedlastyear inconnectionwiththerepetitiveOne.Butwhatourexperience (15)showsusIwillarticulateitforyouisthatinthe differentfieldsthatareproposedtoit,specificallyand distinctly,theneurotic,theperverse,indeedthepsychotic,is thatthisOnetowhichthereisreducedinthefinalanalysisthe successionofsignifyingelements,thefactthattheyare distinctandthattheysucceedoneanother doesnotexhaustthefunctionoftheOther. AndthisiswhatIamexpressingherestarting fromthisoriginatingOtheraslocusofthe signifier,ofthisstillinexistentSwhichby situatingitselfasdeterminedbythe signifier,undertheformofthesetwocolumns whicharethoseunderwhichasyouknowone canwritedowntheoperationofdivision. WithrespecttothisOther,dependingonthisOther,thesubject isinscribedasaquotient,heismarkedbytheunarytraitof thesignifierinthefieldoftheOther.Well,itisnotforall that,asImightsay,thathecutstheOtherintoslices.There isaremainderinthesenseofdivision,aresidue.This remainder,thisfinalother,thisirrational,thisproofandsole guaranteewhenallissaidanddoneoftheothernessofthe Other,istheo.Andthisiswhythetwoterms,f andQ , the subjectasmarkedbythebarofthesignifier,thelittleobject oasresidueoftheputtingintocondition,ifIcanexpress myselfinthisway,oftheOther,areonthesameside,bothon theobjectivesideofthebar,bothonthesideoftheOther. Thephantasy,thesupportofmydesire,isinitstotalityonthe sideoftheOther,$andQ.Whatisonmysidenow,isprecisely whatconstitutesmeasunconscious,namelyj>, theOtherinsofar asIdonotreachit.

21.11.62

II23

AmIgoingtoleadyouanyfurtherhere?No,becauseIhaverun outoftime.Andinordernottoleaveyouonapointwhichis soclosedoffasregardsthecontinuationofthedialecticwhich isgoingtobeinsertedintoitandwhich,asyouwillsee, requiresthatthenextstepthatIhavetoexplaintoyouiswhat Iamcommittingtotheaffair,namelythatinthesubsistenceof thephantasyIwillimagethesenseofwhatIhavetoproduce withareminderofanexperiencewhichIthinkwillbeforyou Godknowsinwhatismostinterestingforyou,Iamnottheone whosaidit,itisFreud:ofsomeuseintheexperienceof love.

(16)Iwanttopointouttoyou,atthepointthatweareat, thatinthistheoryofdesireinitsrelationshiptotheOther youhavethefollowingkey:thefactisthat,contrarytothe hopethattheHegelianperspectivemaygiveyou,themodeofthe conquestoftheother,istheone,alas,toooftenadoptedbyone ofthepartners:"Iloveyou,evenifyoudon'twantit".You mustnotbelievethatHegeldidnotglimpsethisprolongationof hisdoctrine.Thereisaverypreciouslittlenotewherehe indicatesthathecouldhavemadehiswholedialecticpassalong thispath.Itisthesamenotewherehesaysthat,ifhedidnot takethispath,itisbecauseitseemedtohimtolack seriousness.Howrighthewas! Tryitout.Letmeknowhow successfulitis!Thereisneverthelessanotherformulawhichif itdoesnotdemonstrateanybetteritseffectiveness,itis perhapsonlybecauseitisnotarticulatable,butthatdoesnot meanthatitisnotarticulated.Itis"Idesireyou,evenifI donotknowit".Whereveritsucceeds,howeverinarticulatable itmaybe,inmakingitselfheard,thisone,Iassureyouis irresistible.Andwhy?Iwillnotleavethisasariddlefor you.Ifthisweresayable,whatwouldIbesayingbyit?I wouldbesayingtotheotherthat,desiringhimwithoutknowing itofcourse,stillwithoutknowingit,Itakehimastheobject unknowntomyselfofmydesire,namelyinourconceptionof desirethatIidentifyhim,thatIidentifyyou,youtowhomIam speaking,youyourself,totheobjectwhichislackingto yourself,namelythatbythiscircuitthatIhavetotaketo reachtheobjectofmydesire,Iaccomplishpreciselyforhim whatheislookingfor.Itisindeedinthiswaythatinnocently ornot,ifItakethisdetour,theotherassuch,objecthere youshouldnoteofmylove,willfallnecessarilyintomy toils.Iwillleaveyouonthis,onthisrecipe,andIwillsee youthenexttime.

28.11.62 Seminar3:Wednesday28November1962

III24

YouwillhavenoticedthatIamalwayshappytolatchontosome currenteventinourdialogue.

Whenallissaidanddone,thereisnothingexceptwhatis current,thatiswhyitissodifficulttoliveinwhatwecould callthe:orldofreflection.Itisbecauseintruthnotmuch happensthere.Isometimesinconveniencemyselftoseeif somewheresomelittlequestionmarkisnotappearingsomewhere. Iamrarelyrewarded.Thatiswhypeopleposemeserious questionswellthen,youwillnotblamemefortakingadvantage ofit.

SoIcontinuemydialoguewiththepersontowhomIalready alludedtwiceinmyprecedingseminars,inconnectionwiththe fashion,whichIpunctuatedthelasttime,regardingthe differencethereisbetweentheconceptionoftheHegelian articulationofdesireandmine.Iambeingurgedtosaymore aboutwhatistextuallydesignatedasabeyondtobeaccomplished inmyowndiscourse,amoreprecisearticulationbetweenthe mirrorstageand,astheRomereportputsit,betweenthe specularimageandthesignifier.Letusaddthatsomehiatus (2)seemstoremainthere,notwithoutmyinterlocutorglimpsing thatperhapsheretheuseofthewordhiatus,cutorsplit,is nothingotherthantheexpectedresponse.Neverthelessunder thisform,itmightappeartobewhatitwouldbeineffect:an eluding,oranelision.AndthatiswhyIwilltryquite willinglytodaytorespondtohim,andthisallthemorebecause wefindourselvestherestrictlyon.thepathofwhatIhaveto describeforyouthisyearconcerninganxiety:anxietyiswhatis goingtoallowustogooveragain,Iamsayinggooveragainthe articulationthusrequiredofme.Isaygooveragainbecause thosewhohavefollowedmetheselastyearsandevenwithout

28.11.62

III25

necessarilyhavingbeenassiduoushereateverypoint,thosewho havereadwhatIwrote,havealreadymoreorlesstheelementsto fillour,tomakethiscut,thishiatusfunction,asyouare goingtoseefromthefewreminderswithwhichIamgoingto begin. Intruth,Idonotbelievethatthereeverweretwophasesin whatItaught:onephasewhichissupposedtobecentredonthe mirrorstage,onsomethinghighlightedintheimaginary,andthen after,withthismomentofourhistorythatislocatedbythe Romereport,thediscoverywhichIsuddenlymadeofthe signifier.InatextwhichIbelieveisnolongereasytoget holdofbutwhichcanafterallbefoundinanygoodpsychiatric library,atextwhichappearedinL'volutionpsychiatrique calledPropossurlacausalitpsychique,adiscoursewhichtakes usback,ifIremembercorrectly,tojustafterthewarin1946, Iwouldaskthosewhoare'interestedinthequestionwhichis thusposedtometoconsultittheywillseetherethingswhich willprovetothemthatitisnotjustnowthattheinterplay betweenthesetworegisterswascloselywovenbyme. Intruthifthisdiscoursewasfollowedbyaratherlongsilence, letussaythatthisshouldnotastonishyoutoomuch.Therewas aroadtotravelafterwardstoopenacertainnumberofearsto thisdiscourse,andyoumustnotbelievethatatthetimewhen ifthatinterestsyou,rereadthese"Propossurlacausalit psychique"thatatthetimewhenImadetheseremarksthatit waseasytofindearstounderstandthem. (3)Intruth,sinceitwasatBonnevalthattheseRemarkswere madeandthatamorerecentmeetingatBonnevalmanifestedtoa certainnumberthedistancethathadbeentravelledsince,you shouldbeawarethatthereactionstothesefirstRemarkswere ratherastonishing.Themodesttermofambivalencewhichwemake useofintheanalyticmilieu,isthebestwaytocharacterise thereactionswhichIrecordedtotheseRemarks,andeven, becauseIamgoingtobequeriedaboutthissubject,Idonot finditabsolutelyuselesstonotethatatatime,whicha certainnumberofyouwerealreadysufficientlyformedto remember,thatatatimewhichwasthetimeafterthewarandof somemovementofrenewalorotherthatonemighthavehopedfrom itand,Icannothelprememberingallofasudden,whenIam broughtbacktothatepoch,thefactindeedthatthosewhowere certainlynotindividuallytheleastdisposedtohearadiscourse whichwasverynewthen,whowerethepeoplesituatedsomewhere indeedthatiscalledpoliticallyontheleft,andeventhe extremeleft,theCommunistsinfacttocallthembytheirname, veryspeciallydemonstratedonthisoccasionthesortofthing, thisreaction,thismode,thisstyle,whichImustpinpointwith atermthatisincurrentuse,whichoneshouldpausefora momentbeforeputtingforwarditisaveryunjusttermwith respecttothosewhoinvokeditoriginally,butitisaterm whichendedupbytakingonameaningwhichisunambiguous,we willperhapshavetocomebacktoitinwhatfollows,Iam employingithereinthecourtlysenseitisthetermof Pharisaism.

28.11.62

III26

Iwouldsaythatonthatoccasion,inthislittleglassofwater whichisourpsychiatricmilieu,CommunistPharisaismreally operatedflatoutinthesenseofwhatwesawbeingusedforat leastourpresentgenerationhereinFrance,namelytoensurethe permanenceofthisbodyofgoodorbadhabitsinwhichacertain establishedorderfindscomfortandsecurity.Inshort,Icannot butbearwitnesstothefactthatitwasfromtheveryspecial reservationsthattheyshowed,thatIunderstoodatthattime thatmydiscoursewouldtakealongtimetomakeitselfheard. HencethesilenceinquestionandtheworkthatIhaveputinby devotingmyselftomakingitpenetratesimplythemilieuwhose experiencerendereditmostapttohearit,namelytheanalytic (4) milieu.Iwillspareyoutheadventuresthatfollowed.

ButthismaymakeyourereadthePropossurlacausalite psychique.Youwillsee,especiallyafterwhatItoldyou today,thatalreadytheframeworkexistedinwhicheachoneof thetwoperspectivesthatmyinterlocutorquiterightly distinguishes,wasinscribed.Thesetwoperspectivesare punctuatedherebythesetwocolouredlines,theverticalonein blue,thehorizontaloneinredwhichthesign(I)ofthe imaginaryand(S)ofthesymbolicrespectivelydesignatehere. Therearemanywaysofremindingyouthatthearticulationofthe subjecttothesmallotherandthearticulationofthesubjectto thebigOtherdonotexistseparatelyinwhatIamdemonstrating toyou.Thereismorethanonewayofshowingittoyou.Iam goingtoremindyouacertainofnumberofmomentswhichhave alreadybeenilluminated,punctuatedasessentialinmy discourse.Ipointouttoyouthatwhatyouseehereonmy blackboard,intheotherlinesthathavebeendrawn,youare goingtoseetheelementsinvolvedbeingplacedisnothing otherthanaschemaalreadypublishedintheremarksthatI thoughtIshouldmakeonthereportofDanielLagacheat Royaumont.Andthisdrawinginwhichthereisarticulated somethingwhichhastheclosestrelationshipwithoursubject, namelythefunctionofdependencyofwhattakingitfromthis reportofDanielLagachebutalsofromapreviousdiscoursethat IhadgivenhereinthesecondyearofmyseminarofwhatI calledrespectivelytheidealegoandtheegoideal,yes,letus recallthenhowthespecularrelationshipisinserted,finds itselfthereforetakingitsplace,findsitselfdependingonthe factthatthesubjectisconstitutedinthelocusoftheOther. Heconstituteshimselffromhismarkinrelationshiptothe signifier.Already,simplyinthelittleexemplaryimagefrom whichthedemonstrationofthemirrorstagebegins,inthisso calledjubilatorymomentwhentheinfantassumeshimselfasa functioningtotalityassuchinhisspecularimage,haveInot alwaysrecalledtheessentialrelationshiptothismoment,of thismovementwhichensuresthatthelittlechildwhohasjust graspedhimselfinthisinauguralexperienceofrecognitionin themirror,turnsbacktowardstheonewhoiscarryinghim,who issupportinghim,whosustainshim,whoistherebehindhim, towardstheadultturnsbackinamovementthatisreallyso (5) frequent, I would say, so constant that each and every one of you,Ithink,mayhavethememoryofthismovementturnsback

28.11.62

III27

towardstheonewhoiscarryinghim,towardstheadult,towards theonewhohererepresentsthebigOther,asiftocallinaway onhisassenttowhatatthismomentthechild,thecontentof whoseexperiencewearetryingtoassume,thesenseofwhich momentwereconstructinthemirrorstagebyreferringittothis movementoftherotation(mutation)oftheheadwhichturnsback andwhichreturnstowardstheimage,seemstodemandofhimto ratifythevalueofthisimage.Ofcoursethisisonlyan indicationthatIamrecallingtoyou,giventheinaugurallink betweenthisrelationshiptothebigOtherandtheadventofthe functionofthespecularimagethusnotedasalwaysbyi(o).But dowehavetoremainatthat?And,sinceitiswithinawork whichIhadaskedofmyinterlocutorconcerningthedoubtswhich hadcometohiminconnectionspecificallywithwhatClaude LviStrausshadputforwardinhisbookLapensesauvaqe,whose relationasyouwillseeisreallyIreferredabovetocurrent eventsclosetowhatwehavetosaythisyear,for,Ibelieve, whatwehavetotacklehere,inordertomarkthissortof progresswhichtheusageofpsychoanalyticreasoningconstitutes, issomethingwhichhappenstorespondpreciselytothisgapwhere morethanoneofyouforthemomenthavecometoahalt,theone whichthroughouthisdevelopmentClaudeLviStraussshowsin thissortofoppositionbetweenwhathecallsanalyticreasoning anddialecticreasoning. AnditisindeedinfactaroundthisoppositionthatIwould finallyliketoestablish,atthepresenttime,thefollowing introductoryremarkwhichIhavetomaketoyouonmypathtoday: whathaveIpickedout,extracted,fromtheinauguralstep constitutedinthethinkingofFreudbyTheinterpretationof dreamsifnotthefollowingwhichIremindyouof,whichI stressedthatFreudfirstintroducestheunconsciousin connectionwiththedreampreciselyasalocusthathecalled eineandererSchauplatz,adifferentsceneofaction(scne)? Fromthebeginning,fromthecomingintoplayofthefunctionof theunconscious,thistermandthisfunctionareintroducedinto itasessantial.

(6)Wellthen,Ibelieveineffectthatthisisaconstituting modeofwhatis,letussay,ourreason,ofthispaththatweare lookingfortodiscernitsstructures,tomakeyouunderstand whatIamgoingtosaytoyou.Letussaywithoutfurtherado itwillbenecessarytocomebacktoit,becausewedonotyet knowwhatitmeanswhatthefirstphaseis.Thefirstphase, is:thereistheworld.Andletussaythatanalyticreason,to whichthediscourseofClaudeLviStrausstendstogivethe primacy,concernsthisworldasitisandgrantsitwiththis primacyasingularhomogenity,whichisindeedwhatoffendsand disturbsthemostlucidamongyou,whocannothelppointingout, discerningwhatthisinvolvesintermsofareturntowhatone couldcallasortofprimarymaterialisminthewholemeasure thatatthelimit,inthisdiscoursetheveryoperationofthe structure,ofthecombinatory,sopowerfullyarticulatedbythe discourseofClaudeLviStraussonlyrejoinsforexamplethe verystructureofthebrain,indeedthestructureofmatter, onlyrepresents,inaccordancewiththeformdescribedasthe

28.11.62

III28

materialismoftheeighteenthcentury,thedoublet,noteventhe understudy(doublure).Iknowwellthatthisisonlya perspectiveatthelimitthatwecangrasp,butthatitis worthwhilegraspingitsinceitisinawayexpressly articulated. Nowthedimensionofthestage(scne),itsseparationfromthe locus,whetherworldlyornot,cosmicornot,wherethespectator is,isthereindeedtoimagetooureyestheradicaldistinction betweenthislocuswherethings,betheythethingsoftheworld, whereallthethingsoftheworldcometobespoken,tobestaged inaccordancewiththelawsofthesignifierwhichwecannotin anywayholdfromthebeginningtobehomogeneouswiththelaws oftheworld.Theexistenceofdiscourseandwhatensuresthat weareimplicatedinitassubjects,isthereonlytooobviously alongtimebeforetheadventofscience,andtheeffort marvellousinitshopelessnessthatClaudeLviStraussmakesto homogenisethediscoursethathecallsthatofmagicwiththe discourseofscience,issomethingwhichisadmirably instructive,butwhichhecannotforasinglemomentpushasfar astheillusionthatthereisnothereamoment,acut,a differenceandIamgoingtoemphasiseinalittlewhilewhatI meanbythisandwhatwehavetosayaboutit. (7)Therefore,firstphase,theworld.Secondphase,thestage uponwhichweconstructthisworld. Andthisisthedimensionof history.Historyhasalwaysthischaracterofastaging.Itis indeedinthisrespectthatthediscourseofClaudeLvi Strauss,specificallyinthechapterwhereherespondsto JeanPaulSartre,thefinaldevelopmentthatJeanPaulSartre establishestorealisethisoperationwhichIcalledthelast timeputtinghistorybackbetweenitsshafts. Thelimitationoftherangeofthehistoricalgame,thereminder thatthetimeofhistoryistobedistinguishedfromcosmictime, thatdatesthemselvestakeonallofasuddenadifferentvalue whethertheyarecalled21Decemberor18Brumaire,andthatix. isnoteventhesamecalendarthatwearedealingwithastheone thatyoutearthepagesoffeveryday.Theproofisthatthese dateshaveforyouadifferentmeaning,thattheyarereevoked, whenitisnecessary,likeanyotherdayofthecalendaras givingthemtheirmark,theircharacteristic,theirstyleof differenceorofrepetition.Sothen,oncethestagehastaken priority,whathappens,isthatthewholeworldisplacedonit, thatwithDescartes,onecansay:"Iadvanceontothestageof theworld",ashedoes,"masked",andthatstartingfromthere thequestioncanbeposedofwhattheworldowes,whatwehave calledatthebeginningquiteinnocentlytheworld,whatthe worldowestowhathascomedowntoitagainfromthisstage. Andthatwhicheverythingthatwehavecalledtheworldinthe courseofhistoryandwhoseresiduesaresuperimposedonone another,piledupwithoutmoreovertheslightestworryabout contradictions,andthatwhichculturebringsusasbeingthe world,whichisapilingup,whichisawarehouseofunclaimed objects,ofworldswhichhavesucceededoneanotherandbecause theyareincompatibleliveonlytoocomfortablytogetherwithin

28.11.62

III29

eachoneofus,astructurewhosepregnanceanddepththe particularfieldofourexperienceallowsustomeasure especiallyinthatoftheobsessionalneuroticregardingwhom Freudhimselflongagoremarkedthedegreetowhichthese,these cosmicworlds,couldcoexistinafashionwhichapparentlygives risetonoobjectionsinhim,whileatthesametimemanifesting thegreatestheterogeneityatafirstapproach,afirst examination.

(8) Inshort,theputtingintoquestionofwhatthecosmicworld isintherealisentirelylegitimate,oncewehavereferredto thestage.Iswhatwebelievewehavetodealwithasworld,not quitesimplytheaccumulatedremaindersofwhatcamedownfrom thestagewhenasImightputitthestagewasontour?Well then,thisreminder,thisreminderisgoingtointroducetousa thirdremark,athirdphasewhichIoughttorecalltoyouasa priordiscourse,andallthemore,perhapsthistimeinan insistentwaythatitisnotaphase,thatIdidnothaveenough timethentoaccentuateit.Becausewearetalkingabouta stage,weknowwhatfunctionpreciselythetheatreholdsinthe functioningofthemythswhichallowusanalyststothink.I bringyoubacktoHamletandtothiscrucialpointwhichhas alreadygivenrisetoquestionsforanumberofauthorsandmore particularlyforRankwhowroteonthispointanarticlethatwas ineveryway,giventheearlyperiodheproducedit,anadmirable articleineveryway,itistheattentionthathedrewtothe functionofthestageonthestage. WhatdoesHamlet,theHamletofShakespeare,theHamletwhoisa stagecharacter,whatdoesHamletbringontothestagewiththe players?NodoubttheMousetrap,thesouriciere,withwhich,he tellsus,heisgoingtolayholdof,totrap,theconscienceof theking.Butbesidesthefactthatverystrangethingshappen onitandinparticularsomethingwhichatthetime,atthetime whenIwasspeakingtoyouatsuchlengthaboutHamlet,Ididnot wanttointroducetoyoubecauseitwouldhaveorientedus towardsaliteratureatbottomevenmoreHamleticyouknowthat thisexists,thatitexiststothepointthatthereisenoughof ittocoverthesewallsmoreHamleticthanpsychoanalyticand thatverystrangethingshappeninit,includingthefollowing, namelythatwhenthissceneismimedasaprologuebeforethe playersbegintheirspeeches,wellthen,thisdoesnotseemto disturbthekingmuch,eventhoughneverthelessthepresumed gesturesofhiscrimearetherepantomimedbeforehim.Onthe contrarythereissomethingverystrange,itisthereal overwhelming,thecrisisofagitationwhichseizesHamletfroma certainmomentwhentherecomesonthestageafterafew speeches,whentherecomesthecrucialmoment,theoneatwhich (9) thecharacternamedLucianusorLucianocarriesout,carries outhiscrime,ontheoneofthetwocharacterswhorepresents theking,theshamking(leroidecomedie),eventhoughhehad inhisspeechaffirmedhimself,assuredhimselfasbeingtheking inacertaindimension,aswellastheonewhorepresentshis wife,hisspouseafterthesituationhadbeenwellestablished, alltheauthorswhohavepausedatthisscene,haveremarkedthat therigoutofthecharacterisexactly,notthatoftheking

28.11.62

III30

whomitijaquestionoftrapping,butofHamlethimself,and thatmoreoveritisindicatedthatthischaracterisnotthe brotheroftheshamking,isnotinarelationshipwithhimwhich wouldbehomologoustotheoneoftheusurperwhoisinthe tragedyinpossessionofQueenGertrude,afterhavingcarriedout themurder,butinapositionhomologoustotheoneHamlethasto thischaracter,thatitisthenephewoftheshamking. What,whenallissaidanddone,doesHamletcausetobe representedthereonthestage?Itishimself,carryingoutthe crimeinquestion,thischaracterwhosedesire,forreasonsthat Itriedtoarticulateforyou,cannotberousedtoaccomplishthe willoftheghost,ofthefantomeofhisfather,thischaracter attemptstoembodysomethingandwhatitisamatterof embodyingpassesbywayofhisimagewhichisreallyspecular here,hisimagenotinthesituation,themodeofcarryingout hisvengeance,butofassumingfirstofallthecrimethatmust beavenged. Nowwhatdowesee?Thatitisinsufficient,thatitisallvery wellforhimtobeseized,afterthissortofmagiclantern effect,bywhatonecanreallyinhisremarks,inhisstyle,in thequiteordinaryfashionmoreoverthattheactorsbringthis momenttolife,byagenuinelittleattackofmaniacalagitation, whenhefindshimselfamomentlaterwithhisenemywithinhis reach,hecanonlyarticulatesomethingwhichforeverylistener hasalwaysbeenindeedsomethingthatcouldnotbeexperiencedas otherthananevasionbehindapretext,itisthatundoubtedly, hecatcheshisenemyatamomentthatistooholythekingis prayingforhimtodecidebystrikinghimatthatmoment,to makehimgodirectlytoheaven. Iamnotgoingtodelaybytranslatingallthatthismeans, becausehereImustgofurther.Iwanttoadvanceenoughtoday (10)andpointouttoyouthatalongsidethisfailureI stronglyarticulatedthissecondphaseatthattime,Ishowedyou itswholeimportitisinthemeasurethatanidentificationof aquitedifferentnaturewhichIcalledidentificationwith Ophelia,itisinthemeasurethatthefurioussoulthatwecan legitimatelyinfertobethatofthevictim,ofthepersonwho committedsuicide,obviouslyofferedasasacrificetothemanes ofherfatherbecauseitisafterthemurderofherfatherthat sheweakens,thatshesuccumbs,butthisshowsustheageold beliefsabouttheconsequencesofcertainkindsofdeathfromthe veryfactthatthefuneralceremoniesinhercase,cannotbe fullycarriedoutthatthereisnocalminginthevengeance thatsheforherpartiscryingoutfor,thatitisatthemoment oftherevelationofwhatthisneglected,unrecognisedobjecthad beenforhim,thatweseetherebeingplayedoutinShakespeare inacompletelyopenwaythisidentificationtotheobjectthat Freuddesignatesforusasbeingthemajormainspringofthe functionofmourning,thisimplacabledefinition,Iwouldsay, thatFreudgavetomourning,thissortofreversesidethathe designatedtothetearswhichareconsecratedtoit,thisground ofreproachthatthereisinthefactthatallonewantsofthe realityoftheonewhomonehaslost,istowanttorememberthe

28.11.62

III31

sorrowthathehasleftbehind.Whatastonishingcrueltyandone wellmadetoremindusofthelegitimacyofmoreprimitive celebrationsthatcollectivepracticesstillareabletobringto life.Whynotrejoiceatthefactthatheexisted?Thepeasants whomwethinkaredrowninganinjuriousinsensibilityintheir banquets,aredoingsomethingquitedifferent:itistheadvent oftheonewhohasbeentothesortofsimpleglorythathe merits,becauseofhavingbeenamongussimplyalivingbeing. Letusnotforgetthatthisidentificationtotheobjectof mourningthatFreudhasthusdedicatedunderitsnegativemodes, has,ifitexists,alsoitspositivephase,thattheentryinto HamletofwhatIcalledherethefuryofthefemininesoul,is whatgiveshimtheenergytobecome,fromthenon,this sleepwalkerwhoacceptseverything,uptoandincludingI sufficientlymarkeditbeingtheonewhoholdsthestakesin thefight,whotakesthesideofhisenemy,thekinghimself, againsthisspecularimagewhoisLaertes.Fromthenon,things willbesettledallbythemselvesandwithouthimdoinginshort (11)anythingexceptexactlywhatshouldnotbedone,byleading himtowhathehastodo,namelythatheshouldbehimself mortallywounded,beforekillingtheking.Wehavehere,the distance,thedifferencethatexistsbetweentwosortsof imaginaryidentification:1)thatofo:i(o),thespecularimage asitisgiventousatthemomentofthestageonthestage: 2)themoremysteriousonewhoseenigmabeginstobedeveloped there,namelytosomethingelse,theobject,theobjectofdesire assuch,designatedwithoutanyambiguityinShakespeare's articulationassuchbecauseitispreciselyasobjectofdesire thatithadbeenneglecteduptoacertainmoment,thatitis reintegratedonthestagebywayofidentification,preciselyin themeasurethatasobjectithasjustdisappeared,thatasone mightsaytheretroactivedimension,thisdimensionofthe imperfectintheambiguousformthatitisusedinFrench,which istheonewhichgivesitsenergytothefashioninwhichI repeatbeforeyouthe"ilnesavaitpas",whichmeans:atthe lastminutedidhenotknow,alittlemoreandhewouldhave known.Thisobjectofdesireofwhichitisnotfornothingthat desireinFrenchissaidtobedesiderium,namelythis retroactiverecognition,thisobjectwhichwasthere,itisalong thispaththatthereisplacedthereturnofHamlet,thatwhich isthehighpointofhisdestiny,ofhisfunctionasHamlet,ifI canexpressmyselfthus,ofhisHamleticcompletion,itishere thatthisthirdmomentofreferencetomypreviousdiscourse showsuswherethequestioningshouldbecarriedto,asyou alreadyknowforalongtime,becauseitisthesameonethatI amalwaysrenewingfrommultipleangles:thestatusoftheobject quaobjectofdesire.EverythingthatClaudeLviStrausssays aboutthefunctionofmagic,aboutthefunctionofmyth,hasits valueonconditionthatweknowthatitisamatterofthe relationshiptothisobjectwhichhasthestatusofobjectof desire,astatuswhichIagreeisnotyetestablished,which itisourobjectthisyeartomakeadvancebytakingthepathof approachingitthroughanxietyandthatitwouldbewellallthe samenottoconfusethisobjectofdesirewiththeobjectdefined byepistemologyastheadventofacertainobjectscientifically definedastheadventoftheobjectwhichistheobjectofour

28.11.62

III32

science,veryspecificallydefined,byacertaindiscoveryofthe (12)efficacityofthesignifyingoperationassuch,whichis propertoourscienceIamspeakingaboutthesciencewhich existsamongusfortwocenturiesleavesopenthequestionof whatIcalledabovethecosmismoftheobject. Itisnotsurethatthereisacosmosandourscienceadvancesin themeasurethatitrenouncespreservinganycosmicor cosmisingpresupposition.Werediscoverherethisessential referencepoint,onewhichissoessentialthatonecannotfail tobeastonishedthatinrestoringunderamodernformatypeof permanence,ofperpetuity,oftheeternityofthecosmismofthe realityoftheobject,ClaudeLviStrauss,inLapensesauvage doesnotbringtoeverybodythekindofsecurity,ofserenity,of Epicureanpacificationwhichoughttoresultfromit.The questionisposedofwhetheritisonlyanalystswhoarenot satisfiedorwhetheritiseverybody.NowIclaim,eventhougbI donotyethaveproofofit,thatitshouldbeeverybody.Itis amatterofexplainingwhy,whypeoplearenotcontenttosee totemismsuddenly,asonemightsay,emptiedofwhatImightcall inagrosswayinordertomakemyselfunderstooditsemotional content,whyarepeoplenotsatisfiedthattheworldshould, sincetheNeolithicerabecauseonecannotgobackanyfurther thanthatalreadybeorderedinsuchawaythateverythingis onlyaninsignificantlittlewaveonthesurfaceofthatorder, inotherwords,whydowewantsomuchtopreservethedimension ofanxiety.Theremustbesomereasonforthatbecausethe bias,thepassagewhichisheredesignatedforusbetweenthis returntoanassuredcosmismandontheotherhandthe maintenanceofanhistoricalpathoswhichwedonotholdwith eitherallthatmucheventhoughithaspreciselyitsfunction itisindeedthroughthestudyofthefunctionofanxietythat thispathweareseekingmustpass.AndthatiswhyIamledto remindyouofthetermsinwhichitcanbeseenhowthespecular relationshipispreciselylinkedtotherelationshipwiththebig Other.InthisarticlewhichIaskedyoutoreferto,becauseI amnotgoingtoredoithereinitsentirety,whattheapparatus, thelittleimagewhichIfomentedtomakeunderstoodwhatwas involved,whatthisapparatusisdesignedfor,isthefollowing: itistoremindusofsomethingIstressedattheendofmy seminarondesire,itisthatthefunctionofspecularcathexis istobeconceivedofassituatedwithinthedialecticof(13) narcissismasFreudintroducedit. Thiscathexisofthespecularimageisafundamentalmomentof theimaginaryrelationship,fundamentalinthefactthatthereis alimitandthefactisthatthewholeoflibidinalcathexisdoes notpassthroughthespecularimage.Thereisaremainder.I alreadytriedand,Ihope,succeededsufficientlyinmakingyou conceivehowandwhywecancharacterisethisremainderundera central,pivotalmode,inthiswholedialecticanditishere thatIwillbeginagainthenexttimandshowyouhowthis functionismoreprivilegedthanIhavebeenabletomakeitup tonowunderthemode,Iamsaying,ofthephallus. Andthatmeansthathenceforth,inanyimaginarymappingout,

28.11.62

III 33

thephallusappearsintheformofalack,ofa($>)Inthe wholemeasurethatthereisrealisedati(o)somethingthatI calledtherealimage,theconstitutioninthematerialofthe subjectoftheimageofthebodyfunctioningasproperly imaginary,thatistosaylibidinised,thephallusappearsasa minus,appearsasablank.Thephallusnodoubtisan operationalreserve,butonewhichisnotonlynotrepresentedat theleveloftheimaginarybutwhichiscircumscribedand,in inaword,cutoutofthespecularimage. EverythingthatItried,lastyear,toarticulateforyouabout thecrosscapis,toaddahingetothisdialectic,something which,intheambiguousdomainoftopology,insofarasitslims downinanextremewaythedataoftheimaginary,insofarasit operatesonasortoftransspacewhich,whenallissaidand done,everythingmakesusthinkismadeupoftheworst signifyingarticulation,whileatthesametimestillleaving withinourreachsomeintuitiveelements,preciselythose supportedbythismisshapenandneverthelessveryexpressive imageofthecrosscapwhichImanipulatedbeforeyouformore thanamonthinordertomakeyouconceivehowonasurface definedinthiswaysuchasthisoneIamnotgoingtorecall itherethecutcanestablishtwopieces,twodifferentpieces, onewhichmayhaveaspecularimageandtheotherwhichliterally doesnothaveone.Therelationbetweenthisreservation,this reservationwhichisimaginarilyungraspable,eventhoughitis linked,thankGod,toastillperfectlygraspableorgan,namely (14)thatoftheinstrumentwhichoughtallthesamefromtimeto timebebroughtintoactionforthesatisfactionofdesire,the phallus,therelationshipbetweenthis(<p)andtheconstitution ofowhichisthisremainder,thisresidue,thisobjectwhose statusescapesfromthestatusoftheobjectderivedfromthe specularimage,escapesfromthelawsofthetranscendental aesthetic,thisobjectwhosestatusissodifficultforusto articulatethatitisthroughitthattherehaveenteredallthe confusionsofanalytictheory,thisobjectowhoseconstituting characteristicswehaveonlybeguntooutlineandwhichwebring hereontotheagenda,thisobjecto,istheonewhichisatstake everywhereFreudspeaksaboutobjectwhenanxietyisinvolved. Theambiguitycomesfromthewayinwhichwecannotbutimagine thisobjectinthespecularregister.Itisamatterprecisely ofestablishinghereandwewilldoit,weareabletodoit toestablishanothermodeofimaginarisation,ifIcanexpress myselfinthisway,inwhichthisobjectisdefined.Thisis whatwearegoingtobeabletodo,ifyouwanttofollowme, namelystepbystep.Fromwhat,inthisarticlethatIam speakingtoyouabout,doImakethedialecticbegin?FromanS, thesubjectaspossible,thesubjectbecauseonemustatleast speakabouthimifonespeaks,thesubjectwhosemodelisgiven tousbytheclassicalconceptionofthesubjectonthissingle conditionthatwelimithimtothefactthathespeaks,and,once hespeaks,somethingisproduced. Oncehebeginstospeak,theunarytraitcomesintoplay.The primaryidentificationatthisstartingpointconstitutedbythe factofbeingabletosayoneandone,andoneagain,andone

28.11.62

III 34

againandthatitisalwaysfromaonethatonemustbegin,itis startingfromtheretheschemaofthearticleinquestion outlinesitstartingfromtherethatthereisestablishedthe possibilityoftherecognitionassuchoftheunitcalledi(o). Thisi(o)isgiveninspecularexperiencebutasItoldyou, thisspecularexperienceisauthenticatedbytheOtherandas such,atthelevelofthesigni(o).Remembermyschema,I cannotheregiveyouagainthetermsoftheamusinglittle physicsexperimentwhichImadeuseoftobeabletoimageitfor you:i'(o)whichisthevirtualimageofarealimage,atthe levelofthisvirtualimage,nothingappearshere. (15) Iwrote($>)becausewewillhavetobringitherethenext time.($>)isnomorevisible,isnomoretangible,isnomore presentifiableherethanitisthere, (-<p) hasnotenteredinto theimaginary.Theinitial,inauguralfate,thephaseIinsist ofwhichwearespeakingdependshereonthefollowingwhich willhavetowaitforthenexttimeformetoarticulateitfor youthatdesiredependsontherelationshipthatIgaveyouas beingthatofthephantasy,thediamond,withitsmeaningthat wewilllearnhowtoreadinastilldifferentwaysoon,o:o

Thismeansthatitwouldbeinthemeasurethatthesubjectcould reallybeandnotthroughthemediationoftheotheratthe placeofIthathewouldhavearelationshipwithwhatitisa matteroftakinginthebodyoftheoriginalspecularimagei(o), namelytheobjectofhisdesire,here,thesetwopillars,arethe supportofthefunctionofdesire,andifdesireexistsand sustainsmaninhisexistenceasman,itisinthemeasurethat thisrelationshipisaccessiblebysomedetour,thatthe artificesgiveusaccesstotheimaginaryrelationshipthatthe phantasyconstitutes.Butthisisinnowaypossibleinan effectivefashion.Whatmanisconfrontedwith,isnever anythingbuttheimageofwhatinmyschemaIrepresentedas youknoworasyoudonotknowbyi'(o)thattheillusionof thissphericalmirrorproduceshereintherealstate,inthe formoftherealimage,hehasitsvirtualimagewithnothingin itsbody[neck?].Theo,supportofdesireinthephantasy,is notvisibleinwhatconstitutes,forman,theimageofhis desire.

Thispresenceelsewheretherefore,onthishitherside,and,as youseehere,tooclosetohimtobeseen,asonemightsay,of theo,thisistheinitiumofdesireanditisfromthatthat theimagei'(o)takesonitsprestige.Butthemoreman approaches,circumscribes,caresseswhathebelievestobethe objectofhisdesire,themoreinfactheisdeviated,turned asidefromit,preciselybecauseofthefactthateverythingthat hedoesonthispathinordertogetclosertoit,alwaysgives morebodytowhatintheobjectofthisdesirerepresentsthe specularimage.Thefurtherhegoes,themorehewants,inthe objectofhisdesire,topreserve,tomaintainlistencarefully towhatIamtellingyoutoprotectthisistheintactaspect ofthisprimordialvasewhichthespecularimageisthemorehe (16) engageshimselfonthispathwhichisoftenincorrectly calledthepathoftheperfectionofobjectrelations,themore

28.11.62 heisdeceived.

III35

Whatconstitutesanxiety,iswhensomething,amechanism,makes thereappearhereatwhatIwouldcalltomakemyselfunderstood simplyitsnaturalplace,attheplacewhichcorrespondstothe oneoccupiedbytheotheobjectofdesire,somethingandwhen Isaysomething,youshouldunderstandanythingwhatsoeverI wouldaskyou,betweennowandthenexttime,totakethe trouble,withthisintroductionthatIamgivingyoutoitto rereadthearticleontheUnheimlich.ItisanarticlewhichI haveneverheardanyonegivingacommentaryon,never,never heardacommentaryon,andwhichnooneseemseventoglimpseas beingtheabsolutelyindispensablehingeforapproachingthe questionofanxiety. JustasIapproachedtheunconsciousbythewitticism,Iwill approachanxietythisyearbytheUnheimlich,itiswhatappears atthisplace.ThisiswhyIhavewrittenitforyoufromtoday: itisthe(9),thesomethingwhichremindsusthatwhat everythingstartsfromisimaginarycastration,thatthereisno andforgoodreasonimageoflack.Whensomethingappears there,itisbecause,ifIcanexpressmyselfinthisway,that thelackislacking.Nowthismayappeartobesimplyajoke,a concetti(?)whichiswellplacedinmystylewhicheveryone knowsisGongoric.Well,Idon'tgiveadamn.Iwouldjustlike topointouttoyouthatmanythingscanappearwhichare anomalous,thisisnotwhatmakesusanxious.Butifallofa suddenallnormsarelacking,namelywhatconstitutesthelack becausethenormiscorrelativetotheideaoflackifallofa suddenitisnotlackingandbelievemetrytoapplythattoa lotofthingsitisatthatmomentthatanxietybegins. SothatalreadyIauthoriseyoutotakeupagainthereadingof whatFreudsaysinhislastgreatarticleonanxiety,thatof Inhibitions,symptomsandanxiety,fromwhichwehavealready begunforafirstoutline.Thenwiththiskey,youwillseethe truesensetobegiven,inhiswriting,tothetermoflossof object.ItisherethatIwilltakethingsupagainthenext time,andwhereIhopetogiveitstruesensetoourresearchfor thisyear.

5.12.62

IV 1

Sothen,Iamagainputtingontheblackboardforyouthis figure,thisschemabymeansofwhichIengagedmyselfwithyou thelasttimeinthearticulationofwhatisourobject,namely throughanxietyIamsayingitsphenomenon,butalsobythe placethatIamgoingtoteachyoutodesignateasbeingitsown togothoroughlyintothefunctionoftheobjectinanalytic experience.

BrieflyIwanttopointouttoyouthattherewillsoonappear Seminar4:Wednesday5December1962

somethingthatItookthetroubletowriteupfroman intervention,fromacommunicationImadeitismorethantwo yearsagonow,itwasthe21stofSeptember1960ataHegelian meetingatRoyaumont,atwhichIhadchosentotreatofthe followingsubject:"Subversionofthesubjectanddialecticof desireintheFreudianunconscious".Ipointouttothosewho havealreadyfamilarisedthemselveswithmyteachingthatinsum Ithinktheywillfindtherecompletesatisfactionasregardsthe phasesofconstructionandtheutilisation,thefunctioning,of (2)whattogetherwehavecalledthegraph.Thisispublishedat acentreat173Boulevard,SaintGermainandwhichisresponsible forpublishingalltheworkofRoyaumont.Ithinkthatthiswork willsoonappearinavolumewhichwillalsoincludetheother interventionswhicharenotallespeciallyanalyticwhich weremadeinthecourseofthismeetingcentred,Irepeat,on Hegelianism.

Itisappropriatetomentionthistodayinthemeasurethat subversionofthesubject,likedialecticofdesire,iswhat framesforusthisfunctionoftheobjectintowhichwearenow goingtohavetoadvancemoredeeply.

5.12.62

IV37

Inthisrespect,especiallyforthosewhocomehereasnovices,I donotthinkthatIcouldencounterinanywaywhatIhaveto calltheveryantipatheticreactionthatIstillremembergreeted theworkofthistitle,asItoldyou,attheRoyaumontCongress onthepart,tomyastonishment,ofphilosopherswhomIbelieve morehardenedtowelcomingtheunusualandwhoundoubtedlyin somethingwhichwaspreciselyconstructedtoputbeforethemvery profoundlythefunctionoftheobjectandspecificallythe objectofdesireendedupontheirpartwithanimpressionthat Icannotqualifyotherwisethaninthewaytheydescribedit themselves:thatofasortofnightmare,indeedevenofa lucubrationemergingfromacertaindiabolism.

Doesitnotappearallthesamethateverythinginanexperience thatIwouldcallmodern,anexperienceatthelevelofwhat thereisbroughtintermsofprofoundmodificationsinthe apprehensionoftheobject,bytheera,thatIamnotthefirst todescribeastheeraoftechnique,shouldthatnotbringtoyou theideathatadiscourseontheobjectmustnecessarilypassby wayofcomplexrelationshipswhichdonotpermitustoaccedeto itexceptbywayofprofoundchicanery?Canonenotsaythatfor examplethismoduleofobject,socharacteristicofwhatisgiven tousIamspeakingaboutthemostexternalexperience,Iam nottalkingaboutanalyticexperiencethismoduleofobject whichiscalledthesparepart,isitnotsomethingwhich deservestobedweltonandsomethingwhichbringsaprofoundly (3)newdimensiontoeverynoeticinterrogationconcerningour relationshiptotheobject?Forafterallwhatisasparepart? Whatisitssubsistenceoutsideitseventualusewithrespectto acertainmodelwhichisfunctioning,butwhichcanalsomoreover becomeobsolete,nolongerberepeatedastheysay?Afterthat whatbecomesof,whatmeaninghasasparepart?

Whyshouldthisprofileofacertainenigmaticrelationshipto theobjectnotbeofusetoustodayasanintroduction,asa reminderofsomethingwhichisnotavaincomplication,that thereisnoneedforustobeastonishedortosteelourselves againstaschema,againstaschemalikethisonewhichIrecalled foryouandalreadyintroducedthelasttime,andthattheresult isthatitisatthatplace,attheplacewhereintheOther,at thelocusoftheOther,authenticatedbytheOther,thereis profiledanimageofourselvesthatissimplyreflected,already problematic,evenfallaciousthatitisataplacethatis situatedwithrespecttoanimagewhichischaracterisedbya lack,bythefactthatwhatiscalledfortherecannotappear there,thatthereisprofoundlyorientatedandpolarisedthe functionofthisimageitself,thatdesireisthere,notsimply veiled,butessentiallyplacedinrelationtoanabsence,toa possibilityofappearingdeterminedbyapresencewhichis elsewhereanddeterminesitmoreclosely,but,whereitis, ungraspablebythesubject,namelyhere,Iindicatedit,theoof theobject,oftheobjectwhichconstitutesourquestion,ofthe objectinthefunctionthatitfulfillsinthephantasyatthe placethatsomethingcanappear.ThelasttimeIputthissign (),inparentheses,pointingouttoyouthatherethereought tobeprofiledarelationshipwiththelibidinalreserve,with

5.12.62

IV38

thesomethingwhichisnotprojected,withthesomethingwhichis notcathectedatthelevelofthespecularimage,forthereason thatitremainsprofoundlycathected,irreducibleatthelevelof one'sownbody,atthelevelofprimarynarcissism,atthelevel ofwhatiscallederotism,atthelevelofanautistic jouissance,analimentinshortremainingthereforwhatwill interveneeventuallyasinstrumentintherelationshiptothe other,totheotherconstitutedstartingfromthisimageofmy fellow,thisotherwhowillprofilewithitsformanditsnorms theimageofthebodyinitsseductivefunctionontheonewhois thesexualpartner.

(4) Thereforeyouseetherebeingestablishedarelationship: what,asItoldyouthelasttime,cancometobedistinguished atthisplacedesignatedherebythe(jp),isanxiety,castration anxietyinitsrelationshiptotheOther.Thequestionofthis relationshiptotheOtheristheoneintowhichwearegoingto advancetoday.Letussayrightawayyousee,Iamgoing straighttothenodalpointthateverythingthatweknowabout thisstructureofthesubject,aboutthisdialecticofdesire whichistheonethatweanalystshavetoarticulate,something absolutelynew,originalabout,welearnedthroughwhat,along whatpath?Alongthepathoftheexperienceoftheneurotic. AndwhathasFreudtoldus?Itisthatthefinaltermthathe arrivedatinelaboratingthisexperience,thetermwhichhe pointsouttousasbeingforhimhisdestination,hisendpoint, theunsurpassabletermforhim,iscastrationanxiety. Whatdoesthatmean?Isthistermunsurpassable?Whatismeant bythisstoppingoftheanalyticdialecticoncastrationanxiety? Doyounotalreadysee,inthesimpleusageoftheschemathatI amusing,therebeingoutlinedthewaythatIintendtoleadyou? Itbeginsfromabetterarticulationofthisfactofexperience, designatedbyFreudintheneurotic'scomingtoahaltbefore castrationanxiety.TheopeningthatIamproposingtoyou consistsinthefactthatthedialecticthatIamshowingyou hereallowstoarticulate:thefactisthatitisnotatall castrationanxietyinitselfwhichconstitutesthefinalimpasse oftheneuroticbecausetheform,theformofcastration,of castrationinitsimaginarystructure,isalreadyconstructed hereintheapproachtothelibidinisedimageofmyfellow,itis constructedatthelevelofthebreakingthatisproducedatsome timebecauseofacertainimaginarydramaandthisasyouknow iswhatgivesimportancetotheaccidentsofthescenewhich forthatreasonisdescribedastraumatic.Thereareallsorts ofvariations,ofpossibleanomalies,inthisimaginarybreak whichalreadyindicatesomethinginthematerial,thatcanbe usedforwhat?Foranotherfunctionwhich,foritspart,gives itsfullsensetothetermcastration.

Whattheneuroticretreatsfrom,isnotcastration,itisfrom makingofhisowncastrationwhatislackingtotheOther,0,it isfrommakingofhiscastrationsomethingpositivewhichisthe (5) guaranteeofthisfunctionoftheOther.ThisOtherwhich slipsawayintheindefiniteputtingoffofsignifications,this Otherwhichthesubjectnolongerseesasanythingbutdestiny,

5.12.62

IV39

butadestinywhichhasnoend,adestinywhichlosesitselfin theseaofhistoriesandwhatarehistories,ifnotanimmense fictionwhatcanensurearelationshipofthesubjecttothis universeofsignifications,ifnotthatsomewherethereis jouissance?Hecanonlyensurethisbymeansofasignifier,and thissignifierisnecessarilylacking.Itisthetoppingup thatthesubjectiscalledontomakeatthismissingplacebya signwhichwecallonfromhisowncastration. DedicatinghiscastrationtothisguaranteeoftheOtheriswhat theneuroticcomestoahaltbeforehecomestoahaltbeforeit forareasonthatisinawayinternaltoanalysis:thefactis thatanalysisbringshimtothisrendevous.Whenallissaidand donecastrationisnothingotherthatthemomentofthe interpretationofcastration. IhaveperhapsbeenquickerthanIintendedtobeinmydiscourse thismorning.Inanycaseyouseeitindicatedtherethat perhapsthereisapossiblewaythrough,butofcoursewecan onlyexplorethispossibilitybygoingbacktothisveryplaceat whichimaginarycastrationfunctions,asIhavejustpointedout toyou,inordertoconstituteproperlyspeakingwithallits rightswhatiscalledthecastrationcomplex. Itisthereforeattheleveloftheputtinginquestionofthis castrationcomplexthatourwholeconcreteexplorationof anxiety,thisyear,isgoingtoallowustostudythispossible waythough,oneallthemorepossibleinthatithasalreadybeen takenonseveraloccasions.Itisthestudyofthephenomenology ofanxietywhichisgoingtoallowustosayhowandwhy. Anxiety,whichwetakeinitsminimaldefinitionasasignal,a definitionwhicheventhoughitcomesattheendoftheprogress ofFreud'sthinkingisnotwhatpeoplebelieve,namelytheresult ofanabandoningofthefirstpositionsofFreudwhichmadeofit thefruitofanenergeticmetabolism,neitheranabandoning,nor evenanewconquestbecauseatthetimewhenFreudmadeof anxietythetransformationofthelibido,thereisalreadythe indicationthatitcouldfunctionasasignal.Thiswouldbe (6)easytoshowyouinpassingbyconsultingthetext.Ihave toomuchtodo,tobringupthisyearwithyouconcerning anxiety,tobecomeboggeddowntoolongatthelevelofthis explanationoftext.

Anxiety,asItoldyou,islinkedtoeverythingthatcanappear atthatplaceandwhatassuresusofthis,isaphenomenonwhich becauseithasbeenaccordedtoolittleattentionhasmeantthat wehavenotarrivedatasatisfying,unitaryformulationofall thefunctionsofanxietyinthefieldofourexperience.This phenomenon,isUnheimlichkeit.IaskedyoutorefertoFreud's textthelasttime,andforthesamereasonsitisbecauseIdo nothavethetimetospelloutthistextwithyouagain.Manyof you,asIknow,wentatitrightaway,forwhichIthankthem. Thefirstthingwhichstandsoutinitevenonasuperficial reading,istheimportancethatFreudgivestolinguistic analysis.Ifitwerenoteverywhereobvious,thistextwouldbe

5.12.62

IV40

enoughjustbyitselftojustifytheimportancethatIgiveto thefunctionsofthesignifierinmycommentaryofFreud.The thingwhichwillstandoutsecondly,whenyoureadthewayin whichFreudintroducesthenotionoftheunheimlich,the explorationofdictionariesconcerningthisword,isthatthe definitionofunheimlichistobeunheimlich.Itiswhatisat thehighpointofHeim,thatisUnheim.Andthensincehehas onlytoexplaintouswhyitislikethat,becauseitisvery obviousbysimplyreadingthedictionaries,hedoesnotdelayany longeronitheislikemetodayhehastoadvance.Wellthen, forourconventions,fortheclarityofourlanguage,forwhat follows,thisplacedesignatedherethelasttime,wearegoing tocallbyitsname:thisiswhatiscalledHeim.Ifyouwish, letussaythatifthiswordhasameaninginhumanexperience, thisiswherethehomeofmanis.Givetothiswordhome (maison)alltheresonancesyouwish,includingtheastrological ones.ManfindshishomeinapointsituatedintheOtherbeyond theimageofwhichwearemadeandthisplacerepresentsthe absencewhereweare.Supposingwhichhappensthatit revealsitselfforwhatitis:thepresenceelsewherewhich constitutosthisplaceasabsence,thenitisthequeenofthe game.Itmakesoffwiththeimagewhichsupportsitandthe specularimagebecomestheimageofthedoublewithwhatit (7)bringsintermsofaradicalstrangenessand,toemployterms whichtakeontheirsignificationbybeingopposedtothe Hegelianterms,bymakingusappearasobjectbyrevealingtous thenonautonomyofthesubject.EverythingthatFreudpicked outasexampleintheHoffmanntextswhichareattheheartof suchanexperience:theSandManandhisatrociousstoryinwhich oneseesthesubjectreboundingfromcaptivationtocaptivation beforethisformofimagewhichproperlyspeakingmaterializes theextremelyreducedschemathatIgiveyouofithere,butthe dollinquestion,whichtheheroofthestoryspiesbehindthe windowofthesorcererwhocarriesoutsomemagicaloperationor otheronher,isproperlythisimage%'intheoperationof completingitbywhatisintheveryformofthestoryabsolutely distinguished,namelytheeye.Andtheeyeinvolvedcanonlybe thatoftheheroofthestory.Thethemeofthiseyewhichisto bestolenfromhim,iswhatgivestheexplanatorythreadofthe wholestory. Itissignificantofsomeembarrassmentorotherlinkedtothe factthatitwasthefirsttimethattheploughshareenteredonto thislineoftherevelationofsubjectivestructure,thatFreud givesusinawaythisreferenceinanunpackagedway.Hesays: "readTheDevil'sElixir".Icannoteventellyouhowcomplete itis,thedegreetowhichitcontainsallthepossibleformsof thesamemechanisminwhichtherearemadeexplicitallthe incidencesinwhichthisfunctioncanbeproduced,inwhichthere canbeproducedthisunheimlichreaction.Obviouslyhedoesnot gointoit,heisinawayovercome'bytheluxuriancethatis effectivelypresentedbythisshortlittlenovelwhichitis stillnotsoeasytogetacopyof,eventhoughbythegoodness ofsomeone,Istilldonotknowwho,amongthosepresentIfindI haveoneandIthankyouforitoratleastIthanktheperson

5.12.62

IV41

inquestiononthislectern.Itisveryusefultohavemore thanonecopyatone'sdisposal. Onthispoint,Heimdoesnotmanifestitselfsimply,asyouhave alwaysknown,namelythatdesireisrevealedasthedesireofthe Other,heredesireintheOther,butIwouldsaythatmydesire entersthedenwhereithasbeenawaitedfromalleternityinthe shapeoftheobjectthatIam,insofarasitexilesmefrommy subjectivitybyresolvingofitselfallthesignifierstowhich (8)thissubjectivityisattached.Naturallythatdoesnot happeneveryday,andperhapsevenitonlyhappensinthetales ofHoffmann.InTheDevil'sElixiritisquiteclear.Atevery detourofthislongandsotortuoustruth,weunderstandfromthe notethatFreudgives,whichallowsittobeunderstoodthatone losesoneselfalittleinitandeventhis"losingoneselfinit" ispartofthefunctionofthelabyrinththatmustbebroughtto life.Butitisclearthat,eventhougheveryonemakesthis detour,thesubjectonlyarrivesat,onlyaccedesto,hisdesire bysubstitutinghimselfalwaysforoneofhisowndoubles.

ItisnotfornothingthatFreudinsistsontheessential dimensionwhichthefieldoffictiongivestoourexperienceof theunheimlich.Itistoofleetinginrealityandfiction demonstratesitmuchbetter,producesiteveninamorestable fashionbecauseitisbetterarticulated.Itisasortofideal point,butoneverypreciousforus,since,fromthatpointon, wearegoingtobeabletoseethefunctionofphantasy.This possibility,articulatedrepeatedlyinaworkliketheDevil's Elixir,butlocatableinsomanyotherauthors,ofthemajor effectoffiction,thiseffectintheeffectivecurrentof existenceiswhatremainswecansayatthestateofphantasy. Andwhatisphantasytakenfromthisangleifnotwhichwehave somedoubtsabouteinWunsch,awishandeven,likeallwishes, rathernaive.Toexpressitratherhumorously,Iwouldsaythat Sdesireofo,theformulaofthephantasy,canbetranslated,in thisperspective,thattheOtherfaints,swoons,Iwouldsay, beforethisobjectthatIam,adeductionmadefromthefactthat Iseemyself. Herethen,becauseIcannotavoidposingthingslikethatinan. apodicticway,andthenafterwardsyouwillseehowitfunctions, Iwilltellyourightawaytodeclaremyhandthatthetwophases inwhichIwrotetherelationshipsofStoobysituatingthem differentlywithrespecttothereflectivefunctionofO.With respecttothismirrorO,thesetwofashionscorrespondexactly, tothefashion,totheredistributionofthetermsofthe

(9)mightsaytoexpressmyselfveryroughlytomakemyself understoodintheirproperplace:theoistherewhereitis,

5.12.62

IV42

phantasyinthepervertandintheneurotic.ThingsareasI

5.12.62

IV43

wherethesubjectcannotseeit,asyouknow,andthe$isatits place.Thatiswhyonecansaythattheperversesubject,while remainingunconsciousofthewayinwhichthisfunctions,offers himselfloyallytothejouissanceoftheOther.Only,wewould neverhaveknownanythingaboutit,iftherewerenotneurotics forwhomphantasyhasabsolutelynotthesamefunction.Sothat itisatthesametimehewhorevealsittoyouinitsstructure becauseofwhathemakesofit,butwithwhathemakesofit, throughwhathemakesofit,hescrewsyoulikehescrews everybodyelse.Because,asIamgoingtoexplaintoyou,he makesuseofthisphantasyforveryparticularends.Thisis whatIalreadyexpressedbeforeyouonotheroccasions,bysaying thatwhatwasbelievedtohavebeenperceivedasbeinga perversionundertheneurosis,issimplywhatIamintheprocess ofexplainingtoyou,namelyaphantasyentirelysituatedatthe locusoftheOther,thesupporttakenuponsomethingwhich,if oneencountersit,isgoingtopresentitselfasperversion.

Neuroticshaveperversephantasies,andthatiswhyanalystshave rackedtheirbrainsforalongtimeaskingthemselveswhatthat means.Itcanbeclearlyseenallthesamethatitisnotthe samething,thatitdoesnotfunctioninthesameway.Hencethe questionwhichisengenderedandtheconfusionswhichmultiply aboutthequestionofwhether,forexampleaperversionisreally aperversion,namelywhetheritdoesnotfunctionasaquestion whichreduplicatesthefollowing:namelyofwhatusetheperverse phantasyistotheneurotic?Becausethereisallthesameone thingthat,startingfromthepositionofthefunctionthatI havejustsetupbeforeyouofthephantasy,onemustbeginby saying,itisthatthisphantasythattheneuroticmakesuseof, thatheorganisesatthemomentthathemakesuseofitthere isindeedineffectsomethingoftheorderofowhichappearsat theplaceofHeim,abovetheimagethatIdesignateforyou,the locusoftheappearanceofanxietywellthen,thereis somethingaltogetherstrikingwhichisthat,precisely,thisis whatserveshimbesttodefendhimselfagainstanxiety,tocover uptheanxiety. Thereisthereforethiscanonlybeconceivednaturally startingfrompresuppositionswhichIhadtoposeatfirstin theirextremeform,butlikeeverynewdiscourse,youhaveto (10)judgeitatthemomentthatittakesshapeandseewhether itcovers(asIthinkyouhavenodoubt)thefunctioningof experiencethisobjectowhichtheneuroticputsintohis phantasy,suitshim,Iwouldsay,thewaygaiterssuitarabbit. Thisindeediswhytheneuroticnevermakesverymuchofhis phantasy.Itsucceedsinprotectinghimagainstanxiety preciselyinthemeasurethatitisafalseo.Itisthe functionthatIillustratedforyoualongtimeagoofthedream of"thebutcher'sbeautifulwife".Thebutcher'sbeautifulwife lovescaviaronlyshedoesnotwantitbecausethismightgive toomuchpleasuretoherbigbruteofahusbandwhoiscapableof swallowingthatwiththerest,eventhatwouldnotstophim. Now whatintereststhebutcher'sbeautifulwife,isnotatallof coursetofeedherhusbandwithcaviar,because,asItoldyou, hewouldaddawholemenutoit,becausehehasahugeappetite,

5.12.62

IV44

thebutcher.Theonlythingthatintereststhebutcher's beautifulwifeisthatherhusbandshouldwantthelittlenothing thatsheholdsinreserve. Thisformulaisquiteclearwhenwearedealingwithahysteric believemetoday:itappliestoallneurotics.Thisobjecto functioningintheirphantasy,andwhichservesasadefensefor themagainsttheiranxiety,isalso,despiteallappearances,the baitwithwhichtheyholdontotheother.AndthankGodforit: itistothisthatweowepsychoanalysis.

TherewasaladynamedAnna0whoknewsomethingaboutthe operationofthehystericalgameandwhopresentedherwhole story,allherphantasies,toMessrsBreuerandFreudwho precipitatedthemselvesontoitlikelittlefishintowater. FreudonInolongerrememberwhatpage,271,ofStudieniiber HysteriemarvelledatthefactthaninAnna0allthesamethere wasnottheslightestdefense.Shegaveeverythingshehad,just likethat.Therewasnoneedtoworkveryhardtohavethewhole package.Obviouslyhefoundhimselfbeforeagenerousformof hystericalfunctioning.AnditwasforthatreasonthatBreuer, asyouknow,reallyfeltitgoingdownbecausehe,alongwith theformidablebaitalsoswallowedthelittlenothing,andhe spentsometimetryingtoregurgitateit.Hestayedwellaway fromitinfuture. (11)LuckilyFreudwasneurotic.Andsincehewasboth intelligentandcourageous,heknewhowtomakeuseofhisown anxietyabouthisdesirewhichwasatthesourceofhis ridiculousattachmenttothisimpossiblewomanwhoasamatterof factburiedhimcalledMadameFreudandheknewhowtomakeuse ofittoprojectontotheXrayscreenofhisfidelitytothis phantasticalobject,torecogniseinitwithoutblinkingevenfor aninstantwhatitwasaquestionofdoing,namelytounderstand whatuseallofthiswasandwellandtrulytoadmitthatAnna0 hadperfectlyinhersights,Freudhimself,butthathewas obviouslyalittlebithardertohavethantheother,Breuer.It isindeedtothisthatweoweourentrythroughphantasyintothe mechanismofanalysisandintoarationaluseofthe transference.

Itisperhapsalsowhatisgoingtoallowustotakethenext stepandtoperceivethatwhatconstitutestheborderbetweenthe neuroticandtheothersanewleapwhosepassageIwouldask youtonote,sinceliketheotherswearegoingtohaveto justifyitsubsequentlywhateffectivelyfunctionsinthe neurotic,isthatatthislevelalreadydisplacedforhim,oof theobjectissomethingwhichisalreadysufficientlyexplained bythefactthathewasalreadyabletotransportthefunctionof ointotheother.Therealitythatexistsbehindthisfallacious useoftheobjectinthephantasyoftheneurotichasavery simplename:itisthedemand. The true object the neurotic seeks is a demand: he wants a demand to be made of him, he wants to be begged. The only thing that he doesnotwantistopaytheprice.Thisisagrossexperience

5.12.62

IV45

whichanalystshavenodoubtnotsufficientlytakenapart, illuminatedbyFreud'sexplanations,forthemnottohave believeditnecessarytoreturnheretotheslipperyslopeof moralismandtodeducefromitaphantasywhichcanbefound everywhereintheoldestmoralisticreligiouspreachings,thatof oblativity.

Theyhaveobviouslyglimpsedthat,sincehewantstogive nothing,thishasacertainrelationshipalsowiththefactthat hisdifficultyisintheorderofreceiving.Hewantstobe begged,Itoldyou,anddoesnotwanttopaytheprice.Whileif hereallywishedtogivesomething,perhapsitwouldwork.Only, dotheanalystsinquestion,thosewhospeaksobeautifullyabout (12)genitalmaturityasifthiswerethelocusofthegift notperceivethatwhattheneuroticmustbetaughttogive,is thisthingthathedoesnotimagine,itisnothing,itis preciselyhisanxiety.Thisiswhatleadsustoourpointof departuretodaydesignatingthecomingtoastoponcastration anxiety.Theneuroticwillnotgivehisanxiety.Wewilllearn moreaboutit:wewilllearnwhy.Itissotruethatthisis whatisinvolved,thatallthesamethewholeprocess,thewhole chainofanalysisconsistsinthefactthatatleasthegivesits equivalent,thathebeginsbygivinghissymptomalittle.And thisiswhyananalysis,asFreudsays,beginsbyaputtinginto shapeofsymptoms.Weareindeedattherequiredplaceandwe trytocatchhim,Godknows,inhisowntrap.Youcanneverdo anythingotherwithsomeone.Hemakesyouwhatisreallya fallaciousoffer,wellthenoneacceptsit.Bythisoneenters intothegamethroughwhichheappealstothedemand.Hewants youtodemandsomethingofhim.Sinceyoudemandnothingofhim thisishowthefirstentryintoanalysistakesplacehe beginstomodulatehisown,hisdemands,whichcomethereatthe placeHeim.AndItellyouinpassing:Ifindithardtosee, outsidewhatisarticulatedalmostbyitselfonthisschema,how onehasbeenabletojustifyuptonow,exceptbyasortof false,grosscomprehensibility,thedialecticoffrustration aggressionregression.Itisinthemeasurethatyouleavethe demandwithoutananswerthattherebeginstobearticulated here,thattherebeginstobeproducedwhat?Theaggression involved.Wherehaveyoueverseen,exceptoutsideanalysisin practicesdescribedasgrouppsychotherapythatwehaveheard tellof,noaggressionbeingproduced?Butonthecontrarythe dimensionofaggressivitycomesintoplaytoputinquestion againwhatitaimsatbyitsnature,namelytherelationshipto thespecularimage. Itisinthemeasurethatthesubjectexhaustshisragesagainst thisimagethatthereisproducedthissequenceofdemandswhich goesalwaystowardsamoreoriginaldemandhistoricallyspeaking, andregressionassuchismodulated. Thepointatwhichwearrivenowand'whichalsohasneverbeen explaineduptonowinasatisfactoryfashion,ishowithappens thatitisalongthisregressivepaththatthesubjectisleadto amomentthatweareindeedforcedtosituatehistoricallyas progressive.Therearethosewho,placedbeforethisparadoxof

5.12.62

IV46

howitisthatbygoingbacktotheoralphaseoneseparatesout thephallicrelationship,havetriedtomakeusbelievethat aftertheregressiononeshouldretraceone'sstepsinthe oppositedirection,whichisabsolutelycontrarytoexperience. Therehasneverbeenananalysis,nomatterhowsuccessfulitis supposedtohavebeenintheprocessofregression,which repassedthroughtheoppositestages,whichwouldbenecessaryif itweresomethinglikeageneticreconstructionthatwas involved.Onthecontraryitisinthemeasurethatthereare exhaustedtotheend,tothebottomofthebarrel,alltheforms ofdemand,includingthezerodemand,thatweseeappearingat thebottomtherelationtocastration. Castrationisfoundinscribedasarelationatthelimitofthis regressivecycleofdemand.Itappearsthereimmediately afterwardsandinthemeasurethattheregisterofdemandis exhausted.Itisthisthatmustbeunderstoodtopologically. Idonotwanttopushthingsanyfurthertoday.Butallthe sameIwillendwitharemarkwhichsinceitconvergeswiththe oneonwhichIendedmylastdiscoursewilltakeyourreflection inadirectionwhichwillfacilitateforyouthenextstepasI havejustnowhighlightedit.AndhereagainIamnotgoingto delayonuselessdetours,Iamgoingtotakethingsrightatthe centre.InInhibitions,symptomsandanxiety,Freudtellsus, orappearstotellus,thatanxietyisthereaction,the signalreactiontothelossofanobjectheenumeratesthatof theallenvelopinguterinemilieu,whichhappensatbirth, eventuallythatofthemotherconsideredasobject,thatofthe penis,thatofobjectloveandthatoftheloveofthesuperego.

NowwhatdidItellyouthelasttimetoputyoualreadyona certainpaththatisessentialtograsp,ifnotthatanxietyis notthesignalofalackbutofsomethingthatyoumustmanageto conceiveofatthisredoubledlevelasbeingtheabsenceofthis (14)supportofthelack.Wellthen,takeupagainFreud'svery listthatItakeherearrestedatitsterminfullflight,asI mightsay:doyounotknowthatitisnotnostalgiaforwhatis calledthematernalwombwhichengendersanxiety,itisits imminence,itiseverythingthatannouncestoussomethingwhich willallowustoglimpsethatwearegoingtoreenterit.What provokesanxiety?Itisnot,contrarytowhatissaid,either therhythmnorthealternationofthepresenceabsenceofthe mother.Andwhatprovesit,isthattheinfanttakespleasurein repeatingthisgameofpresenceandabsence:thispossibilityof absence,iswhatgivespresenceitssecurity.Whatismost anxietyprovokingforthechild,isthatpreciselythis relationoflackonwhichheestablisheshimself,whichmakeshim desire,thisrelationisallthemoredisturbedwhenthereisno possibilityoflack,whenthemotherisalwaysonhisback,and especiallybywipinghisbottom,themodelofthedemand,ofthe demandwhichcannotfail.Andatahigherlevelatthefollowing phase,thatofthesocalledlossofthepenis,whatisinvolved? WhatdoweseeatthebeginningoflittleHans'phobia? Thefollowing,thatwhattheaccentisputon,whatisnotwell

5.12.62

IV47

centred,namelythatanxietyissupposedtobelinkedtothe interdictionbythemotherofmasturbatorypractices,is experienced,perceivedbythechildasthepresenceofthedesire ofthemotherbeingexercisedtowardshim.Whatisanxietyin generalinrelationtotheobjectofdesire,whatdoesexperience teacheushere,ifnotthatitistemptation,notthelossofthe object,butpreciselythepresenceofthefactthatobjectsare notlacking?Andtopasstothefollowingstage,thatofthe loveofthesuperegowitheverythingthatitissupposedtopose alongwhatiscalledthepathoffailure,whatdoesthatmean,if notthatwhatisfeared,issuccess,itisalwaysthe"itisnot missing,canemanquepas"? Iwillleaveyoutodayonthispointdesignedtomakeyouget aroundaconfusionwhichpreciselyreposesentirelyonthe difficultyofidentifyingtheobjectofdesire.Anditisnot becauseitisdifficulttoidentifythatitisnotthere:itis thereanditsfunctionisdecisiveforwhatconcernsanxiety.

(15)YoushouldconsiderthatwhatItoldyoutodayisstillonly apreliminarywayin,thattheprecisemodeofsituatingitthat wewillgointofromthenexttimeisthereforetobesituated betweenthreethemesthatyouhaveseenbeingoutlinedinmy discoursetoday:oneisthejouissanceoftheOther,thesecond thedemandoftheOther,thethirdcouldonlybeheardbythe sharpestears.Itisthefollowing,thissortofdesirewhich manifestsitselfininterpretation,ofwhichtheveryincidence ofanalysisinthetreatmentisthemostexemplaryandthemost enigmaticform,theonewhichhasmademeposethequestionfora longtimeforyou:"Inthisessentialeconomyofdesire,what doesthissortofprivilegeddesirewhichIcallthedesireof theanalystrepresent?"

12.12.62 Seminar5: Wednesday12December1962

V48

Wehaveseen,wehaveread,wewillseeandreadagainthata certainwayofteachingpsychoanalysis,specificallytheone thatispursuedhere,hasasupposedlymorephilosophical characterthananothertypewhichissupposedtotrytoconnect upwithamoreconcrete,morescientific,moreexperimental experience.Itdoesnotmatterwhatwordoneuses.

Itisnotmyfault,astheysay,ifpsychoanalysis,onthe theoreticalplane,putsinquestionthedesiretoknow,and thereforeplacesitself,alreadyplacesitselfinitsdiscourse onthehitherside,inwhatprecedesthemomentofknowledge whichjuntbyitselfwouldalreadyjustifythissortofputting inquestionwhichgivestoourdiscourse,whatwemightcalla certainphilosophicalhue.

Forthatmattermoreover,Iwasprecededinthisbytheinventor ofpsychoanalysishimselfwhowasindeed,asfarasIknow, someonewhowasatthelevelofadirectexperience,thatof patients,ofmentalpatients,ofthoseespeciallythatare calledwithagreaterrigoursinceFreud,neurotics.

Butafterall,thiswouldnotbeareasonforremainingany longerthannecessaryonanepistemologicalquestioning,ifthe placeofdesire,thewayinwhichinwhichithollowsitselfout (secreuse),wasnotateveryinstantateveryinstantinour therapeuticpositionpresentifiedforusthroughaproblem, whichisthemostconcreteoneofall,thatofnotallowing ourselvestoengageonafalsepath,ofnotrespondingtoitin thewrongway,ofnotrespondinginexactlytoit,atleastof consideringrecognisedacertaingoalthatwepursueandwhich isnotsoclear.Irememberhavingprovokedindignationinthe sortofcolleaguewhoknowsonoccasionhowtobarricadehimself

12.12.62

V49

(2) behindsomebombastorotheroffinesentimentsdesignedto reassuresomeoneorother,tohaveprovokedindignationby sayingthatinanalysisacureonlycameinawayasabonus. Thiswasseenassomesortofdisdainfortheonethatweare responsiblefor,thepersonwhoissuffering.Iwasspeaking fromamethodologicalpointofview.Itisquitecertainthat ourjustificationaswellasourdutyistoamelioratethe positionofthesubject.AndIclaimthatnothingismore uncertaininthefieldthatweareinthantheconceptof acure.

Isananalysiswhichendswiththeentryofthemaleorfemale patientintothethirdorderacure,evenifthesubjectfinds himselfimprovedasregardshissymptoms,andinacertainway, acertainorderthathehasreconqueredenunciatesthemost expressreservationsabouttheways,nowseenbyhimas perverse,throughwhichwehavemadehimpassinordertomake himenterthekingdomofheaven. This happens. That is why I do not think I am deviating for a single instant from our experience. My discourse, very far from deviating from it, consists precisely in recalling that within our experience every question can be asked, and that it is necessary, precisely, for us to preserve in it the possibility of a certain thread which, at least for us, guarantees us that we are not cheating on what is our very instrument, namely the planeoftruth. This necessitates of course an exploration which must not only be serious,butIwouldsayuptoacertainpointtobe,notsimply a .........,butwhatitcanbebuttoacertaindegree, . yes,encyclopedic. Itisnoteasyinasubjectlikeanxietytogathertogetherina discourselikeminethisyearwhat,letussay,for psychoanalystsoughttobefunctional,whatthey,oughtnotto forgetforasingleinstantaboutwhatisimportanttous.We havedesignatedonthislittleschematheplacecurrently occupiedby astheplaceofanxiety,asthisplacewhichI alreadydesignatedasconstitutingacertainvoid,anxiety appearingthereabouteverythingwhichmanifestsitselfatthis place,toconfuseus,asImightsay,asregardsthestructuring functionofthisvoid. Thesigns,asImightputit,theindicestobemoreexact,the importofthistautologywillonlyhavevalueifwecanfindthem confirmedbysomeapproachorotherwhichhasbeengivenby (3) everyseriousstudyofthephenomenonofanxiety,whatever itspresuppositionsmightbe.Evenifthesepresuppositions appeartoonarrowforus,shouldbesituatedwithinthisradical experiencewhichisours,itremainsthatsomethinghasbeen wellgraspedatacertainlevelandevenifthephenomenonof anxietyappearstoustobelimited,distorted,insufficientin thelightofourexperience,weshouldatleasttrytolearnvhy itisthatway.Nowitisnotalwaysthatway.Wehaveto

12.12.62

V50

harvest ctt any level whatsoever where there has been formulated uptothepresentthequestioningaboutthesubjectofanxiety. Itismyintentiontodaytoindicate,becauseIamnotable,of course,toaddtogethersomethingthatwouldrequireawhole yearofseminars,toaddtogetherwhathasbeencontributedina certainnumberoftypesofquestioningwhicharecalled rightlyorwronglyforexampletheobjectiveapproachtothe problemofanxiety,theexperimentalapproachtotheproblemof anxiety.

Andofcourse,wewouldonlyloseourselvesintheseresponses, ifIhadnotgivenyouatthebeginningthelinesofsight,the orientationpointsthatwecannotabandonforasinglemomentin ordertoguarantee,torestrictourobject,sothatwecansee whatconditionsitinthemostradical,themostfundamental fashion.Anditisforthisreasonthatthelasttime,my discourseendedbycircumscribingthem,asonemightsay,with threereferencepointswhichIhadofcourseonlystartedon,to introducethreepointswhereundoubtedly,thedimensionofthe Otherremaineddominant.NamelythedemandoftheOther,the jouissanceoftheOtherand,inaquitemodalformwhich remainedmoreoveratthestateofaquestionmark,thedesireof theOtherinsofarasitisthisdesirewhichcorrespondsto ourinterrogation,Imeanthatoftheanalyst,oftheanalystin sofarasheintervenesasterm. Wearenotgoingtodowhatwereproachalltheotherswith doing,namelyelideourselvesfromthetextoftheexperience whichinterrogatesus.Theanxietytowhichwehavehereto bringaformula,isananxietywhichrespondstous,itisan anxietythatweprovoke,itisananxietytowhichwehaveon occasionadeterminingrelationship. ThisdimensionoftheOtherwherewefindourplace,our efficaciousplaceinsofarpreciselyasweknowhownotto restrictitwhichisthemotiveofthequestionthatIam (4)posing,namelythemeasureinwhichourdesireoughtnotto narrowitthisdimensionoftheOther,Iwouldliketomake yousensethatitisnotabsentfromanyofthemodesunder whichuptonowanattempthasbeenmadetocircumscribe,toget closerto,thisphenomenonofanxiety.AndIwouldsaythatat thepointofmentalexercisethatIhaveformed,habituatedyou to,perhapsindeedyoumayseethevanityinthissortof bombast,ofvainsuccess,offalsetriumphthatsomepeoplefind themselvestakinginthefactthat,forexample,supposedlyin oppositiontoanalyticthinkingandagainwoulditevenbe that,whenallissaidanddoneneurosesareproducedin animalsinthelaboratory,ontheexperimentalbench.These neuroses,thosewhichthePavlovianlaboratory,ImeanPavlov himselfandthosewhofollowedhim,,emphasisedonoccasion,what dotheyshowus?Wearetoldthatinthetextandthesequence oftheseexperimentsbywhichoneconditionswhatiscalledone orotherreflexoftheanimal,namelyoneorother"natural reaction"ofoneofthesesystemswhichareassociatedtoa stimulus,toanexcitationwhichformspartofaregister

12.12.62

V51

presumedtobecompletelydifferentfromtheonewhichis involvedinthereaction,byacertainmodeofmakingthese conditionedreactionsconverge,wearegoingtotakeinto accounttheeffectofcontrariety.Oncewehavealready obtained,conditioned,producedoneoftheseresponsesofthe organism,wearegoingtoputitinapositionofrespondingat thesametimeintwoopposedways,generatingasonemightsaya sortoforganicperplexity. Togofurther,wewouldevensaythatincertaincaseswecan,we havetheideathatwhatweareobtainingisasortofexhaustion ofthepossibilitiesofresponse,asortofmorefundamental disordergeneratedbytheirconfusion,somethingwhichinvolves inamoreradicalfashionwhatonecancalltheordinaryfield ofthereactioninvolved,whichistheobjectiveexpressionof whatcanbeinterpretedinamoregeneralperspectiveasdefined bycertainmodesofreactionwhicharecalledinstinctual.In short,togettothepointwherethedemandmadeonthefunction itissomethingwhichhasbeentheorisedmorerecentlyandin differentculturalareas,bythetermstressmayendup, culminateinthesortofdeficitwhichoverwhelmsthefunction itself,whichinvolvesthesysteminawaywhichmodifiesit, beyondtheregisterofthefunctionalresponse,whichismoreor lessclose,inthelastingtracesthatitengenders,toa lesionaldeficit.

(5)Itwouldnodoubtbeimportanttohighlightinthisrangeof experimentalinterrogation,where,properlyspeaking,thereis manifestedsomethingwhichremindsusamongneuroticreactions oftheformdescribedas"anxietyridden".Thereis neverthelesssomethingwhichappearstobeeludedinsuchaway ofposingtheproblemoftheexperiment.Eludedinawayfor whichitisnodoubtimpossibletoreproachthereporterof theseexperimentsforeluding,becausethiselisionis constitutiveoftheexperimentitself.Butforsomeonewhohas toconnectthisexperimenttoourexperience,namelytheone whichhappenswithaspeakingsubjectthisistheimportance ofthisdimensioninsofarasIremindyouofititis impossiblenottonoticethefollowing,thathoweverprimitive maybetheanimalorganismthusinterrogatedcomparedtothatof thespeaKingsubjectandtheseorganismsarefarfrombeing primitive,frombeingdistantfromourowninthePavlovian experiments,becausetheyaredogsthedimensionoftheOther ispresentintheexperiment.

Itisnottodayoryesterdaythatinterveningforexampleduring oneofourscientificmeetingsonsomephenomenawhichwere broughttousIcannotgooverthemagaintodayconcerning thecreationofexperimentalneurosis,Ipointedouttotheone whowascommunicatinghisresearches,thathisownpresencein theexperimentasahumanperson,manipulatingacertainnumber ofthingsaroundtheanimal,shouldatoneorothermomentof theexperiment,beputinquestion,takenintoaccount.When oneknowshowadogbehavesvisavistheonewhoiscalledor whoisnotcalledhismaster,oneknowsthatthedimensionof theOthercounts,inanycase,foradog.Butevenifitwere

12.12.62

V52

notadog,ifitwereagrasshopperoraleech,becauseofthe factthatthereisthiscollectionofsystems,thedimensionof theOtherispresent.Youwilltellme:inagrasshopperora leech,theorganismundergoingtheexperiment,knowsnothing aboutthisdimensionoftheOther.Iagreeabsolutely,andthat iswhymywholeeffortforacertaintimewastodemonstratethe extentofthelevelthatinourcase,assubjects,aswelearn tomanipulate,todeterminethissubjectthatweare,thereis alsoawholefieldwhereweknownothingaboutwhatconstitutes usasfield.AndthattheSelbstbewusstseinthatItaughtyou toname,thesubjectwhoispresumedtoknow(lesujetsuppose savoir),isadeceptiveillusion.TheSelbstbewusstsein consideredasconstitutiveofaknowingsubjectisanillusion, (6)isasourceoferror.Forthedimensionofthesubject supposedlytransparentinhisownactofknowing,onlybegins withthecomingintoplayofaspecifiedobjectwhichistheone thatIamtrytocircumscribeinthemirrorstage,namely,of theimageofone'sownbodyinsofarasthesubjectina jubilatoryfashionhasineffectthefeelingofbeingbeforean objectwhichmakeshim,thesubject,transparenttohimself. Theextensionofthisillusion,whichinitselfradically constitutestheillusionofconsciousness,toeverykindof knowledgeismotivatedbythefactthattheobjectofknowledge willhenceforthbeconstructed,modelled,ontheimageofthis relationshiptothespecularimage,anditispreciselywhythis objectofknowledgeisinsufficient. Andifpsychoanalysisdidnotexist,onewouldknowitfromthe following:thefactisthatthereexistmomentsoftheappearance oftheobjectwhichthrowusintoacompletelydifferent dimension,adimensionwhichmeritssinceitisgivenby experiencetobedetachedassuchasprimalinexperience, whichispreciselythedimensionofthestrange,ofsomething whichcaninnowayallowitselftobegrasped,asleaving beforeitthesubjecttransparenttohisknowledge. Beforethisnewthing,thesubjectliterallyvacillatesand everythingisputinquestionaboutthesocalledprimordial relationofthesubjecttoeveryeffectofknowledge.

Thisemergenceofsomethinginthefieldoftheobject,which posesitsproblemasbeingthatofanirreduciblestructuring, astheemergenceofanunknownasexperienced,isnotaquestion whichisposedtoanalystsbecausesinceitisagivenof experienceitisallthesamenecessarytotrytoexplainwhy childrenareafraidofthedark,andoneseesatthesametime thattheyarenotalwaysafraidofthedark,andthenonedoes somepsychology,thesocalledexperimentersengagepreciselyin theoriesabouttheeffectofaninherited,ancestral,primordial reactionfromathinkingsinceitseemsthatitisalways necessarytopreservethetermthinkingfromathinking differentlystructuredtological,rationalthinking.And peoplemakeconstructionsandinventthings:thisishowpeople startdoingphilosophy.Hereweawaitthosewithwhomwehave onoccasiontocarryoutthedialogueontheveryterrainwhere

12.12.62

V53

thisdialoguehastobejudged,namelywhetherweforourpart canaccountforitinalesshypotheticalfashion. (7)ThisformthatIamgivingyou,whichisconceivable, consistsingraspingthatifintheconstitutionofanobject whichistheobjectcorrelativeofafirstmodeofapproach,the onewhichbeginsfromtherecognitionofourownform,andif thisknowledge,limitedinitself,allowstheretoescape somethingofthisprimitivecathexistoourbeingwhichisgiven bythefactofexistingasbody,isitnotsayingsomething whichisnotonlyreasonablebuttestabletosaythatitisthis remainder,itisthisnonimaginedresidueofthebodywhich comesbysomedetourandhereweareabletodesignatethis detourtomanifestitselfhereatthisplaceprovidedforthe lack,tomanifestitselfinthisfashionandinafashionsince itisnotspecularbecomeshenceforthunlocatable:thislackof certainreferencepointsiseffectivelyadimensionofanxiety. WewouldnotbeindisagreementthenwiththewayinwhichKurt Goldsteinwouldapproachthisphenomenonforexample.Whenhe speakstousaboutanxiety,hespeaksaboutitverypertinently. Howisthewholephenomenologyoflesionalphenomena,where Goldsteinminutelypursuesthisexperiencewhichinterestsus, tobearticulatedifnotfromthepriorremarkthattheorganism inallitsrelationaleffectsfunctionsasatotality.Thereis notasingleoneofourmuscleswhichisnotinvolvedwhenwe nodourhead,thateveryreactiontoasituationimpliesthe totalityoftheorganicresponseandifwefollowit,wesee emergingtwotermscloselywovenwithoneanother,thetermof catastrophicreaction,andinitsphenomenon,withinthefield ofthiscatastrophicreaction,themappingoutassuchof phenomenaofanxiety.

Iwouldaskyoutoconsulttheveryaccessibletextssincethey havebeentranslatedintoFrenchofGoldstein'sanalysesin ordertolocatethereatoncethedegreetowhichthese formulationsareclosetoourownandthedegreeofclaritythey woulddrawbybeingmoreexpresslybasedonthem.Becauseat everyinstant,ifyoufollowthetextwiththiskeythatIam bringingyou,youwillseethedifferencethereisbetweenthe disorderreactionbywhichthesubjectrespondstohis inoperancy,tothefactofbeingconfrontedwithasituation whichisunsurmountableassuch,nodoubtbecauseofhisdeficit onthisoccasion.Itisafterallawaywhichisnotforeignto whatcanhappentoevenanondeficientsubjectbeforea situation,asituationofunsurmountabledanger.Inorderfor theHilflosigkeitreactionofanxietytobeproducedassuch, twoconditionsarealwaysnecessary,youcanseeitinthe concretecasesmentioned:1)thatthedeficienteffectshould besufficientlylimitedforthesubjecttocircumscribeitin thetestthatheisundergoing,and.thatbyreasonofthislimit thelacunaappearsassuchintheobjectivefield.Itisthis emergenceoflackinapositiveformwhichisthesourceof anxiety,providedthat:condition2),whichmustnotbeomitted here,thatitisundertheeffectofademand,ofatest organisedbythefactthatthesubjecthasbeforehimGoldstein

12.12.62

V54

orsomeonefromhislaboratorywhosubjectshimtoanorganised test,thatthereisproducedthisfieldoflackandthequestion posedinthisfield,intheseterms,thatthereissolittle reasonforomittingthatwhenyouknowwhereandwhentoseek them,youwillunfailinglyfindthem,ifthereisneedofit. Tojumptoacompletelydifferentorder,Iwouldevokeherethe mostmassive,unreconstituted,ancestralexperience,rejected ontotheobscurityofancienttimesfromwhichwearesupposed tohaveescaped,anecessitywhichunitesuswiththeseages whichisstillcurrentandwhichverycuriouslywespeakabout onlyveryrarely:itisthatofthenightmare.Oneasksoneself whyforsometime,analystsinterestthemselvessolittleinthe nightmare.

Iintroduceitherebecauseitisgoingtobenecessaryallthe sameforustoremainonitthisyearforacertaintimeandI willtellyouwhy.Iwilltellyouwhyandwheretofindthe material,becauseifthereisalreadyonthisquestionanalready establishedandveryremarkableliterature,towhichyoushould refer,itishoweverforgottenitmaybeonthispointitis namelyJones'bookonthenightmare,abookofincomparable riches.Irecalltoyouthefundamentalphenomenology.Iam notdreamingforamomentofeludingtheprincipaldimension: theanxietyofthenightmareisexperiencedproperlyspeakingas thatofthejouissanceoftheOther.Thecorrelativeofthe nightmare,istheincubusorthesuccubus,itisthisbeingwho weighswithhiswholeopaqueweightofalienjouissanceonyour chest,whocrushesyouunderhisjouissance. Wellthen,tointroduceourselvesfromthisimportantangleinto whatthethematicofthenightmarewillbringus,thefirst thinginanycasewhichappears,whichappearsinthemyth,but alsointhephenomenologyofthenightmare,ofthenightmareas experienced,isthatthisbeingwhoweighsdownbyhis jouissanceisalsoaquestioningbeingandevenproperly (9)speaking,onewhomanifests,deployshimselfinthis complete,developeddimensionofthequestionassuchwhichis calledtheriddle. Thesphinx,whosecomingintoplaydonotforgetprecedes thewholeOedipusdrama,isanightmarefigureandaquestioning figureatthesametime.Wewillhavetocomebacktoit.

Thisquestion,givingthemostprimordialformofwhatIcalled thedimensionofdemand,theoneasyouaregoingtosee thatweusuallycalldemandinthesenseofasupposedly instinctualexigencyisonlythenareducedformofit.Herewe arethereforebroughtbackourselvestoaquestionwhichis articulatedinthesenseofinterrogatingonceagain,ofcoming backtotherelationshipofanexperiencewhich,intheusual senseofthetermsubject,canbecalledpresubjectivewiththe termofthequestion,ofthequestioninitsmostwellshaped form,intheformofasignifierwhichproposesitselfas opaque,whichisthepositionoftheriddleassuch.

12.12.62

V55

ThisbringsusbacktotermswhichIbelievetobeperfectly articulated,Imeanwhichenableyouateveryinstanttoputme backagainstmyownwall,toaccountfordefinitionsalready proposedandtoputthemtothetestoftheirusage.This signifier,asItoldyouatoneturningpoint,isatrace,but aneffacedtrace.Thesignifier,asItoldyouatanother turningpoint,isdistinguishedfromthesignbythefactthat thesigniswhatrepresentssomethingforsomeone.Butthe signifier,asItoldyou,iswhatrepresentsasubjectfor anothersignifier. Wearegoingtoputthistothetestagaininthesensethat concerningthisobjectthatisinvolved,namelyourrelationship, ouranxietyriddenrelationshiptosomelostobjectbutwhich issurelynotneverthelesslostforeveryonenamely,asyou see,asIwillshowyou,whereisittobefoundagain?Because ofcourse,itisnotenoughtoforgetsomethingforitnotto continuetobethere,onlyitistherewherewenolongerknow howtorecogniseit.Tofinditagain,itwouldbenecessaryto comebacktothesubjectofthetrace.Fortogiveyouterms designedtoanimatetheinterestofthisresearchforyou,Iam goingrightawaytogiveyoutwoflashsonthesubjectofour mostcommonexperience. (1) Doesitnotseemtoyouthatthereisanobviouscorrelation betweenwhatIamtryingtooutlineforyouandthephenomenology (10)ofthehystericalsymptom,thehystericalsymptom,inthe broadestsense?Letusnotforgetthattherearenotonly littlehysterias,therearealsobigones:therearethe anaesthesized,therearetheparalyzed,therearethe scotomized,therearenarrowingsofthefieldofvision. Anxietyonlyappearsinhysteriaexactlyinthemeasurethat theselacksarenotseen. (2) ThereissomethingwhichisnotoftenglimpsedandevenI thinkIcansaythisthatyouscarcelyeverbringintoplay,it issomethingwhichexplainsawholesectionofthebehaviourof theobsessional. Igiveyouthiskeyperhapsinsufficientlyexplainedsinceitis goingtobenecessaryformetobringyoubyalongdetourbut Igiveyouthistermattheendofourpath,amongothers,if onlytointerestyouinthispaththeobsessional,inhisvery particularwayofdealingwiththesignifier,namelyofputting itindoubt,ofknowinghowtopolishit,toeffaceit,to triturateit,tobreakitintopieces,namelytobehavewithit likeLadyMacbethwiththiscursedspotofblood,the obsessional,takingaculdesacnodoubt,butonewhoseaimis notdoubtful,operates,preciselyinthesenseofrediscovering underthesignifier,thesign. Ungeschehenmachen:makingtheinscriptionofthestorynuland void.Ithappenedlikethat,butitisnotsure.Itisnot surebecauseitisonlysignifier(dusignifiant),thatstoryis thereforeatrick,andinthistheobsessionalisrighthehas graspedsomething,hewantstogototheorigin,totheprevious

12.12.62

V56

step,tothatofthesignthatIamnowgoingtotrytomakeyou travelintheoppositesense.ItisnotfornothingthatI startedtodayfromourlaboratoryanimals.Afterall,animals donotexistonlyinlaboratories,onecouldopenthedoorand seewhattheyfortheirpartdowithtraces. Itisnotonlymenwhohavethepropertyofeffacingtheir traces,ofoperatingwithtraces.Oneseesanimalseffacing theirtraces.Oneseesevencomplexbehaviourswhichconsistin coveringacertainnumberoftraces,withdejection,for example.Itiswellknownamongcats.

Onepartofanimalbehaviourconsistsinstructuringacertain fieldofitsUmwelt,ofitsenvironment,bytraceswhich punctuateit,whichdefineitslimits.Itiswhatiscalledthe constitutionoftheterritory.Thehippopotamidothatwith theirdejectionsandalsowiththeproduceofcertainglands whichare,ifIrememberrightly,perianalintheircase.The (11)deerrubshishornsagainstthebarkofcertaintrees,this alsohastheimportofamappingoutoftraces.Iamnotgoing todevelopheretheinfinitevarietyofwhatadevelopedzoology canteachyouaboutthis. Whatisimportanttome,iswhatIhavetotellyouconcerning whatImeanabouttheeffacingoftraces.Theanimal,asItold you,effaceshistracesandmakesfalsetraces.Doesheforall thatmakesignifiers?Thereisonethingthattheanimaldoes notdo:hedoesnotmakefalsetracesinordertomakeus believethattheyarefalse.Hedoesnotmakefalselyfalse traces,whichisabehaviour,thatIwouldnotsayis essentiallyhuman,butpreciselyessentiallysignifying.This iswherethelimitis.YouunderstandthatImeantracesmade sothatonebelievesthemtobefalseandwhicharenevertheless thetracesofmytruepassing,andthisiswhatImeanbysaying thathereasubjectispresentified.Whenatracehasbeenmade inorderthatoneshouldtakeittobeafalsetrace,thenwe knowthatthereisaspeakingsubjectassuch,andweknowthen thatthereisasubjectascauseandtheverynotionofcause hasnoothersupportthanthat.

Wetryafterwardstoextendittotheuniverse,buttheoriginal causeisthecauseassuchofatracewhichpresentsitselfas empty,whichwantstobetakenforafalsetrace.Andwhatdoes thatmean?Thatmeansindissolublythatthesubjectwhereheis bornaddresseshimselftowhat?HeaddresseshimselftowhatI wouldbrieflycallthemostradicalformoftherationalityof theOther.Forthisbehaviourhasnootherpossibleimportthan torankitselfatthelocusoftheOtherinthechainof signifiers,ofsignifierswhichhaveorhavenotthesame origin,butwhichconstitutetheonlypossibletermofreference forthetracewhichhasbecomesignifying.

Sothatyougraspherethatattheorigin,whatnourishesthe emergenceofthesignifier,isanaimingatwhattheOther,the realOtherdoesnotknow.The"hedidnotknow"isrootedinan "hemustnotknow".Thesignifiernodoubtrevealsthesubject,

12.12.62 butbyeffacinghistrace.

V57

Firstthenthereisano,theobjectofthehunt,andanOin theintervalofwhichthesubjectSappears,withthebirthof thesignifier,butasbarred,asnotknown(nonsu)assuch. (12) Thewholesubsequentmappingoutofthesubjectreposeson thenecessityofareconquestofthisoriginalnotknown. Understandthereforeherethissomethingwhichalreadymade appeartoyouthereallyradicalrelationshipconcerningthe beingtobereconqueredofthissubjectandthisgroupingofo, oftheobjectofthehunt,withthisfirstappearanceofthe subjectasnotknown,whichmeansunconscious,unbewusste justifiedbythephilosophicaltraditionwhichconfusedthe Bewusstofconsciousness,withabsoluteknowledgeandwhich cannotsufficeforus,insofarasweknowthatthisknowing andconsciousnessarenotconfused,butthatFreudleavesopen thequestionofwhereindeedtheexistenceofthisfielddefined asafieldofconsciousnesscomesfrom.AndhereafterallI canclaimthatthemirrorstagearticulatedasitis, contributestothisthebeginningsofasolution.BecauseI wellknowhowunsatisfieditcanleavesomespiritsformedon Cartesianmeditation.Ithinkthatthisyearwecantakea furtherstepwhichwillmakeyougraspwheretherealorigin, theoriginalobjectofthissystemdescribedasconsciousness, is. Forwewillnotbesatisfiedtoseetheperspectivesof consciousnessbeingrefuteduntilweknowthatitattachesitself toanisolatableobject,toanobjectspecifiedinthestructure. Iindicatedtoyoualittleearlierthepositionoftheneurotic inthisdialectic.Idonotintendtoleaveyouinmuch suspense.Tocomebacktoitimmediately,ifyouhavebeenable tograspthecoreofwhatisinvolvedconcerningtheemergenceof thesignifierassuch,thiswillenableustounderstand immediatelytheslipperyslopepresentedtous,concerningwhat happensinneurosis. Imeanthatthedemandoftheneurotic,allthetrapsthat analyticdialectichasgoneinto,comefromthefactthatthere hasbeenunrecognisedinitthefundamentalshareoffalseness thatthereisinthisdemand.

Theexistenceofanxietyislinkedtothefactthateverydemand, eventhemostarchaicandthemostprimitive,alwayshas somethingdeceptivewithrespecttowhatpreservestheplaceof desire,andthisiswhatexplainsalsotheanxietyridden contextofwhatgivesacompleteresponsetothisfalsedemand. ThisiswhatensuresthatthemotherwhoasIsawemerging,not solongago,inthediscourseofoneofmypatients,allowed absolutelynospacebetweenherselfandherchilduptoa particularage,onlygavetothisdemandafalseresponse,a (13) reallyinexactresponse,since,ifthedemandisthis somethingwhichisstructured,inthewaythatIhavetoldyou, sincethesignifieriswhatitis,thisdemandisnottobe

12.12.62

V58

takenliterally:whattheinfantdemandsfromhismotherbythis demand,issomethingwhichforhimisdesignedtostructurethis presenceabsencerelationshipwhichtheoriginalfortdagame structuresandisafirstexerciseofmasteryover. Butthetotalfillingofacertainvoidwhichshouldbe preservedwhichhasnothingtodowitheitherthepositiveor negativecontentofthedemand,thisiswheretherearisesthe disturbanceinwhichanxietyismanifested. Butinordertograspit,toseeclearlyitsconsequences,it seemstomethatouralgebrabringsushereareadymade instrument.Ifthedemandcomeshereimproperlyattheplaceof whatiseluded,otheobject,thisexplainstoyou,oncondition thatyoumakeuseofmyalgebrawhatisanalgebraifnot somethingverysimpledesignedtomakeusachieveamechanical stateinitshandling,withoutyouhavingtounderstand somethingverycomplicated,anditismuchbetterlikethat:I havealwaysbeentold:inmathematics,itisenoughforthe algebratobecorrectlyconstructedifItaughtyoutowrite thedrive,$cutwewillcomebacktothiscutandyouhave alreadybeguntoformacertainideaofitearlierwhatitisa matterofcutting,istheelanofthehunter$cutofD,ofthe demand,ifthisishowItaughtyoutowritethedrive,this explainstoyoufirstofallwhyitisamongneuroticsthat drivesweredescribed.Itisinthewholemeasurethatthe phantasy$ 4 opresentsitselfinaprivilegedfashion,asinthe neurotic,as|D,inotherwordsthatitisalureofthe phantasticalstructureintheneuroticwhichallowedthisfirst stepcalledthedrivetobemadewhichFreudalwaysandwithout anykindofwaveringdesignatedasTrieb,namelyassomething whichhasahistoryinGermanphilosophicalthought,whichitis absolutelyimpossibletoconfusewiththeterminstinct. Asaresultofthis,evenintheStandardEditionrecentlyagain and,ifIrememberrightlyinthetextofInhibitions,symptoms andanxiety,Ifindtranslatedby"instinctualneed",something whichintheGermantextiscalledBedrfnis.Whynottranslate (14)simply,ifyouwish,"Bedrfnis"by"need",whichisagood translationfromtheGermantotheEnglish?Whyaddthis "instinctual"whichisabsolutelynotinthetextandwhichis enoughtofalsifythewholemeaningofthesentence? Allofwhichimmediatelyallowsittobegraspedthatadrive hasnothingtodowithaninstinctIhavenoobjectiontomake tothedefinitionofsomethingthatcanbecalledinstinctand evenasitiscalledintheusualfashion,whynotforexample, describeinthiswaytheneedsthatlivingbeingshavetofeed themselves,forexample. Wellthen,yes,sinceitistheoraldrivethatisinvolved, doesitnotseemtoyouthatthetermoferotogeneityappliedto whatiscalledtheoraldriveissomethingwhichbringsusright awaytotheproblem:whyisitonlythemouththatisinvolved? Andwhynotalsothegastricsecretions,becausealittle earlier,weweretalkingaboutPavlov'sdogs?Andevenwhymore

12.12.62

V59

especially if we look closely at it, up to a certain age, only the lips and, when that time has passed, what Homer called the enclosureoftheteeth? Dowenotfindthereimmediately,fromthefirstproperly speakinganalyticapproachtoinstinct,thislineofbreaking whichIspeaktoyouaboutasessentialtothisdialectic establishedbythisreferencetotheotherinthemirrorthe referencetowhichIthoughtIhadbroughtyouearlierI didnotfinditinmypapersthatIwillgiveyouthenext time,inHegel,inthePhenomenologyofthespirit,whereitjs formallysaidthatlanguageiswork,itisinthiswaythatthe subjectmakeshisinsidepasstotheoutside.Andthesentence evenissuchthatitisquiteclearthatthisinsideout,as theysayinEnglishisreallythemetaphorofthegloveturned insideout.

ButifIgavetothisreferencetheideaofaloss,itisinas muchassomethinginitdoesnotundergothisinversion,thatat everystagearesidueremainswhichisnotinvertible,nor signifiableinthisarticulatedregister.Andwewillnotbe astonishedthattheseformsoftheobjectappeartousunderthe formthatiscalledpartialthathasstruckusenoughforusto annotateitassuchunderthesectionedform,inwhichweareled tomakeinterveneanobjectforexamplecorrelativetothisoral drive. Thismaternalnipple,thefirstphenomenologyofwhichcannot failtobeadmittedasthatofacut,riddled,breast,Imean somethingwhichispresentedashavinganartificialcharacter. Thisindeediswhatallowsittobereplacedbyanyotherkind (15)ofsootherwhichfunctionsexactlyinthesamewayinthe economyoftheoraldrive. Ifonewishestomakebiologicalreferencesthereferencesto need,ofcourseareessential,itisnotamatterofrefusing thembutitistoseethatthecompletelyprimitivestructural differenceintroducestherethefactofruptures,ofcuts, introducesthereimmediatelythesignifyingdialectic.Isthere somethingherewhichisimpenetrabletoaconceptionthatIwould calleverythingthatismostnatural?Thedimensionofthe signifier,whatisit,ifnot,ifyouwish,ananimalwhointhe huntforhisobjectiscaughtupinsomethingsuchthatthe pursuitofthisobjectmustleadhimontoanotherfieldofthe tracewherethispursuititselfassuchnolongertakeson anythingbutanintroductoryvalue. Thephantasy,the|withrespecttoo,heretakesonthe signifyingvalueoftheentryofthesubjectintothissomething whichisgoingtoleadhimtothisindefinitechainof signifierswhicharecalleddestiny.. Onecanescapeitindefinitely,namelythatwhatitisgoingto beamatterofrediscovering,ispreciselythestart:howitgot intothisbusinessofthesignifier.

12.12.62

V60

Nowitisallthesameclearthatitiswellworththetrouble torecognisehowthefirstobjects,thosewhichwerelocatedin thestructureofthedrive,namelytheonewhichIalreadynamed above,thiscutbreast,andthenlater,thedemandtothemother beinginvertedintoademandofthemother,forthisobject, whichonecannototherwiseseewhyitshouldbeprivileged,this objectwhichiscalledtheturd,namelysomethingwhichalsohas arelationshipwithazonewhichiscallederogenousand regardingwhichitisallthesamenecessarytoseethathere alsoitisinsofarasseparatedbyalimitfromthewhole functionalsystemthatitiscloseto,andwhichisinfinitely morevastamongtheexcretoryfunctionswhytheanus,ifitis notinitsdeterminingfunctionasasphincter,ofsomething whichcontributestothecuttingofanobject,andtheobject thatisinvolvedistheturdwitheverythingthatitcancometo represent,notsimply,asissaid,thegift,buttheidentity withthisobjectwhosenatureweareseekingandthisiswhat givesititsvalue,itsaccent.

AndwhatamIsayingagainstthis,ifnotpreciselytojustify theeventualfunctionwhichisgiventoitundertherubricof ((16)objectrelationsintheevolutionIdonotmean yesterday,butthedaybeforeyesterdayofanalytictheory, exceptthatitisaltogethertofalsifyittoseeinitasort ofmodeloftheanalysand'sworldinwhichaprocessof maturationwouldallowtheprogressiverestorationofareaction presumedtobetotal,authentic,whileallthatisinvolvedisa scrapdesignatingtheonlythingthatisimportant,namelythe place,theplaceofavoidwheretherewouldcomeasIwill showyoutobesituated,othermuchmoreinterestingobjects whichyouknowmoreoveralready,butthatyoudonotknowhowto place.

Fortodayonlytopreservetheplaceofthisvoid,because moreoversomethinginourprojectwillnotfailtoevokethe existentialandeventheexistentialisttheoryofanxiety,you canbesurethatitisnotbychancethatoneofthosewhomone canconsiderasoneofthefathers,atleastinthemodernera, oftheexistentialperspective,thisPascalwhomwedonotknow toowellwhyhefascinatesusbecauseifwebelievethe theoreticiansofsciencehegoteverythingwronginfinitesimal calculusthathewas,itappears,withinanaceofdiscovering, Ithinkratherthathedidnotgiveadamnaboutit,because thereissomethingwhichinterestedhimandthisiswhyPascal stilltouchesus,eventhoseamonguswhoareabsolute unbelieversitisthatPascal,likethegoodJansenistthathe was,wasinterestedindesire.Andthatiswhy,Itellyouthis inconfidence,hecarriedouttheexperimentsofPuydeDomeon thevacuum.Whethernaturedoesordoesnotabhoravacuum,was capitalforhim,becausethatsignifiedtheabhorrenceofall thescholarsofhistimefordesire.Thisvacuumisof absolutelynotheoreticalinterestanylonger. Ithasalmostno meaningforusanylonger.Weknowthatinavacuum,weknow therecanstillbeproducedknots,fullnesses(despleins), packetsofwaves,andanythingyoucouldwish.AndforPascal precisely,because,ifnotnature,thewholeofthoughtupto

12.12.62

V61

thenhadahorrorofthefactthattherecouldbeavacuum anywhere,thisiswhatisproposedtoourattention,andtoknow whether,wealsoforourpartdonotyieldfromtimetotimeto thishorror.

19.12.62

VI 1

WhatIamevokingforyouherethenisnotmetaphysics.I allowedmyselftoemployatermtowhichcontemporaryeventshave givenacertainprominenceforsomeyears,Iwillspeakratherof brainwashing. WhatIintendtodoistoteachyou,bymeansofamethod,to recognise,torecogniseintherightplacewhatpresentsitself inyourexperienceandofcoursetheefficacityofwhatIam claimingtodocanonlybetestedbyexperience.

Seminar6:

Wednesday19December1962

Andifsometimespeoplehaveobjectedtothepresenceatmy teachingofcertainpeoplewhomIhaveinanalysis,afterallthe legitimacyofthecoexistenceoftworelationshipstome,the oneinwhichIamheardandtheoneinwhichonemakesoneself heardbyme,canonlybejudgedfromwithinandinthemeasure thatwhatIamteachingyouherecaneffectivelyfacilitatefor eachoneImeaninanycaseforsomeonewhoisworkingwithme anaccesstotherecognitionofhisownpath. Inthisconnectionofcoursethereissomething,alimit,where externalcontrolstops,butundoubtedlyitisnotabadsign,if itcanbeseen,thatthosewhoparticipatefromthesetwo positionswillatleastlearnfromthemtoreadbetter.

Brainwashing,Ihavesaid,isindeedformetosubmitmyselfto thiscontrolofrecognisingintheremarksofthosethatI analysesomethingdifferenttowhatthereisinthebooks. Inversely,forthem,itisthattoknowhowtorecognisein passinginthebookswhatiseffectivelyinthebooks.Andin thisconnection,Icanonlycongratulatemyselfforexampleona littlesign,likethisrecentone,whichcametomefromthe mouthofsomeonepreciselywhomIhaveinanalysis,thatin passingtheredidnotescapehimtheimportofatraitlikethis onethatcanbecaughtinpassinginabookwhoseFrench translationhasappearedrecentlyandhowlateitisina workbyFerenczi,namelythisbookwhoseoriginaltitleis: VersucheinerGenitaltheorie,"Research"veryprecisely"into atheoryofgenitality",andnotsimply"Abouttheoriginsof

19.12.62

VI63

(2)sexuallife",astheyhavedrownedithere,abookwhich undoubtedlycannotbutbedisturbingbecauseofacertainaspect whichIalreadyhighlightedlongagoforthosewhoknowhowto listenashavingattimesitsshareattimes,butwhich,bringing withitallthesamethisenormousexperience,allowstheretobe positedinitsdetoursseveraltraitswhicharepreciousforus, includingthefollowingtowhichIamsuretheauthorhimself doesnotgivealltheimportanceitmeritspreciselyinhisplan, inhisresearch,byarrivingatatooharmonious,atoo allenglobingnotionofwhatconstitutesitsobject,namely,the genitalperspective,realisation.

Inpassing,hereishowheexpresseshimself:"Thedevelopmentof genitalsexuality,cursorilydescribedaboveinthemale",he saysitisineffectwhatisinvolvedinthemaleman,themale "undergoesinthefemale",whatistranslatedas,"arather suddeninterruption",analtogetherincorrecttranslationbecause whatisinvolvedinGermanis"einezimmlichunvermittelte Unterbrechung",aninterruption,thatmeansthatitismostoften unmediated,thatitisnotapartofwhatFerenczidescribesas amphimixis,whichisonlywhenallissaidanddone,oneofthe naturalformsofwhatwecall"thesis,antithesis,synthesis",of whatwecalldialecticalprogress,asImightputit.This,no doubt,isnotthetermwhichisvalorisedinFerenczi'smind,but whatanimateseffectivelyhiswholeconstruction,isindeedwhat henotes,itisthatunvermittelte,namelyinalateralposition withrespecttothisprocessandletusnotforgetwhatitisa matteroffindingofgenitalsynthesisandharmony,is thereforetobeproperlytranslatedhereby"ratherasan impasse",outsidetheprogressofmediation. Thisinterruption,hesays,"ischaracterizedaboveallelse", andhereheonlyaccentuateswhatFreudtellsus"bythe displacementoferogeneityfromtheclitoris(thefemalepenis) tothecavityofthevagina. Psychoanalyticexperiencecompels theassumption,however,thatnotonlythevaginabut,inthe mannerofhysteria,otherpartsofthebodyaswellare genitalized,inparticularthenippleandthesurroundingarea."

As you know, there are many other zones again in hysteria. Besides moreover the translation here, because it does not effectivelyfollowthepreciousaspectofwhatwearebrought hereasmaterial,atranslationthatisinaway ........... ,there (3) is simply, not at all "en tmoigne galement", but "nach Art derHystrie"inGerman. Whatdoesthatmean?Whatdoesthatmean,forsomeonewhohas learnedwhetherhereorelsewheretounderstand,ifnotthat thecomingintooperationofthevaginaassuchinthegenital relationship,isamechanismthatisstrictlyequivalenttoany otherhystericalmechanism?Andherewhyshouldwebe astonished?Whyshouldwebeastonishedatthisfromthemoment thatthroughourschemaoftheplaceoftheemptylocusinthe functionofdesireyouhavequitereadytoberecognised somethingaboutwhichtheleastthatcanbesaidisthat,for

19.12.62

VI64

you,itcouldatleastsituatethisparadox,thisparadoxwhich isdefinedasfollows:thefactisthatthelocus,thehomeof jouissanceisfoundnormally,sinceitisnaturallyplaced preciselyinanorganwhichyouknowinthemostcertainfashion, throughexperienceaswellasbyananatomicalphysiological investigations,tobeinsensitiveinthesensethatitcouldnot evenbecomeawareofsensationbecauseitisnotinnervated, thatthelocus,thatthefinallocusofjouissance,ofgenital jouissanceisaplaceafterall,itisnotamysteryonto whichonecanpourfloodsofboilingwater,andatatemperature thatcouldnotbetoleratedbyanyothermucusmembrane,without provokingreal,immediatesensoryreactions. Whatdoesthatmean,ifnotthatwehaveeveryreason,before enteringintothediachronicmythofasupposedmaturation,to mapoutthecorrelationswhichwouldmakeofthenodoubt necessarypointofarrival,ofcompletion,ofaccomplishmentof thesexualfunctioninthegenitalfunction,somethingotherthan aprocessofmaturation,thanalocusofconvergence,of synthesis,ofeverythingthatpresenteditselfuptothenin termsofpartialtendenciesandtorecognise,notalonethe necessityofthisemptyplaceinafunctionalpointofdesire, buttoseethatevenifitistherethatnatureitself,that physiologyisgoingtofinditsmostfavourablefunctionalpoint, wethusfindourselvesinaclearerposition,atonceliberated fromthisweightofparadoxwhichisgoingtomakeusimagineso manymythicalconstructionsaroundthesupposedvaginal jouissance,andnotatallofcoursethatsomethingcannotbe indicatedbeyondanditis,ifyouremember,thosewhoattended ourAmsterdamCongress,whattheymayrememberIindicatedatthe beginningoftheCongress,somethingwhichforwantofan (4)apparatus,forwantofthisstructuralregisterwhose articulationsIamtryingtogiveyouhere,couldnoteven,in thecourseofaCongressatwhichmanyworthythingsweresaid, beeffectivelyarticulatedandmappedoutassuch,and neverthelesshowpreciousitisforustoknow,sincemoreover alltheparadoxesconcerningtheplacetobegiventohysteriain whatcouldbecalledthescaleofneuroses,thisambiguityin particularwhichbringsitaboutthatbecauseoftheseobvious analogieswhoseessentialelement,majorelementIam highlightingherewiththehystericalmechanism,wearecalledto putitonadiachronicscaleasthemostadvancedneurosis becauseitistheclosesttogenitalcompletion,thatitis necesssaryforusinthelightofthisdiachronicconceptionto putattheendofinfantilematuration,andthatbythereversal thatclinicalexperienceshowsusonthecontrary,wemust,in theneuroticscale,consideronthecontraryasthemostprimary, theoneuponwhichspecifically,forexample,theconstructions ofobsessionalneurosisareconstructed,thattherelationsina wordbetweenhysteriaandpsychosisitself,withschizophrenia areobvious. Theonlythingthatcanallowusalsonottobeeternally,asthe needarisesandobserversbringusthepointsofviewthatwe havetotackleonhysteriaputtingiteitherattheend,orat thebeginning,ofsupposedlyevolutionaryphases,isfirstand

19.12.62

VI4

foremosttoreferittowhatpredominates,namelythestructure, thesynchronicstructureofdesire(Seeschema,page1).Itisto isolate,intheconstitutivestructureofdesireassuch,which meansthatIdesignatethisplace,theplaceoftheblank,the placeofthevoid,asstillplayinganessentialfunctionand thefactthatthisfunctionshouldbehighlightedinamajorway, inthecompleted,terminalstructureofthegenitalrelationship, isatoncetheconfirmationofthewellfoundednessofourmethod andalsothebeginningofaclearervision,clearedof ........... , ofwhatwehavetomapoutconcerningproperlygenitalphenomena. Thereisnodoubtanobstacle,anobjectiontousseeingit directlybecauseinordertoreachitwemustgobyarather complicatedpath.Thisroundaboutpathisanxietyandthatis whywearedealingwithitthisyear.

Thepointthatweareatatthismomentatwhichtherecomesto completionwiththeyearafirstphaseofourdiscourse,consists (5)thereforeinyouassuringyourselvesthatthereisa structureofanxietyandtheimportantpoint,thecoreofthe fashioninwhichinthesefirsttalksIannounced,putforward, tackledforyou,issufficientlyinthisimage,Imean,inwhat itcontributesintermsofaframeworkwhichistobetaken entirelyinitsspecifiedcharacter.Iwouldevensayuptoa certainpointthatitstilldoesnotshowadequately,inthis tachygraphicform,inwhichIhavebeenrepeatingitforyouon theblackboardsincethebeginningofmydiscourseitis necessarytoinsistonthefactthatthisstrokeissomething thatyouseeincrosssectionandisamirror.Amirrordoesnot stretchouttoinfinity,amirrorhaslimits,andwhatreminds youofthisisthat,ifyourefertothearticlefromwhichthis schemaistaken,Itakeintoaccountthelimitsofthemirror onecans^.esomethinginthismirrorfromapointsituated,as onemightsay,somewhereinthespaceofthemirror,fromwhich itisnotperceptiblebythesubject. Inotherwords,Imyselfdonotnecessarilyseemyeyeinthe mirror,evenifthemirrorhelpsmetoseesomethingthatIwould notseeotherwise.WhatImeanbythat,isthatthefirstthing tobeadvancedconcerningthestructureofanxiety,issomething thatyoualwaysforgetintheobservationswhereitreveals itself:fascinatedbythecontentofthemirror,youforgetits limitsandthefactthatanxietyisframed. ThosewhoheardmyinterventionattheJournesProvincialeson phantasy,thetextofwhichinterventionIamstillwaitingfor aftertwomonthsandaweek,mayrecallthatIusedasametaphor apaintingwhichisplacedinawindowframe,anabsurdtechnique nodoubt,ifitisamatterofbetterseeingwhatisonthe painting,butasIalsoexplainedtoyou,itisnotexactlythis thatisinvolved,itis,whatevermaybethecharmofwhatis paintedonthecanvas,nottoseewhatcanbeseenthroughthe window.

Whattheinauguraldreaminthehistoryofanalysisshowsusin thedreamoftheWolfman,whoseprivilege,ashappens

66.12.62

VI5

incidentallyandinanunambiguousfashion,isthatitisthe apparitioninthedreamofapureschematicformofthephantasy, itisbecausetherepetitivedreamoftheWolfmanisthepure phantasyunveiledinitsstructure,thatittakesonits importance,andthatFreudchoosesittomake,inthis observationwhichonlyhasthisunexhausted,inexhaustible (6)characterforusbecauseitinvolvesessentially,from beginningtoend,therelationshipofthephantasytothereal. Whatdoweseeinthisdream?Thesuddenopeningandthetwo termsareindicatedofawindow.Thephantasyisseenbeyonda paneandthroughawindowwhichopens,thephantasyisframed andyouwillrecogniseinwhatyouseebeyondifyouknowof coursehowtoperceiveityouwillrecogniseinitsmost diverseformsthesamestructurethatyouseehereinthemirror ofmyschema.Therearealwaysthetwobarsofamoreorless developedsupportandofsomethingwhichissupported,thereare thewolvesonthebranchesofthetreethereisonsomedrawing orotherofaschizophrenicIhaveonlytoopenanycollection togatherthemupasImightsaybytheshovelfullalsoon occasionsometreewithattheendforexampletotakemyfirst exampleinthepapergivenbyBobo(?)atthelastAntwerp Congressonthephenomenonofexpressionwithwhatattheend ofitsbranches?Thatwhichforaschizophrenicfillstherole thatthewolvesplayinthecaseoftheborderlinethatthe Wolfmanis.Here,asignifier,itisbeyondthebranchesofthe treethattheschizophrenicinquestionwritestheformulaofhis secret:"Iosonosemprevista",namelysomethingthatshehad neverbeenabletosayuptothen"Iamalwaysseen".Hereagain ImustpauseinordertomakeyouseethatinItalianasin French,vistahasanambiguousmeaning,itisnotonlyapast participle,itisalsosightwithitstwomeaningssubjectiveand objective,thefunctionofsightandthefactofbeingseen,as onesaysthesightofalandscape,theonewhichistakenthere asanobjectonapostcard.Iwillofcoursecomebackonallof that.

WhatIsimplywanttostressheretoday,isthatthehorrible, thesuspicious,theuncanny,everythingbywhichwetranslate,as bestwecaninFrench,thismasterfulunheimlich,presentsitself throughskylights,thatitisasframedthatthereissituated forusthefieldofanxiety.ThusyourediscoverthatbywhichI introducedthediscussionforyou,namelytherelationship betweenthestageandtheworld.

"Suddenly","allofasudden",youwillalwaysfindthisterm,at themomentthatthephenomenonoftheunheimlichmakesitsentry! Thestagewhichproposesitselfinitsowndimension,beyondno doubtweknowthatwhatoughttobereferredtoitiswhatcannot besaidintheworld.Itiswhatwealwaysexpectwhenthe curtainrises,itisthisquicklyextinguishedbriefmomentof anxiety,butwhichisneverlackingtothedimensionwhich ensuresthatwearedoingmorethancomingtosettleour backsidesintoamoreorlessexpensiveseat,whichisthemoment ofthethreeknocks,whichisthemomentthecurtainopens. And withoutthis,thisquicklyelidedintroductorymomentofanxiety, nothingcouldeventakeonthevalueofwhatisgoingtobe

19.12.62

VI67

determinedastragicorascomic,thatwhichcannotbe,here again,noteverytongueprovidesyouwiththesameresources,it isnotakonnenthatisinvolved.Ofcoursemanythingscanbe said,fromamaterialpointofview.Itisamatterofabeing able,durfen,whichbadlytranslateswhatispermittedornot permitted,sincedurfenreferstoamoreoriginaldimension.It isevenbecauseMandurfnicht,thatitcannotbedone,thatMan kan,thatafteralloneisgoingtobeable,andthatherethere comesintoplaytheforcing,thedimensionofrelaxation,that properlyspeakingconstitutesthedramaticaction. Wecouldnotspendtoomuchtimeonthenuancesofthisframing ofanxiety.AreyougoingtosaythatIamappealingtoitin thesenseofbringingitbacktoexpectation,topreparation,to astateofalert,toaresponsewhichisalreadyoneofdefence towhatisgoingtohappen.Thatyes!ItistheErwartung,it istheconstitutionofthehostileassuch,itisthefirst recoursebeyondHilflosigkeit Butanxietyisdifferent.If,ineffect,expectationcanserve amongothermeanstoframeit,inaword,thereisnoneedfor thisexpectation:theframeisalwaysthere!Anxietyis different.Anxietyiswhenthereappearsinthisframesomething whichisalreadytheremuchclosertohome:Heim,theguest (1'h5te),youwillsay,andinacertainsense,ofcourse,this unknownguestwhoappearsinanunexpectedfashionhasagood dealtodowithwhatismetwithintheUnheimlich,butitisnot enoughtodesignatehiminthisway.For,asthetermindicates toyouverywellasithappensinFrench,thisguest,inthe ordinarysenseoftheword,isalreadysomeonewhohasbeenwell workedoverintermsofexpectation.

Thisguestisalreadywhathadbecomehostile,hadpassedinto thehostilitybywhichIbeganthisdiscourseaboutexpectation. Thisguest,intheordinarysense,isnottheheimlich,itisnot thepersonwholivesinthehouse,itissomeonehostilewhohas beensoftened,pacified,accepted.ThatwhichbelongstoHeim, thatwhichbelongstoGeheimnis,hasneverpassedthroughthese detourswhenallissaidanddone,hasneverpassedthroughthese (8)networks,throughthesesieves,throughthesesievesof recognition:ithasremainedunheimlich,lessuninhabitablethan inhabitant(moinsinhabituablequ'inhabitant),lessinhabitual thanuninnabited(moinsinhabituelqu'inhabite).

Itisthisemergenceoftheheimlichintheframethat constitutesthephenomenonofanxiety.Andthisiswhyitis wrongtosaythatanxietyiswithoutanobject.Anxietyhasa completelydifferentsortofobjecttoanyapprehensionthathas beenprepared,structured,structuredbywhat?Bythegrillof thecut,ofthefurrow,oftheunarytrait,ofthe"that'sit" whichalwaysinoperatingasonemightsayclosesthelipsIam sayingtheliporthelipsofthis'cutwhichbecomesthesealed letteronthesubjectinorder,asIexplainedtoyouthelast time,tosendhimoffunderasealedcovertodifferenttraces. Thesignifiersmakeoftheworldanetworkoftraces,inwhich

19.12.62

VI68

thepassagefromonecycletoanotherishenceforthpossible. Whatdoesthatmean?WhatItoldyouthelasttime:the signifiergeneratesaworld,theworldofthespeakingsubject whoseessentialcharacteristicisthatitispossibletomakea mistakeaboutit. Anxietyisthisverycut,withoutwhichthepresenceofthe signifier,itsfunctioning,itsentry,itsfurrowintherealis unthinkable.Itisthiscutwhichisopenedupandwhichallows theretoappearsomethingthatyouwillunderstandbetterwhenI saytheunexpected,thevisit,thepieceofnews,whatis expressedsowellbythetermpresentimentwhichisnotsimplyto beunderstoodasthepresentimentofsomething,butalsothe "pre"ofReeling,thatwhichisbeforethebirthofafeeling.

Alltheswitchingpointsarepossiblestartingfromsomething whichisanxiety,whichis,whenallissaidanddonewhatwe expectedandwhichisthetruesubstanceofanxiety,the"what doesnotdeceive",whatisbeyonddoubting,fordonotallow yourselftobetakeninbyappearances:itisnotbecause,of course,thelinkbetweenanxietyanddoubtandhesitation,and whatiscalledtheambivalentgameoftheobsessional,mayappear clinicallyobvioustoyou,thatitisthesamething. Anxietyisnotdoubtanxietyisthecauseofdoubt.Iamsaying thecauseofdoubt,itisnotthefirsttime,anditwillnotbe thelast,thatIwillhavetocomebackhereonthefactthatif thereismaintained,aftersomanycenturiesofcritical understanding,thefunctionofcausality,itisindeedbecauseit (9)iselsewherethanwhereitisrefuted,andthatifthereisa dimensioninwhichweshouldseekthetruefunction,thetrue weight,themeaningofthemaintenanceofthefunctionof causality,itisinthisdirectionofthebeginningofanxiety. DoubtthereforeasItoldyou,isonlytheretocombatanxiety andpreciselyalltheeffortthatdoubtexpends,isagainst lures.Itisinthemeasurethatwhatitisamatterof avoidingisthedimensionofappallingcertaintythatisin anxiety.

Ithinkthatyouwillstopmeheretotellme,ortoremindme, ofwhatIputforwardmorethanonceinaphoristicforms,that allhumanactivityexpandsintocertaintyoragainthatit generatescertaintyorinageneralfashionthatthereferenceto certaintyisessentiallyaction.Wellyes,ofcourse,anditis preciselythisthatallowsmetointroducenowtheessential relationbetweenanxietyandactionassuch,itisprecisely perhapsfromanxietythatactionborrowsitcertainty. Toactistotearitscertaintyfromanxiety.Toact,isto operateatransferofanxiety.AndifIallowmyselftoadvance herealittlequicklythisdiscourseattheendofthetrimester, itistofillinortoalmostfilli'ntheblanksthatIleftyou withinthetableofmyfirstseminar.Ithinkthatyouremember ittheonewhichisorganisedasfollows:

19.12.62

VI69

Inhibition,symptom,anxiety,impede,whichIcompletedwith embarrass,withemotionandheredismay.Isaidtoyou:whatis here?Twothings:thepassageal'acteandactingout.Isaid almosttobecomplete,becauseIhavenotthetimetotellyou why,thepassageal'acteinthisplaceandactingoutata differentone,butIwillallthesamemakeyouadvancealongthe pathbypointingouttoyou,intheclosestrelationshipwithour remarksthismorning,theoppositionthatwasalreadyimpliedand evenexpressedinmyfirstintroductionoftheseterms,andwhose positionIamnowgoingtounderline,namelybetweenthe dimensionoftoomuchwhichisinembarrassmentandthedimension ofthetoolittleinwhatItoldyou,bymeansofanetymological commentarywhichyourememberIthinkatleastthosewhowere (10)thereIunderlinedaboutthesenseofdismay.

Dismay,asItoldyou,isessentiallytheevocationofapower whichislacking,esmayer,theexperienceofwhatyouarelacking inneed.Itisinthereferencetothesetwotermswhoselinkis essentialinoursubjectforthislinkunderlinestheambiguity: ifthereistoomuch,whatwehavetodealwiththenisnot lackingtousifitislackingtous,whysaythatelsewhereit embarrassesus,letusbeonourguardherenottoyieldtothe mostflatteringofillusions. Inattackinganxietyhereourselves,whatarewetryingtodo, whatdoallthosewhohavespokenofit'scientificallywant? GoodLord,itwasthatitwaspureneed,whatwasrequiredofme topositatthebeginningasnecessaryfortheconstitutionofa world,itisherethatthisrevealsitselfnottobeuseless,and thatyouhavecontrolofit.Thisisbetterseenprecisely becauseitisanxietythatisinvolved.Andwhatisseenis what?Andtowanttospeakaboutitinaproperlyscientificway istoshowthatitiswhat?Animmensedeception.Itisnot realisedthatthewholedomainwhichourdiscoursehasconquered alwaysendsupshowingthatitisanimmensedeception. Tomasterthephenomenonbythought,isalwaystoshowhowone canremakeitinafalsifiedway,itistobeabletoreproduce it,namelytobeabletomakeasignifierofit.Asignifierof what?Inreproducingitthesubjectcanfalsifythebookof accounts,whichshouldnotastonishusifitistrue,asIteach you,thatthesignifieristhetraceofthesubjectinthe world'scourse.Only,ifwebelieveweareabletocontinuethis gamewithanxiety,wellthen,wearesureofmissingout,because

19.12.62

VI70

preciselyIstatedrightatthebeginningthatanxietyis concernedwithwhatescapesthisgame.Thereforethisiswhatwe mustbeonguardagainstatthemomentofgraspingwhatismeant bythisrelationshipofembarrassmenttotoomuchsignifier,of lacktotoolittlesignifier.Iamgoingtoillustratethis relationshipifyouhavenotdonesoalready:iftherewereno analysis,ofcourse,Icouldnotspeakaboutitbutanalysis encountereditatthefirstcorner.Thephallusforexample, littleHans,justasmuchofalogicianasAristotle,posesthe equation:allanimatebeingshaveaphallus.Iampresupposing ofcoursethatIamaddressingmyselftopeoplewhohavefollowed raycommentaryontheanalysisoflittleHans,whowillremember hereinthisconnection,Ithink,whatIwascarefulto (11)accentuatelastyearconcerningwhatiscalledthe universalaffirmativeproposition.Itoldyouthemeaningof whatIwantedtoproduceforyoubythis,namelythatthe affirmationwhichisdescribedasuniversal,positiveuniversal, onlyhasmeaningfromthedefinitionofthereal,startingfrom theimpossible.Itisimpossibleforananimatebeingnotto haveaphallus,somethingthat,asyousee,poseslogicinthis essentiallyprecariousfunctionofcondemningthereal,of eternallystumblingintotheimpossible.Andwehavenoother meansofapprehendingit,weadvancefromstumbletostumble. Example:therearelivingbeings,Mummyforexample,whodonot haveaphallus,sotheremustbenolivingbeings,henceanxiety. Andthefollowingstepistobetaken.Itiscertainthatthe easiestthingistosaythateventhosewhodonothaveone,have one.Thisindeediswhyitistheonethatweholdontoin general. Itisthatthelivingbeingswhichdonothavea phallushaveonedespiteandagainsteverything.Itisbecause theyhaveaphallusthatwepsychologistswillcallunrealthis willsimplybethesignifyingphallusthattheyareliving beings.

Thus,fromonestumbletoanother,thereprogressesIdonotdare tosayknowledge,butundoubtedlyunderstanding.Icannotresist thepleasureinpassingofsharingwithyouthediscoverythat chance,aluckychance,whatiscalledchancebutwhichis scarcelythatatall,aluckydiscoverythatImadeforyouno laterthanlastweekend,inadictionaryofslang.Godknows,I havetakenenoughtimetocometoit,buttheEnglishtongueis reallyalovelytongue.Isthereanyoneherethenwhoknowsthat sincethefifteenthcentury,Englishslanghasfoundthismarvel ofreplacingonoccasions"Iunderstandyouperfectly",for example,by"Iunderstumble",namelyIamwritingitout,since thephonetisinghasallowedyouperhapstomissthenuancewhat Ihavejustexplainedtoyou,notwhatismeantbyunderstand:I understandyou,butsomethinguntranslatableintoFrenchsince thewholevalueofthisslangwordisthefamousstumblewhich meanspreciselywhatIamintheprocessofexplainingtoyou: thetrebuchement.Iunderstandyou,'thatremindsmethatoneway oranother,isalwaystogofurtheralongthepathof misunderstanding. Moreover,ifthestuffofexperiencewascomposed,asclassical

19.12.62

VI71

psychology teaches us, of the real and the unreal and why not howcanonenotrecallinthisconnectionwhatthisindicatesto (12) usintermsofhavingtotakeadvantageofwhatisproperly theFreudianconquest,andwhichisspecificallythefollowing: itisthatifmanistormentedbytheunrealinthereal,it wouldbealtogethervaintohopetoridoneselfofitforthe reason,whichiswhatintheFreudianconquestisquiteprecisely disturbing,thatintheunreal,itistherealwhichtorments him.Hisconcern,Sorge,thephilosopherMartinHeideggertells us.Ofcourse!Thisisagreatadvanceforus.

Isthisthefinalterm,thatbeforebusyingoneself,before speaking,beforegettingdowntowork,concernispresupposed? Whatdoesthatmean?Anddowenotseethatherewearealready atthelevelofanartofconcern:manisobviouslyagreat producerofsomethingwhichinsofarasitregardshimiscalled concern.Butinthatcase,Iprefertolearnitinaholybook, whichisatthesametimethemostprofanatorybookwhichexists, calledEcclesiastes.IthinkIwillrefertoitinthefuture. ThisEcclesiasteswhichisasyouknowtheGreektranslationin theseptuagintofthetermqoheleth,auniqueterm,employedor. thisoccasion,whichcomesfromqahal,congregation,qoheleth, beingatoncetheabstractandfeminineformofit,being properlyspeakingthecongregatingvirtue,therallier,the ecclesia,ifyouwish,ratherthanEcclesiastes. Andwhatdoesitteachus,thisbookwhichIdescribedasa sacredandmostprofanebook.Herethephilosopherdoesnotfail tostumble,inreadingit,onsomeEpicureanechoorother,asI haveread!TotalkofEpicureaninconnectionwithEcclesiastes! IknowthatEpicurushaslongceasedtocalmus,aswas,asyou knowhisintention.ButtosaythatEcclesiasteshadfora singlemomentachanceofproducingthesameeffectonus,can onlymeanthatonehasneverevenopenedit!

"Godcommandsmetoenjoy(dejouir)"thisistextuallyinthe BibleitisallthesamethewordofGod.Andevenifitis notthewordofGodforyou,Ithinkthatyouhavealready noticedthetotaldifferencethereisbetweentheGodoftheJews andtheGodofPlato.EvenifChristianhistorythoughtitself obliged,inconnectionwiththeGodoftheJews,tofindwiththe GodofPlatoitslittlepsychoticevasion,itis,allthesame, timetorememberthedifferencethereisbetweentheuniversal moverGodofAristotle,thesovereigngoodGod,adelusional conceptionofPlato,andtheGodoftheJews,namelyaGodwith whomonespeaks,aGodwhodemandssomethingofyouandwhoin (13) Ecclesiastes gives you the order "enjoy (jouis)". That is really something! Because to enjoy when ordered to do so, is all the same something in which everyone senses that if there is a source, an origin of anxiety, it ought all the same to be found somewhere there. To this order "Jouis!", I can only answer one thing, which is: "J'ouis (I hear)". 'Of course, but naturally I donotenjoysoeasilyforallthat.

Such is the relief, the originality, the dimension, the order of presence,inwhichthereisactivatedforustheGodwhospeaks,

19.12.62

VI72

theonewhotellsusexpresslythatheiswhatheis.Inorder toadvancewhileitistherewithinmyreach,intothefieldof hisdemands,andbecauseyouaregoingtoseethatitisvery closetooursubject,Iwouldintroducethisisthemoment somethingwhichyoumaywellimagineIdidnotnoticetodayor yesterday,namelythat,amongthesedemandsofGodtohis elected,privilegedpeople,therearesomequitepreciseones regardingwhichitseemsthatthisGoddidnotneedthe prescienceofmyseminartocarefullyspecifytheterms.There isoneofthemcalledcircumcision. Heordersustoenjoy,andwhatismorehegoesintohowit shouldbedone.Hespecifiesthedemand,heseparatesoutthe object.Thisiswhy,Ithink,foryouasforme,therecouldrot failtoappearforalongtime,theextraordinaryentanglements, theconfusionoftheanalogicalevocationthatthereisinthe supposedreferenceofcircumcisiontocastration.Ofcoursethis hasarelationshipwiththeobjectofanxiety.

Buttosaythatcircumcisionisthecauseofit,orinany fashionwhatsoever,therepresentative,theanalogueofwhatwe callcastrationanditscomplex,isaflagranterror.Itdoes notgetyououtofthesymptomprecisely,namelyofthatwhichin thecaseofsomesubjectorotherwhohasbeencircumcised,may establishitself,intermsofconfusionconcerningitsbrandwith whatisinvolvedeventuallyinneurosisregardingthecomplexof castration. Becauseafterall,thereisnothinglesscastratingthan circumcision.Whenitisclearcut,whenitiswelldone, undoubtedlywecannotdenythattheresultisratherelegant.I assureyouthatalongsideallthesesexualorgans,Imeanthe maleones,ofgreaterGreecethattheantiquedealers,onthe pretextthatIamananalyst,bringmebythecartloadandwhich mysecretaryputsintothealreadyovercrowdedcourtyard, alongsideallthesesexualorgans,inwhichImustsaythatbyan accentuationwhichIdonotdaretoqualifyasaestheticthe phimosisisalwaysaccentuatedinaparticularlydisgusting (14)fashionthereisallthesameinthepracticeof circumcisionsomethinghealthyfromtheaestheticpointofview. Andmoreoverthosewhocontinuetorepeatonthispointthe confusionswhicharealloverpsychoanalyticwritings,allthe samemostofthemhavelongagograspedthattherewassomething fromthefunctionalpointofviewwhichisjustasessentialas reducing,atleastinpartinasignifyingfashion,theambiguity thatisdescribedasthbisexualtype."Jesuislaplaieetle couteau",Baudelairesayssomewhere. Wellthen,whyconsiderit tobethenormalfunctiontobeatoncethedartandthesheath? Thereisobviouslyinthisritualattentionofcircumcisiona reductionofbisexualitywhichcannotbutobviouslygenerate somethinghealthyasregardthedivisionofroles. Theseremarks,asyoucanwellsense,arenotbytheway,they openuppreciselythequestionwhichsituatesbeyond,something whichalroadyfromthisexplanationcannolongerappearasa sortofcapriciousritual,butsomethingwhichconformstowhat

19.73.62

VI12

inthedemandIteachyoutoconsiderasthecircumscribingof theobject,asthefunctionofthecutitmustbesaidof thisdelimitedzonehere:Goddemandsanoffering,andvery preciselytoseparateouttheobjectafterhavingcircumscribed itthatwhetherafterthatthesourcesaswellastheexperience ofthosewhoaregroupedtogether,recogniseoneanotherbythis traditionalsign,thatiftheirexperiencedoesnotforallthat leadtoaloweringperhapsfarfromitoftherelationto anxiety,itisstartingfromtherethatthequestionbegins. Oneofthosewhoareevokedhereanditisreallynot designatinganybodyinmyaudiencecalledmeonedayina privatenotethelastofthecabalisticChristians.Youcanbe reassured,ifsomeinvestigationorotherinvolvingproperly speakingthecalculusofsignifiersmaybesomethingonwhichI delayfromtimetotime,itwillnevermakememistakeasImay saymyillusionsforthelanternofknowledgeorindeedrather, ifthislanternturnsouttobeablindlantern,torecognisemy illusioninit,butmoredirectlythanFreudbecause,coming afterhim,IquestionhisGod:"Chevuoi?","Whatdoyouwantof me?",inotherwords:"Whatistherelationshipofdesiretothe law?"Aquestionalwayselidedbythephilosophicaltradition, buttowhichFreudansweredandyouliveonit,eveniflike (15)everybodyelseyouhavenotrealisedit.Thereply:itis thesamethingaswhatIamteachingyou,whatIamteachingyou leadsyouto,andwhichisalreadythereinthetext,masked underthemythofOedipus,itisthatdesireandthelaw,which appeartobeopposedinarelationshipofantithesis,areonly oneandthesamebarriertobarouraccesstothething. Nolens, volens:desiring,Icommmitmyselftothepathofthelaw.That iswhyFreudrelatestheoriginofthelawtotheopaque ungraspabledesireofthefather.Butwhatthisdiscoveryand allanalyticenquiryleadsyouto,isnottolosesightofthe truththereisbehindthislure.

Whethermyobjectsarenormativedornot,aslongasIdesire,I knownothingofwhatIdesire.Andthenfromtimetotimean objectappearsamongalltheothers,whichIreallydonotknow whyitisthere.Ontheonehand,thereistheonewhichIhave learnedcoversmyanxiety,theobjectofthephobiaandIdo notdenythatIhadtohaveitexplainedtomeuptothenIdid notknowwhatIwasthinkingabout,excepttosaythatyouhave one,youhaveoryouhavenotoneontheotherhand,thereis theone,asregardswhichIcannotreallyjustifywhyitshould betheoneIdesire,andI,whodonotdetestgirls,whyshouldI lovealittleslipperstillmore.Ontheonehandthereisthe wolf,ontheothertheshepherdess.ThisiswhereIwillleave youattheendofthesefirsttalksaboutanxiety,thereis somethingelsetobeunderstoodabouttheanxietyprovokingorder ofGod,thereisDiana'shuntwhich,atatimethatIchose,that ofFreud'scentenary,was,Itoldyou,thepathofFreud'squest, thereissomethingtowhichIinvite'youforthecomingtrimester regardinganxiety,thereisthedeathofthewolf.

9.1.63 Seminar7: Wednesday9January1963

VII

74

Inthethirtysecondintroductorylecturetopsychoanalysis, namelyintheseriesofNewIntroductoryLectureson PsychoanalysiswhichhasbeentranslatedintoFrench,Freud specifiesthatitisamatterofintroducingsomethingwhichhas not,hesays,inanywayapurelyspeculativecharacter,butit hasbeentranslatedforusintheunintelligibleFrenchwhichyou canformyourownopinionof: "Maisilnepeutvraimenttre questionquedeconceptions. Eneffet,ils'agitdetrouverles idesabstraites,justesquiappliquesalamatirebrutede l'observationyapporterontordreetclart".Thereisnofull stopinGermanwhereIhaveshownit,andthereisnoenigmain thesentence:"Itisamatter",Freudtellsus,"Sondernes handeltsichwirklich",nottrulybutreally,"ofconceptions" (comma),namelyImeanbythatVorstellungen,correctabstract representations,itisamatterofeinzufahrenthem,ofbringing them,ofbringingtolight,theseconceptionswhoseapplication totheroheStoff,therawmaterialofobservation,Beobachtung, willpermitustomakeemergefromthem,togivebirthfromthem toorderandtransparency.

It is obviously always distressing to entrust something as preciousasthetranslationofFreudtoladiesinwaiting. Thiseffort,thisprogramme,theonethatwehavebeentryingour bestathereforsomeyears,anditisbecauseofthisthattoday wefindthatwehave,inshort,specifiedonourpathabout anxiety,thestatusofsomethingwhichIwoulddesignateright awaybytheletterowhichyouseehereenthronedabovethe outline,theoutlineofthevasewhichsymbolizesforusthe narcissisticcontainerofthelibido,insofarasthroughthe mediationofthismirroroftheOtheritcanberelatedtoits

9.1.63

VII75

ownimagei'(o)andthatbetweenthetwotherecanoperatethis communicatingoscillationthatFreuddesignatesasthe reversibilitybetweenthelibidoofone'sownbodyandthatof theobject. Fromthiseconomicoscillation,thisreversiblelibidofromi(o) toi'(o),thereissomethingwhichwewouldnotsayescapes,but whichintervenesintheformofanincidencewhosestyleof disturbanceispreciselytheonethatwearestudyingthisyear. Themoststrikingmanifestation,thesignaloftheintervention ofthisobjecto,isanxiety.

Thisdoesnotmeanthatthisobjectoisonlythereverseof anxiety,thatitonlyintervenes,thatitonlyfunctionsin correlationwithanxiety.Anxiety,Freudtaughtus,playsthe functionofasignalwithrespecttosomething.Iamsaying:it isasignalrelatedtowhatishappeningabouttherelationship ofasubject,ofasubjectwhomoreovercannotenterintothis relationshipexceptinthevacillationofacertainfading,the onewhichthenotationofthesubjectbyan$designates,the relationshipofthissubject,atthisvacillatingmoment,with (3)thisobjectinallitsgenerality. Anxietyisthesignalofcertainmomentsofthisrelationship. Thisiswnatwearegoingtostrivetoshowyoumoreabouttoday. Itisclearthatthissupposesafurtherstepinthesituationof specifyingwhatwemeanbythisobjecto.Imean,wedesignate thisobjectpreciselybyo.Ipointoutthatthisalgebraic notationhasitsfunction,itislikeathreaddesignedtoallow ustorecogniseitsidentityunderthedifferentincidencesin whichitappearstous.Itsnotationisalgebraic,o,precisely torespondtothisgoalofpuremappingoutofidentity,it havingalreadybeenpositedbyusthatthemappingoutbyaword, byasignifier,isalwaysandcanonlybeametaphor,namely leavinginaway,outsidethesignificationinducedbyits introduction,thefunctionofthesignifieritself.Theterm goodthoughitgeneratesthesignificationofgood,isnotgood byitselfandfarfromit,foritgeneratesevilatthesame time.

Inthesamewaytodesignatethelittleobythetermobjectis, asyousee,ametaphoricalusage,sinceitisborrowedprecisely fromthissubjectobjectrelationshipfromwhichthetermobject isconstituted,whichnodoubtissuitablefordesignatingthe generalfunctionofobjectivityandthisobject,ofwhichwe havetospeakunderthetermo,ispreciselyanobjectwhichis outsideanypossibledefinitionofobjectivity.Iwillnotspeak ofwhatishappeningtoobjectivityinthefieldofscience,Iam speakingaboutourscienceingeneral,youknowthatsinceKanta numberofmisfortuneshavebefallenit,anumberofmisfortunes whichallarise,intheheartofthisobject,fromhavingwanted togivetoogreatasharetocertain,"obviousthings",and especiallythosewhichbelongtothefieldoftranscendental aesthetics,likeforexampleholdingasobvioustheindependence, theseparationbetweenthedimensionsofspaceandthoseoftime wasputtothetestintheelaborationofthescientificobject

9.1.63

VII76

orcameintocollisionwiththissomethingthatisexpressed quiteincorrectlyasacrisisofscientificreason:inshortthis wholeeffortwhichhadtobeundertakeninordertoseethat (4) preciselythesetworegistersofthespatialandtemporal dimensionscouldnot,atacertainlevelofphysics,continueto beheldasindependentvariables,asurprisingfact,whichseems tohaveposedtosomemindsindissolubleproblemswhichdonot seemneverthelesstobeallthatworthyofbringingustoahalt, andifweseethatitispreciselytothestatusoftheobject thatweshouldhaverecoursetogivetothesymbolicitsexact placeintheconstitution,intheexpressionofexperience,not tomakeriskyextrapolationsfromtheimaginaryintothe symbolic.

Intruth,thetimethatisinvolved,atthelevelatwhichthere maybeposedtheproblemsthatcomefromderealisingitina fourthdimension,hasnothingtodowiththetimewhich,in intuition,seemsindeedtoposititselfasasortof unsurpassableshockofthereal,namelysomethingwhichappears toallofus,andthattakingitasanobviousfact,assomething which,inthesymbolic,couldbeexpressedbyanindependent variableissimplyacategoricalerroratthebeginning. Thereisthesamedifficulty,asyouknow,atacertainlimitof physics,withthebody,andhereIwouldsaythatweareonour ownground,becauseitiseffectivelyonwhathasnotbeendone, onwhathasnotbeendoneatthebeginningasregardsacorrect statusoftheexperiencethatwehavehereourwordtosay.We haveourwordtosaysince,ourexperiencepositsandestablishes thatnointuition,thatnotransparency,thatno DurchsichtigbarkeitsinceitisFreud'stermwhichisfounded purelyandsimplyontheintuitionofconsciousness,canbeheld tobeoriginalandthereforevalidandthereforecannot constitutethestartingpointofanytranscendentalaesthetics, forthesimplereasonthatthesubjectcannotbeinanyway situatedinanexhaustivefashioninconsciousness,sinceitis firstlyandprimarilyunconscious.

Tothismustbeadded,thatifitisfirstlyandprimarily unconscious,itisbecauseintheconstitutionofthesubject,we mustfirstlyandprimarilyholdtobepriortothisconstitution, acertainincidencewhichisthatofthesignifier.Theproblem isthatoftheentryofthesignifierintotherealandtosee (5) howfromthisthesubjectisborn.Doesitmeanthat,ifwe findourselvesasitwerebeforeasortofdescentofthespirit, theapparitionofwingedsignifierswouldbegintomaketheir holesinthisrealallbythemselves,inthemidstofwhichthere wouldappearoneoftheseholeswhichwouldbethesubject.I thinkthat,intheintroductionoftherealimaginarysymbolic division,nooneimputessuchaplantome.Itisamattertoday ofknowingwhatisthereatfirst,whatitispreciselythat allowsthissignifiertobeincarnated.Whatallowsitisof coursewhatwehavetheretopresentifyourselvestooneanother, ourbody.Onlythisbodyisnottobetakeneither,forits part,inthepureandsimplecategoriesofthetranscendental aesthetics.Thisbodyisnotinaword,constitutableintheway

9.1.63

VII77

thatDescartesestablishesinthefieldofextension. Itisa matterofourseeingthatthebodyinquestionisnotgiventous inapureandsimplefashioninourmirror,thateveninthis experienceofthemirror,therecanoccuramomentwherethis image,thisspecularimagethatwethinkwehaveinourgrasp,is modified:whatwehavefacetofacewithus,ourstature,our face,ourpairofeyes,allowstheretoemergethedimensionof ourownlookandthevalueoftheimagethenbeginstochange especiallyifthereisamomentatwhichthislookwhichappears inthemirrorbeginstolooknolongeratourselves,initium, aura,thedawningofafeelingofstrangenesswhichopensthe doortoanxiety.

Thepassagefromthespecularimagetothisdoublewhoescapes me,heroisthepointatwhichsomethinghappenswhose generality,function,presenceinthewholephenomenalfieldwe canshow,Ibelieve,bythearticulationthatwearegivingto thisfunctionofo,andwecanshowthatthefunctiongoeswell beyondwhatappearsatthisstrangemomentthatIwishedhere simplytopinpointbecauseitscharacteriswellknownandalso mostdiscreetinitsintensity. Howdoesthereoccurthistransformationoftheobject,which, fromasituatableobject,alocatableobject,anexchangeable objectconstructsthissortofprivate,incommunicableand (6)neverthelessdominantobjectwhichisourcorrelativeinthe phantasy?Whereexactlythemomentofthismoulting,ofthis transformation,ofthisrevelationoccurs,is,Ibelieve somethingthat,alongcertainpaths,fromcertainangleswhichI alreadypreparedforyouinthecourseoftheprecedingyears, canbemorethandesignated,canbeexplained,andthat,inthe littleschemathatIhavebroughtyoutodayontheboard somethingoftheseconceptions,Auffassungen,inotherwordsof theserichtiq,correctrepresentationscanbegivenwhichmakes thealwaysmoreorlessopaque,obscure,appealtointuition,to experience,somethingdurchsichtig,transparent.Inotherwords, toreconstituteforourselvesthetranscendentalaestheticwhich suitsus,whichsuitsourexperience.

Youcanholdthenascertain,throughmydiscourse,thatwhatis commonlytransmitted,Ithink,aboutanxietynotextractedfrom Freud'sdiscoursebutfromapartofhisdiscourse,thatanxiety hasnoobjectisproperlywhatIamcorrecting:"itisnot withoutanobject,ellen'estpassansobjet",suchisexactly theformulaonwhichthereoughttobesuspendedthis relationshipofanxietytoanobject. Itisnotproperlyspeakingtheobjectofanxiety,inthis"not without(passans)",yourecognisetheformulathatIalready usedinthepastabouttherelationshipofthesubjecttothe phallus,"heisnotwithouthavingit,iln'estpassans 1'avoir".

Thisrelationshipof"notbeingwithouthaving"doesnotmean thatoneknowswhatobjectisinvolved.WhenIsay"heisnot withoutresources,heisnotwithoutguile"thatmeansprecisely

9.1.63

VII78

that these resources are obscure at least for me and that his guileisnotoftheusualsort. Moreovereventhelinguisticintroductionofthetermsans,sine, whichisprofoundlycorrelativetothisappositionofhaud,non haudsine,notwithout,isacertaintypeofconditionalliaison, ifyouwish,whichlinksbeingtohavinginasortof alternationheisnotwithouthavingitbutbesides,whereit is,itisnotseen. Dowenothavehereprecisely,thesociologicalfunctionofthe phallus,provided,ofcourse,thatwetakeithereatthelevel ofthecapitalletter,atthelevelofthe^>,inwhichit incarnatesthemostalienatingfunctionofthesubjectin (7)exchangeitself,insocialexchange.Thesubjectasheis involvedinit,isreducedtobeingthebearerofthephallus. Thisiswhatmakescastrationnecessaryforasocialisedsociety inwhichthereare,asClaudLviStrausshaspointedouttous, prohibitionsofcourse,butalsoandaboveallpreferences.

Thisisthetruesecret,itisthetruthofwhatClaudLvi Straussmakesturnaroundtheexchangeofwomeninthestructure. Beneaththeexchangeofwomen,thephallusesaregoingtofulfill them.Itmustnotbeseenthatitisthephallusitselfwhichis atstake.Ifoneseesit,thereisanxiety. Icouldherebranchoffontomorethanonetrack.Itisclear thatwiththisreference,wehavearrived,allofasudden,at thecastrationcomplex.Wellthen,byGod,whynotengage ourselvesourselfinit. Castration,asIhavefrequentlyremindedyou,thecastrationof thecomplex,isnotacastration.Thatissomethingeveryone knows,noonehastheslightestdoubtaboutit,and,acurious thing,peopledonotdwellonit.Itisallthesameof interest,thisimage,thisphantasy.Whereisittobesituated? Betweentheimaginaryandthesymbolic,whatishappening?Isit thegeldingwhichiswellknownfromtheferociouspracticesof war?Itisundoubtedlyclosertoitthantothefabricationof eunuchs. Themutilationofthepenis,ofcourse,iswhatisevokedbythe phantasticalthreatsemanatingfromthefatherorfromthe mother,dependingontheepochofpsychoanalysis."Ifyoudo that,itwillbecutoffyou".Moreoveritisnecessarythat thisaccentofcuttingshouldbegivenallitsimportancefor theretobesustainedthepracticeofcircumcisiontowhichthe lasttime,youheardmemakewhatImightcallprophylactic references,namelytheremarkthatthepsychicincidenceof circumcisionisfarfrombeingunequivocal,andthatIamnotthe onlyonetohavenotedit. Oneofthelastworks,aremarkableonenodoubt,onthesubject, thatofNunberg,oncircumcisionconceivedintermsofits relationswithbisexuality,istheretoremindusofsomething whichalreadyagoodnumberofotherauthorshadintroduced

9.1.63

VII79

beforehim,thatcircumcisionhasjustasmuchthegoal,theaim, (8) ofreinforcing,byisolatingit,thetermofmasculinityin themanastoprovoketheeffects,atleastintheir anxietyprovokingincidence,astoprovoketheeffectsdescribed asthoseofthecastrationcomplex. Nevertheless,itispreciselythisincidence,thisrelationship, thiscommondenominatorofthecutwhichallowsustobringinto thefieldofcastration,theoperationofcircumcision,of Beschneidung,ofareltosayitinHebrew. Istherenotalsoherealittlesomethingwhichmightallowusto takeafurtherstepaboutthefunctionofcastrationanxiety. Wellthen,itisthefollowing,thetermwhichwelack:"Iam goingtocutitoffyou",saystheMammywhoisdescribedas castrating.Fine,andafterwards,wherewilltheWiwimacher,as itiscalledintheobservationoflittleHans,be?Wellthen, ifweadmitthatthisthreat,alwayspresentifiedbyour experience,iscarriedout,itwillbethere,intheoperational fieldofthecommonobject,oftheexchangeableobject,itwill bethere,inthehandsofthemotherwhohascutitoff.Andit isindeedthisthatwouldbestrangeinthesituation. Itoftenhappensthatoursubjectshavedreamswheretheyhave theobjectintheirhands,eitherbecauseithasbeenbrokenoff byagangrene,orbecausesomepartner,inthedream,hastaken thetroubletocarryoutthecuttingoperation,orbysome correlativeaccidentorotherthatisdiverselynuancedwith uncanninessandanxiety,aparticularlydisturbingcharacteristic ofthedream,wellthen,here,tosituateforustheimportance ofthispassageoftheobject,suddenly,towhatonecouldcall Zuhandenheit,asHeideggerwouldsay,itshandiness,inthefield ofcommonobjectsandtheperplexitywhichresultsfromit,and moreover,thiswholepassagetothesideofthehandy,ofthe utensil,ispreciselythatwhichhereintheobservationof littleHans,isdesignatedforusalsobyadream.Heintroduces thetapfitter,theonewhoisgoingtounscrewit,torescrew it,changethewholediscussionofEingewurzelt,aboutwhatisor isnotwellrootedinthebody,intothefield,intotheregister oftheinterchangeable.Andthismoment,thisphenomenological turningpoint,hereconnectsup,andallowsustodesignatethe oppositionbetweenthesetwotypesofobjectaccordingtotheir (9) status.WhenIbegantoannouncethefunction,the fundamentalfunctioninthegeneralestablishmentofthefieldof theobject,ofthemirrorstage,whatpathdidItake?Alongthe planeoftheprimaryidentification,theoriginalmiscognitionof thesubjectasawholeinhisspecularimage,thenthe transitivistreferencewhichisestablishedinhisrelationship withtheimaginaryother,hisfellow,whichmakeshimalways badlyseparatedoutfromthisidentitywiththeotherand introducesheremediation,acommonobjectwhichisanobjectof rivalry,anobject,then,whosestatusisgoingtobeginfromthe notionofbelongingornot:itbelongstoyouoritbelongsto me.Inthisfield,therearetwosortsofobjects,theonesthat canbeshared,andthosewhichcannotbe.Thosewhichcannotbe, whenIseetheminvolvedallthesameinthisdomainofsharing,

9.1.63

VII80

withtheotherobjects,whosestatusrestsentirelyonrivalry, thisambiguousrivalrywhichisatthesametimeemulation butalsoagreement,theyarepriceableobjects,theyareobjects ofexchange.Buttherearesomeofthem,andifIputthe phallusintheforefront,itisofcoursebecauseitisthemost illustriousbecauseofthefactofcastrationbutthereare others,asyouknow,otherswhichyouknow,thebestknown equivalentsofthisphallus,thosewhichprecedeit,theturd, thenipple,therearethoseperhapswhichyouknowlesswell, eventhoughtheyareperfectlyvisibleinanalyticliterature, andwewilltrytodesignatetheseobjectswhentheyenterwith recognisablefreedomintothisfieldwheretheyhaveonlytodo, thefieldofsharing.Whentheyappear,anxietysignalsforus theparticularityoftheirstatus.Theseobjectspriortothe constitutionofthestatusofthecommonobject,ofthe communicableobject,ofthesocialisedobject,thisiswhatis involvedintheo.

Wewillnametheseobjects,wewilldrawupacatalogueofthem, whichisnotofcourseexhaustive,butperhapsalso,letushope so:alreadyjustnow,Ihavenamedthree,Iwouldsaythatasa firstapproachtothiscatalogue,thereareonlytwomissingand thatthetotalitycorrespondstothefiveformsofloss,of perte,Verlust,thatFreuddesignatesinInhibitions,symptoms (10)andanxiety,asbeingthemajormomentsoftheapparitionof thesignal. Iwant,beforegoinganyfurther,totakeupanotherbranchof theswitchlinewhichyousawmealittleearlierintheprocess ofchoosing,tomakearemark,whoseasides,Ibelieve,willhave foryousomeilluminatingaspects.Isitnotstrange, significantofsomething,thatinanalyticresearch,thereis manifestedaquitedifferentlacktotheoneIalreadydesignated insayingthatwehavenottakenasinglestepinthe physiologicalquestionoffemininesexuality. Wecouldaccuseourselvesofthesamefailureasregardsmale impotence.Becauseafterall,intheprocess,clearlylocatable initsnormativephases,ofthemasculinesideofcopulation,we arestillatthestageofreferringourselvestowhatcanbe foundinanybookofphysiologyabouttheprocessoferection first,thenoforgasm. Thereferencetothestimulusresponsecircuitis,whenallis saidanddone,whatwesatisfyourselveswith,asifthehomology betweenorgasmicdischargeandthemotorpartofthiscircuitin anykindofactionwereacceptable.Ofcourse,wearenotat thatstage,farfromit. EveninFreudandtheproblemwasin factraisedbyhimwhyinsexualpleasureisthecircuitnotas elsewheretheshortestcircuittoreturntothelevelofminimal exitation,whyisthereaVorlust,aforepleasure,asitis translated,whichconsistsprecisely.inraisingashighas possiblethisminimallevel?

Andtheinterventionoforgasm,namelyfromwhatmomentisthis raisingofthelevellinkedasanormtothepreliminary

9.1.63

VII81

operationinterrupted?Haveweinanywaygivenaschemaofwhat intervenes,ofthemechanism,ifyouwish,givenaphysiological representationofthespokenthing,ofwhatFreudwouldcallthe Abfuhrinnervtionen,thecircuitofinnervationwhichisthe supportofthebringingintoplayofthedischarge?Havewe distinguishedit,isolatedit,designatedit,becauseitmustbe (11) consideredasdistinctfromwhatfunctionedbefore,because whatwasfunctioningbefore,waspreciselythatthisprocess shouldnotgotowardsitsdischargebeforereachingacertain leveloftheraisingofthestimulus?Itisthenanexerciseof thepleasurefunctiontendingtogetclosetoitsownlimit, namelytothearousalofpain.

Sowheredoesthisfeedbackcomefrom?Noonedreamsoftelling us.ButIwouldpointouttoyou,thatnotI,butthevery peoplewho,psychoanalyticdoctrinetellsus,shouldtellus normallythattheOthermustintervenehere,becausewhat constitutesanormalgenitalfunctionispresentedtousas linkedtooblativity.Letusbetoldthenhowthefunctionof givingassuchinterveneshicetnuncwhenoneisfucking! This,inanycase,hasindeeditsinterestforeitheritis valid,oritisnotanditiscertainthatinsomewaythere mustintervenethefunctionoftheOther.

Inanycase,sinceanimportantpartofourspeculationsconcern whatiscalledthechoiceoftheloveobject,andsinceitisin thedisturbancesofthislovelifethatthereliesanimportant partofanalyticexperience,sinceinthisfieldthereferenceto theprimordialobject,tothemother,isheldtobecapital,a distinctionisimposedastowhereoneshouldlocatethis frequentincidenceofthefactthatforsomepeopletheresultis thattheycannotfunctionasregardsorgasmexceptwith prostitutes,andthatforothersitisonlywithothersubjects choseninadifferentregister.

Asweknowfromouranalysestherelationshiptotheprostitute isalmostdirectlymeshedintothereferencetothemother.In othercases,thedeteriorations,degradationsofLiebesleben,of thelovelife,arelinkedtotheoppositionbetweenthematernal bodywhichevokesacertaintypeofrelationshiptothesubject, andthewomanofacertaindifferenttypeinsofarasshe becomesthesupport,isequivalenttothephallicobject.

Howdoesallofthiscomeabout?Thispicture,thisschema (pi),theonethatIhaveoncemorereproducedhereontheupper partoftheboardallowsustodesignatewhatImean.Isthe mechanism,thearticulationproducedatthelevelofthe (12) attractionoftheobject,whichbecomesornotinvestedfor uswiththisglamour,withthisdesirablebrilliance,withthis colourthisishowsexualityisdesignatedinChinesewhich meansthattheobjectbecomesstimulatingpreciselyatthelevel ofexcitation?

Thisiswhythispreferentialcolourwillbesituated,Iwould say,atthesamelevelofsignalwhichcanalsobethatof

9.1.63

VII82

anxiety,Iamsayingthenatthislevelherei'(o).Sothenit willbeamatterofknowingwhy,andIamindicatingit immediatelysothatyoucanseewhereIwanttogetto:bythe branchingoffoftheoriginalerogenouscathexisfromwhatis herequaopresentandhiddenatthesametime. Orthatwhichfunctionsasasortingelementinthechoiceof loveobjectisproducedhereattheleveloftheframingbyan Einschrnkung,bythisnarrowingdirectlyreferredbyFreudto themechanismoftheego,bythislimitationofthefieldof interestwhichexcludesacertaintypeofobjectpreciselyin functionofitsrelationshipwiththemother. Thetwomechanismsare,asyousee,atthetwoendsofthis chain,whichbeginsatinhibitionandwhichfinisheswithanxiety whosediagonallineImarkedoutinthetablethatIgaveyouat thebeginningofthisyear.Wehavearighttodistinguishtwo differentmechanismsininhibitionandanxietyandpreciselyto conceiveofhowbothoneandtheothercanintervenefromtopto bottomofeverysexualmanifestation. Iaddthefollowingthat,whenIsayfromtoptobottom,Iam includinginitwhatinourexperienceiscalledtransference. RecentlyIheardanallusionbeingmadetothefactthatwein ourSocietyarepeoplewhoknowagooddealabouttransference. Totellthetruth,sinceacertainworkontransferencewhichwas donebeforeourSocietywasfounded,Iknowonlyoneotherwork whichhasbeenevoked,namelythatoftheyearthatIdevotedto itwithyouhere.

Isaidalotofthings,certainlyinaformwhichwasthemost appropriateone,namelyinaformthatwaspartlyveiled.Itis certainthatpreviouslyintheearlierworkontransferenceto (13)whichIhavejustalludedandwhichcontributedadivision asbrilliantasthatoftheoppositionbetweentheneedfor repetitionandtherepetitionofneed(theworkofLagache),you seethathavingrecoursetoaplayonwordstodesignatethings whichmoreoverarenotwithouttheirinterestisnotsimplymy privilege.ButIthinkthatthereferencetotransference,to limitituniquelytotheeffectsofrepetition,totheeffectsof reproduction,issomethingthatwouldaltogetherdeservetobe extended,andthatthesynchronicdimensionrisks,through insistingonthehistoricalelement,ontheelementofthe repetitionoflivedexperience,risksinanycase,risksleaving toonesideawholenolessimportantdimensionwhichis preciselywhatcanappear,whatisincluded,latentinthe positionoftheanalyst,throughwhichthereliesinthespace thathedetermines,thefunctionofthispartialobject.

Thisiswhat,inspeakingtoyouabouttransference,ifyou remember,Idesignatedbythemetaphor,whichisclearenoughit seemstome,ofthehandwhichstretchesouttowardsthelogand atthemomentofreachingthislog,thislogburstsintoflames, andintheflamesanotherhandappearswhichstretchesout towardsthefirstone.

9.1.63

VII83

This is what I also designated, in studying Plato's Symposium, by thefunctionnamedagalmainthediscourseofAlcibiades. Ithinkthattheinadequacyofthesynchronicreferencetothe functionofthepartialobjectintheanalyticrelationship,in thetransferencerelationship,establishesthebasisforopening adossierconcerningadomainwhichIamandamnotastonished, notsurprisedinanycase,toseeleftintheshade,namelythat acertainnumberoffailuresinthesexualfunctioncanbe consideredasdistributedinacertainfieldofwhatwecancall postanalyticresults.

Ibelievethatthisanalysisofthefunctionoftheanalystas thespaceofthefieldofthepartialobject,ispreciselythat beforewhich,fromtheanalyticpointofview,Freudbroughtus toahaltinhisarticleon"Analysisterminableand interminable",andifonestartsfromtheideathatFreud's limit,wasonefindsitrightthroughallhisobservations (14)thenonperceptionofwhatisproperlytobeanalysedinthe synchronicrelationshipbetweentheanalysandandtheanalyst concerningthisfunctionofthepartialobject,onewillsee thereandifyouwish,Iwillcomebacktoittheverysource ofhisfailureofthefailureofhisinterventionwithDora, withthewomaninthecaseoffemininehomosexuality,onewill seeinitespeciallywhyFreuddesignatesforusincastration anxietywhathecallsthelimitofanalysis,preciselyinthe measurethatheremainedforhisanalysandtheseat,thelocusof thispartialobject. IfFreudtellsusthatanalysisleavesmanandwomanunsatisfied, theoneinthefieldofwhatisproperlycalledinthecaseof themalethecastrationcomplexandtheotheraboutPenisneid, thisisnotanabsolutelimit,itisthelimitwherefinite analysisendswithFreud,itisthelimitwhichcontinuesto followthisindefinitelyapproachedparallelismwhich characterisestheasymptote.TheanalysiswhichFreudcalls indefinite,unlimited(andnotinfinite)analysis,occursinthe measurethatsomethingaboutwhichIcanatleastposethe questionastohowitisanalysable,hadbeennot,Iwouldsay, unanalysed,butrevealedonlyinapartialfashionwherethis limitisestablished.

YoumustnotbelievethatIamsayinghere,thatIam contributingheresomethingagainwhichoughttobeconsideredas completelyoutsidethelimitsoftheblueprintalreadysketched outbyourexperience,becauseafterall,torefertorecentand familiarworksintheFrenchdomainofourwork,itisaround penisenvy,thatoneanalystmadehisanalysisofobsessionalsin particularturn,throughtheyearsthatmadeupthetimeofhis writing.HowofteninthecourseofpreviousyearshaveI commentedontheseobservationsforyouinordertocriticise them,toshowinthem,withwhatwehadatthattimetohand, whatIconsideredastheirstumblingpoint.Iwouldformulate here,inamoreprecisefashion,atthepointofexplanationthat wearegettingto,whatisinvolved,whatImeant.Whatwas involvedyouseeitfromadetailedreadingofthese

9.1.63

VII84

(15) observationswhatwasinvolvedifnotthefillingofthis fieldwhichIdesignateastheinterpretationtobemadeofthe phallicfunctionatthelevelofthebigOtherwhoseplaceis heldbytheanalystandthecovering,Iwouldsay,ofthisplace withthephantasyoffellatio,andespeciallyconcerningthe analyst'spenis. Averyclearindication.Theproblemhadbeenseenandletme tellyouthatitisnotbychance,Imeanbychancewithrespect towhatIamintheprocessofdevelopingbeforeyou.Onlymy remarkisthatherethereisonlyanangle,andaninadequate angle:for,inreality,thisphantasyusedforananalysiswhich couldnothereexhaustwhatwasinvolved,onlyrejoinsaphantasy symptomaticoftheobsessional.

And to designate what I mean, I would go back here to a reference which, in the literature, is really exemplary, namely the well known nocturnal behavior of the Ratman when, having obtained by himself, his own erection in front of a mirror, he goes and opens the door to the landing, to his landing, to the imagined ghost of his dead father, to present, before the eyes of this spectre, the presentstateofhismember. Toanalysewhatisinvolvedthenuniquelythenatthelevelof thisphantasyofthefellatiooftheanalystsolinkedbythe authorinquestiontowhathecalledthetechniqueofrapprocher (gettingcloser)totherelationshipofdistanceconsideredas essential,fundamentaltotheobsessionalstructure,specifically initsrelationshipswithpsychosis,is,Ibelieve,simplyto haveallowedthesubject,indeedeventohaveencouragedherto takeonthisphantasticalreaction,whichisthatoftheRatman, totakeontheroleofthisOtherinthemodeofpresencewhich ispreciselyhereconstitutedbydeath,ofthisotherwholooks, bypushinghereven,Iwouldsay,alittlefurtherphantastically simplybythefellatio. Itisobviousthatthisfinalpoint,thisfinaltermisonly addressedheretothosewhosepracticeallowsthemtoputthe importoftheseremarksintheirproperplace. (16) I will end on the path on which we will advance further the next time, and to give their meaning to these two images which I have designated for you here in the right corner at the bottom of the board: the first represents a this is not seen, in fact, at first sight represents a vase, and its neck. I put the hole of this neck facing you to designate, to clearly stress for you that whatisimportantformeistheedge. Thesecondisthetransformationwhichcanbecarried outasregardsthisneckandthisedge.Startingfrom there,thereisgoingtoappeartoyoutheopportuneness ofthelonginsistencethatIplacedlastyearon topologicalconsiderationsconcerningthefunctionof identificationIspecifieditforyouatthelevel ofdesire,namelythethirdtypedesignatedbyFreud,in hisarticleonidentification,theonewhosemajorexample

9.1.63 hefindsinhysteria.

VII85

Hereistneincidenceandtheimportofthesetopological considerations.ItoldyouthatIkeptyousolongonthecross captogiveyouthepossibilityofintuitivelyconceivingwhat mustbecalledthedistinctionbetweentheobjectwearespeaking about,o,andtheobjectcreated,constructedstartingfromthe specularrelationship,thecommonobjectpreciselyconcerningthe specularimage. Togoquickly,Iamgoing,Ithink,toremindyouofit,interms whicharesimplebutadequategiventheamountofwork accomplishedpreviously.

What ensures that a specular image is distinct from that which it represents?Itisthattherightbecomestheleftandinversely. Inotherwords,ifwetrustthisideaweusuallyhaveour rewardwhenwetrusteventhemostaphoristicthingsinFreud thattheegoisasurface,itisintopologicaltermsofpure surfacethattheproblemoughttobeposed:thespecularimage, withrespecttowhatitduplicates,isexactlythepassagefrom therighthandglovetothelefthandglove,whatonecanobtain onasimplesurfacebyturningthegloveinsideout. RememberthatitwasnottodayoryesterdaythatIspoketoyou aboutthegloveorthehood.ThewholedreamquotedbyElla (17)Sharpeturnsforthemostpartaroundthismodel.

TrytheexperimentnowwithwhatItaughtyoutoknowIhope therearenotmanywhodonotknowityetabouttheMoebius strip,namelyIrecallitforthosewhohavenotyetheardtell ofityouobtainveryeasilyinanywaywhatsoever,bytaking thisbelt,andafterhavingopenedit,fastenitagainhaving givenitmeanwhileahalfturn,youobtainaMoebiusstrip, namelysomethingonwhichanantwalkingalongpassesfromoneof theseapparentfacestotheotherface,withoutneedingtopass acrosstheedge,namelyasurfacewithasingleface.

Asurfacewithasinglefacecannotbeturnedinsideout.For effectivelyyoutakeaMoebiusstrip,youmakeityouseethai therearetwowaystomakeit,dependingonwhetheroneturns, onemakesthehalfturnthatIspokeaboutabovetotherightor totheleftandthattheydonotoverlap.Butifyouturnoneof theminsideoutitwillalwaysbeidenticaltoitself.Thisis whatIcallnothavingaspecularimage.

9.1.63

VII86

YouknowontheotherhandthatItoldyouthatinthecrosscap, when,bymeansofasection,acut,whichhasnoothercondition thanthatofrejoiningitself,afterhavingincludedinitthe holepointofthecrosscap,when,Iamsaying,youisolatea partofthecrosscap,itremainsaMoebiusstrip. Hereistheresidualpart.Iconstructed itforyou,Iampassingitaround.It hasitsinterestbecause,letmetellyou: thisiso.Igiveittoyoulikeahost, foryouwillmakeuseofitsubsequently. Thatishowoismade.

It made is like that when cut any whatsoever occurred, has whetheritisthatofthecord,thatofcircumcision,andsome (18)othersstillwhichwewillhavetodesignate. Thereremains,afterthiscutwhateveritmaybe,something comparabletotheMoebiusstrip,somethingwhichdoesnothavea specularimage.NowthenconsidercarefullywhatIwanttotell you.

Thefirstphase,thevasewhichisherehasitsspecularimage, theidealego,constitutiveoftheworldofthecommonobject. Addtoitointheformofacrosscap,andseparateoutinthis crosscapthelittleobjectothatIhaveplacedinyourhands. Thereremains,unitedtoi'(o),theremainder,namelyaMoebius strip,inotherwordsIamrepresentingitforyouhereitis thesamethingasifyoumaketherebegin,fromtheopposite pointoftheedgeofthevase,asurfacewhichconnectsupwith itself,asintheMoebiusstrip. Becausefromthatmoment,the wholevasebecomesaMoebius strip,becauseanantwalking alongtheoutsideentersthe insidewithoutanydifficulty. Thespecularimagebecomesthe strangeandinvasiveimageof thedouble,becomesthatwhich happenslittlebylittleatthe endofthelifeofMaupassant whenhebeginsbynolonger seeinghimselfinthemirror, orwhenheperceivesinaroom somethingwhichturnsitsback onhimandregardingwhichhe immediatelyknowsthatheis notwithoutsomerelationship tothisghost,whentheghost turnsback,heseesthatitis himself.

Thisiswhatisinvolvedintheentryofointotheworldofthe real,whichitisonlyreturningto.Andnotice,_to.end,whatis involved.Itmayseemstrange,bizarretoyouasahypothesis,

9.1.63

VII87

thatsomethingressemblesthis.Noticehoweverthatifweputit outsidetheoperationofthevisualfield,behavelikeablind man,closeyoureyesforamoment,andfeelingyourway,follow theedgeofthistransformedvase.Butitisavaselikethe other,thereisonlyoneholebecausethereisonlyoneedge.it appearstohavetwoofthem.Andthisambiguitybetweentheone andthetwo,Ithinkthatthosewhohavesimplyreadalittle knowthatitisacommonambiguityconcerningtheapparitionof thephallusinthefieldofdreamappearanceandnotonly dreamsofthesexualorganwherethereapparentlyisnoreal phallus.Itsordinarymodeofapparitionistoappearinthe formoftwophalluses.There,that'senoughfortoday!

Seminar8:

Wednesday16January1963

Iwouldliketomanagetotellyoutodayacertainnumberof thingsaboutwhatIhavetaughtyoutodesignateastheobjecto, thisobjectotowardswhichtheaphorismthatIputforwardthe lasttimeaboutanxietyorientsus,namelythatitisnotwithout anobject.Thisiswhytheobjectocomesthisyearintothe centreofourremarks.Andifeffectivelyitisinscribedinthe frameofthisanxietythatItookasatitle,itispreciselyfor thereasonthatitisessentiallyfromthisanglethatitis possibletospeakaboutit,whichmeansagainthatanxietyisits onlysubjectiveexpression. Iftheowhichwearedealingwithherewasallthesame introducedalongtimeagoandalongthepathwhichbringsitto you,wasthereforeannouncedelsewhere,itwasannouncedinthe formulaofthephantasy$o,desireofo,thisistheformulaof thephantasyquasupportfordesire.

Myfirstpointwillbethentorecall,toarticulate,toaddone morespecificationcertainlyforthosewhohaveheardme,onenot impossibleforthemtomasterbythemselves,eventhoughit doesnotseemsuperfluoustometounderlineittoday.Asa firstpointIhopetoreachpointfourandtospecifythis functionoftheobjectinsofaraswedefineitanalyticallyas objectofdesire,themiragecomingfromaperspectivethatone couldcallsubjectivist,Imeantheonewhichintheconstitution ofourexperienceputsthewholeaccentonthestructureofthe subject,thislineofelaborationthatthemodernphilosophical traditionbroughttoitsmostextremepoint,letussay,around Husserl,byseparatingoutthefunctionofintentionality,isone thatmakesusthecaptivesofamisunderstanding,concerningwhat canbecalledtheobjectofdesire.Theobjectofdesirecannot beconceivedofinafashionwhichteachesusthatthereisno noeme,nothinkingaboutsomething'whichisnotturnedtowards something,theonlypointaroundwhichidealismcanturninits pathtowardstheReal.

16.1.63 16.1.63

VIII

89

Vili 2

(2) Isthishowthingsareasregardsdesire?Forthislevelof ourlisteningwhichexistsineveryoneandwhichhasneedof intuition,Iwouldsay:"Istheobjectofdesireoutinfront? Thisisthemiragethatisinvolvedandwhichhassterilised everythingthatinanalysisintendedtoadvanceinthedirection describedasobjectrelations.Itisinordertorectifyitthat Ihavealreadytravelledalongmanypaths.Itisanewwayof accentuatingthisrectificationthatIamgoingtoputforwardto younow. Iwillnotmakeitasdevelopedasitnodoubtshouldbe, reserving,Ihope,thisformulationforaworkwhichwillreach youalongadifferentpath. Ithinkthatformostofyoulisteningitwillbeenoughtohear thegrossformulaewithwhichIbelieveIcancontentmyselfto emphasisetodaythispointwhichIhavejustintroduced. Youknowhow,intheprogressofepistemology,theisolationof thenotionofcausehasproducedconsiderabledifficulties.It isnotwithoutaseriesofreductionswhichendupbyleadingit tothemosttenuousandthemostequivocalfunctionthatthe notionofcausewasabletobemaintainedinthedevelopmentof whatinthelargestsensewecouldcallourphysics. Itisclearontheotherhandthatwhateverreductiononesubmits itto,whatonemightcallthementalfunctionofthisnotion cannotbeeliminated,reducedtoasortofmetaphysicalshadow. Weclearlysensethatthereissomething,whichitistoolittle tosaythatisarecoursetointuition,whichmakesitsubsist, whichremainsaroundthisfunctionofcause,andIclaimthatit isstartingfromthereexaminationthatwecanmakeofit, startingfromanalyticexperience,thatthewholeCritiqueof purereason,broughtuptodatewithourscience,could reestablishacorrectstatusofcause. IscarcelydaretosaytointroduceitforafterallwhatIam goingtoformulateishereonlyadiscourseeventandscarcely anchoredxnthisdialecticIwouldsaythen,tofixouraims, whatIintendtomakeyouunderstand.Theobject,theobjecto, thisobjectwhichisnottobesituatedinanythingwhatsoever whichisanalogoustotheintentionalityofannoeme,whichis notintheintentionalityofdesire,thisobjectoughttobe conceivedbyusasthecauseofdesire,and,totakeupmy (3) metaphorofalittlewhileago,theobjectisbehinddesire. Itisfromthisobjectothattherearisesthisdimensionwhose omission,whoseelision,whoseavoidanceinthetheoryofthe subjectconstitutedtheinadequacyuptothepresentofthis wholecoordinationwhosecentremanifestsitselfasatheoryof knowledge,gnoseology. Moreoverthisfunctionoftheobject,inthenovelstructural topologythatitrequires,isquitetangibleinFreud's formulations,andspecificallyinthoseconcerningthedrive.

Letitsufficeformetoifyouwanttocheckitagainsta text,IwouldreferyoutotheXXXIIndlecturefromthe Introductiontopsychoanalysis,whichcanbefoundinwhatis calledthenewseriesofVorlesungen,theoneIquotedthelast timeitisclearthatthedistinctionbetweenZiel,thegoalof thedriveandtheObjektissomethingquitedifferenttowhat youfirstthink,thatthisgoalandthisobjectshouldbeatthe sameplace.AndthestatementsofFreudthatyouwillfindin thisplace,inthelecturethatIamdesignatingforyou,employ verystrikingterms,thefirstofwhichisthetermeingeschoben: theobjectslidesinit,goessomewhereitisthesameword whichisusedfortheVerschiebungwhichdesignatesdisplacement theobjectinitsessentialfunctionasthesomethingwhich slipsawayisherehighlightedassuch,atthelevelof understandingwhichisproperlyourown. Ontheotherhand,thereis,atthisleveltheexplicit oppositionbetweentwotermsusseres,external,outside,and inneres,inside.Itisspecifiedthattheobjectisnodoubtto besituatedusseres,ontheoutside,andontheotherhandthat thesatisfactionofthetendencyisonlyfoundtobeaccomplished insofarasitconnectsupwithsomethingwhichistobe consideredintheinneres,theinsideofthebody,itisthere thatitfindsitsBefriedigung,itssatisfaction.Thisalso tellsyouthatwhatIintroducedforyouasatopological functionallowsustoformulateinaclearfashionthatwhathas tobeintroducedheretoresolvethisimpasse,thisriddle,is thenotionofanoutsidebeforeacertainintriorisation,ofthe outsidewhichissituatedhere,o,beforethesubjectatthe locusoftheOther,graspshimselfinxinthisspecularform whichintroducesforhimthedistinctionbetweenthemeandthe (4)notme.

Itistothisoutside,tothislocusoftheobjectbeforeany intriorisation,thattherebelongsifyoutrytotakeupagain thenotionofcausethatthisnotionofcause,Iamsaying, belongs. Iamgoingtoillustrateitimmediatelyinthesimplestfashion tomakeyouhearwhatIamsayingbecausemoreoverIwill abstaintodayfromdoinganymetaphysics. In order to image it, it is not by chance that I will make use of the fetish as such, where there is unveiled this dimension of the objectascauseofdesire.Becauseitisnottheslipper,orthe

16.1.63

VIII91

breast,norwhateveritmaybeinwhichyouincarnatethefetish thatisdesiredbutthefetishascauseofdesirewhichhooks ontowhateveritcan,ontosomeonewhoisnotabsolutely necessarilytheonewhoiswearingtheslippertheslippercan beinhersurroundingsitisnotevennecessarythatsheshould havethebreast:thebreastcanbeinthehead.Butwhat everyoneknows,isthat,forthefetishist,itisnecessarythat thefetisnshouldbethere,thatitistheconditionuponwhich desiresustainsitself. AndIwouldindicatehere,inpassing,thisterm,littleusedI believeinGermanandthatthevaguetranslationsthatwehavein inFrench,allowtoescapecompletelyitis,whenanxietyis involved,therelationshipthatFreudindicateswith Libidoaushalt.Wearedealingherewithatermwhichisbetween Aushaltungwhichwouldindicatesomethingoftheorderof interruption,ofbreakingandInhaltwhichisthecontent.Itis neitheronethingnortheother:itisthesupportofthelibido. Inaword,thisrelationshiptotheobjectthatIamspeaking abouttoyoutoday,isheredirected,indicatedinafashion whichallowsasynthesistobemadebetweenthesignalfunction ofanxietyanditsrelationshipallthesametosomethingthatwe cancallaninterruptioninthesupportofthelibido. Wearegoingtocomebacktoitbecausethisisoneofthepoints thatIintendtoadvancebeforeyoutoday.AssumingthatIhave mademyselfadequatelyunderstoodbythisreferencetothe fetish,aboutthemaximaldifferencethatthereisbetweentwo possibleperspectivesconcerningtheobjectasobjectofdesire, twospecificationsofwhatisinvolved,whenIputofirstinan essentialprecession,Iwillillustrateitalittlefurther. Everythingthatfollowsinourdiscoursewillnotstop (5)illustratingitfurther,butalreadyIwantyoutounderstand properlywhatisinvolved,whereourresearchwillleadus:the factisthatitisattheverylocuswhereyourmentalhabits indicatethatyoushouldseekforthesubject,thissomething whichdespiteyouisoutlinedassuchassubjectattheplace whereforexampleFreudindicatesthesourceofthetendency, indeedtherewherethereissomethingwhich,indiscourse,you articulateasbeingyou,therewhereyousay:"I",itisthere properlyspeakingthatattheleveloftheunconsciousthereis situatedo. Atthislevel,youareo,theobject,andeveryoneknowsthat thisiswhatisintolerableandnotonlytodiscourseitself, whichafterallbetraysit.Iamgoingtoillustrateitright awaybyaremarkdestinedtointroducesomedisplacement,some disturbanceeven,asregardstherutsinwhichyouareusedto leavingthefunctionsdescribedassadismandmasochismasifall thatwasinvolvedtherewastheregisterofasortofimmanent aggressionanditsreversibility. Itispreciselyinthemeasurethatonehastoenterintotheir subjectivestructurethattraitsofdifferencearegoingto appear,theessentialbeingtheonethatIamgoingtodesignate

16.1.63

VIII92

now.Ifsadismcanbeimaged,inaformwhichisonlyan abbreviatedschemaofthesamedistinctionsthatthegraph organises,inaformulawithfourverticesofthekindthatIam designatinghere,wehaveherethesideof0,oftheOther,and herethatofletussay,ofthesubjectS,ofthisstill unconstituted of I this subject precisely be to questioned,tobe revisedwithinourexperience,ofwhich weonlyknowthatitcannot,inany case,coincidewiththetraditional formulaofthesubject,namelythe degreeofexhaustiontherecanbein everyrelationshipwiththeobject. Ifthereissomethingtherecalledsadisticdesire,withallthe enigmaitinvolves,itisonlyarticulatable,itisonly formulatableinsofarasthisschize,thisdissociation,thatit aimsessentiallyatintroducingintheother,byimposingonhim, uptoacertainlimit,thatwhichcannotbetolerated,atthe exactlyadequatelimitwheretheremanifestsitself,wherethere appearsintheotherthisdivision,thisgapthereisbetweenhis (6)existenceassubjectandwhatheundergoes,whathecan sufferinhisbody. Andtosuchadegreeisitthisdistinction,thisdivision,this gapasessentialthatisinvolvedandamatterofquestioning, thatinfactitisnotsomuchthesufferingoftheotherthatis soughtinthesadisticintention,ashisanxietypreciselyhere Iarticulate,Idesignate,Inotethislittlesign,f 8,whichin thefirstformulaethatIbelieveinmysecondlectureofthis year,Iintroducedconcerninganxiety,Itaughtyoutoreadby thetermnot0 , 1 toldyou,butzerotheanxietyoftheother, hisessentialexistenceassubjectwithrespecttothisanxiety, thisiswhatthesadisticdesirewantstomakevibrate. Anditisforthisreasonthat,inoneofmypastseminars,Idid nothesitatetorelateitsstructureasproperlyhomologousto whatKantarticulatedasaconditionfortheexerciseofpure practicalreason,ofamoralwillproperlyspeaking,and,ina word,tosituatetheretheonlypointwheretherecanbe manifestedarelationshipwithapuremoralgood. Iapologiseforthebriefnessofthisreminder.Thosewhowere presentatthisrapprochementwillrememberitthosewhowere notabletoattendwillsee,Ithink,appearinginthenottoo distantfuturewhatItookupofitagaininaprefaceto Philosophyintheboudoirwhichwaspreciselythetextaround whichIhadorganisedthiscomparison.

WhatisimportanttodayandtheonlythingIwanttoaddanother touchto,isthatwhatcharacterisesthesadisticdesireis properlythathedoesnotknowthatintheaccomplishmentofhis act,ofhisritualbecauseitinvolvesproperlyspeakingthis typeofhumanactioninwhichwefindallthestructuresof ritualwhathedoesnotknow,iswhatheislookingfor,and whatheislookingfor,isproperlyspeakingtorealisehimself,

16.1.63

VIII93

tomakehimselfappear,towhomsince,inanycase,this revelationcanonlyremainobscuretohimselftomakehimself appearaspureobject,blackfetish.Thisishowtherecanbe resumed,initsfinalterm,themanifestationofsadisticdesire, insofarastheonewhoisitsagentgoestowardssucha realisation. (7) Moreover,ifyouevokewhatisinvolvedinthefigureof Sade,youwillseethenthatitisnotbychanceif,whatcanbe extractedfromit,whatremainsofit,throughasortof transubstantiationthroughtheages,withtheimaginary elaborationofhisfigurethroughoutthegenerations,isaform ManRaycoulddonobetterwhenhetriedtoconstructhis imaginaryportraitpreciselyapetrifiedform.Quitedifferent is,asyouknow,thepositionofthemasochistforwhomthis incarnationofhimselfasobjectisthedeclaredgoal,whetherhe turnshimselfintoadogunderthetableorapieceof merchandise,anitemthatistreatedinacontractbygivingit over,bysellingitasoneamongotherobjectsthatareonthe market,inshort,hisidentificationwiththisotherobjectwhich Icalledthecommonobject,theobjectofexchange,thisisthe route,thisisthepathonwhichheseekspreciselywhatis impossible,whichistograsphimselfforwhatheis,insofar aslikeallofusheisano.. Toknowwhyheissointerestedbythisrecognition,whichall thesameremainsimpossible,isofcoursewhatmanyparticular conditionsofhisanalysiscouldreveal.Butbeforeevenbeing abletounderstandtheseparticularconditions,therearecertain conjunctionswhichmustbeproperlyestablishedhereandwhich arethemoststructuralones. Thisiswhatwearegoingtotry todonow. YoushouldclearlyunderstandthatIhavenotsaid,without elaboration,thatthemasochistattainshisidentificationwith theobject.Asforthesadistthisidentificationonlyappears onthestage.Only,evenonthisstage,thesadistdoesnotsee himself,heonlyseestheremainder.Thereisalsosomething thatthemasochistdoesnotseewewillseewhatperhapsa littlelaterbutthisallowsmetointroducerightawaysome formulaethefirstofwhichisthefollowing:thattorecognise oneselfastheobjectofone'sdesire,inthesensethatIam articulatingittoday,isalwaysmasochistic.Thisformulahas theinterestofmakingthedifficultytangibleforyou,because itisalltooconvenienttouseourlittlePunchandtosaythat ifthereismasochism,itisbecausethesuperegoisvery wicked,forexample.Weknowofcoursethatwithinmasochismwe makeallthenecessarydistinctions:erogenousmasochism, femininemasochism,moralmasochism.Butasthesimple enunciationofthisclassificationhasprettymuchthesame effectaswhatIwouldsayifIweretosay:"Thereisthis glass,thereistheChristianfaith,andthereisthecollapseof (8) WallStreet".Thisshouldallthesameleaveusalittle dissatisfied.Ifthetermmasochismcanhaveameaning,itwould bewelltofindamoreunitaryformulaforitandifwewereto

16.1.63

VIII94

saythatthesuperegoisthecauseofmasochism,wewouldnotbe abandoningtoomuchthissatisfyingintuition,exceptforthe factthat,sincewehavesaidbeforethattheobjectisthecause ofdesire,wewouldseethatthesuperegoshares,atleastthat itsharesthefunctionofthisobjectquacause,asIhave introducedittodayinordertomakeyousensehowtrueitis.I couldincludeitinthecatalogue,intheseriesoftheseobjects aswewillhavetodeploythembeforeyou,byillustratingthis placewithallthecontents,ifyouwish,thatitcanhaveand whicharenumerable.IfIdidnotdoitatthebeginning,itwas sothatyouwouldnotloseyourheads,byseeingthemas contents,andthinkthattheyarethesamethingthatyoualways discoveraboutanalysis.Foritisnottrue.Ifyouthinkyou knowthefunctionofthematernalbreast,orthatoftheturd, youknowwellhowmuchobscurityremainsinyourmindsaboutthe phallus,andwhenitistheobjectwhichcomesimmediatelyafter thatisconcerned.Iwillgiveittoyouallthesame,asaway ofgivingyourcuriositysomethingtofeedon,namelytheeyeas such,aboutityouknownothingatall.Thisiswhyitshould onlybeapproachedwithprudence,andforthebestofreasons. Thisistheobjectinvolvedsince,whenallissaidanddone,it istheobjectwithoutwhichthereisnoanxiety,itisbecauseit isadangerousobject.LetusbeprudentthereforesinceIlack, thatistosayintheimmediate,theopportunityofmakingappear inwhatsenseIsaiditthiscaughttheearofoneofmy listenersIsaid,twolecturesago,thatifdesireandthelaw werethesamething,itisinsofarandinthissensethat desireandthelawhaveacommonobject.

Itisnotenoughtheninthiscasetogiveoneselfthe consolationthattheyare,withrespecttooneanother,likethe twosidesofthewall,orlikethefrontandtheback.Thisis tocheapenthedifficultyand,togostraighttothepointwhich makesyousenseit,Iwouldsaythatitisnotforanyother reasonthantomakeyousenseit,thatthereisvalueinthe (9)centralmythwhichallowedpsychoanalysistotakeoff,namely theOedipusmyth.

TheOedipusmythmeansnothingelse,ifnotthat,attheorigin, desire,thedesireofthefatherandthelawareoneandthesame thing,andthattherelationshipbetweenthelawanddesireisso closethatnothingbutthefunctionofthelawtracesthepathof desire,thatdesire,quadesireofthemother,forthemother,is identicaltothefunctionofthelaw.Itisinsofarasthelaw prohibitsherthatitimposesdesiringher:forafterallthe motherisnotinherselfthemostdesirableobject.If everythingisorganisedaroundthisdesireforthemother,ifit isstartingfromtherethatitisposedthatthewomanoneshould preferforthisiswhatisinquestionshouldbeotherthan themother,whatdoesthatmean,ifnotthatacommandmentis imposed,isintroducedintotheverystructureofdesirethatin awordonedesiresaccordingtothecommandment.Whatdoesthe wholemythofOedipusmean,ifnotthatthedesireofthefather iswhathasmadethelaw.

16.1.63

VIII95

Fromthisperspectivemasochismtakesonthevalueandfunction ofappearingandclearlyappearingitisitsonlyvalueforthe masochistwhendesireandthelawarefoundtogetherfor whatthemasochisttriestomakeappearandIadd,onhis littlestage,foronemustneverforgetthisdimensionis somethingwherethedesireoftheOtherlaysdownthelaw. Weseeimmediatelyoneofitseffects:itisthatthemasochist himselfappearsinthisfunctionthatIwouldcalllopsided (dejet)withrespecttothisobjectofours,theoofwhichwe speakundertheappearanceofwaste(dejete),ofwhatisthrown tothedogs,ontherubbishheap,inthedustbin,tothe rejectionofthecommonobject,forwantofbeingabletoputit elsewhere.

Itisoneoftheaspectsinwhichtherecanappeartheoasit showsitselfinperversion.Andthisdoesnotexhaustinanyway whatwecanonlycircumscribebygoingaroundit,namelythe functionofo.ButsinceIhavetakenthisperspectiveof masochism,sinceIhaveintroducedit,wemustgiveourselves otherpointsofreferencetosituatethisfunctionofo.Yousee oneofthematthelevelofmasochism.Iremindyouthatone mustfirsttakeforitsfunctionofgrosscorrelation,thatthe centraleffectofthisidentitywhichconjoinsthedesireofthe (10)fatherandthelaw,isthecastrationcomplexinsofaras whenthelawisbornbythismoulting,thismysteriousmutation ofthedesireofthefatherafterhehadbeenkilled,the consequenceis,justasmuchinthehistoryofanalyticthought asineverythingthatwecanconceiveofasthemostcertain liaison,isinanycasethecastrationcomplex. Thisiswhyyouhavealreadyseenappearinginmyschemasthe notation(<J>)attheplacewhereoismissing. Therefore,afirstpointtoday:Ispoketoyouabouttheobject ascauseofdesire.Secondpoint,Itoldyou:to.recognise oneselfastheobjectofone'sdesire,isalwaysmasochisticI pointedouttoyouinthisconnectionwhatwastakingshapefor usasapresentationinacertainincidenceofthesuperego,I indicatedtoyouaparticularitythatisinsomewaydepreciated ofwhatishappeningattheplaceofthisobjectointheform of($>). Wecometoourthirdpoint,theonewhichconcernspreciselythis possibilityofthemanifestationsoftheobjectoaslack.Itis structuraltoit.Anditisinordertomakeitconceivablethat thisschema,thisimagedesignedtomakeitfamiliartoyouhas beenpresentifiedandrecalledtoyouforsometimepast. Theobjectoatthelevelofouranalyticsubject,ofthesource ofwhatsubsistsasbodywhichinpart,forushidesfromusasI mightsayitsownwill,thisobjectoisthisrockofwhichFreud speaks,thisfinalirreduciblereserveoflibidowhosecontours itissopathetictoseehimliterallypunctuatinginthesetexts everytimethatheencountersit.Iwillnotendmylecture

16.1.63

VIII96

todaywithouttellingyouwhereyoushouldgotorenewthis conviction.Thislittleo,attheplacewhereitis,atthe levelwhereitcouldberecognisedifitwerepossiblebecause ofcoursealittleearlierItoldyouthattorecogniseoneself asobjectofone'sdesireisalwaysmasochisticifitwere possible,themasochistonlydoesitonthestage.Andyouare goingtoseewhathappenswhenhecannolongerremainthere,on thestage.Wearenotalwaysonthestage,eventhoughthestage stretchesveryfar,andevenintothedomainofourdreams.And quanotonthestageandremainingonthissideofit,andtrying (11)toreadintheOtherwhathereturnsfrom,wefindnothing butthelackhereatX(schema).

Itisthisliaison,coordinationbetweentheobjectandits necessarylacktherewherethesubjectisconstitutedatthe locusoftheOther,namelyasfaraspossible,beyondevenwhat canappearinthereturnoftherepressedandconstitutingthe Urverdranqunq,theirreducibleoftheincognito,becausemoreover wecannotsayabsolutelyunknowablebecausewearetalkingabout it,itisherethatthereisstructured,thatthereissituated what,inouranalysisofthetransference,Iproducedbeforeyou bythetermagalma.

Itisinsofarasthisemptyplaceisaimedatassuchthat thereisestablishedthealwaysmoreorlessneglectedandfor goodreasonsdimensionoftransference.Thatthisplaceas suchcanbecircumscribedbysomethingwhichismaterialisedin thisimage,acertainedge,acertainopening,acertaingap wheretheconstitutionofthespecularimageshowsitslimits, thisistheelectivelocusofanxiety. Thisphenomenonofedge,inwhatopenslikethiswindow on privileged occasions, marks the illusory limit of this world of recognition, of the one that I call the stage. That it should be linked to this edge, to this framing, to this gap which is illustrated in this schema at least twice, in this edge here of the mirror and moreover in this little sign,^, that this is the locus of anxiety, is what you ought always to retain as the signalofwhatistobesoughtforinthemiddle.

ThetextofFreudtowhichIwouldaskyoutorefer,foritisa textthatisalwaysmorestupefyingtoreadbecauseofthis doubleaspectofweaknesses,ofinadequacieswhichalwayspresent themselvestonovicesatthebeginningasthefirstthingstobe pickedoutinthetextofFreudandofthedepthwithwhich everythingthathecomesupagainstrevealsthedegreetowhich Freudwasherearoundthisveryfieldthatwearetryingto designate,ofcourse,itisnecessaryfirstofallforyoutobe familiarwiththetextofDoracan,forthosewhoheardmy discourseontheSymposium,recallthisdimensionalwayseluded whentransferenceisinvolved,andoftheotherdimensionin parenthesis,namelythattransferenceisnotsimplysomething thatreproducesasituation,anaction,anattitude,anold (12)trauma,andrepeatsitthefactisthatthereisalways anothercoordinate,theoneonwhichIputtheaccentin

16.1.63

VIII97

connectionwiththeanalyticinterventionofSocrates,namely specificallyinthecasewhereIevokealovepresentinthe real,andthatwecanunderstandnothingabouttransferenceifwe donotknowthatitisalsotheconsequenceofthatlove,thatit isinconnectionwiththispresentloveandanalystsshould rememberitduringanalysesofalovewhichispresentin differentways,butthatatleasttheyshouldrememberit,when itistherevisible,thatitisinfunctionofwhatwecouldcall thisreallovethatthereisestablishedwhatisthecentral questionoftransference,namelytheonethesubjectposes concerningtheagalma,namelywhatheislacking.Foritiswith thislackthatheloves.ItisnotfornothingthatforyearsI havebeenrepeatingtoyouthatloveistogivewhatonedoesnot have.Thisiseventheprincipleofthecastrationcomplex:in ordertohavethephallus,inordertobeabletomakeuseofit, itisnecessarypreciselynottobeit.

Whenonereturnstotheconditionswhereitappearsthatoneis itforoneisitjustasmuchforaman,thereisnodoubt aboutit,andforawomanwewillsayagainthroughwhat incidencesheisledtobecomeitwellthenitisalwaysvery dangerous. Letitsufficeformetoaskyoubeforeleavingyoutoreread attentivelythistextentirelydevotedtotherelationships betweenFreudandhispatient,thisgirlIremindyouofwhom hesaysthatanalysismakesthereappearthatitisessentially aroundanenigmaticdisappointmentconcerningthebirthinher family,theapparitioninherhouseholdofalittlechildthat shehasbeenorientedtowardshomosexuality. Withanabsolutelyadmirabletouchofthescienceofanalogy, Freudperceiveswhatisinvolvedinthisdemonstrativeloveof theyounggirlforawomanwhohasundoubtedlyasuspect reputation,withregardtowhomshebehavesherself,Freudtells us,inanessentiallyvirilefashion.Andifonelimitsoneself toreadingsimplywhatisthere,Godknows,virility,weareso usedtospeakingaboutitwithoutknowingthatwedonotseethat whatheintendstoemphasisethere,iswhatItriedtopresentify beforeyouinallsortsofwaysinstressingthatitisthe functionofwhatiscalledcourtlylove:shebehaveslikethe (13)knightwhosuffersforhislady,iscontentwiththemost impoverished,theleastsubstantialfavours,whoprefersevento onlyhavethoseandwhofinally,themoretheobjectofhislove goesintheoppositedirectiontowhatonecouldcallreward,the moreheoverestimatesandraisesthisobjecttoaneminent dignity.

Whenmanifestlythewholepublicclamourcannotfailtoimpress onherthateffectivelythebehaviourofherwellbelovedis extremelydoubtful,thisdimensionofexaltationonlyseesthere beingaddedtoitthesupplementaryandreinforcedaimofsaving her.AllofthisisadmirablyunderlinedbyFreudandyouknow howthegirlinquestionhadbeenbroughttohisconsultation room:itisinthemeasurethatoneday,thisliaisoncarriedout

16.1.63

VIII98

whatismorereallyindefianceofthewholecity,inastyle whoserelationshipofprovocationwithrespecttoherfamily Freudperceivedrightawayanditappearsveryquicklyandvery certainlythatitisherfatherthisliaisoncomestoanend becauseofanencounter.Theyounggirlinthecompanyofher beloved,wearetold,passes,onthewaytotheofficeofthe fatherinquestion,thisfatherwhothrowsanirritatedglanceat herthescenethenhappensveryquickly.Thepersonforwhom, nodoubt,thisadventureisonlyaratherobscuredistractionand whoisbeginningobviouslytohaveenoughofitandwho,no doubt,doesnotwanttoexposeherselftogreatdifficulties, tellstheyounggirlthatthishaslastedlongenoughandthat thatisitforthefuture,thatsheshouldstopsendingher,as shedoeseveryday,countlessflowers,followinghereverywhere shegoes.Andatthisthegirlimmediatelythrowsherselfovera placeasregardswhichyouwillrememberatonetimeIexplored minutelythemapsofViennatoallowitsfullmeaningtobegiven tothecaseoflittleHans,Iwouldnotgosofartodayasto tellyoutheplacewheresomethingveryprobablycanbefound somethingcomparabletowhatyoustillseeoverbyBoulevard Pereire,namelyalittleditchatthebottomofwhichthereare therailsofalittlerailwaywhichisnotworkinganymore,this iswherethegirlthrowsherself,niederkommt,fallsdown. Therearemanythingstosayaboutthisniederkommen.IfIam introducingithere,itisbecauseitisanactofwhichitis notsufficienttomention,torecall,theanalogywiththe meaningofniederkommenintheeventofgivingtobirth,to exhaustits(14)meaning.Thisneiderkommenisessentialfor everysuddenrelatingofthesubjectwithwhatheisaso.

Itisnotfornothingthatthemelancholicsubjecthassuch apropensityandonealwaysaccomplishedwithablinding, disconcerting,rapidityforthrowinghimselfthroughthewindow.

Thewindow,insofarasitremindsusofthislimitbetweenthe stageandtheworld,indicatestouswhatismeantbythisactby which,inaway,thesubjectreturnstothisfundamental exclusionhefeelshimselftobeinattheverymomentthatthere isconjoinedintheabsoluteofasubject,whichweanalysts alonecanhaveanideaof,thisconjunctionbetweendesireand thelaw.

Thisisproperlywhathappensatthemomentoftheencounter betweenthecouple,theknightofLesbosandherKareninian object,ifIcanexpressmyselfinthisway,withthefather. Foritisnotenoughtosaythatthefatherthrewanirritated glancetounderstandhowtherecouldhavebeenproducedthis passageal'acte.Thereissomethingwhichbelongstheretothe verybasisoftherelationship,tothestructurebecausewhatis involved?LetussayitbrieflyintermsthatIbelieve sufficientlypreparedforyoutounderstandthem:thegirlfor whomtheattachmenttothefatherandthedisappointmentbecause ofthebirth,ofayoungbrother,ifIrememberrightly,this disappointmentwastheturningpointofherlife,isgoingthen

16.1.63

VIII99

todowhat?Makeofhercastrationasawomanwhattheknight doeswithrespecttohislady,towhompreciselyheoffersthe sacrificeofhisvirileprerogativestomakeofherthesupport ofwhatislinkedintherelationshipbyaninversiontothis sacrificeitself,namelytheputtinginplaceofthelack, preciselywhatislackingtothefieldoftheother,namelythe supremeguarantee,thefactthatthelawiswellandtrulythe desireofthefather,thatoneissureofit,thatthereisalaw ofthefather,anabsolutephallus,^. Nodoubtresentmentandvengeancearedecisiveinthe relationshipbetweenthisgirlandherfather.Thatiswhat resentmentandvengeanceare:thislaw,thissupremephallus, hereiswhereIputit.Sheismylady,andsinceIcannotbe yoursubmissivewoman,andIyourobject,Iamtheonewho sustains,whocreates,theidealisedrelationshiptowhatis inadequateinmyself,whatwasrepulsed.Letusnotforgetthat thegirlhadgivenupon,hadletgothecultureofher (15)narcissism,hertoilet,hercoquetry/herbeauty,tobecome theservantknightofthelady. Itisinthemeasurethatallofthisiscontainedinthissimple encounterandatthelevelofthefather'slook,forwhom, neverthelessonthiswholescenewhichhadcompletelygainedthe assentofthesubject,thatthisscenefallsunderthelookof thefather,thatthereisproducedwhatwecouldcallin referringourselvestothefirsttablethatIgaveyouaboutthe coordinatesofanxietythissupremeembarrassment,thatemotion consultthistable,youwillseeitsexactcoordinatesemotion isaddedtoitbythesuddenimpossibilityoffacinguptothe sceneherfriendhadputbeforehertwoessentialconditionsof whatisproperlyspeakingcalledpassageal'acte,(andhereIam addressingmyselftosomeonewhoaskedmetoanticipatealittle onwhatIcansayaboutthisdistinctionfromactingout,we^will havetocomebacktoit),thetwoconditionsofthepassagea 1'acteassucharerealised.Whatcomesatthismomenttothe subject,isherabsoluteidentificationtothiso,towhichshe isreduced.Confrontationwiththisdesireofthefatherupon whichallherbehaviourisconstructed,withthislawwhichis presentifiedinthelookofthefather,itisthroughthisthat shefeelsherselfidentifiedandatthesamemoment,rejected, ejectedoffthestage. Onlythe"lettingfall",the"lettingoneselffall"canrealise it.Idonothavethetimetodaytoindicatetoyouthe directionthatthistakes,namelythatthecelebratednotationby Freudoftheidentificationtotheobjectinmourning,asbeing somethingonwhichthereisbroughttobearsomethingwhichhe expressesastherevengeoftheonewhoisexperiencingthe mourning,isnotenough.Wecarryonmourningandweexperience thedevaluatingeffectsofmourninginsofarastheobjectthat wearemourningforwas,withoutusknowingit,theonewhichhad become,thatwehadmadethesupportforourcastration. Castrationreturnstousandweseeourselvesforwhatweare,

16.1.63

Vili 13

insofaraswewouldbeessentiallyreturnedtothispositionof castration.YouseethatIamrunningoutoftimeandthathere Icanonlygiveanindicationbutwhatwelldesignatesthe degreetowhichthisiswhatisinvolvedtherearetwothings:it isthewayinwhichFreudsensesthathoweverspectacularthe advancesmadebythepatientinheranalysis,itrunsoffher (16) likewateroffaduck'sback,andifhedesignates specificallythisplacewhichisthatofointhemirrorofthe Otherbyallpossiblecoordinates,withoutofcoursehavingthe elementsofmytopology,butonecouldnotsayitmoreclearly, forhesaysthere:"Here,whatIcometoahaltbefore,whatI runinto,(saysFreud),issomethinglikewhathappensin hypnosis".Nowwhatisitthathappensinhypnosis?Itisthat thesubjectiscapableofreadinginthemirroroftheOther everythingthatisthereatthelevelofthislittlevasein dots:onegoesforeverythingthatisspecularisable.Itisnot fornothingthatthemirror,thestopperofthecarafe,indeed thelookofthehypnotiser,aretheinstrumentsofhypnosis.The onlythingthatonedoesnotseeinhypnosis,ispreciselythe stopperofthecarafeitself,northelookofthehypnotiser whichisthecauseofhypnosis.

Thecauseofhypnosisisnotseenintheconsequencesof hypnosis.Theotherreference:thedoubtoftheobsessional. Andonwhatisbroughttobeartheradicaldoubtwhichensures alsothattheanalysesofobsessionalsarepursuedforalong timeandverynicely?Thetreatmentofanobsessionisalwaysa realhoneymoonbetweentheanalystandtheanalysand,insofar asthiscentrewhereFreuddesignatesverywellthesortof discoursespokenbytheobsessional,namely:"Heisreallyavery nicemanhetellsmethemostbeautifulthingsintheworld,the troubleisthatIdonotquitebelievethem".Ifitiscentral, itisbecauseitisthere,inx,inthecaseoftheyoung homosexual,whatisinvolved,ispreciselywhatoughtto illuminateus,namelyacertainpromotionofthephallusassuch, totheplaceofoanditishereIfeelscrupulousaboutsaying it,becausemoreoveritisamarvellouslyilluminatingtextthat Idonotneedtogiveyoutheotherpropertiesof,butIwould beseechyounottotakeasoneofthesemeaninglessrepetitions thatwehavebecomeusedto,sincethatonwhich,themanin question,whowasdiscoveringthingsatthattime,endshistext, namelythedistinctionbetweenconstitutionalelementsand historicalelementsitdoesnotmatterwhichonesinthe determinationofhomosexuality,andtheisolation,thisbeingas suchtheproperfieldofanalysis,oftheobject,theobject choice(Objektwahl)distinguishingitassuch,asincludingthe (17) mechanismswhichareoriginal,everythingturnseffectively aroundthisrelationshipbetweenthesubjectando. TheparadoxistheonewhichisclosetowhatIindicatedtoyou thesecondtimeasthepointwhereFreudbequeathedusthe questionofhowtooperateatthelevelofthecastration complex,anddesignatedbysomethingwhichisinscribedinthe observationwhichIamastonishedisnotamorecommonobjectof astonishmentamonganalysts,thatthisanalysisendswithFreud

16.1.63

VIII 14

droppingher. ForwithDoraIwillcomebacktoitwecanbetterarticulate nowwhathappenednoteverythingisawkwardlydone,farfromit, andonecmsaythatifDorawasnotcompletelyanalysed,Freud seesclearlytotheveryend.Buthere,wherethefunctionof smallo,oftheobject,isinawaysoprevalentinthe observationofthehomosexualthatitevengottothestageof passingintotherealinthispassageal'actewhosesymbolic revelationheneverthelessunderstandssowell,Freudgivesup: "Iwillnotbeabletodoanything",hesaystohimselfandhe passesherontoafemalecolleague.Itishewhotakesthe initiativeoflettingherfall. Iwillleaveyouonthistermtogiveyouanopportunityof reflectingonit,becauseyouwillclearlyseethatthisconcern leadsustoaimatanessentialreferenceintheanalytic handlingofthetransference.

23.1.63 Seminar9:Wednesday23January1963

IX

102

Today we are going to continue speaking about what I am designatingforyouasthesmallo.

Tomaintainouraxis,inotherwords,inordernottoallowyou theopportunityofdriftingoffbecauseofmyveryexplanations, Iwillbeginbyrecallingitsrelationshiptothesubject. Nevertheless,whatwehavetosay,toemphasistoday,isits relationshiptothebigOther,theotherconnotedbyanO, because,asweshallsee,itisessentialtounderstandthatit istothic.Otherthatitowesitsisolation,thatitis constitutedasaremainderintherelationshipofthesubjectto theOther.ThatiswhyIhavereproducedthisschema,the homologueoftheapparatusofdivision.Thesubjectonthetop rightinsofarasbyourdialecticittakesitsoriginfromthe functionofthesignifier,thhypotheticalsubjectSatthe originofthisdialecticconstitutesitselfatthelocusofthe Otherasmarkedbythesignifier,theonlysubjectourexperience hasaccessto,inverselysuspendingthewholeexistenceofthe Otheronaguaranteewhichislacking,thebarredOther:0 . Butfromthisoperation,thereisaremainder:itistheo.The lasttime,Iinitiated,Iputbeforeyouasanexample,nota uniqueexampleforbehindthisexample,thatofthecaseof femalehomosexuality,therewasprofiledthatofDoraIput beforeyouasastructuralcharacteristicofthisrelationshipof thesubjecttoo,theessentialpossibility,whatcouldbecalled (2)theuniversalrelationshipconcerningtheo,foratevery levelyouwillalwaysfindit,andIwouldsaythatthisisthe mostcharacteristicconnotation,sincepreciselyitislinkedto thisfunctionoftheremainder.ThisiswhatIcalled,borrowed fromthevocabularyandthereadingofFreudinconnectionwith thepassageal'actewhichbroughthimhiscaseoffemale

23.1.63

IX

103

homosexuality,thelettingdrop,theniederkommenlassen.And younodoubtrememberthatIendedwiththisremarkthat, strangely,thisiswhatinconnectionwiththecasemarkedthe responseofFreudhimselftoadifficultythatisquite exemplary,forineverythingthatFreudtestifiedtousbyhis action,byhisbehaviour,byhisexperience,thislettingdropis uniqueatthesametimeasitisalmostsomanifest,so provokativeinhistext,thatforsomepeoplereadingitit becomesquasiinvisible.

ThislettingdropistheessentialcorrelatethatIindicatedto youthelasttimeofthepassageal'acte.Againfromwhatside isthislettingdropseen,inthepassageal'acte?Fromthe sideofthesubject,precisely.Thepassageal'acteis,ifyou wish,onthesideofthesubjectinthephantasyinsofarasshe appearseffacedbythebartothemaximumextent.Itisatthe momentofgreatestembarrassmentthat,withthebehavioural additionofemotionasdisorderofmovement,thesubject,asone mightsay,precipitatesherselffromwheresheis,fromthelocus ofthestagewhereitisonlyasafundamentallyhistoricised subjectthatshecanmaintainherselfinherstatusofsubject, thatessentiallyshetopplesoffthestage,thisisthevery structureassuchofthepassageal'acte. Thewomanintheobservationonfemalehomosexualityjumpsover thelittlebarrierwhichseparatesherfromtheculvertwhere thererunsthelittlesemiundergroundtramwayinVienna,Doraat themomencofembarrassmentintowhichIpointeditouttoyou (3)alongtimeagothetricksentence,theclumsytrapofMrK putsher:"Mywifemeansnothingtome",goesintoaction(passe al'acte).

Theslap,theslapwhichherecanonlyexpressnothingbutthe mostcompleteambiguity:isitMrKorMrsKthatsheloves?It iscertainlynottheslapwhichwilltellus.Butsuchaslapis oneofthesigns,ofthesecrucialmomentsindestinywhichwe canseereverberatingfromgenerationtogenerationwithits valueasaswitchingpointinaparticulardestiny.

Thisdirectionofescapingfromthestage,iswhatallowsusto recogniseand,youwillsee,todistinguishthepassagea.l'actewit itspropervalue,fromthissomethingquitedifferentwhichis actingout.

WillItellyouofanotherveryobviousexample?Whowoulddream ofcontestingthislabelforwhatiscalledafugue?Andwhat isafugueinasubject,alwaysputinamoreorlessinfantile position,whothrowshimselfintoit,ifnotthissortofexit fromthestage,thisvagabonddepartureintothepureworld, wherethesubjectsetsofftosearchfor,toencountersomething everywhererefused:hefrothswithrage(ilsefaitmousse),as theysayofcourse,hecomesback,hereturns,thiscanbethe opportunitytobecomeenragedandthisdeparture,isindeedthis passagefromthestagetotheworldforwhichmoreoveritwasso usefulthat,inthefirstphasesofthisdiscourseonanxiety,I

23.1.63

IX

104

posedforyouthisessentialdistinctionbetweentworegistersof theworld,theplacewheretherealhurriesontothisstageof theOtherwheremanassubjecthastoconstitutehimself,totake hisplaceastheonewhocarriestheword,butwhocanonlycarry itinastructurewhichhowevertrulyitisestablishedisa structureoffiction.

Iwillcome,inordertotellyouatfirsthowthisremainderas suchassertsitselfinthemostcharacteristicway,tospeakto (4) youtodayfirstofallImeanbeforegoinganyfurtherin thefunctionofanxietyaboutactingout. Itmaynodoubtseemtoyou,ifnotastonishing,atleastanother detourafurtherdetour,isitnotadetourtoomany?tohear meinadiscourseaboutanxietyonsomethingwhichatfirstsight seemsrathertobeanavoidanceofit.Observe,nevertheless, thatyouareonlyrediscoveringherewhataninterrogationwhich wasessentialatthebeginning,hasalreadypunctuatedinmy discourse,namelywhetheranxietyisnotsoabsoluteamodeof communicationbetweenthesubjectandtheOtherthattotellthe truthonecouldaskoneselfwhetheranxietyisnotproperly speakingwhatiscommontothesubjectandtotheOther. Iputhere,inordertofinditagainlater,alittlemark,a whitestone,namelyoneofthetraitswhichgivesusmost difficultyandwhichwemustpreserve,namelythatnodiscourse aboutanxietycanfailtorecognisethatwehavetodealwiththe phenomenonofanxietyincertainanimals.Andafterall,whatis therehereatfirst,ifnotaquestion,namelyhowcanwebeso sureofafeelinginananimal,andperhapsonlyofthisone. Foritistheonlyonethatwecanhavenodoubtsaboutwhenwe encounteritinananimal,rediscoveringhereinanexteriorform thischaracterwhichIalreadynotedanxietyinvolves,ofbeing thissomethingwhichdoesnotdeceive.

HavingpositedthereforetheoutlineofwhatIhopetocover today,Irecallfirstofallasregardsthisotowardswhichwe advancethroughitsrelationshiptotheOther,totheO,some remarksbywayofreminder,andstartingfromthefollowing, whichwasalreadyindicatedinwhatItoldyouuptonow,that (5) anxietyyouseeitemerginginthisschemawhichhere reflectstachygraphicallyandIapologiseifitappearsatthe sametimealittleapproximateanxiety,wesee,emergingin conformitywiththelastthinkingofFreud,anxietyisasignal intheegoifitisasignalintheego,itoughttobethere somewhere,atthelocusoftheidealegointheschemaandifit issomewhere,IthinkIhavealreadysufficientlyshownyouto beginwiththatitmustbehereatx,anditisaphenomenonof theedgeintheimaginaryfieldoftheego,thistermofedge beinglegitimatedsinceitisbasedontheaffirmationofFreud himself,thattheegoisasurface,andeven,headds,a projectionofasurfaceIrecalledthatatonestage.Letus saythereforethatitisacolour,asImightsay. Iwilljustifylater,whenIhavetheopportunity,the

23.1.63

IX

105

metaphoricaluseofthistermcolour,whichappearsattheedge ofthespecularsurfaceitself,itselfaninversion,qua specular,oftherealsurface.Here,letusnotforget,itisa realimagethatwecalli(o),theidealego. Theidealego,thisfunctionthroughwhichtheegoisconstituted bytheseriesofidentificationstowhat?Tocertainobjects, thoseinconnectionwithwhichFreudproposestousinDasIch unddasEs,essentiallytheambiguitybetweenidentificationand love. Youknowheunderlinesthattheproblemofthisambiguityleaves him,Freud,perplexed.Wewillthereforenotbeastonishedthat thisambiguityissomethingweourselvescanonlyapproachwith thehelpofformulaeputtingtothetesttheverystatusofour ownsubjectivityindiscoursebythatImeaninlearnedor teachingdiscourseanambiguitydesignatedbytherelationship ofwhatforalongtimeIemphasisedbeforeyouintheproper place,astherelationshipbetweenbeingandhaving.

(6) Theobjectofidentification,o,tounderlinebyareference point,inthesalientpointsevenofFreud'swork,isthe identificationwhichisessentiallyatthesourceofmourning, forexample.Thiso,objectofidentification,isalsooaslove objectonlyinsofarasit,thiso,iswhatmakesofthelover, touseamedievalandtraditionalterm,whattearsawaythis lovermetaphorically,tomakeofhim,inproposinghimselfas lovable,eromenon,bymakingofhimeronthesubjectofalack, thereforethatthroughwhichheconstituteshimselfproperlyin love,whatgiveshim,asImightsay,theinstrumentoflove, namelywefinditagainthatoneloves,thatoneisalover withwhatonedoesnothave.

oiscalledoinourdiscourse,notsimplyasthefunctionofan algebraicidentitythatwespecifiedtheotherday,but,ifIcan putithumorously,becauseitiswhatonenolongerhas(n'a plus). Thisiswhyonecanrediscoveralongtheregressivepath,namely intheformofidentificationtobeing,thiso,whatoneno longerhas.ItisexactlywhatmakesFreudputtheterm regressionexactlyatthepointwherehespecifiesthe relationshipsbetweenidentificationandlove.Butinthis regressionwhereoremainswhatitis,theinstrument,itiswith whatoneisthatonecan,asImightsay,haveornothave. Itiswiththisrealimageconstitutedhere,whenitemerges,as i(o),thatonecatchesornotwhatremainsintheneckofthis image,themultiplicityoftheoobjectsrepresentedinmyschema bytherealflowerscaughtupornotintheconstitution,thanks totheconcavemirrorattheback,ofthesymbolofsomething, letussay,whichoughttoberediscoveredinthestructureof thecortexthefoundationforacertainrelationshipbetweenman andtheimageofhisbodyanddifferentobjectswhichcanbe (7) constitutedfromthisbodyareornotcaught,graspedatthe

23.1.63

IX

106

momentwheni(o)hastheopportunityofconstitutingitself. Thisiswhyweoughttograspthatbeforethemirrorstagewhat willbei(o)isthereinthedisorderofsmallo'swhichthereis noquestionyetofhavingornot.Anditistothisthatthere correspondsthetruemeaning,themostprofoundmeaningtobe giventothetermautoerotismisthatonelacksself(onmanque desoi),asImightsay,entirely.Itisnottheexternalworld thatonelacks,asitisincorrectlyput,itisoneself. Hereisthepossibilityofthisphantasyofthefragmentedbody whichsomeofyouhaverecognised,haveencountered,in schizophrenics.Thisdoesnotforallthatallowustodecideon thedeterminantsofthisphantasyofthefragmentedbodywhich thoseofwhomIamspeakinghaveseenbeingoutlinedinthe schizophrenic.AndthisiswhyIalsohighlightedthemeritofa recentresearchconcerningthecoordinatesofthesedeterminants ofschizophrenics,aresearchwhichdidnotclaimatallto exhaustthesedeterminants,butwhichconnotedoneoftheir traitsbyremarkingstrictlyandnothingmoreinthearticulation ofthemotheroftheschizophrenicwhatherchildwaswhenhewas inherbelly:nothingmorethanadiverselyconvenientor embarrassingbody,namelythesubjectificationofoaspurereal. Letusobserveonceagainthismoment,thisstatebeforethe emergenceofi(o),beforethedistinctionbetweenallthesmall o'sandthisrealimagewithrespecttowhichtheyaregoingto bethisremainderthatonehasordoesnothave. Yes,letusmakethisremark:ifFreudtellsusthatanxietyis thisphenomenonontheedge,thissignalatthelimitoftheego, (8)againstthisotherthing,x,whichheremustnotappearinso faraso,theremainder,isabhorredbytheOther.Howdidit happenthatthismovementofreflection,theguides,therailsof experienceledtheanalysts,RankfirstofallandFreud followinghimonthispoint,tofindtheoriginofanxietyat thisprespecular,preautoeroticlevel,atthislevelofbirth wherewhocoulddreamnobodydreamtofitintheanalytic concertofspeakingabouttheconstitutionofanego.Thereis heresomethingwhichprovesineffect,thatifitispossibleto defineanxietyasasignal,anedgephenomenonintheegowhen theegoisconstituted,itissurelynotexhaustive.Thiswe rediscoverquiteclearlyinoneofthephenomenabestknownto accompanyanxiety,thosewhichonedesignates,inunderstanding themanalyticallyinanundoubtedlyambiguousfashiontojudge fromthedivergencesforwewillhavetocomebacktothem theyarethephenomenapreciselymostcontrarytothestructure oftheegoassuch,thephenomenaofdepersonalisation.This givesrisetothequestion,thatwecannotavoid,ofsituating depersonalisationauthentically.

Youknowtheplacethatthisphenomenontookonincertain referencepointspropertoone,orseveral,authorsoftheFrench SchooltowhomIalreadyhadtorefer.Ithinkitwillbeeasy torecognisetherelationshipbetweenthesereferencepointsand

23.1.63

IX

107

whatIamdevelopinghere,Imeantoassumethatthesereference pointsarenotforeigntothesketchesthatIwaspreviouslyable togiveofit.Thenotionofdistance,herealmosttangible,in thenecessitythatIhavealwaysmarked,preciselyofthe relationbetweenthisdistanceandtheexistenceofthemirror, whichgivestothesubjectthisdistancingfromhimselfthatthe dimensionoftheOtherisdesignedtooffertohim,butthisdoes (9) notenableustoconcludeeitherthatanybringingclosercan giveusthesolutiontoanyofthedifficultiesthatare generatedbythenecessityofthisdistance. Inotherwords,itisnotbecausetheobjectsareinvasive,asI mightputit,inpsychosis,whichconstitutestheirdangerfor theego.Itistheverystructureoftheseobjectswhichmakes themunsuitableforegoising(alamoisation).ThisiswhatI triedtomakeyougraspwiththehelpoftopologicalreferences, metaphorsifyouwishbutIbelievethatisgoingtoofar whichImadeuseofinsofarastheyintroducethepossibility ofanonspecularisableshapeintothestructureofcertainof theseobjects.Letussaythatphenomenologically, depersonalisationbeginsletusendoursentencewithsomething whichseemstobeobviouswiththenonrecognitionofthe specularimage.Everyoneknowshowtangiblethisisinclinical practice,howfrequentlyitisfromnotbeingabletofind himselfinthemirrororinsomethingelsethatisanalogous, thatthesubjectbeginstobeseizedbydepersonalising vacillation.Butletusarticulatemorepreciselythatthis formulagivenbytheeventisinsufficient,namelythatitis becausewhatisseeninthemirrorisanxietyprovokingthatthis cannotbeproposedtotherecognitionoftheOther,andtorefer toamomentthatImarkedascharacteristicofthismirror experience,asparadigmaticoftheconstitutionoftheidealego inthespaceofOther,thatarelationshiptothespecularimage isestablishedsuchthattheinfantisnotabletoturnhishead, inaccordancewiththismovementwhichIdescribedtoyouas familiar,towardsthisOther,thiswitness,thisadultwhois therebehindhim,tocommunicatehissmiletoher,the manifestationsofhisjubilationaboutsomethingwhichmakeshim (10) communicatewiththespecularimage,thatanother relationshipisestablishedofwhichheistoocaptiveforthis movementtobepossibleherethepurelydualrelationship dispossessesthisfeelingoftherelationshipofdispossession markedbycliniciansinpsychosisdispossessesthesubjectof thisrelationshiptothebigOther.

Thespecularisationisstrange,and,astheEnglishsay,"odd", unsymmetrical,itistheHorlaofMaupassant,theoutsideof space,insofarasspaceisthedimensionofwhatcanbe superimposed.Buthereatthepointthatweareat,tostopat whatissignifiedbythisseparation,thiscutlinkedtothe anxietyofbirth,insofarassomethingimpreciseexiststhere fromwhichtherearegeneratedall'sortsofconfusions.Tobe honestIdonothavethetimeandIcanonlyindicateit.Iwill comebacktoit.Youshouldbeawarehoweverthatatthisplace itwouldbewellneverthelesstohavegreatreservationsabout

23.1.63

IX

108

thestructuringofthephenomenonofanxiety.Thereforeitwill beenoughforyoutorefertothetextofFreud.Freudasyou willseeseesitsconvenienceinthefactthatatthelevelof theanxietyofbirththereisconstitutedawholeconstellation ofmovements,principallyvasomotor,respiratory,whichhesays is"arealconstellation",anditisthisthatwillbecarried overintoitsfunctionofsignalintheway,hetellsus,an hystericalattackisconstructed,beingitselfthereproduction ofinheritedmovementsfortheexpressionofcertainemotional moments.

Undoubtedlythisisaltogetherinconceivablebecausepreciselyof thefactthatitisimpossibleatthebeginningtosituatethis complexityinarelationshipwiththeegowhichwouldallowit subsequentlytoserveasasignaloftheego,exceptthroughthe mediationofwhatwehavetoseekintermsofstructureinthe relationshipbetweeni(o)andthiso. (11) Butinthatcasethecharacteristicseparationatthe beginning,theonewhichallowsustoapproach,toconceiveof therelationship,isnottheseparationfromthemother. Thecutinvolvedisnotthatbetweenthechildandthemother. Thefashioninwhichthechildoriginallydwellsinthemother, posesthewholeproblemofthecharacteroftherelationshipsof theeggwiththebodyofthemotherinmammals,whichyouknow hasawholeaspectwhichmakesitwithrespecttothebodyofthe motheraforeignbody,aparasite,abodyencrustedbythehaiiy rootsofitschorioninthisorganthatisspecialisedtoreceive it,theuterus,withthemucusofwhichithasacertain involvement. Thecutwhichinterestsus,theonewhichmakesitsmarkona certainnumberofclinicallyrecognisablephenomenaandforwhich thenwecannotavoidit,isacutwhich,thankGodforour conception,ismuchmoresatisfyingthanthecutofthechildwho isborn,whenhedropsintotheworldwithwhat?Withhis envelopes.Ihaveonlytoreferyoutoanybookofembryology whatsoeverwhichislessthanahundredyearsoldforyoutobe abletograspinitthat,inordertohaveacompletenotionof thisprespeculartotalitywhichiso,youhavetoconsiderthese envelopesaselementsofthebody. Itisstartingfromtheegg thattheseenvelopesaredifferentiated,andyouwillseethere verycuriouslythattheyaresoinsuchafashionthatthey illustrateIhaveconfidenceenoughinyouafterourworkof lastyeararoundthecrosscapthatyoumayfindverysimply thedegreetowhichontheschemasillustratingthesechaptersof embryologyontheenvelope,youcanseebeingmanifestedallthe varietiesofthisinsidetooutside,ofthisoutsideinwhichthe (12) foetusfloats,itselfenvelopedinitsamnion,theamniotic cavityitselfbeingenvelopedinanectodermiclaminaand presentingitsfacetowardstheoutsideincontinuitywiththe endoblast. Inshorttheanalogybetweenwhatisdetachedwiththecut

23.1.63

IX

109

betweentheembryoanditsenvelopes,andthisseparationontha crosscapofacertainenigmaticoonwhichIinsisted,is tangiblehere.Andifwehavetorediscoveritsubsequently,I thinkthatIhavetodaysufficientlyindicateditforthat. ThereremainsforustodotodaythenwhatIannouncedtoyou, concerningwhatisindicatedbyactingoutaboutthisessential relationshipbetweenoand0. Inoppositiontothepassageal'acte,allactingoutpresents itselfwithcertaincharacteristicswhicharegoingtoallowus toisolateit.Theprofound,necessaryrelationshipbetween actingoutandthisoiswhereIwanttoleadyou,inawayby thehand,inordernottoletyoudrop.Observemoreoverinyour clinicalsurveysthedegreetowhichbeingheldbythehandin ordernottobeletdropisaltogetheressentialinacertain typeofrelationshipofthesubjecttosomethingwhichwhenyou encounterityoucanabsolutelydesignateasbeingforhimano. Thisgivesrisetounionsofaverywidespreadtypewhicharenot forallthatanyeasiertomanage,becausemoreovertheothatis involvedcanbeforthesubjectthemostinconvenientsuperego.

Thetypeofmotherthatwecall,notinappropriately,butwithout knowingabsolutelywhatwemean,aphallicwomanIwouldadvise youtobecarefulbeforeapplyingthislabel.Butifyouare dealingwithsomeonewhotellsyouthatintheverymeasure itselfthatanobjectismostprecioustoher,inexplicablyshe (13)willbeappallinglytemptednottoholdontothisobjectif itfalls,expectingsomethingorothermiraculousfromthissort ofcatastropheandthatthemostbelovedchildispreciselythe onethatonedaysheinexplicablyletsdropandyouknowthatin Greektragedythishasnotescapedtheperspicacityof GiraudouxthisisthemostprofoundcomplaintofElectraabout Clytemnestraitisthatonedayshehadleftherfallfromher arms. Herethen,youcanidentifywhatitisappropriateonthis occasiontocallaphallicmother.Therearenodoubtother modeswearesayingthatthisoneappearstheleastdeceptive. Andnowletusgointoactingoutinthecaseoffemale homosexuality.Ifthesuicideattemptisapassageal'acte,I wouldsaythatthewholeadventurewiththewomanofdoubtful reputation,whoisraisedtothefunctionof^supremeobject,is anactingout.IfDora'sslapisapassageal'acte,Iwouldsay thatalltheparadoxicalbehaviour,thatFreuddiscovers immediatelywithsuchperspicacity,ofDoraintheK'shousehold isanactingout. Actingout,isessentiallysomethinginthebehaviourofthe subjectthatshowsitself.Thedemonstrativeaccent,the orientationtowardstheOtherofeveryactingoutissomething thatoughttobehighlighted. In the case of female homosexuality Freud insists on it it is before the eyes/bf all, it is in the very measure and all the more whenthispublicitybecomesscandalous,thatthebehaviourofthe

23.1.63

IX

110

younghomosexualisaccentuated.Andwhatshowsitself,whenone advancesstepbystep,showsitselfessentiallyasother,other thanitis,whatitisnobodyknowsbutnobodydoubtsthatitis other. (14) Whatthatisinthecaseoftheyounghomosexual,Freudsays allthesame"Shewantedachildfromherfather",hetellsus. Butifyouweresatisfiedwiththat,youarenotveryhardto please,becausethischildhasnothingtodowithamaternal need.Thatindeediswhy,alittleearlier,Iwantedatleastto indicatetheproblematicoftherelationshipofthechildtothe mother.Contrarytoawholeslippageinthewholeofanalytic thought,itisnecessarytoputtheelucidationofunconscious desireinwhatImightcallasortoflateralrelationshipwith respecttotheprincipalcurrentthathasbeenelaborated.

Thereisinthisnormalrelationshipofthemothertothechild, inanycaseinwhatwecangraspofitthroughitseconomic incidence,somethingfull,somethingroundedout,something closed,somethingpreciselysocompleteduringthegestatory phasethatonecansaythatweneedveryspecialcaretomakeit enter,toseehowitsincidenceisappliedtothisrelationship ofcuttingbetweeni(o)ando.Andafterallweonlyneedour analyticexperienceofthetransferenceandtoknowatwhat momentofouranalysesouranalysandsbecomepregnantandtheuse thisistothem,toknowclearlythatitisalwaystherampartof areturntothemostprofoundnarcissism.

Butletusleavethat.Itisindeedassomethingelsethatthe younghomosexualwantstohavethischild.Andmoreoverthis thingdidnotescape,thankGod,fromFreud:shewantedthis childasaphallus,namely,asthedoctrineannouncesitinFreud inthemostdevelopedform,asasubstitute,Ersatz,for somethingwhichfallsfullythenintoourdialecticofthecut andofthelack,oftheoasdropped,oftheoaslacking.This (15) iswhatallowsher,havingfailedintherealisationofher desire,torealiseitatoncedifferentlyandinthesame way,aseron.Shemakesherselfaloverinotherwords,she establishesherselfonwhatshedoesnothave,thephallus,and toshowclearlythatshehasit,shegivesit.Itisineffecta completelydemonstrativeway.Shebehaves,Freudtellsus, visavistheLadywithacapitalL,likeaservantknight,lika aman,asonewhocansacrificeforherwhathehas,hisphallus.

Letuscombinethenthesetwoterms,ofshowing,of demonstrating,andofdesire,nodoubtadesirewhoseessence, whosepresence,asyousee,istobe,toshowoneself,asItold you,asother,andwhileshowingherselfasothertostill designateherselfinthisway.Intheactingout,wewillsay thenthatdesire,inaway,toaffirmitselfastruth,engages itselfalongapathonwhich,nodoubt,itonlymanagestodoso inasingularfashion.Andweknowalreadybyourworkherethat inacertainwayonecansaythattruthofitsnatureisnotin desire.Ifwerecalltheformulathatessentiallyitisnot articulatableeventhoughitisarticulated,wewillbeless

23.1.63

IX

111

astonishedbythephenomenonbeforewhichwefindourselves.And Igaveyouafurtherlink:itisarticulatedobjectivelysince thisobjectthatIamdesignatinghere,iswhatIcalledthelast timetheobjectasitscause. Actingoutessentiallyisthedemonstration,thenodoubtveiled showing,butwhichisonlyveiledforusassubject,insofaras itspeaks,insofarasitcouldbetrue,notveiledinitself, onthecontraryvisibletothemaximumdegree,andbecauseof that,forthatveryreasoninvisibleinacertainregister. Showingitscause,itisthisremainder,itisitscollapse,it iswhatfnllsintotheaffairthatistheessentialofwhatis shown. Betweenthesubjecthere,whichisImightsay "othered"(autrifie)initsfictionalstructure,andthe nonauthentifiableOther,nevercompletely,what emergesisthisremaindero,itisthepoundofflesh, ($in0),whichmeans,IthinkyouknowwhoIam quotingonecanmakealltheborrowingsonewishesto plugtheholesofdesireandofmelancholythereis here the Jew who, for his part, knows something about balancing accountsandwhodemandsattheend:thepoundofflesh. This is the feature that you always find in actingout. Remember a point of what I wrote about in my report, "The Direction of the Treatment", where I spoke about the observation of Ernest Kris in connectionwiththecaseofplagiarism. ErnestKris,becausehewasonacertainpathwhichwewill perhapshavetoname,wantstoreduceitbymeansofthetruth heshowshiminthemostirrefutablefashionthatheisnota plagiaristhehasreadhisbookhisbookiswellandtruly original,onthecontraryitistheotherswhohavecopiedhim. Thesubjectcannotcontestit.Onlyhedoesnotgiveadamn aboutit.Andonleaving,whatishegoingtodo?Asyouknow Ithinkthatthereareallthesamesomepeople,amajority,who readfromtimetotimewhatIwritehegoesandeatsfresh brains. Iamnotintheprocessofrecallingthemechanismofthecase. Iamteachingyoutorecogniseanactingoutandwhatthatmeans, whatIamdesignatingasthesmalloorthepoundofflesh. Withthefreshbrains,thepatientsimplyindicatestoErnest Kris"Everythingyoutellmeistrue,simplythatdoesnottouch thequestionthereremainthefreshbrains.Inordertoshow (17)you,IamgoingtoeatsomewhenIleaveinordertotell youaboutitthenexttime". Iaminsisting.Onecannot,inthesematters,gotooslowly. Youwillsaytomewhatisoriginalinthat?Youwillsayto me,afterallIammakingthedemandsandgivingtheanswersI wouldsay,Ihopenot,butsinceyoucouldallthesamesaytome

23.1.63

IX

112

ifIhavenotsufficientlyemphasisedit"Whatisoriginalin this,thisactingoutandthisdemonstrationofthisunknown desire?Thesymptomisthesame.Actingoutisasymptomwhich showsitselfasother,andsodoesit.Theproofisthatithas tobeinterpreted".Allrightthenletusdotthei'scarefully. Youknowthatthesymptomcannotbeinterpreteddirectlythat transferenceisnecessary,namelytheintroductionoftheOther. Youdonotgraspitproperlyyetperhaps.Thenyouaregoingto saytome,"Wellyes,thisiswhatyouareintheprocessof tellingusaboutactingout." No,whatisinvolvedhere,istotellyouthatitisnot essentiallyinthenatureofthesymptomtohavetobe interpreteditdoesnotcallforinterpretationlikeactingout, contrarytowhatyoumightthink.Moreoverithastobesaid actingoutcallsforaninterpretationandthequestionthatIam intheprocessofposing,isthatofknowingwhetheritis possible.Iwillshowyouthatitis.Butitisinthebalance inanalytictheoryandpractice. Intheothercase,itisclearthatitispossible,buton certainconditionswhichareaddedtothesymptom,namelythat transferenceofitsnatureshouldbeestablishedthesymptomis not,likeactingout,callingforaninterpretation.Foritis toooftenforgottenwhatwediscoverinthesymptom,inits (18)essence,isnot,Isay,acalltotheOther,isnotthat whichshowstotheOther,thatthesymptominitsnatureis jouissancedonotforgetitabackhandedjouissance,no doubt,unterbliebendeBefriedigungthesymptomdoesnotneedyou asactingoutdoes,itissufficientofitselfitisofthe orderofwhatIhavetaughtyoutodistinguishfromdesireas beingjouissance,namelythatitgoes,foritspart,towardsthe Thing,havingpassedthebarrierofthegood(areferencetomy seminaronEthics),namelyofthepleasureprinciple,andthisis whythisjouissancecanexpressitselfbyanUnlust. Iamnottheonlyonewhoiseitherinventingorarticulatingall ofthis,itissaidintheseverytermsinFreudUnlust, unpleasure,forthosewhohavenotyetheardthisterm,in German.

Sothenletusreturntoactingout,asopposedtothesymptom, actingoutforitspartisthebeginningoftransference.Itis wildtransference.Thereisnoneedforanalysisasyouno doubtknowfortheretobetransference.Buttransference withoutanalysisisactingout,actingoutinanalysisis transference.Theresultisthatoneofthequestionstobe posed,is,concerningtheorganisationoftransferenceImean theorganisation,theHandlungoftransferencethatoneofthe waysofposingthequestionistoaskhowonecandomesticatethe wildtransference,howonegetsthewildelephantintothe enclosureorhowonecangetthehorseintothering,whereone makeshimturnround,inthecircus. Itisoneofthewaysofposingtheproblemoftransferencewhich

23.1.63

IX

113

itwouldbequiteusefultoposefromthisangle,becauseitis theonlywayofknowinghowtodealwithactingout. (19) Forpeoplewhomayhavetointerestthemselvesinthenear futureinactingout,Inotetheexistence,inthePsychoanalytic Quarterly,ofthearticlebyPhyllisGreenacre"GeneralProblems ofActingOut".ItisinNumberIVofVolume19of1950,soit isnotimpossibletofind.Itisaveryinterestingarticlein manyways,andevokesamemoryforme:itwasatthetimeabout tenyearsagowhenwehadalreadyreceivedavisitfromsome investigators.PhyllisGreenacre,whowasoneofthem,gaveme theopportunitytoobservealovelyactingout,namelythe freneticmasturbation,whichshecarriedoutbeforemyeyes,ofa littleJapanesemusselfisherman,whichIownedandwhichstill carriesthetracesofit,Imeanthisobjectdoes.Ihavetosay thatthisfurnishedtheopportunityforaveryagreeable conversation,muchbetterthantheonepunctuatedbydifferent passagesal'acte,forexampleherjumpsalmosttotheceiling, whichIhadwiththelady.

Thereforethisarticleon"Generalproblemsofactingout",in whichthereareverypertinentremarks,eventhoughasthoseof youwhoreaditwillsee,theygainbybeingilluminatedbythe originallinesthatIamtryingtosketchbeforeyou. The question then is to know how to deal with actingout. There are three of them, she says. There is interpreting it, there is prohibitingit,thereisreinforcingtheego. Youshouldnothaveanygreatillusionsaboutinterpretingit. PhyllisGreenacreisaveryveryablewoman.Interpretingit, afterwhatIhavejusttoldyou,promisestohaveverylittle effect,asImightsay,ifonlybecausethisiswhytheacting outisdone.Whenyoulookatthingsclosely,mostofthetime (20) youseethatthesubjectknowsverywellthatwhatheis doing,isdonetoofferhimselftoyourinterpretationby actingout.Onlyyousee,itisnotthemeaningofwhatyou interpretthatcounts,whateveritmaybeitistheremainder. Sothatthistimeatleast,withoutsomethingmore,itisan impasse.Itisveryinterestingtospendsometimescanningthe hypotheses.

Toprohibitit,naturallythatevenmakestheauthorherself smilewhenshesays:allthesame,onecandomanythings,butto saytoasubject,"Noactingout",issomethingwhichisallthe samedifficult.Besidesnobodydreamsofdoingit.Allthe same,inthisconnection,oneobservestheamountofprejudicial prohibitionthereisinanalysis.Manythingsobviouslyaredone toavoidactingoutinthesession.Thenonetellsthemnotto takedeci3ionsthatareessentialfortheirexistenceduringthe analysis.Whydoesonedoallofthis?Indeeditisafactthat whereveronehasahold,hasacertainrelationshipwithwhatone cancalldangereitherforthesubject,orfortheanalyst.

23.1.63

IX

114

Infactoneprohibitsmuchmorethanonebelieves.IfIsay whichIwouldbequitewillingtoillustratewhatIhavejust said,itisbecauseessentially,andbecausewearedoctors,and becausewearegood,assomeoneorotherhassaid,onedoesnot wantthepatientwhohascometoentrusthimselftoustohurt himself.Andthefunnythingisthatonemanagesit. Actingoutisthesignallthesamethatoneispreventingalot ofthings.Isthiswhatisinvolved,whenMrsGreenacrespeaks aboutallowingamoresolidtransferencetobeestablished?What Iwouldliketoremarkonhere,isthatacertainaspectof analysisthatisnotseenisitsaccidentinsurance,sickness insuranceaspectbecauseitisveryfunnyallthesamehowmuch (21) atleastfromthemomentthatananalysthastakenonthat experiencethatiscalled,namelyallthathemostoftenignores inhisownattitude,thedegreetowhichshorttermillnessesare rareduringanalyses,thedegreetowhich,inananalysiswhich lastsforacertaintime,colds,flues,allofthatiseffaced, andevenlongtermillnessesindeed,ifthereweremoreanalyses insociety,Ithinkthatsocialinsurance,aswellaslife insurance,wouldhavetotaketheproportionofanalysesinthe populationintoaccountinordertomodifytheirrates. Inversely,whenanaccidenthappensanaccident,Iamnot speakingdimplyaboutactingoutitisveryregularly attributedbythepatientandbyhisentouragetotheanalysis, itisinawaynaturallyattributedtotheanalysis.Theyare rightitisanactingout,thereforeitisaddressedtothe Other.Andifoneisananalyst,itisthereforeaddressedto theanalyst.Ifhehastakenupthisplace,somuchtheworse forhim.Hehasallthesametheresponsibilitywhichbelongsto thisplacewhichhehasagreedtooccupy. ThesequestionsaredesignedperhapstoclarifyforyouwhatI meanwhenIspeakaboutthedesireoftheanalystandwhenI questionit.Withoutdwellingforamomentonthequestionwhich changesthequestionofthewayinwhichwedomesticatethe transferenceforyouseethatIamintheprocessofsaying thatitisnotsimplewithoutstoppingforamomenttosaywhat itisIamalwaysopposedto,namelythatwhatisinvolvedhere isreinforcingtheegobecauseontheadmissionevenofthose whoareengagedalongthispathformorethanadecadeandmore exactlyforsomanydecadesthatpeoplearebeginningtospeak lessaboutitnowadays,thiscanonlymean,asweseeinthe (22) literature,leadingthesubjecttotheidentification,not atallwiththisimageasareflectionoftheidealegointhe Other,buttotheegooftheanalystwiththeresultthatBalint describesforus,thereallymanicterminalcrisisthathe describesforusasbeingthatoftheendofananalysis characterisedinthisway,andwhichrepresentstheinsurrection oftheowhichhasremainedabsolutelyuntouched.

LetusreturnthentoFreudandtotheobservationofthecaseof femalehomosexuality,inconnectionwithwhichwehaveallsorts ofquiteadmirablenotations,becauseatthesametimeashe

23.1.63

IX

115

tellsusthatheisquiteclearthatthereisnohinthereof somethingcalledtransferencebeingproduced,hesaysatthesame time,andatthistimeandinthiscasewhichdesignatessome blindspotorotherinhisposition,hesaysallthesamethat thereisnoquestionofstoppingforaninstantatthehypothesis thatthereisnotransference. Thisistofailtorecognisewhatisinvolvedinthetransference relationship.Wefinditexpresslyformulatedinthisdiscourse ofFreudabouthiscaseoffemalehomosexuality.Itnonetheless remainsthatFreud,thedayhehadapatientwhothethingis articulatedassuchwholiedtohiminadream,forthisishow Freudcharacterisesthecase,theagalma,whatispreciousin thisdiscourseonfemalehomosexuality,isthatFreudstopsfora moment,flabbergasted,beforethefollowinghealsomakes demandsandgivestheanswershesays,"Whatishappeninghere, theunconsciouscanlie?",forthedreams,asyouknow,ofthis patient,markeverydaygreaterandgreaterprogresstowardsthe sextowhichsheisdestined.Freuddoesnotbelieveitfora singlemomentandwithgoodreason!forthepatientwho bringshimherdreamstellshimatthesametime:"But,yesof course,thiswillallowmetomarry,andallowmeatthesame (14)timetooccupymyselfallthemorewithwomen".Therefore, sheherselfistellinghimthatsheislying.AndmoreoverFreud hasnodoubtaboutit.Itispreciselytheabsenceofany appearanceofthetransferencerelationship.Butwhatdoeshe pauseatthen,thisunconsciousthatweareusedtoconsidering asbeingthemostprofound,thetrulytrue?Itthencandeceive us.Anditisaroundthisthatthewholedebateturns,itis aroundthisZutrauen,ofthistrustweshouldhave:canwestill preserveit,hesays. Heaffirmsitinasentencewhichisverycharacteristicbecause itissoellipticalandconcentrated,thatishasthischaracter almostofstumblingoverwordswhatisreallyinvolvedIwill readthesentenceagainforyou,Ididnotbringitwithme,I willbringitthenexttime,itisreallyverylovelyitis stillaquestionofasquabble. Thisunconsciousstilldeservestrust.Thediscourseofthe dream,hetellsus,isnotthesamethingastheunconsciousit isconstructedbyadesirecomingfromtheunconscious,buthe admitsatthesametimethatitisthisdesirethatisexpressed, tothepointofformulatingit:itmustbethenthatthedesire comesfromsomething,andcomingfromtheunconscious,anditis thisdesirewhichisexpressedthroughlies. Shetellshimherselfthatherdreamsarelying.WhatFreud pausesat,istheproblemofanysymptomaticlie.Youseewhata lieisforachildiswhatthesubjectmeansbylying.The strangething,isthatFreudletsthingsdropinthefaceofthis seizingupofthewholemachinehedoesnotinteresthimself preciselyinwhatmakesitseizeup,namelythewastescraps,the littleremainder,whathasbroughteverythingtoahaltandwhat isherethatcomesintoquestion.

23.1.63

IX

116

Withoutseeingwhatheisembarrassedby,heisundoubtedly moved,asheshows,bythisthreattothefidelityofthe unconscious,hegoesintoaction(passea.1'acte).Itisthe pointatwhichFreudrefusestoseethestructureoffictionat theoriginofthetruth,whichishispassion. This is where he has not sufficiently meditated on what, speaking about the phantasy, I emphasised before you in a recent discourse on the paradox of Epimenides, on the "I am lying" and its complete acceptability, in so far as what lies is desire in the moment that affirming itself as desire it delivers the subject to this logical cancellingout on which the philosopher pauses, when heseesthecontradictionof"Iamlying".

ButafterallwhatFreudismissing,asweknow,iswhatheis missinginhisdiscourse.Itiswhathasalwaysremainedasa questionforhimasaquestion:"Whatdoesawomanwant?".The stumblingofFreud'sthinkinguponsomethingthatwecancall provisionally....donotmakemesaythatwomanassuchisa liar,butthatfemininityconcealsitselfandthatthereis somethingofthatanglethere. Toemploythetermsofliquid,itisthatflowingsweetness, somethingbeforewhichFreudalmostdiedofsuffocationbecause ofanocturnalstrolltakenbyhisfiancee,theverydaythat theyexchangedthetwofinalvows,withavaguecousin,Ino longerrememberverywell,Ididnotlookupthebiography,I callhimavaguecousin,itissomeindifferentperson,itisone oftheseyounggallantswhohaveastheysayanassuredfuture, whichmeansthattheydonothaveanywithwhomhehad discoveredalittlelaterthatshehadtakenalittlestroll,and thisiswheretheblindspotis:Freudwantshertotellhim everything.Thewomandidindeeddohertalkingcure,andas regardschimneysweepingshewaswellswept!

(25)Forsometime,peoplehavenotbeenstubbornaboutitthe importantthingistobetogetherinthesamechimney.The question,whenyouemergeasyouknow,itwasrecalledatthe endofoneofmyarticles,borrowedfromtheTalmudwhenyou emergetogetherfromachimney,whichofthetwoisgoingtowash hisface?Yes,Iadviseyoutorereadthisarticle,andnot alonethatone,butalsotheonethatIwroteon"TheFreudian thing".TheFreudianthingyoucanseedesignatedthere,with acertainamountofemphasisImightsayisthisDianathatI designateasshowingthecontinuationofthishuntwhich continues.TheFreudianthing,iswhatFreudletdrop,butitis stillwhatleads,intheshapeofallofus,thewholehuntafter hisdeath.Wewillcontinuethispursuitthenexttime.

30.1.63 Seminar10:Wednesday30January1963

117

Anxiety,wehavealwaysbeentaught,isafearwithoutanobject. Achantinwhich,wecouldsayhere,anotherdiscoursealready announcesitself,achantwhichhoweverscientificitmaybeis closetothatofthechildwhoreassureshimself.Forthetruth thatIamenuntiatingforyou,Iformulateinthefollowingway: "Itisnotwithoutanobject".Whichisnottosaythatthis objectisaccessiblealongthesamepathasalltheothers.At thetimeIsaidit,Iunderlinedthatitwouldbeanotherwayof riddingoneselfofanxietytosaythatahomologousdiscourse, similartoeveryotherpartofscientificdiscourse,could symbolisethisobject,putusinthatrelationshipofsymbolwith ittowhich,inthisconnection,wearegoingtoreturn. Anxietysustainsthisrelationshipofnotbeingwithoutanobject subjecttothereservationthatthisisnottosaynortobeable tosay,aswecouldforsomethingdifferent,whatobjectis involved. Inotherwords,anxietyintroducesuswiththeaccentofmaximal communicabilitytothefunctionoflack,insofarasitis radicalforourfield.Thisrelationshiptolackisso fundamentalfortheconstitutionofanylogicandinsuchaway thatonecansaythatthehistoryoflogicisthatofitssuccess inmaskingit,whichmeansthatitappearstobeakintoasort ofvastparapraxis,ifwegivetothistermitspositivesense.

Thisindeediswhyyouseeme,alongonepath,alwayscomingback totheseparadoxesoflogicwhicharedesignedtosuggesttoyou thepaths,thewaysin,bywhichthereisregulated,thereis imposedonusthecertainstylebywhichweareableforourpart (2)tosucceedwiththisparapraxis:nottomissthelack(nepas manqueraumanque). ThatiswhyIthoughtoncemoreofintroducingmydiscoursetoday bysomethingwhichofcourseisonlyanapologue,andonwhich youcannotbaseyourselfonanyanalogyproperlyspeakingin ordertofindinitwhatmightbethesupportforsituatingthis lack,butwhichneverthelessisusefulinordertoreopenina waythisdimensionwhichinawayeverydiscourse,every discourseofanalyticliteratureitself,givesyou,inthe intervals,Iwouldsay,oftheoneinwhichherefromweekto week,Icatchupwithyou,necessarilytorediscoverthehingeof somethingwhichmightcloseinourexperience,and,bywhatever

30.1.63

X118

gap it intends to designate this lack, would find in it something thatthisdiscoursecouldfill. Thelittleapologuethen,thefirstonethatcametome.There couldbeothers,andafterall,allIwanttodohereistogo quickly.Itoldyouinshortatonetimethatthereisnolack intherealthelackisonlygraspablethroughthemediationof thesymbolic.Itisatthelevelofthelibrary,onemightsay: heresuchavolumeisnotinitsplace(manqueasaplace),this placewhichisaplacedesignatedalreadybytheintroduction, intothereal,ofthesymbolic.Andhere,thislackherethatI amspeakingabout,thislackwhichthesymbolinawayeasily fills,designatestheplace,designatestheabsence,presentifies whatisnotthere.Butnoticethatthevolumeinquestion carriesonthefirstpageavolumewhichIacquiredthisweek, andthisiswhatinspiredthislittleapologuecarriesonthe firstpagethenotation:"thefourengravingsfromsuchandsuch tosuchandsucharemissing".Doesthismean,inaccordance withthefunctionofthedoublenegation,thatbecausethevolume isnotinitsplace,thelackofthesefourengravingsis (3)removed,thattheengravingscomebacktoit.Clearly,there isnoquestionofit. Thismayappearabitstupidtoyou,butIwouldpointouttoyou thatherewehavethewholequestionoflogic,oflogic transposedintotheseintuitivetermsoftheEulerianschema,of theincludedlack.Whatisthepositionofthefamilyinthe genus,oftheindividualinthespecies,whatconstitutesahole withinaplanecircle?

IfImadeyoudosomuchtopologylastyear,itwasindeedto suggesttoyouthatthefunctionoftheholeisnotunivocal. Andthisindeedishowyoumustunderstandthatthereisalways introducedalongthispathofthinkingthatwedescribein differentformsasmetaphoricalindifferentforms,butalways indeedbeingreferredtosomething,thisplanification,this implicationoftheverysimpleplaneasconstituting fundamentallytheintuitivesupportofthesurface.Nowthis relationshiptothesurfaceisinfinitelymorecomplexandof coursebysimplyintroducingtoyouthering,thetorus,youare abletoseethatitisenoughtoelaboratewhatisinappearance themostsimplesurfacetoimagine,toseetherebeing diversified,onconditionthatweconsideritindeedas itis,asasurface,toseetherebeingdiversified strangelytherethefunctionofthehole. Ipointouttoyouonceagainhowitistobe understoodbecauseeverythingthatisineffecttobe known,howaholecanbefilled,canbecompleted,we willseethatnocirclewhatsoeverdrawnonthis surfaceoftheholeisableforthisistheproblem toconstrictitselftothe.stageofbeingnothingbut thisvanishinglimit,thepoint,andofdisappearing. (4)Forofcoursethereareholeswhichcan,onwhichwecan

operateinthisway,anditisenoughforustodrawourcircle inthefollowingwayifIdrawit,itisinordernotto expressmyselfotherwiseorinthatwaytoseethattheycannot reducethemselvestozero.Therearestructureswhichdonot involvethefillingofthehole

Theessenceofthecrosscap,asIshowedittoyoulastyearis thefollowing:itisthatapparentlywhatevercutyoudrawonthe surfaceIwillnotspendanymoretimeonit,Iwouldaskyou totestitoutforyourselveswewillnothaveapparentlythis diversityifwedrawthiscutinthisway,whichishomologous atthelevelofthecrosscaptothecutwhichonthetorusis repeatedasfollows,namelywhichpartakesoftwoothertypesof circle,whichreunitestheminitself,thetwofirstthatIhave justdrawn,ifyoudrawthemhereonthecrosscapinthisway, ifyoudrawthiscut,passinginthiswaythroughthisprivileged pointtowhichIdrewyourattentionlastyear,youwillalways havesomethingwhichinappearancewillbealwaysabletobe reducedtotheminimalsurface,butnotwithoutasIpointed outtoyouthereremainingattheendIrepeatwhateverthe sortofcut,thereremainingattheendonlysomethingwhichis symbolisednotlikeaconcentricreduction,butirreduciblyin thisshapeorinthatonewhichisthesame,andthatonecannot assuchnotdifferentiatefromIwhatIearliercalledconcentric (5)punctualisation.

Itisinthisthatthecrosscapwasforusanothercontributing pathinwhatconcernsthepossibilityofanirreducibletypeof lack.Thelackisradical.Itisradicalforthevery constitutionofsubjectivity,asitappearstousonthepathof analyticalexperience.Which,ifyouwish,Iwouldliketo enunciateinthisformula:"Onceitisknown,oncesomethingof theRealcomestobeknown,thereissomethinglostandthe surestwaytoapproachthissomethinglost,istoconceiveofit asafragmentofthebody".

Hereisthetruthwhichinthisopaque,grossformistheone thatanalyticexperiencegivesus,andwhichitintroduceswith itsirreduciblecharacterintoanyreflectionhenceforthpossible onanyconceivableformofourcondition.Thispoint,itmustbe clearlysaid,involvesenoughoftheintolerableforusto ceaselesslytrytodistortit,whichhasnodoubttwoaspects, namelythatinthisveryeffortwearedoingmorethansketching outitsoutlinesandthatwearealwaystempted,inthevery measurethatweapproachthisoutline,toforgetitinfunction oftheverystructurethatthislackrepresents.

30.1.63 30.1 63

X120 X 4

Whenceitresults,anothertruth,thatwecouldsaythatevery turnofourexperiencerestsonthefactthattherelationshipto theOther,insofarasitisthatinwhichthereissituated everypossibilityofsymbolisationandthelocusofdiscourse,is connectedwithastructuralflaw,andthatweareobligedthis isthefurthersteptoconceivethatwearetouchinghereon whatmakespossiblethisrelationshiptotheOther,namelythis pointfromwhichitemergesthatthereissignifier(du siqnifiant),istheonewhichinawaycannotbesignified.This (6) iswhatismeantbywhatIcallthe"lackofsignifier" point.

Andrecently,Iheardsomeonewhodoesnotunderstandmetoo badlyatall,respondingtome,questioningme,whetherthisdoes notmeanthatwereferourselvestothatwhichinanysignifier isinawaytheimaginarymaterial,theshapeofthewordorthat oftheChinesecharacter,ifyouwish,whatisirreducibleinthe factthatitisnecessarythateverysignifiershouldhavean intuitivesupportliketheothers,likealltherest. Well,preciselynot.Forofcourse,thisisthetemptationthat arisesinthisconnection.Thisisnotwhatisinvolvedas regardsthislack.Andinordertomakeyousenseit,Iwill refertodefinitionswhichIhavealreadygivenyouandwhich oughttobeenough.Itoldyou:"Thereisnolackwhichisnot ofthesymbolicorder.Butprivation,foritspart,issomething real."Whatwearespeakingaboutissomethingrealwhatmy discourseturnsaround,whenItrytorepresentforyouthis decisivepoint,whichneverthelesswealwaysforget,notonlyin ourtheory,butinourpracticeofanalyticexperience,isa privationwhichmanifestsitselfasmuchinthetheoryasinthe practice,itisarealprivationandwhichassuchcanbe reduced.Isitenoughtodesignateitinordertoremoveit?If wemanagetocircumscribeitscientificallywhichisperfectly conceivableitisenoughtoworkovertheanalyticliterature, anexampleofwhichIwillgiveyouinalittlewhile,namelya sample,tobeginwiththereisnootherwayofdoingthisI tookthefirstvolumeoftheInternationalJournalwhichcameto handandIwillshowyouthatalmosteverywherewefindthe probleminvolved:whetheronespeaksaboutanxiety,about actingoutoraboutsinceitisthetitleofthearticleto (7) whichIwillalludelateraboutRIamnottheonlyone whomakesuseoflettersthetotalresponse.Thetotal responseoftheanalystintheanalyticsituation,bysomeone whomithappenswerediscover,ofwhomIspokeinthesecondyear ofmyseminar,MargaretLittlebyname,wewillfindthisproblem verywellcentredandwecandefineit:whereistheprivation situated,whereobviouslydoessheslipupinthemeasurethat sheattemptstogetcloserandclosertotheproblemthata certaintypeofpatientposesforher?Itisnotthis,the reduction,theprivation,thesymbolisation,itsarticulation herewhichwillremovethelack.Thisiswhatwehavetokeep clearlyinmindfromthestart,andifitisonlytounderstand whatissignifiedfromonepointofviewbyamodeofappearance ofthislack:asItoldyou,privationissomethingreal.Itis

clearthatawomandoesnothaveapenis.Butifyoudonot symbolisethepenisastheessentialelementtohaveornotto have,shewillknownothingofthisprivation.Lackforitspart issymbolic. Castrationappearsinthecourseofanalysis,insofarasthis relationshipwiththeOther,whichmoreoverdidnotwaitfor analysistobeconstituted,isfundamental.Castration,asI toldyou,issymbolic,namelyitreferstoacertainphenomenon oflack,andatthelevelofthissymbolisation,namely,inthe relationshiptotheOther,insofarasthesubjecthasto constitutehimselfintheanalyticdiscourse.Oneofthe possibleformsoftheappearanceofthelackisherethe(), theoriginalsupportwhichisonlyoneofthepossible^ expressionsoftheoriginallack,ofthestructuralflaw inscribedinthebeingintheworldofthesubjectwithwhomwe (8) havetodeal.Andintheseconditionsitisconceivable, normaltoaskoneselfwhy,bybringinganalyticexperiencetoa certainpointandnotbeyondthistermofcastrationcomplex, thatFreudgivesusasfinalintheman,hetellsus,andof Penisneidinthewoman,canbeputinquestion.Itisnot necessarythatitshouldbefinal. Thisindeediswhyitisanessentialapproachinourexperience toconceiveofthisfunctionoflackinitsoriginalstructure. Anditisnecessarytocomebacktoitmanytimesinordernotto missit.

Anotherfable:theinsectwhomovesalongthesurfaceofthe MoebiusstripIhavenowIthinkspokenenoughaboutitforyou toknowimmediatelywhatImeanthisinsectcanbelievethat ateverymoment,ifthisinsecthastherepresentationofwhata surfaceis,thereisaface,theonealwaysonthereverseside oftheoneonwhichheismoving,thathehasnotexplored.He canbelieveinthisreverseside.Nowasyouknowthereisnot one.He,withoutknowingit,exploreswhatisnotthetwofaces, exploresthesinglefacethatisthere:andneverthelessatevery instant,thereisindeedareverse.Whathelacksinorderto perceivethathehasgonetothereverseside,isthelittle missingpiece,theoneoutlinedforyouinthiswayofcutting thecrosscapandthatonedayImaterialised,toputitinyour hands,constructed,thismissinglittlepiece.Itisawayof turninghereinashortcircuitaroundthepointwhichbringsit backbytheshortestpathtothereversesideofthepointwhere hewastheinstantbefore.

This little missing piece, the o as it happens, does this mean, because we are describing it there in a paradigmatic form, that theaffairisresolvedforallthat?Absolutelynot,sinceitis (9) thefactthatthispieceismissing,thatgivesallits realitytotheworldaroundwhichthelittleinsectismoving. Thelittleinterioreightiswellandtruly irreducible:itisalackforwhichthesymboldoesnot supply.Itisnottheninthefirstplace,anabsence whichthesymbolcanmakeupfor.

30.1.63

X122

Norisitacancellationoradngationforcancellationand dngation, formsconstitutedfromtherelationshipthatthe symbolallowstobeintroducedintothereal,namelythe definitionofabsence,cancellationanddngationisanattempt toundothatwhichinthesignifierseparatesusfromtheorigin andfromthisstructuralflaw.Itisanattempttorejoinits signfunctionitiswhattheobsessional,forallthat,strives andexhaustshimselffor.Cancellationanddngationaim thenatthispointoflack,butdonotrejoinitforallthat becauseasFreudexplains,alltheydoistoduplicatethe functionofthesignifierinapplyingittothemselves,andthe moreIsayitisnotthat,themoreitisthat.

Thespotofblood,intellectualornot,whetheritistheone thatLadyMacbethexhaustsherselfwithorwhatLautramont designatesundertheterm"intellectual",isimpossibletoefface becauseitisthenatureofthesignifierpreciselytostriveto effaceatrace.Andthemoreonetriestoeffaceit,to rediscoverthetrace,themorethetraceinsistsassignifier. Whenceitresultsthatwehavetodeal,asregardsthe relationshiptothefactthatthelittleomanifestsitselfas causeofdesire,withanalwaysambiguousproblematic.Ineffect whenitisinscribedinourschema,whichis alwaystoberenewed,therearetwowaysinwhich therelationshipoftheOthertothesmallocan appear. (10) we If can rejoin them, is it precisely the by function of anxiety,insofarasanxiety,whereveritisproduced,isthe signalofitandthereisnootherwayofbeingabletointerpret whatissaidtousinanalyticliteratureaboutanxiety.

Becauseafterallnoticehowstrangeitistobringtogether thesetwoaspectsofanalyticdiscourse:ontheonehandthat anxietyisthegreatest,mostradicaldefenceandthatitis necessaryhereforthediscourseaboutittobedividedintotwo references:1)onetotherealinsofarasanxietyisthe responsetothemostoriginaldanger,totheunsurmountable Hilflosigkeit,totheabsolutedistressofenteringintothe worldandthat2)ontheotherhand,itisgoingtobeabletobe subsequentlytakenupbytheegoasasignalofinfinitely slighterdangers,ofdangers,aswearetoldsomewherebyJones,

30.1.63

X123

whoonthispointshowsatactandameasurewhichisoften greatlylackinginthebombastofanalyticdiscourse,aboutwhat hecallsthethreatsoftheId,ofthea,oftheEs,whichJones simplycallsa"burieddesire",undesirenterre.Asheremarks, isthisreturnofaburieddesiresodangerousafterall,and doesthismeritthemobilisationofsuchamajorsignalasthis ultimate,finalsignalwhichanxietyissupposedtobe,ifin ordertoexplainitweareobligedtohaverecoursetothemost absolutevitaldanger. (11) Andthisparadoxisfoundagainalittlefurtheron.For thereisnoanalyticdiscoursewhich,afterhavingmadeof anxietythefinalelementofeverydefence,doesnotspeaktous aboutdefenceagainstanxiety.Sothatthisinstrumentwhichis sousefulforwarningusaboutdanger,istheveryonethatwe havetodefendourselvesagainstanditisinthiswaythatone explainsallsortsofreactions,ofconstructions,offormations, inthefieldofpsychopathology.Istherenotsomeparadoxhere whichrequiresthingstobeformulateddifferently,namelythat thedefenceisnotagainstanxiety,butagainstthatofwhich anxietyisthesignalandthatwhatisinvolvedisnotdefence againstanxiety,butagainstacertainlack,exceptforthefact thatweknowthattherearedifferentstructures,definableas such,ofthislack,thatthelackofthesingleedge,whichis thatoftnerelationshipwiththenarcissisticimage,isnotthe sameasthatofthedoubleedgewhichIamspeakingtoyouabout, andwhichisreferredtotheleastextremecutandtotheone whichconcernstheoassuch,insofarasitappears,asit manifestsitself,thatitiswithit,thatwehave,thatwecan, thatweoughttobedealing,atacertainlevelofthehandling ofthetransference. Heretherewillappear,itseemstome,betterthanelsewhere thatthelackofhandlingisnotthehandlingofthelackand thatwhatneedstobepickedoutiswhatyoualwaysfindevery timeadiscourseispushedfarenoughabouttherelationshipthat wehaveasOthertotheonethatwehaveinanalysis,thatthe questionisposedastowhatourrelationshipwiththisoought tobe.

There is an obvious gap between the permanent, profound putting in question which the analytic experience in itself is supposed tobe,alwaysreferringthe.subjectontosomethingdifferent (12) towhathemanifeststouswhateveritsnaturemaybe. Transferenceisonly,asoneofmywomenpatientssaidtomenot longago:"IfIwassurethatitwasonlytransference".The functionofthe"only(neque):"itisonlytransference"the reversesideof"Hehasonlytodoitinthisway",thisformof theverbwhichisconjugated,butnot,asyoubelieve,theone whichmakesonesay:"IIn'aqu'avait",thatoneseesflowering spontaneouslyinaspontaneousdiscourse. It is the other aspect of what is explained to us as being, it seems, the charge, the burden of the hero analyst of having to interiorisethiso,totakeitintohimself,asagoodorbad

30.1.63

X124

object,butasaninternalobjectandthatitisfromtherethat thereissupposedtoemergeallthecreativitythroughwhichhe oughttorestorethesubject'saccesstotheworld. Boththingsaretrue,eventhoughtheyarenotconnected:itis preciselyforthisreasonthattheyareconfusedandthatby confusingthem,nothingclearissaidaboutwhatconcernsthe handlingofthistransferentialrelationship,theonewhichturns aroundtheo.Butitisthisthatissufficientlyexplainedby theremarkthatImadetoyou,thatwhatdistinguishesthe positionofthesubjectwithrespecttoo,andthevery constitutionassuchofhisdesire,is,tosaythingsina summaryfashion,thatwhetherwearedealingwithapervertora psychotic,therelationshipofthephantasy$Ooisestablished inthisway(Schemap6),anditisherethatinordertohandle thetransferentialrelationshipwehaveineffecttotakeinto ourselveslikeaforeignbody,anincorporationofwhichweare thepatient,theoinquestion,namelytheobjectwhichis absolutelyforeigntothesubjectwhoisspeakingtous,inso farasitisthecauseofhislack.

Inthecaseofneurosis,thepositionisdifferentinsofaras asItoldyousomethingappearsherewhichdistinguishesthe functionofthephantasyintheneurotic.Herethereappears (13)atXsomethingofhisphantasywhichisano,andwhichonly appearsso(leparait).Andwhichonlyappearssobecausethis littleoisnotspecularisableandcannotappearhere,as Imight say,inperson,butonlyasasubstitute.Andit isonlytherethatthereisappliedtheprofound questioningofanyauthenticityintheclassical analysisoftransference. Butthisisnottosaythatwehaveherethecauseof transference,andwehavetodealwiththislittleowhich,for itspart,isnotonthestage,butwhichonlyasksatevery instanttobeallowedtomountittointroduceitsdiscourse there,evenitthisweretosow,intheonewhocontinuestoho'. thestage,tosowconfusion,disorder,tosay:"Stopthe tragedy",justasmuchas"Stopthecomedy",eventhoughthisis alittlebetter.Thereisnodrama.WhydoesAjaxgethimself intosuchastew,astheysay,whenafterallifallhedidwas toexterminatethesheepthatissomuchthebetter?Itisall thesamelessseriousthanifhehadexterminatedalltheGreeks sincehedidnotexterminatealltheGreeks,heisalltheless dishonouredandifheindulgesinthisridiculousmanifestatioi everyoneknowsitisbecauseMinervacastaspellonhim.

Comedyislesseasytoexorcise.Aseveryoneknows,itismore gay,andevenifoneexorcisesit,whathappensonthestagecai veryeasilycontinueonebeginsagainatthesongofthe billygoat'sfoot,atthetruehistoryofwhatisinvolvedfrom thebeginning,attheoriginofdesire.Andthisisthereason whymoreovertragedybearsinitself,initsterm,initsname, itsdesignation,thisreferencetothebillygoatandthesatyr, (14)whoseplacemoreoverwasalwaysreservedattheendofa

30.1.63 trilogy.

125

Thebillygoatwhojumpsontothestage,iswhatactingoutis. AndtheactingoutIamspeakingabout,namelytheinverse movementofwhatmoderntheatreaspiresto,namelythatthe actorsgodownamongtheaudience:itisthespectatorswhomount thestageandsaytherewhattheyhavetosay. AndthisiswhysomeonelikeMargaretLittle,chosenfromamong othersandasItoldyoureallyinthewaythatone blindfoldsoneselfandlaysoutpagestomakeadivinationby spinningaknife.

MargaretLittle,inherarticleon"Theanalyst'stotalresponse tohispatient'sneeds",ofMayAugust1957,PartsIIIIVof Volume38oftheInternationalJournalofPsychoanalysis,pursues thediscoursethatIalreadydweltonatapointinmyseminar whenthisarticlehadnotyetappeared.Thosewhowerethere willremembertheremarksthatImade,aboutacertainanxiety riddendiscourseonherpartandherattemptstomasteritin connectionwithcountertransference.Theynodoubtremember thatIdidnotstopatthefirstappearanceoftheproblem, namelytheeffectsofaninexactinterpretation,namelythatone dayananalystsaystooneofhispatientswhocomesbackfrom havingmadeabroadcast,abroadcastonasubjectwhichinterests theanalysthimselfweseemoreorlessthemilieuinwhich thiscouldhavehappened:"Youspokeverywellyesterday,butI seeyouareverydepressedtodayitissurelybecauseofthe fearyouhaveofhavinghurtmebyinvadinganareathatIam interestedin".Twoyearshavetopassbeforethesubject perceives,inconnectionwiththereturnofananniversary,that whathadcausedhimtobesosadwaslinkedtothefeelinghe (15)had,havingmadethisbroadcast,ofhavingrevivedin himselfthefeelingofmourningthathehadabouttherecent deathofhismotherwho,hesays,couldthereforenotseesuccess representedforhersonatbeinginthiswaymomentarilypromoted tothepositionofastar. MargaretLittleisstruck,becauseitisapatientthatshehad takenonfromthisanalyst,bythefactthateffectivelythe analystinmakinghisinterpretationhaddonenomorethan interpretwhatwaspassingthroughhisownunconscious,namely thateffectivelyhewasverysorryatthesuccessofhispatient. Whatisinvolvedneverthelessissomethingquitedifferent, namelythatitisnotenoughtotalkaboutmourningandevento seetherepetitionofthemourningthatthesubjectwassuffering atthattime,theonethattwoyearslaterhewashavingforhis analyst,buttoseewhatisinvolvedinthefunctionofmourning itselfandhereatthesametimetotakealittlefurtherwhat Freudtellsusaboutmourningasidentificationwiththelost object.Itisnotanadequatedefinitionofmourning.Weare onlyinmourningaboutsomeoneofwhomwecansay"Iwashislack (j'etaissonmanque)".Wemournpeoplethatwehaveeitherwell orbadlytreatedandvisaviswhomwedonotknowwhetherwe

30.1.63

126

fulfillthisfunctionofbeingattheplaceoftheirlack. Whatwegiveinlove,isessentiallywhatwedonothaveand, whenwhatwedonothavereturnstous,thereisundoubtedlya regressionandatthesametimearevelationofthewayinwhich wehavefailedtheperson(manquealapersonne)inrepresenting hislack. Buthere,becauseoftheirreduciblecharacterofthe miscognitionconcerningthelack,thismiscognitionsimplyis reversed,namelythatthisfunctionthatwehadofbeinghis lack,wenowbelieveweareabletoexpressinthefactthatwe (16) havebeenlackingtohim,eventhoughitwaspreciselyfor thisreasonthatwewerepreciousandindispensabletohim. HereiswhatIwouldaskyou:ifitispossible,pickoutthis andacertainnumberofotherreferencepoints,ifyouare willingtoworkatit,inMargaretLittle'sarticle.Itisa furtherphaseofreflectionwhichisconsiderablydeeper,ifnot better.Becauseitisnotbetter.Theveryproblematic definitionofcountertransferenceisabsolutelynotadvancedand Iwouldsayuptoacertainpointthatwecanbegratefultoher becauseifshehadadvancedintoit,itwouldhavebeen mathematically,intoerror.Allshewantsasyouwillseeto considerfromthenonisthetotalresponseoftheanalyst, namelyjustasmuchthefactthatheisthereasanalystasthe thingswhich,forhimtheanalyst,asthispresentexampleshows, canescapefromhisownunconscious,asthefactthatlikeevery otherlivingbeingsheexperiencesfeelingsinthecourseof analysis,andthatafterallshedoesnotsayitlikethat,but thisiswhatisinvolved:beingtheOther,sheisintheposition thatItoldyouaboutthelasttime,namelyfromthebeginning oneofentireresponsibility.

Itisthereforewiththisclass,this"immensetotal",asshe says,ofherpositionasanalyst,thatsheintendstorespond beforeusandrespondhonestlyaboutwhatsheconceivestobethe responseoftheanalyst.Theresultisthatshegoesasfaras totakethemostcontrarypositionsthatdoesnotmeanthat theyarefalsetotheclassicalformulations,namelythatfar fromremainingoutsidethegame,theanalystmustsupposein principlethatheisinvolveduptothehilt,considerhimselfon occasioneffectivelyasresponsibleandinanycase,never (17) refusetotestify,ifconcerningwhathappensinthe analysissheisforexamplesummoned,byhersubject,toanswer beforeacourtoflaw. Iamnotsayingherethatthisattitudecanbesustained,Iam sayingthattoevokeit,toplacewithinthisperspectivethe functionoftheanalystissomethingwhichundoubtedlywill appeartoyouofanoriginalitywhichgivesrisetoproblems, thatthefeelingsImeanallthefeelingsoftheanalystcan beinsomecasessummoned,asImightsay,tojustifythemselves, notonlyatthetribunaloftheanalysthimselfwhicheveryone willadmitbutevenwithrespecttothesubject,andthatthe

30.1.63

11

weightofallthefeelingsthattheanalystmayexperiencewith regardtooneorothersubjectwhoisengagedwithhiminthe analyticenterprise,canbenotaloneinvoked,butbepromoted intosomethingwhichwillbenotaninterpretation,butan avowal,enteringinthiswayonapathwhosefirstintroduction intoanalysisbyFerencziwastheobjectonthepartofclassical analystsofthemostextremereservations.

Undoubtedly,ourauthordividesthepatientswithwhomsheis dealingintothreeparts.Sincesheseemstoadmitaverylarge rangeofcasesunderhercharge,wehaveontheonehandthe psychoses,forwhomitisnecessarythatsheshouldadmitthat, ifonlyforthehospitalisationthatissometimesnecessary,it isnecessaryforhertodischargeapartofherresponsibilities ontoothersupportstheneuroses,ofwhichshetellsusthatthe greatestshareofresponsibilityofwhichwedischargeourselves alsoinneuroses,isputonthesubject'sshouldersgiving proofofremarkableluciditybut,betweenthetwo,the subjectsshedefinesasthethirdclass,characterneurosesor reactionalpersonalities,whateveryoulike,whatAlexander definesagainas"neuroticcharacters",inshortthiswholearea aroundwhichtherearedevelopedsuchproblematicindicationsor classifications,whileinrealityitisnotakindofsubject thatisinvolved,butazoneofrelationship,theonethatIam defininghereasactingout.Anditisindeedineffectwhatis involved,inthecasethatsheisgoingtodevelopforus,which isthecaseofasubjectwhohascometoherbecausesheperforms actswhichareclassedwithintheframeofkleptomania,whofora yearmoreoverdoesnotmaketheslightestallusiontothese thefts,andwhogoesthroughawholelongtimeofanalysis,under thetotalandvigorousfireonthepartofouranalyst,ofthe mostrepeatedhereandnowtransferenceinterpretationsinthe sensetakennowadays,alongthepathgenerallyadopted,asthat whichoughttobefromacertainmomentstaunched,spongedup ceaselesslyrightthroughtheanalysis. Noneoftheseinterpretations,howeversubtleandvariedshe makesthem,touchforaninstantthedefenceofhersubject.If someoneIamgoingtoendwiththiswouldbewillingtodome theservice,atadatethatwearegoingtofix,ofenteringinto thedetailedexpositionofthiscase,ofdoingthisthingthatI cannotdobeforeyoubecauseitistoolongandbecauseIhave otherthingstotellyou,youwillsee,inallitsdetails,there beingmanifestedtherelevanceofremarksthatIaminthe processofmakingtoyounow.

Theanalysisonlybeginstomove,shetellsus,atthemoment thatonedayherpatientcamewithherfaceswollenwithweeping, andthetearsthatsheisweepingabouttheloss,thedeath,ina countrythatshehadleftalongtimebeforewithherparents, namelytheGermanyofthattime,NaziGermany,ofapersonwho wasnotdistinguishedamongthosewhohadlookedafterherduring herchildhood,exceptthatshewasafriendofherparentsandno (19)doubtafriendwithwhomshehadverydifferent relationshipsthanherrelationshipswithherparentsforitis

30.1.63

12

afactthatshenevershowedsuchmourningforanyoneelse(247). Beforethispassionate,surprisingreaction,whatisthereaction ofouranalyst?Undoubtedlyoneofinterpretingasonealways does.Shevariesthemagain,asawayofseeingwhichonewill work.Theclassicinterpretation,namelythatthismourningisa needforretortionagainsttheobject,thatthismourningis perhapsaddressedtoher,theanalyst,thatitisaway,using thepersonthatsheismourningforasascreen,ofbringingto her,theanalystallthereproachesthatshehasagainsther. Nothingworks. Somethingbeginstobefreedupwhentheanalystliterallyas youwillsee,itisveryvisibleinthetextadmitsbeforethe subjectthatsheiscompletelyconfusedandthattoseeherlike thatwaspainfultotheanalystherself.Andimmediatelyour analystdeducesthatitisthepositive,thereal,theliving elementofafeelingwhichgaveitsmovementtotheanalysis. Thewholetextbearssufficientwitnesstoit,thesubject chosen,thestyleaswellastheorderofitsdevelopment,forus tobeabletosaywhatisinvolvedandwhatundoubtedlytouches thesubject,whatmakesitpossibleforher,whichallowsherto transferproperlyspeakinginherrelationshiptotheanalystthe reactioninvolvedinthismourning,namelytheappearanceofthe following,thattherewasapersonforwhomshewasabletobea lack:thefactisthattheinterventionoftheanalystmakes thereappeartoherintheanalystthisthingwhichiscalled anxiety.Itisinfunctionofwhereweareatthelimitof somethingwhichdesignatesintheanalysistheplaceofthelack thatthisinsertion,thatthisgraft,asImightsay,this (20)layeringwhichallowsasubjectwhosewholerelationship withherparentsisdefinedyouwillseeintheobservation thatinnorelationshipwasthisfemalesubjectabletograsp herselfasalacktofindhereawaytoopenup. Itisnotquapositivefeelingthattheinterpretationifone cancallitthat,becauseitiswelldescribedforusinthe observation:thesubjectdropsherarmsandgivesupatthis place,thatthis"interpretation",ifonecandescribeitas such,reached,itisasanintroductioninaninvoluntarywayof somethingthatisinquestionandthatalwaysoughttocomeinto questionatwhateverpointitmaybe,evenifitisattheend, intheanalysis,namelythefunctionofthecut.Andwhatis goingtoallowyoutolocateit,todesignateit,isthatthe turningpointsthedecisiveonesoftheanalysisaretwo moments:themomentthattheanalysttakingcourageinthename oftheideologyoflife,ofthereal,ofanythingyouwish,makes allthesamethemostunusualintervention,tobesituatedas decisivewithrespecttothisperspectivethatIwouldcall sentimentalonefinedaywhenthesubjectwasgoingoveragain allherstoriesaboutmoneyquarrelsifIremembercorrectly, withhermother,sheceaselesslycomesbacktoittheanalyst saystoherintheclearestterms:"Listen!Stopthat,because literallyIcannolongerlistentoit!Youaresendingmeto sleep".(248)

30.1.63

X13

ThesecondtimeIamnotgivingyouthisasamodelof technique,Iamaskingyoutofollowtheproblemswhichareposed forananalystwhoisobviouslyasexperiencedassheisburning withauthenticitythesecondtime,itinvolvedslight modificationswhichhadbeencarriedoutintheanalyst'shouse, whatshecallstheredecorationofherofficeifwearetogo (21) ontheaverageredecorationcarriedoutbyourcolleagues, itmusthavebeenlovelyalreadyourMargaretLittlehadbeen pesteredalldaybytheremarksofherpatients:"It'snice,it's notnice,thebrownisdisgusting,thatgreenislovely....":and nowhereisourpatientwhostartsagaintowardstheendofthe day,shetellsus,andputsthatintermsthatare,letussay,a littlebitmoreaggressivethantheothers,andshesaystoher textually:"Ireallydon'tcarewhatyouthinkaboutit".(248) Thepatient,Ihavetosay,likethefirsttime,isprofoundly shocked,astounded.Afterwhichsheemergesfromhersilence withenthusiasticcries:"Everythingyouhavedonethereis marvellous".Iwillspareyouthedetailsoftheprogressof thisanalysis.WhatIwouldsimplyliketodesignatehere,is thatinconnectionwiththiscasewhichisfavourableand,ifyou wish,choseninapartofthefieldparticularlyfavourableto thisproblematic,whatisdecisiveinthisfactorofprogress whichconsistsessentiallyinintroducingthefunctionofthe cut,isinsofarasshetellsherinherfirstinterpretation thefollowing:"You'releavingmeoutofitcompletely:youare sendingmetosleep",andintheothercasesheliterallyputs herinherplace:"Youcanthinkwhatyouwantaboutmy decoration,ofmyoffice.Idon'tcareaboutitinthe slightest!",thatsomethingdecisivewasmobilisedinthe transferentialrelationshipthatisinquestionhere.

Thisallowsustodesignatewhatisinvolvedforthesubject.The problemforher,oneofherproblemsisthatshehadneverbeen abletoproducetheslightestfeelingofmourningforafather whomsheadmired.Butthestoriesasyouwillseewhichare reportedtous,showusthat,ifthereissomethingover emphasisedinherrelationshipswithherfather,itwaswelland (22) trulythatinanycasetherewasnoquestioninhisregard ofrepresentinginanywaysomethingwhichcouldbe,from whateverangleitwastaken,beinglackingtoherfather.

Therewasalittlestrollwithhimandaverysignificantscene aboutwithalittlestickquitesymbolicofthepenis,because thepatientherselfunderlinesitanditseemsinarather innocentwaythefatherthrowsthislittlestickintothewater withoutmakinganycommentonit.Thisstoryisnotthesameas thedimanchesdeVilled'Avray. Andasregardsthemother,theonewhoisinvolvedintheclosest fashionindeterminingthethefts,thisbecauseundoubtedlyshe hasneverbeenabletomakeofthischildanythingotherthana sortofprolongationofherself,apieceoffurniture,an instrumentofmenaceandblackmailonoccasion,butinnocase somethingwhichwithrespecttoherowndesire,thedesireofthe

30.1.63 subject,couldhavebeenacausalrelationship.

14

Itistodesignatethefollowing,namelythatherdesireshe doesnotknowwhichoneofcoursecouldbetakeninto consideration,thateachtimethemotherapproaches,entersinto thefieldofinductionwhereshecanhavesomeeffect,the subjectveryregularlystealssomething,atheftwhichlikeall thetheftsofthekleptomaniachasonlyasignificationof particularinterestwhichmeanssimply:"Iamshowingyouan objectthatIstolebyforceorbyclevernessandwhichmeans thatthereissomewhereanotherobject,myone,theo,theone whichdeservestobeconsidered,tobeallowedtoisolateitself foramoment".Thisfunctionofisolation,ofbeingalone(etre seul)hastheclosestrelationship,isinawaythecorrelative (23) poleofthisfunctionofanxietyasyouwillseeinwhat follows."Life",wearetoldsomewherebysomeonewhoisnotan analyst,EtienneGilson,"existenceisanuninterruptedpowerof activeseparations". Ithinkthatyouwillnotconfuse,aftertoday'sdiscourse,this remarkwiththeonewhichisusuallymadeaboutfrustrations. Somethingelseisinvolved.Whatisinvolvedisthefrontier, thelimitwheretheplaceofthelackisestablished.

Acontinuous,Imeanvariedreflectionaboutthedifferent, metonymicalformsinwhichthereappearinclinicalpracticethe focalpointsofthislack,willconstitutethecontinuationof ourdiscourse.Butwecannotbuttreatitceaselesslyalongwith theputtingintoquestionofwhatonecancallthegoalsof analysis.Thepositionstakenupinthisrespectareso instructive,educativethatIwouldlikeatthepointthatweare at,thatbesidesthisarticletowhichitwouldbeappropriateto return,tofollowitindetail,youshouldreadanotherarticle bysomeonecalledSzaszonthegoalsofanalytictreatment,"On thetheoryofpsychoanalytictreatment",inwhichyouwillsee thatthereisadvancedthefollowing:itisthattheaimsof analysisaregivenbyitsrule.Andthatitsrule,andatthe sametimeitsaimscanonlybedefinedaspromotingasafinal goalofanalysis,ofeveryanalysiswhetheritisdidacticor not,theinitiationofthepatientintoascientificpointof viewthatishowtheauthorexpresseshimselfconcerninghis ownmovements.

Isthatadefinition?Iamnotsayingthatwecanacceptitor rejectit,itisoneoftheextremepositions,itisundoubtedly averysingularandspecialisedposition.Iamnotsaying:isit adefinitionthatwecouldaccept?Iamsaying:whatcanthat definitionteachus?Youhaveheardenoughheretoknowthat (24) undoubtedly,thatifthereissomethingthatIhaveoften putinquestionitispreciselytherelationshipofthe scientificpointofview,insofarasitsaimisalwaysto considerthelackasbeingabletobefilledineverycase,with theproblematicofanexperienceincludinginitself,oftaking thelackassuchintoaccount.

131.1.63

X15

Itneverthelessremainsthatsuchapointofviewisusefulto pinpoint,especiallyifonerelatesit,ifonelinksittoan articlebyanotheranalyst,anolderarticlebyBarbaraLow, concerningwhatshecallstheEntschdigung,thecompensationsof thepositionoftheanalyst.Youwillseeproducedtherea completelyoppositereference,whichisnottothatofthe scholar,buttothatoftheartist,andthatmoreoverwhatis involvedinanalysisissomethingquitecomparable,shetellsus itiscertainlynotanylessremarkableasananalysisas regardthefirmnessofitsconceptionsquitecomparable,she tellsus,tothesublimationwhichpresidesoverartistic creation.Couldwenotwiththesethreetextsthethirdof whichisintheInternationalZeitschriftofyear20,Imeanthe 20thyearoftheInternationalZeitschriftfrPsychoanalyse inGerman:despiteitsrarityIwillmakeitavailabletowhoever iswillingtotakeresponsibilityforitcouldwenotdecide thatonthe20thFebruary,whichisthedaythatmyreturn sinceIamgoingtoabsentmyselfnowispossible,butnot certain,couldwenotdecidethattwoorthreepersons,two personswhoarehereandwhomIquestionedearlier,bydividing uptherolesamongthemselvesastheyseefit,onetopresent, theothertocriticiseorcomment,oronthecontraryalternating likeachoirthetwopartsthatthesetwoopposingpresentations wouldconstitute,couldthesetwopersons,linkingupif necessarywithathirdforthethirdarticleitisnot unthinkablecommitthemselvestonotleavingthisrostrumempty fortoolongandtotakemyplaceifIamnotthere,withmein theaudienceifIreturn,thisproblem,namelytooccupy themselvesexactlywiththethreearticlesthatIhavejust spokenabout.

IthinkIhaveobtainedfromtwoofthemImeanGranoffand PerriertheirconsentearlierIinviteyouherethentolisten tothemonthe20thFebruary,namelyinexactlythreeweekstime.

27.2.63 Seminar12:

XII1 Wednesday27February1963

Good!WellhereIambackfromwintersports.Thegreaterpart ofmyreflectionstherewereofcourseasusualconcernedwith beingofservicetoyou.Notexclusivelyhowever.Thatiswhy thewintersportsthisyear,apartfromthefactthatIenjoyed them,whichisnotalwaysthecase,struckmebysomethingor otherwhichappearedtomeandwhichbroughtmebacktoaproblem ofwhichtheyseemtobeanobviousincarnation,aliving materialisation,itisthecontemporaryoneofthefunctionof theconcentrationcampforthewealthyold,whichaseveryone knowswillbecomemoreandmoreofaproblemwiththeadvanceof ourcivilisationgiventheadvanceoftheaverageageovertime: thatremindedmethatobviouslythisproblemoftheconcentration campandofitsfunctionatthisepochofourhistoryhasreally beencompletelymisseduptonow,completelymaskedbytheeraof cretinousmoralisingwhichimmediatelyfollowedtheendofthe war,andtheabsurdideathatweweregoingtobeabletofinish justasquicklywiththem,Iamstilltalkingaboutconcentration camps.IndeedIwillnotgoonanylongeraboutthedifferent commercialtravellerswhomadeaspecialtyofstiflingthe affair,inthefirstrankofwhomtherewas,asyouknow,onewho receivedtheNobelPrize.Wesawthedegreetowhichhewasup tohisheroismoftheabsurdwhenhehadtomakeuphismind aboutaseriouscontemporaryquestion. Allofthattoremindusbecausemoreoverinparallelwith thesereflectionsIwasrereading,IsayitagainasIdid earlier,inordertobeofservicetoyou,myseminaronEthics ofafewyearsagoandthistorenewthewellfoundednatureof whatIbelieveIarticulatedthereasbeingthemostessential accordingtoourmasterFreud,whatIthinkIemphasisedtherein afashionworthyofthetruththatwasinvolved,thatall moralityistobesoughtinitsorigin,initssource,onthe sideoftheReal.Againyouhavetoknowofcoursewhatismeant bythat.Ithinkthatforthosewhounderstoodthisseminarmore preciselymoralityistobesoughtonthesideoftherealand moreespeciallyinpolitics.Thisisnottoencourageyoutogo lookingforitintheCommonMarket! SonowIamgoingnotonlytoinvitetospeakbutalsogivethe presidingrole,astheysay,ormoreexactlythepositionof chairmantotheonewhooccupieditthelasttime,Granoff,who isgoingtocomeuphere,becauseheisgoingtohavetoreply

27.2.63

XII133

(2)sincehegaveageneralintroductiontothethreeparts, andisgoingtohavesayatleastafewwordsinreplytoMadame Aulagnierwhoisgoingtocompletetodaytheloopofwhatwas begunthelasttime. Granoffherethen,andAulagnierhere.Aulagnierisgoingto telluswhatsheextractedfromherworkonthearticleby MargaretLittle. MadameAulagnieronMargaretLittle'sarticle,pp313. Lacan:WouldyouliketosaythefewconcludingwordsthatI suggested,thatyouweregoingtogive,accordingtowhatIread IwilltellyoulaterhowIlearnedwhatwassaidthelasttime butanywayIknowenoughaboutittoknowthatyouannounced thatyoushouldbringthingstoaclose. Granoffconcludes,pp1317. (17)ItwasnotatallabadideaofminetoaskGranoffto conclude,notsimplybecausehehasfreedmefromapartofmy taskofcriticism,butbecauseIbelievehehascompletedina satisfactoryfashionandatthesametimeclarifiedwhatI believeIpickedupfromarapidreadingoftheintroductory talkthathegavethelasttime,andwhichperhapsnotrightly, butafterall,Isayinarapidreadingleftmealittle unsatisfied.

Imustsaythatwithrespecttothetaskthathadbeenreserved tohim,specificallyasregardsthearticlebyBarbaraLow,I foundhimalittlebitshortofthetruth,inaword,nottohave exhaustedeverythingthatcanbedrawnfromthisarticlewhichis certainlybyfarthemostextraordinaryandthemostremarkable ofthethree.

Isawalittlebitthesignofanevasioninthefactthathe sentusback,referredustothemostmodernformofintervention onthesubjectintheshapeofthisarticlebyLuciaToweron theotherhandIamonthewholegratefultohimbecausethis articlehasnowbeenintroduced,andIwouldnothavedoneitfor manyreasonsmyselfthisyear,butnowwecannolongeravoidit.

WewillhavetofindawayofmakingthisarticleofLuciaTower, whichhewasnotabletosummarise,availableatleastbringit totheknowledgeofacertainnumberofpeopletowhomitwould beofthegreatestinterest.

ThistoorientthingsinthewayIwanttotacklethemnowfor thehalfhourorthethirtyfiveminutesthatremaintous.Iam notgoingtosaymuchmoretoyouaboutwhatIknoweachoneof youcontributed,eventhoughIamverygratefultoPerrierfor havingsentmeyesterdayalittlesummaryofwhatheforhispart contributed,asummarythatwasmadenecessarybythefactwhich Idonotneedtolabourtoomuch,thatIwasnotabletohavein timeevenatypedaccountofwhatwassaidthelasttime.

27.2.63

XII134

Whetheritistheeffectofchanceorofbadorganisation,itis certainlynotbecauseofmethatthingshavehappenedinthis waybecauseduringthewholeoftheinterveningtimeItriedto (18) takeeverypossibleprecautionthatsuchanaccidentwould nothappen. ThereforeIamleavingmyselftime.Andperhapseventobe betterinformed,tomakeanallusiontothepointsofdetailthat Iwouldliketopickup.Theauthorsoftheseinterventionswill thereforelosenothingbywaitingforalittlewhile.Ithink thatingeneralyouknowenoughaboutwhatIwantedtocontribute byreferringtothesearticleswhichatfirstappeartobeand areeffectivelyallcentredoncountertransference,whichis preciselyasubjectwhichIdonotclaimtoseeinanywaybeing evenspecifiedforyouinthewayitdeserves,andthereforeto havedonethisfromtheperspectiveofwhatIhavetosaytoyou aboutanxiety,moreexactlyaboutthefunctionthatthis referencetoanxietyoughttofulfillinthegeneralsequenceof myteaching. Thefactisthateffectivelytheseremarksaboutanxietycanno longerbekeptatadistancefromamorepreciseapproachtowhat hasbeenpresentinanalwaysmoreinsistentfashionforsome timeinmydiscourse,namelytheproblemofthedesireofthe analyst.

Forwhenallissaidanddone,thisatleastcannotfailto escapethehardesthearingears:thefactisthatinthe difficultyoftheapproachoftheseauthorsto countertransference,itistheproblemofthedesireofthe analystwhichcreatestheobstacle,whichcreatestheobstacle becauseinshorttakengenerally,namelynotelaboratedaswe havedoneithere,everyinterventionofthisorder,however surprisingthismayappearaftersixtyyearsofanalytic development,seemstoshareafundamentalimprudence. Thepeopleinvolved,whetherwearedealingwithSzasz,orwith BarbaraLowherself,whetherwearedealingstillmorewith MargaretLittleandIwillsaylaterhowthingshavebeen advancedinthisrespectintheextraordinaryconfidencesin whichLuciaTower,themostrecentauthor,hasspokenaboutvery profoundlyonthissubject,morespecificallyhasmadeavery profoundavowalofherexperiencenoneoftheseauthorscan avoidputtingthingsontheplaneofdesire.Thetermcounter transference,asitisenvisaged,namely,ingeneral,broadly speakingtheparticipationoftheanalyst,butletusnotforget thatmoreessentialthantheengagementoftheanalyst,in connectionwithwhichyouseetherebeingproducedinthetexts themostextremevacillationsfromtheirhundredpercent responsibilitytostayingcompletelyoutofit (19) Ibelievethatinthisrespectthefinalarticle,theone whichyouunfortunatelyknowonlyunderanindicativeform,the onebyLuciaTower,highlightswell,notforthefirsttime,but forthefirsttimeinanarticulatedmannersomethingthatis

27.2.63

XII135

muchmoresuggestiveinthisorder,namelythatwhichinthe analyticrelationshipcanoccuronthesideoftheanalystin termsofwhatshecallsasmallchangeforhim,theanalyst thisreciprocityofactionisheresomethingwhichIamnot sayingatallistheessentialterm,letussaythatthesimple evocationofitiswelldesignedtoreestablishthequestionat thelevelatwhichitshouldbeposed.Itisnotamatterin effectofdefinition,evenofanexactdefinitionof countertransference,whichcouldbegivenverysimply,whichis simplynothingotherthanthefollowingwhichhasonlyone drawbackasadefinition,whichisthatitabandonscompletely thequestionwhichisposedaboutitsimport,namelythat countertransferenceiseverythingthatthepsychoanalyst repressesofwhathereceivesassignifierintheanalysis.It isnothingelseandthisiswhythisquestionof countertransferenceisreallynotthequestion.Itisfromthe stateofconfusionthatitisbroughttousinthatittakeson itssignification.Thissignificationaloneistheonefrom whichnoauthorcanescapepreciselyinthemeasurethathe tacklesitandinthemeasurethatthisiswhatinterestshim,it isthedesireoftheanalyst. Ifthisquestionisnotsimplynotresolved,butfinallyhasnot evenbeguntoberesolved,itissimplybecausethereisnotin analytictheoryuptothepresent,Imeanuptothisseminar precisely,anyexactpositioningofwhatdesireis. Itisnodoubtbecausetodoitisnotasmallundertaking. MoreoveryoucanseethatIneverclaimedtodoitinonestep. Forexample:thefashioninwhichIintroduceditof distinguishing,ofteachingyoutosituatedesireasdistinct comparedtodemand.Andspecificallyatthebeginningofthis yearIintroducedsomethingnew,suggestingittoyoufirstto seeyourresponseoryourreactions,attheysay,whichwerenot lacking,namelytheidentity,asIputit,ofdesireandthelaw.

Itisrathercuriousthatsomethingsoobviousbecauseitisan obviousfactinscribedinthefirststepsofanalyticdoctrine itselfthatsomethingsoevidentcanonlybeintroducedor (20)reintroducedifyouwishwithsuchprecautions.

ThisiswhyIcomebacktodaytothisplanetoshowcertain aspects,indeedimplicationsofit.Desirethenisthelaw.It isnotonlythefactthatinanalyticdoctrine,withtheOedipus complexasitscentralcorpus,itisclearthatwhatconstitutes thesubstanceofthelawisthedesireforthemother,that inverselywhatnormativesdesireitself,whatsituatesitas desire,iswhatiscalledthelawoftheprohibitionofincest. Letustakethingsfromtheangle,throughthewayin,definedby thiswordwhichhasapresentifiedmeaningintheverytimesin whichwelive,erotism. Weknow,thatitsSadeanifnotitssadisticmanifestation,is themostexemplaryone.Desirepresentsitselfasawillto

27.2.63

XII136

jouissancefromwhateverangleitappearsIspokeaboutthe Sadeanangle,Ididnotsaythesadisticone,itisjustastrue forwhatiscalledmasochism. Itisquiteclearthatifsomethingisrevealedbyanalytic experience,itisthateveninperversionwheredesireinsum appearsbypresentingitselfaswhatlaysdownthelaw,namelyas asubversionofthelaw,itisinfactwellandtrulythesupport ofalaw.Ifthereissomethingthatwenowknowaboutthe pervert,itisthatwhatappearsfromtheoutsideassatisfaction withoutrestraintisdefence,iswellandtrulythebringinginto play,intoactionofalawinsofarasitrestrains,it suspends,itstops,preciselyonthepathofthisjouissance.

Thewilltojouissanceinthepervertasineveryoneelse,isa willwhichfails,whichencountersitsownlimit,itsown restraint,intheveryexerciseassuchoftheperversedesire. Inaword,thepervertdoesnotknow,aswasverywellemphasised byoneofthepeoplewhospoketodayatmyrequest,hedoesnot knowattheserviceofwhatjouissancehisactivityisexercised. Itisnotinanycaseattheserviceofhisown. Itisthiswhichallowstheretobesituatedwhatisinvolvedat theleveloftheneurotic.Theneuroticischaracterisedbythe followingandthisiswhyhewastheplaceofpassage,thepath toleadustothisdiscovery,whichisadecisivepathin moralitythatthetruenatureofdesireinsofarasthis decisivepathisnottakenexceptfromthemomentthathere (21)attentionhasbeenfocussedonwhatIamexpresslyinthe processofarticulatingbeforeyoujustnow,theneuroticwas thisexemplarypathinthesensethatheshowsus,forhispart, thatitisbywayofthesearchfor,theestablishmentofthelaw itselfthatheneedstopasstogiveitsstatustohisdesire,to sustainhisdesire.Theneuroticmorethananybodyelse highlightsthisexemplaryfactthathecanonlydesirein accordancewiththelaw.Hecannotforhispartsustain,give itsstatustohisdesireexceptasunsatisfiedforhimselforas impossible.ItremainsthatIamgivingmyselftheeasiertask inspeakingtoyouonlyofthehystericortheobsessional, becausethisistoleavecompletelyoutsidethefieldofthe neurosishatwearestillembarrassedbyalongthewholepathwe havetaken,namelyanxietyneurosisaboutwhichIhopethisyear, asregardswhatwehaveengagedonhere,tomakeyoutakethe necessarystep.Letusnotforgetthatitisfromthisthat Freudbeganandthat,ifdeath,hisdeath,deprivedusof something,ifisnottohaveallowedhimfullythetimetocome backtoit.Wearethereforeplaced,howeverparadoxicalthis mayappeartoyouasregardsthesubjectofanxiety,weare placed,wearebroughtbacktothiscrucialplane,tothis crucialpointthatIwillcallthemythofthemorallaw,namely thatanyhealthypositionofthemorallawissupposedtobe soughtinthesenseofanautonomy'ofthesubject. Theveryaccentofthisresearch,thealwaysgreateremphasising inthecourseofthehistoryoftheseethicaltheories,ofthis

27.2.63

XII137

notionofautonomysufficientlyshowswhatisinvolved,namelya defence,thatwhatitisamatterofswallowing,isthisfirst andobvioustruththatthemorallawisheteronomousthisiswhy IinsistonthefactthatitproceedsfromwhatIamcallingthe realinsofarasitintervenes,asitinterveneswhenit intervenesessentially,asFreudtellsus,byelidingthe subject,bydeterminingbyitsveryinterventionwhatiscalled repressionandwhichonlytakesonitsfullmeaningifwestart fromthissynchronicfunction,insofarasIarticulatedit beforeyoubypointingouttoyou,inafirstapproximation,what effacingtracesmeans.Thisisobviouslyonlyafirst approximationbecauseeveryoneknowspreciselythatthetraces arenoteffacedandthatthisiswhatconstitutestheaporiaof thisaffair,theaporiawhichisnotoneforyou,sinceitis verypreciselyforthisreasonthatthereiselaboratedbefore (22)youthenotionofsignifier,andthatwhatisinvolvedis, nottheeffacingoftraces,butthereturnofthesignifierto thestateoftrace,theabolitionofthispassagefromthetrace tothesignifierwhichisconstitutedbywhatItriedtogetyou tosense,todescribeforyoubyputtingintheparenthesisof thetrace,anunderlining,adam,amarkofthetrace.Thisis whatisdemolishedwiththeinterventionofthereal.Thereal referringthesubjectbacktothetrace,abolishesthesubject alsoatthesametime:forthereisnosubjectexceptthroughthe signifier,throughthispassagetothesignifier:asignifieris thatwhichrepresentsthesubjectforanothersignifier. Tograspthesourceofwhatisinvolvedhere,notinthealways toofacileperspectiveofhistoryandofmemory,because forgettingappearstobeatoomaterial,toonaturalthingforit tobebelievedthatitdoesnothappenallbyitself,eventhough itisthemostmysteriousthingintheworldfromthemomentthat memoryispositedasexisting.ThatiswhyIamtryingto introduceyouintoadimensionwhichistransversal,notyetas synchronicastheother. Letustakethemasochist.Themaso,astheysay,itappears, somewhere,namelythemostenigmatictobeputinsuspensefrom thepointofviewofperversion.He,youaregoingtotellme., forhispartknowswellthatitistheOtherwhoenjoys.This wouldbethenthepervertwhohasbroughthistruthtolight.He wouldbetheexceptiontoeverythingthatIsaidearlierabout thepervertnotknowinghowtoenjoy:ofcourse,itisalwaysthe Other,andthemasoissupposedtoknowit.WellthenIwillno doubtcomebacktoit.AsofnowIwanttoemphasisethatwhat escapesthemasochistandwhatputshiminthesamepositionas alltheperverts,isthathebelievesofcoursethatwhatheis lookingfor,isthejouissanceoftheOtherbutprecisely,since hebelievesit,thatisnotwhatheislookingfor.Whatescapes him,eventhoughitisatangibletruth,reallylyingabout everywhereandwithineverybody'sreach,butforallthatnever seenatitstrueleveloffunctioning,isthatheseeksthe anxietyoftheOther. Whichdoesnotmeanthatheistryingtoannoyhim.Becausefor

27.2.63

XII138

wantofunderstandingwhatismeantbyseekingtheanxietyofthe Othernaturallyitisatitsgross,evenstupidlevelthat thingsarebroughttobyasortofcommonsenseforwantof (23) beingabletoseethetruththereisbehindthat,ofcourse oneabandonsthisshellinwhichsomethingmoreprofoundis contained,whichisformulatedinthewaythatIhavejusttold you.

Thisiswhyitisnecessaryforustoreturntothetheoryof anxiety,ofanxietyassignal,andforustoseethedifference, ormoreexactlytothenewthingthatiscontributedbythe dimensionintroducedbytheteachingofLacanaboutanxietyinso farasnotopposingFreud,butplacedforthemomentintwo columns.WewillsaythatFreudattheendofhiselaboration, speaksaboutanxietyassignalbeingproducedintheego aboutwhat?Aninternaldanger.Itisasignrepresenting somethingforsomeone:theinternaldangerfortheego.The transition,theessentialpassagewhichallowsthisstructure itselftobeusedbygivingititsfullmeaningandthisnotion ofinternal,ofinternaldangertobesuppressed:thereisno internaldangerbecauseasparadoxicallytotheeyesof distractedears,Isay,asparadoxicallywhenIreturnedtoit whenIgaveyoumyseminaronEthics,namelytothetopologyof theEntwurfthereisnointernaldangerbecausethisenvelope oftheneurologicalapparatus,insofarasitisatheoryof thisapparatuswhichisgiven,thisenvelopehasnointerior becauseithasonlyasinglesurface,thatthePsisystemas Aufbau,asstructure,asthatwhichinterposesitselfbetween perceptionandconsciousness,issituatedinanotherdimensionas otherqualocusofthesignifierthathenceforwardanxietyis introducedatfirst,asIdiditbeforetheseminarofthisyear, lastyear,asaspecificmanifestationatthislevelofthe desireoftheOtherassuch.

WhatdoesthedesireoftheOtherrepresentquacomingfromthis angle?Itisherethatthesignaltakesonitsvalue,thesignal that,ifitisproducedinaplacethatonecancalltheego topologically,clearlyconcernssomeoneelse.Theegoisthe locusofthesignal.Butitisnotfortheegothatthesignal isgiven.Itisquiteobviousthatifthislightsupatthe leveloftheego,itisinorderthatthesubjectonecannot callitanythingelseshouldbewarnedaboutsomething.

Heiswarnedaboutthissomethingwhichisadesire,namelya demandwhichdoesnotconcernanyneed,whichdoesnotconcern anythingotherthanmyverybeing,namelywhichputsmein questionletussaythatitcancelsitout:inprincipleitis (24) notaddressedtomeaspresentwhichisaddressedtome, ifyouwish,asexpected,whichisaddressedtomemuchmore againaslostandwhich,inorderthattheOthershouldbeable tolocatehimself(s'yretrouve)requestsmyloss. Thatiswhatanxietyis.ThedesireoftheOtherdoesnot recogniseme,asHegelbelieves,whichrendersthequestionquite easy.Forifherecognisesme,sincehewillneverrecogniseme

27.2.63

XII139

sufficiently,allthatislefttomeistouseviolence. Thereforeheneitherrecognisesmenormiscognisesme.Because thatwouldbetooeasy:Icanalwaysescapefromitbystruggle andviolence.Heputsmeinquestion,interrogatesmeatthe veryrootofmyowndesireaso,ascauseofthisdesireandnot asobject,anditisbecauseheisaimingatthisina relationshipofantecedence,inatemporalrelationship,thatI candonothingtobreakthisgripexceptbyengagingmyselfin it.Itisthistemporaldimensionwhichisanxiety,anditis thistemporaldimensionwhichisthatofanalysis.Itisbecause thedesireoftheanalyststimulatesinmethisdimensionof expectationthatIamcaughtinthissomethingwhichisthe efficacyoftheanalysis.Iwouldreallylikehimtoseemeas suchandsuch,forhimtomakeofmeanobject.Therelationship totheother,theHegelianonehere,isveryconvenient,because thenineffectIhaveallsortsofresistancesagainstthat,and againstthisotherdimensionletussayagoodpartofthe resistanceslips.Onlyforthatitisnecessarytoknowwhat desireisandtoseeitsfunction,notatallsimplyontheplane ofthestruggle,buttherewhereHegelandforgoodreason didnotwanttogolookingforit,ontheplaneoflove. Now,ifyougoandperhapsyouwillgowithme,becauseafter allthemoreIthinkaboutitandthemoreIspeakaboutitand themoreIfindindispensabletoillustratethethingsIam speakingaboutifyoureadthearticlebyLuciaTower,youwill seethisstory:twogentlemen(bonshommes)tospeakasone spokeafterthewar,whenonespokeaboutladies(desbonnes femmes)inacertainmilieuyouwillseetwogentlemenwith whom,whatsherecounts,whatsherecountsisparticularly illustrativeandefficacious,theyaretwolovestories. Whydidthethingsucceed?Inonecasewhenshewastouched herself,itisnotshewhotouchedtheother,itistheotherwho putherontotheplaneofloveandintheothercasetheother didnotgettoitandthatisnotinterpretation,becauseitis writtendownandshesayswhy. (23)Andthisisdesignedtoinduceinussomereflectionsonthe factthat,iftherearesomepeoplewhohavesaidsomething sensibleaboutcountertransference,itisuniquelywomen.

Youwillsaytome:MichaelBalint?Onlyitisratherstriking thathewrotehisarticlewithAlice.EllaSharpe,Margaret Little,BarbaraLow,LuciaTower.Whyisitthatitiswomen who,letusalreadysimplysay,havedaredtospeakaboutthe thinginanoverwhelmingmajorityandthattheyshouldhavesaid interestingthings?Itisaquestionthatwillbecompletely clarifiedifwetakeitfromtheangleIamtalkingabout,namely thefunctionofdesire,thefunctionofdesireinlovein connectionwithwhich,Ithink,youarematureenoughtohearthe followingwhichmoreoverisatruthwhichhasalwaysbeenwe]I known,buttowhichitsplacehasneverbeengiven,itisthatin sofarasdesireintervenesinloveandhasasImightsayan essentialstakeinit,desiredoesnotconcernthebeloved

27.2.63 object.

XII140

Aslongasthisprimarytrutharoundwhichalonecanturnavalid dialecticofloveisputforyouintheranksofanErniedrigunq anaccidentoflovelife,ofanOedipuscomplexwhichgrowspaws, wellthen,youwillunderstandabsolutelynothingaboutwhatis involved,aboutthewaythequestionshouldbeposedasregards whatthedesireoftheanalystmaybe.Itisbecauseitis necessarytostartfromtheexperienceoflove,asIdidinthe yearofmyseminarontransference,tosituatethetopologyin whichthistransferencecanbeinscribed,itisbecauseitis necessarytostartfromtherethattodayIambringingyouback toit.

Butnodoubtmydiscoursewilltakeon,fromthefactthatIam goingtoterminateithere,aninterruptedappearance.WhatI producedthereatthefinaltermasaformula,canbetakenasa pause,achapterheadingorconclusionasyouwish.Afterallit ispermissibleforyoutotakeitasastumblingblockorifyou wishasabanality.ButitisherethatIintendthatweshould takeupthenexttimetherestofourdiscoursetosituateinit exactlytheindicativefunctionofanxietyandwhatitwillallow ussubsequentlytogainaccessto.

6.3.63 Seminar13:

XIII1 Wednesday6March1963

Wearegoingthentocontinueourjourneyofapproachtoanxiety, whichIwouldlikeyoutounderstandisindeedoftheorderofan approach.Ofcourse,youarealreadysufficientlyadvisedby whatIamproducinghere,thatIwanttoteachyouthatanxiety isnotwhatshallowpeoplethink.Neverthelessyouwillsee,in rereadingafterwardsthetextsonthismajorpoint,thatwhatyou havelearnedisfarfrombeingabsentfromthemsimplyitis maskedandveiledatthesametime,itismaskedbyformulae whicharestylesperhapsthataretoocautiousundertheir coating,asonemightsay,theircarapace.Thebestauthors allowtheretoappearwhatIalreadyputtheaccentonforyou, thatitisnotobjektlos,thatitisnotwithoutanobject. ThesentencewhichinHemmung,SymptomundAngstprecedes,in AppendixB"ErgnzungzurAngst","Supplementaryremarkson anxiety",theverysentencewhichprecedesthereferencethat Freudmakes,followinginthisthetraditionofindtermination, totheObjektlosiqkeitofanxietyandafterallIwouldonly needtoremindyouofthebulkofthearticleitselftosaythat thischaracteristicofbeingwithoutanobjectcannotberetained butthesentencejustbefore,Freudsaysanxietyis"Die Angst....istAngstvoretwas",itisessentiallyanxietyabout something. Canwebesatisfiedwiththisformula?Ofcoursenot.Ithink thatweoughttogomuchfurther,saymoreaboutthisstructure, thisstructurewhichalready,asyousee,opposesitbycontrast, ifitisafactthatanxiety,beingtherelationshipwiththis objectthatIapproachedwhichisthecauseofdesire,isopposed bycontrastwiththisvor,howhasthisthingwhichIplacedfor youpromotingdesirebehinddesire,goneinfrontofit,thisis perhapsoneofthesourcesoftheproblem.

Inanycase,letusunderlineclearlythatwefindourselvesin thetraditionbeforewhatiscalledanalmostliterarytheme,a commonplace,theonebetweenfearandanxietywhichallthe authors,referringtothesemanticposition,opposeatleastat thebeginning,evenifsubsequentlytheytendtobringthem togetherortoreducethemtooneanotherwhichisnotthecase amongthebestofthem.Atthebeginningundoubtedlyonetends toemphasisethisoppositionbetweenfearandanxietyby,letus say,differentiatingtheirpositionwithrespecttotheobject.

6.3.63

XIII2

Anditisreallytangible,paradoxical,significantoftheerror (2) thuscommittedthatoneisledtostressthatfear,forits part,hasone,hasanobject. Breakingthroughacertaincharacteristic,thereisherean objectivedanger,Gefahr,dangeite,Gef"hrdung,adanger situation,theentryofthesubjectintodanger,whichwould afteralldeserveapause:whatisadanger?Wearegoingtobe toldthatfearisbyitsnature,adequateto,incorrespondence with,entsprechendtotheobjectfromwhichthedangercomes. ThearticleofGoldsteinontheproblemofanxietyonwhichwe willpause,isinthisregardverysignificantofthissortof slipping,ofseduction,ofcapture,asonemightsay,ofthepen ofanauthorwhointhismatterwasabletogathertogether,as youwillsee,theessentialandverypreciouscharacteristicsof oursubjecttheseductionofthepenbyathesis,insistingin afashionwhichonecansayisinnowayrequiredbyitssubject inthisrespectbecauseitisanxietythatisinvolved insisting,asonemightsayontheorientedcharacteroffear,as iffearwerealreadymadeupcompletelyofthelocatingofthe object,oftheorganisationoftheresponse,oftheopposition, oftheEntgegendstehenbetweenwhatisUmweltandeverything whichinthesubjecthastofaceuptoit. Itisnotenoughtoevokethefirstreferencesummonedtomy memorybysuchpropositions:IrememberedwhatIbelieveIhad alreadyunderlinedforyouinalittle,onecannotcallthata shortstory,notation,impressionofChekovwhichwastranslated usingtheterm"frights(frayeurs)".Itrieditinvaintoinform myselfofthetitleofthisshortstoryinRussianbecause, inexplicably,noneofmyRussianspeakinglistenerswereableto findformethisnotation,whichisperfectlywelllocatedwith itsyearintheFrenchtranslation,evenwiththehelpofthis date,intheeditionsofChekovwhichareneverthelessingeneral producedchronologically.Itispeculiar,itisupsettingandI cannotsaythatIamnotdisappointedaboutitinthisnotation underthetermof"Frights",thefrightsthatChekovhimself experiencedIalreadypointedouttoyouonce,Ibelieve,what wasinvolvedoneday,withayoungboywhowasdrivinghis sledgehisdroschka,Ibelieveitiscalled,somethinglike thatheisgoingalongaplane,and,inthedistance,at sunset,thesunalreadysettingonthehorizon,heseesina churchtowerwhichappears,atarangethathecouldreasonably seeitsdetails,heseesflickeringthroughaskylightonavery (3) highstoreyofthetowertowhichheknows,becauseheknows theplace,onecannotgainentryinanyway,amysterious inexplicableflamewhichnothingallowshimtoattributetoany effectofreflectionthereishereobviouslythemappingoutof something:hemakesashortreckoningofwhatcanorcannot accountfortheexistenceofthisphenomenonand,havingreally excludedeverykindofknowncause,"heisallofasuddengripped bysomethingwhichIbelieveinreadingthistextcaninnoway becalledanxiety,heisgrippedbywhathehimselfcalls moreover,forwantobviouslyofbeingabletohaveatpresentthe

6.3.63

XIII3

Russianterm,whichwastranslatedbyfrightsIbelievethisis whatcorrespondsbesttothetextitisoftheordernotof anxiety,butoffear(peur)andwhatheisafraidof,isnot anythingthatthreatenshim,itissomethingwhichhasprecisely thischaracterofreferringtotheunknowninwhatismanifesting itselftohim.Theexamplesthathegivessubsequentlyunder thissameheading,namelythefactthatoneday,heseespassing alongthehorizon,ontherailway,atypeofwagonwhichgives himtheimpression,tohearhisdescription,ofaphantomwagon, becausenothingispullingit,nothingexplainsitsmovement:a wagonpassesatfullspeedalongthecurveoftherailwaywhich isthereatthatmomentbeforehim.Wherehasitcomefrom? Whereisitgoing?Thissortofapparitiontornawayin appearancefromanydeterminismthatcanbelocated,hereagain issomethingthatthrowshimforamomentintodisorder,a veritablepanic,whichiswellandtrulyoftheorderoffear: thereisnomenacethereeitherandthecharacteristicofanxiety isundoubtedlylackinginthissensethatthesubjectisneither seized,norinvolvedinthisinnermostpartofhimselfwhichis theaspectbywhichanxietyischaracterised,onwhichIam insisting. Thethirdexample,istheexampleofathoroughbreddogwhich nothingallowshim,giventhefactthathehascompletelymapped outeverythingthatsurroundshim,whosepresencenothingallows himtoexplainatthistime,inthisplacehebeginstofoment themysteryofFaust'sdog,thinkshecanseetheformunder whichthedevilisapproachinghimitiswellandtrulyfromthe sideoftheunknownthatfeardevelopshere,anditisnotofan object,itisnotofthedogwhoistherethatheisafraid,it isofsomethingelse,itisbehindthedog.

Ontheotherhand,itisclearthatwhatisinsistedon,thatthe effectsoffearhaveinawayacharacterofadequation,in (4)principle,namelyofunleashingaflightreaction,is sufficientlycompromisedbywhatonemustindeedputtheaccent on,thatinmanycasesparalysingfearmanifestsitselfinan inhibiting,evenfullydisorganisingaction,indeedcanthrowthe subjectintoadisarraywhichisleastadaptedtotheresponse, leastadaptedtothefinality,whichmightbesupposedtobethe adequatesubjectiveform.

Itiselsewhere,therefore,thattheremustbesoughtthe distinction,thereferencebywhichanxietyistobe distinguishedfromit.Andyoucanwellimaginethatitisnot simplyaparadox,adesiretoplaywithaninversion,ifIput forwardherebeforeyouthatanxietyisnotwithoutobject,a formulawhoseformundoubtedlydesignatesthissubjective relationshipwhichisthatofahaltingplace,astartingplace fromwhichIwanttoadvancefurthertodaybecauseofcoursethe termobjecthasbeenlongpreparedherebymewithanaccent whichisdistinguishedfromwhattheauthorshaveuptonow definedasobjectwhentheyspeakabouttheobjectoffear. ItiseasytogiveimmediatelyitssupporttothisvorEtwasof

6.3.63

XIII4

Freud,ofcourse,becauseFreudarticulatesitinthearticleand inallsortsofways:itiswhathecallstheinternaldanger, GefahrorGefhrdung,theonewhichcomesfromwithin.AsItold you:itisamatterofnotcontentingyourselfwiththisnotion ofdanger,GefahrorGefhrdung.Because,ifIalreadysignalled earlieritsproblematiccharacterwhenanexternaldangeris involvedinotherwords,whatwarnsthesubjectthatitisa dangerifnotthefearitself,ifnottheanxietybutthesense thattheterminternaldangercanhaveistoolinkedtothe functionofawholestructurethatmustbepreserved,ofawhole orderofwhatwecalldefence,forusnottoseethatinthevery termdefencethefunctionofdangerisitselfimplied,butisnot forallthatclarified.

Letustrythereforetofollowthestructureinamorestepby stepwayandtodesignateclearlywhereweintendtofix,to locatethistraitofsignalonwhichindeedFreuddweltasbeing theonewhichisthemostpropertoindicatetous,tous analysts,theusagethatwecanmakeofthefunctionofanxiety. ThisiswhatIaimatreachingalongthepaththatIamtryingto leadyou.

Onlythenotionofthereal,intheopaquefunctionwhichisthe onefromwhichyouknowIbegininordertoopposetoitthatof thesignifier,allowsustoorientateourselvesandtosay alreadythatthisEtwasbeforewhichanxietyoperatesasa (5)signal,issomethingwhichisletussayforman"necessary" inquotationmarksanirreducibleaspectofthisreal.Itis inthissensethatIriskedgivingyoutheformulathatamongall thesignals,anxietyistheonewhichdoesnotdeceive.

AnxietythenisthesignaloftherealandasItoldyouof anirreduciblemodeunderwhichthisrealpresentsitselfin experience,thisisjustnow,atthepointthatweareat,the guide,theguidingthreadthatIwouldaskyoutoholdontoto seewhereitleadsus.

Thisrealanditsplace,isexactlywhatwiththesupportofthe sign,ofthebartherecanbeinscribedtheoperationwhich, arithmetically,iscalleddivision.Ialreadytaughtyouto situatetheprocessofsubjectificationinsofarasitisatthe locusofcheOther,undertheprimaryspeciesofthesignifier, thatthesubjecthastobeconstitutedatthelocusoftheOther anduponthegivenofthistreasuryofthesignifieralready constitutedintheOtherandjustasessentialforanyadventof humanlifeaseverythingthatwecanconceiveofinthenatural Umwelt.Itiswithrespecttothetreasuryofthe signifierwhichalreadyawaitshim,constitutes thedeviationwherehehastosituatehimself, thatthesubject,thesubjectatthismythical levelwhichdoesnotyetexist,whichonlyexists startingfromthesignifier,whichispriortoit, whichisconstitutivewithrespecttoit,thatthe subject carries out this first interrogative operation: in 0,if youwish,howmanytimesS?

6.3.63

XIII5

And the operation being posited here in a certain fashion which is here in the 0 marked by this interrogation appears here, the difference between this response 0 and the given 0, something that is the remainder, the irreducible of the subject, it is o. o is what remains irreducible in this total operation of the advent of the subject to the locus of the Other, and it is from thisthatitisgoingtotakeonitsfunction. TherelationshipofthisototheS,theoinsofarasitis preciselythatwhichrepresentstheSinarealandirreducible fashion,thisooverS,o/S,thisiswhatcompletesthe operationofdivision,thatwhichineffectsince0,asonemight say,issomethingwhichhasnocommondenominator,isoutsidethe commondenominatorbetweentheoandtheS.Ifwewish conventionallytocompletetheoperationallthesame,weputas numeratortheremainder,o,asdenominatorthedivisor,theS.$ isequivalenttoooverS,o/S. (6)Thisremainder,therefore,insofarasitistheend (chute),asonemightsay,ofthesubjectiveoperation,this remainder,werecogniseinitherestructurally,inananalogy fromcalculation,thelostobjectthisiswhatwehavetodeal with,ontheonehandindesire,ontheotherhandinanxiety. Wehavetodealwithitinanxiety,logically,asonemightsay, beforethemomentthatwehavetodealwithitindesire.

Andifyouwish,toconnotethethreestagesofthisoperation, wewillsaythatherethereisanXwhichwecanonlyname retroactively,andwhichisproperlyspeakingtheapproachofthe Other,theessentiallineofsightwherethesubjecthastopose himselfandwhosenameIwillgiveyouafterwards.Wehavehere thelevelofanxietyinsofarasitisconstitutiveofthe apparitionofthefunctionoanditisatthethirdtermthat thereappearsthe^assubjectofdesire. Toillustratenow,tobringalivethisnodoubtextreme abstractionthatIhavejustarticulated,Iamgoingtoleadyou totheobviousnessoftheimageandthisofcourseallthemore legitimatelyinthatitisanimagethatisinvolved,thatthis irreducibleofoisoftheorderoftheimage.

Hewhopossessedtheobjectofdesireandofthelaw,hewhohad enjoyedhismother,Oedipustogivehimhisname,takesthis furtherstep,heseeswhathehasdone.Youknowwhathappens then.Howchoosetheword,howcanonesaywhatisoftheorder oftheunsayableandwhoseimageneverthelessIwanttomake emergeforyou?Thefactthatheseeswhathehasdonehasasa consequencethatheseesthisisthewordbeforewhichI stumblethemomentafterwardshisowneyesswollenwiththeir vitreoushumoursontheground,aconfusedpileoffilthsince howcanweputit?becausesincehehadtornhiseyesfrom theirsocketshehadquiteobviouslylosthissight.And neverthelessitisnotthathedoesnotseethem,seethemas such,ascauseobjectfinallyunveiledofthefinal,the ultimate,nolongerguilty,butbeyondthelimits,concupiscence,

6.3.63 thatofhavingwantedtoknow.

XIII6

Thetraditionevensaysthatitisstartingfromthatmomentthat hereallybecomesaseer.AtColonusheseesasfarasitis possibletoseeandsofaraheadthatheseesthefuturedestiny ofAthens. Whatisthemomentofanxiety?Isitwhatmakespossiblethis gesturethroughwhichOedipuscantearouthiseyes,makethis sacrificeofthem,thisoffering,thisransomofblindnessin whichhisdestinyisaccomplished?Isthatwhatanxietyis,the possibility,letussay,thatmanhasofmutilatinghimself?No. (7)Itisproperlythatwhichthroughthisimage,Iamstriving todesignateforyou:itisthatanimpossiblesightthreatens youofyourowneyesontheground. HereIbelieveisthesurestkeythatyoucanalwaysrediscover underwhateverstyleofapproachthephenomenonofanxiety presentsitselfforyou.

Andthen,howeverexpressive,howeverprovocativemaybe,asone mightsay,thenarrownessofthelocalitythatIdesignatefor youasbeingthatwhichiscircumscribedbyanxiety,youshould noticethatthisimageisfoundthereasbeyondthelimits,not becauseofsomepreciousnessinmychoice,itisnotaneccentric choiceitis,onceIhavedesignateditforyou,wellandtruly frequenttoencounterit.Gotothefirstexhibitioncurrently opentothepublic,attheMuseedesArtsDecoratifsandyouwill seetwoZurbarans,onefromMontpellier,theotherfromsomewhere elsewhichrepresentforyouIbelieve,LucyandAgathaeachone withtheireyesonaplate,thematchoftheirbreasts.Martyrs, letussay,whichmeanswitnessesofwhatisseenheremoreover, thatitisnot,asaItoldyou,whatispossible,namelythe factthattheseeyesbeingdenucleated,thesebreastsbeingtorn off,whichisanxiety.Becauseintruth,somethingwhichalso deservestobenoticed,theseChristianimagesarenotespecially badlytolerated,despitethefactthatsomepeopleforreasons whicharenotalwaysthebestareabitfastidiousaboutthem. Stendhal,speakingaboutSanStefanoilRotondoinRomefinds thattheseimageswhichareonthewallsaredisgusting. Undoubtedlyintheplacehenamestheyareratherlackinginart sothatoneisintroduced,Imustsay,inamorelivelyfashion totheirsignification.

ButthesecharmingpersonsthatZurbaranpresentstous,by presentingtheseobjectsonaplate,presentuswithnothing otherthansomethingthatcouldbeonoccasionandwedonot depriveourselvesofittheobjectofourdesire:innowaydo theseimagesintroduceus,Ithink,forthemajorityofus,to theorderofanxiety. Forthis,itwouldbenecessaryforhimtobemorepersonally concerned,forhimtobeasadistoramasochist,forexample. Onceatruemasochist,atruesadistisinvolved,whichdoesnot meansomeonewhocanhavephantasiesthatwepinpointassadistic

6.3.63

XIII7

ormasochistic,providedtheyreproducethefundamentalposition (8)ofthesadistorthemasochist,thetruesadist,insofaras wecanlocate,coordinate,constructhisessentialcondition,the truemasochist,insofaraswefindourselves,bysuccessive mappingout,elimination,requiredtopushfurthertheplanof hispositionthanwhatisgiventousbyothersasErlebnis,an Erlebnisitselfmorehomogeneous,theErlebnisoftheneurotic, butanErlebniswhichisonlyareference,adependence,the imageofsomethingbeyond,whichconstitutesthespecificityof theperversepositionandwithregardtowhichtheneurotictakes inawayhisreferenceandhissupportforendstowhichwewill return.

Letustrythereforetosaywhatwecanpresumeaboutwhatthis sadisticormasochisticpositionis,whattheimagesofLucyand Agathamayreallyinterest:thekeytoitisanxiety.Butitis necessarytoseekout,knowwhy.ThemasochistItoldyouthe otherday,thelasttimewhatishisposition?Whatmaskshis phantasyfromhim?TobetheobjectofajouissanceoftheOther whichishisownwilltojouissanceforafterall,themasochist doesnotnecessarily,asahumourousapologuealreadyquotedhere remindsyou,meethispartner.Whatdoesthispositionofobject mask,ifitisnottorejoinhimself,toposithimselfinthe functionofhumanrag,ofthispoorscrapseparatedfromthebody whichispresentedtoushere.AndthisiswhyItellyouthat theaimofthejouissanceoftheOtherisaphantasticalaim. Whatissought,isintheOther,theresponsetothisessential collapseofthesubjectintohisfinalmiserywhichisanxiety. WhereisthisOtherthatisinvolved?Hereindeedisthereason whytherewasproducedinthiscirclethethirdtermalways presentinperversejouissance:theprofoundambiguityinwhich thereissituatedanapparentlydualrelationshipisrediscovered here.BecausemoreoverIhavetomakeyousensewhereIintend toindicatethisanxietytoyou.Wecouldsayandthethingis sufficientlyhighlightedbyallsortsoffeaturesofhistory thatthisanxietywhichistheblindaimofthemasochistfor hisphantasymasksitfromhimisnonethelessreallywhatwe couldcalltheanxietyofGod.

DoIneedtoappealtothemostfundamentalChristianmythto givesubstancetoeverythingthatIamadvancinghere,namely thatifthewholeChristianadventureisnotengagedinthis central, inaugural,attempt,incarnatedbyamanwhoseevery wordistobereheardagainasthoseofsomeonewhopushedthings totheirfinaltermofananxietywhichonlyfindsitsveritable cycleatthelevelofhimforwhomthesacrificeissetup, namelyatthelevelofthefather. Godhasnosoul.Thatisquiteobvious.Notheologianhasever dreamtofattributingonetohim.Neverthelessthetotal, radicalchangeofperspectiveoftherelationshiptoGodbegan withadrama,apassioninwhichsomeonemadehimselfthesoulof God.Sinceitisbecausetheplaceofthesoulisalsosituated atthislevelooftheresidueofthefallenobjectthatis involved,thatisessentiallyinvolved,thatthereisnoliving

6.3.63

XIII8

conceptionofthesoul,withthewholedramaticcortegeinwhich thisnotionappearsandfunctionsinourculturaldomain,unless itisaccompaniedpreciselyinthemostessentialfashionbythis imageofthefall. EverythingthatKierkegaardarticulatesisonlyareferenceto thesegreatstructuralreferencepoints.NowthenobservethatI beganwiththemasochist.Itwasthemoredifficultbut asamatteroffactitwastheonewhichavoidedconfusions. Becauseonecanunderstandbetterwhatasadistisandthesnare involvedhereinmakingofitonlythereversal,theotherside, theinvertedpositionofthemasochist,unlessoneproceeds whichiswhatisusuallydoneintheoppositesense. Inthesadist,anxietyislesshidden.Itisevensolittleso thatitcomestotheforeinthephantasy,which,ifoneanalyses itmakesoftheanxietyofthevictimanaltogetherrequired condition.Onlythisistheverythingwhichoughttomakeus suspicious.WhatthesadistseeksintheOtherbecauseitis quiteclearthatforhimtheOtherexistsanditisnotbecause hetakeshimasobjectthatweoughttosaythatthereissome relationshiporotherthatwecouldcallimmatureoragain,asit isput,pregenital,theOtherisabsolutelyessentialandthis indeediswhatIwantedtoarticulatewhenIgaveyoumyseminar onEthicsbybringingtogetherSadeandKant,theessential puttingintoquestionoftheOtherwhichgoessofarasto simulate,andnotbychance,therequirementsofthemorallaw, whichareindeedtheretoshowusthatthereferencetotheOther assuchformspartofhisaimwhatishesearchinqforthere? Itisherethatthetexts,thetextsthatwecanholdonto,I (10)meanthosewhichgivesomeholdonanadequatecritique, takeontheirvalue,ofcourse,avaluesignaledbythe strangenessofsomemoments,ofsomedetourswhichinaway detachthemselves,explodewithrespecttothelinethatisbeing followed.IwillleaveyoutosearchinJuliette,eveninthe Onehundredandtwentydays,thesefewpassageswherethe characters,completelyoccupiedinslakingonthesechosen victimstheirgreedfortorments,enterintothisbizarre, singularandcurioustrance,indicated,Irepeat,onseveral occasionsinthetextofSade,whichisexpressedinthese strangewords,ineffectthatitisnecessaryformeto articulatehere:"Ihad,"criesthetormentor,"Ihadtheskinof thecunt". Thisisnotafeaturewhichisobviousalongthetrackofthe imaginable,andtheprivilegedcharacter,themomentof enthusiasm,thecharacterofsupremetrophybrandishedatthe highpoincofthechapterissomethingwhich,Ibelieve,is sufficientlyindicativeofthefollowing:itisthatsomethingis soughtwhichisinawaythereverse(l'envers)ofthesubject, whichtakesonhereitssignificationfromthisfeatureofthe gloveturnedinsideoutwhichunderlinesthefeminineessenceof thevictim.Itisthepassagetotheoutsideofwhatismost hiddenthatisinvolvedbutletusobserveatthesametimethat

6.3.63

XIII9

this moment is in a way indicated in the text itself as being totally impenetrated by the subject, allowing there precisely tobemaskedherethetraitofhisownanxiety. Inaword,ifthereissomethingforthatmatterwhichevokeshow littlelightwecanthrowonthetrulysadisticrelationship, thattheformofexplanatorytextsturnasidefromthephantasy, ifthereissomethingthattheysuggesttous,itisinawaythe instrumentalcharactertowhichthefunctionoftheagentis reduced.Thatwhichinawayishidden,exceptinaflash,the aimofhisaction,istheworkaspectofhisoperation.He alsohasarelationshipwithGod,thisiswhatisexposed everywhereinSade'stext.Hecannottakeastepforwardwithout thisreferencetothesupremelywickedbeinganditisjustas clearforhimasfortheonewhoisspeakingthatitisGodthat isinvolved.

Forhisparthegoestoallsortsofexhaustingtrouble,evento theextentofmissinghisgoal,torealisewhich,thankGod,it hastobesaid,Sadesparesushavingtoreconstruct,forhe articulatesitassuchtorealisethejouissanceofGod. IthinkIhaveshownyouherethegameofoccultationthrough whichanxietyandobject,intheoneandintheother,are (11)broughttotheforefront,oneattheexpenseoftheother term,buthowalsointhestructuresthereisdesignated,there isdeclaredtheradicallinkbetweenanxietyandthisobjectin sofarasitfalls.Inthatverywayitsessentialfunctionis approached,itsdecisivefunctionasremainderofthesubject, thesubjectasareal.Undoubtedlythisinvitesustolook again,toplaceagreateraccentontherealityoftheseobjects. Andinmovingontothisfollowingchapter,Icannotfailto remarkthedegreetowhichthisrealstatusofobjects,already neverthelesslocatedforus,hasbeenlefttooneside,been badlydefinedbypeoplewhowouldneverthelessliketoconsider themselvesasthebiologisingreferencepointsandbearingsof psychoanalysisforyou.

Isitnottheoccasiontonoticeacertainnumberofoutstanding featureswhichIwouldwish,asbestIcanandpushingmyplough infrontofme,tointroduceyouto.Becausethebreasts,since wehavethemthereforexampleonSaintAgatha'splate,isitnot anopportunitytoreflect,sinceithasbeensaidalreadya longtimeagoanxietyappearsinseparationbutthenwesee itclearlyiftheyareseparableobjects,theyarenot separablebychancelikethelegofagrasshopper,theyare separablebecausetheyalreadyhave,asImightsay,very sufficiently,anatomicallyacertainstuckoncharacter,theyare hungthere.Thisveryparticularcharacterofcertainanatomical partscompletelyspecifiesasectoroftheanimalscale,theone thatonecallsprecisely,notwithoutreason,itisevenrather curiousthatthisquiteessential,properlyspeakingsignifying characterofthistraithasbeennoticedbecauseafterallit seemsthattherearemorestructuralthingsthanthemammaryto designateacertainanimalgroupingwhichhasmanyothertraits

6.3.63 ofhomogeneitythroughwhichitcouldbedesignated.

XIII10

Thistraitwasnodoubtchosen,anditwasnotamistake.Butit isindeedoneofthecaseswhereoneseesthefactthatthe objectifyingspiritisitselfnotuninfluencedbythepregnance ofpsychologicalfunctions,Iwouldsay,tomakemyself understoodbythosewhohavenotyetunderstood,acertain featureofpregnancewhichisnotsimplysignificant,which inducesinuscertainsignificationsinwhichweareverymuch engaged. Viviparousoviparous:adivisionreallymadetoconfuseus. Becauseallanimalsareviviparousbecausetheygenerateeggsin whichthereisalivingbeingandallanimalsareoviparous becausethereisnoviviparwhichwasnotviviparedinsidean egg.

Butwhynotreallygiveallitsimportancetothisfactwhichis reallycompletelyanalogoustothisbreastwhichIearlierspoke toyouabout,thatfortheeggswhichhaveacertaintimeof intrauterinelife,thereisthiselement,irreducibletothe divisionoftheegginitself,whichiscalledtheplacenta,that thereisherealsosomethingstuckonandthatinaworditis notsomuchthechildwhopumpsmilkfromthemotherasthe breast,justasitistheexistenceoftheplacentawhichgives tothepositionofthechildinsidethebodyofthemotherits characteristicssometimesmanifestedonapathologicalplane ofparasiticnesting.YouseewhereIintendtoputthe emphasis:ontheprivilegeatacertainlevelofelementsthatwe couldqualityasamboceptors. Onwhatsideisthisbreast?Onthesideoftheonewhosucksor onthesideoftheonewhoissucked?AndafterallIamdoing nothinghereotherthanremindingyouofsomethingthat effectivelyanalytictheorywasledto,namelytospeak,Iwould notsayindifferently,butwithambiguityincertainsentences, ofthebreastorofthemother,underliningofcoursethatitis notthesamething.Buthaseverythingbeensaidwhenthebreast isqualifiedasapartialobject? WhenIsayamboceptor,Iamunderliningthatitisasnecessary toarticulatetherelationshipofthematernalsubjecttothe breastasthatofthesucklingtothebreast.Thecutdoesnot happeninthesameplaceforthetwotherearetwocutsso distantthattheyevenleavedifferentresidues(dechets)forthe two.Becausethecuttingofthecordforthechildleaves separatedfromhimdroppings(chutes)whicharecalledthe envelopes.Thisishomogeneouswithhimselfandincontinuity withhisectodermandhisendoderm. Theplacentaisnotparticularlyinvolvedintheaffair.Forthe mother,thecutisplacedatthelevelofthedroppingofthe placenta,thatiseventhereasonwhythesearecalleddes caduquesandthedecay(caducite)ofthisobjectoisherewhat constitutesitsfunction.

6.3.63

XIII

11

Wellthen,allofthisisnotmeanttomakeyourevise immediatelysomeoftherelationsdeduced,imprudentlydeduced fromahastysketchingofwhatIamcallingthelineof separationwherethereisproducedthedropping,theniederfalien typicaloftheapproachofanowhichisneverthelessmore essentialtothesubjectthananyotherpartofhimself. (13) But for the moment to make you steer straight towards what is essential, namely for you to perceive where this questioning leads,tothelevelofcastration. Forwithcastrationalsowearedealingwithanorgan,beforewe gettothecastrationthreat,namelywhatIhavecalledthe possiblegesture,couldwenot,analogouslytotheimagethatI producedtodaybeforeyou,seewhetherwedonothavethe indicationthatanxietyistobeplacedelsewhere?

Becauseaphallus,becausepeoplearealwaysgarglingonabout biology,approachingitinanunbelievablyfrivolousway,a phallusisnotlimitedtothefieldofmammals.Thereareawhole lotofinsects,allrevoltingindifferentways,fromtheblack beetletothecockroach,whichhavewhat?Stings(desdards). Thestinggoesalongwayineffectintheanimal.Thestingis aninstrument,andinmanycasesIdonotwanttogiveyoua courseincomparativeanatomytoday,Iwouldaskyoutoreferto theauthors,ifnecessaryIwillindicatethemtoyouthesting isaninstrument:itisusedforhookingon.Weknownothing abouttheamorousenjoymentsoftheblackbeetleorthe cockroach.Nothingindicateshoweverthattheyaredeprivedof it.Itisevenratherprobablethatjouissanceandsexualunion arealwaysintheclosestpossiblerelationship. Andwhatdoesitmatter!Ourexperienceasmenandtheexperience thatwecanpresumetobethoseofmammalswhomostresembleus conjointhelocusofthejouissanceandtheinstrument,the sting. Whilewetakethethingasbeingselfexplanatory,nothing indicatesthatevenwherethecopulatoryinstrumentisastingor aclaw,anobjectforhookingon,inanycaseneithera tumescentnordetumescentobject,jouissanceislinkedtothe functionoftheobject. Thatjouissance,orgasminourcase,tolimitourselvesto ourselves,coincideswithasImightsaytheputtingoutof action,theputtingoutofoperationoftheinstrumentby detumescence,issomethingthataltogetherdeservesthatwe shouldnotholdittobesomething,asImightsay,whichisas Goldsteinexpressesit,partoftheWesenheit,anessentialpart oftheorganism. (14) Thiscoincidenceofapproachhasnothingrigorousaboutit onceonebeginstothinkaboutitandthenitisnot,asImight say,inthenatureofhumanthings.Infactwhatdoweseein Freud'sfirstintuitionaboutacertainsourceofanxiety?

6.3.63

XIII

12

Coitusinterruptus.Itispreciselythecaseinwhichbythe verynatureoftheoperationsbeingcarriedouttheinstrumentis revealedinitssuddenlyfailedfunctionofbeingan accompanimenttoorgasm,insofarasorgasmissupposedto signifyacommonsatisfaction.

Ileavethisquestioninsuspense.Iamsayingsimplythat anxietyisputforwardbyFreudinitsessentialfunctionthere preciselywheretheaccompanimentoftheorgasmicbuildupwith whatiscalledtheexerciseoftheinstrumentisprecisely disjointed.Thesubjectcanreachejaculation,butitisan ejaculationoutsideandtheanxietyispreciselyprovokedby thisfactwhichishighlighted,whatIcalledearliertheputting outofactionoftheapparatus,oftheinstrumentofjouissance. Subjectivity,ifyouwish,isfocussedonthecollapseofthe phallus.Thiscollapseofthephallus,existsinanycaseina normallycompletedorgasm.Itispreciselytothisthatour attentionshouldbedirectedtohighlightoneofthedimensions ofcastration. Howiscopulationbetweenmanandwomanexperienced,thisiswhat allowsthefunctionofcastration,namelythefactthatthe phallusismoresignificantinhumanexperiencebyitscollapse, byitspossibilityofbeingafallenobject,thanbyits presence,thisiswhatdesignatesthepossibilityoftheplaceof castrationinthehistoryofdesire.

Itisessentialtohighlightthis.BecausewhatdidIendwith thelasttime,ifnotbytellingyou:aslongasdesireisnot structurallysituated,isnotdistinguishedfromthedimensionof jouissance,aslongasthequestionisnotthatofknowingwhat istherelationship,andwhetherthereisarelationshipforeach partnerbetweendesirespecificallythedesireoftheOther andjouissance,thewholeaffairiscondemnedtoobscurity.

ThankstoFreudwehavetheplaneofcleavage.Thatis miraculousinitself.Intheultraprecociousperceptionthat Freudhadofitsessentialcharacter,wehavethefunctionof castrationasintimatelylinkedtothetraitsofthedecayed (caduc)object,ofcaducityascharacterisingitessentially.It (15)isonlystartingfromthisdecayedobjectthatwecansee whatismeantbyspeakingaboutpartialobject.InfactIwill tellyourightaway:thepartialobject,isaninventionofthe neurotic,itisaphantasy.Itishewhomakesapartialobject ofit.Asregardstheorgasmanditsessentialrelationshipwith thefunctionthatwedefineasthefallofthemostrealofthe subject,haveyounothadthosewhohaveheretheexperienceof beinganalyststhetestimonyofitmorethanonce?Howoften haveyoubeentoldthatasubjecthad,Iamnotsayinghisfirst, butoneofhisfirstorgasmswhenhehadtohandupinagreat hurrythecopyofacompositionorofadrawingthathehadto finishquicklyandwheretherewascollectedwhat?Hiswork, atthemomentwhenitwasabsolutelyexpectedthatsomething wouldbetornfromhim.Thecollectionofthecopies:atthat momentheejaculates.Heejaculatesatthehighpointofanxiety

6.3.63 ofcourse.

XIII13

Whenpeoplespeaktousaboutthisfamouseroticisationof anxiety,isitnotfirstofallnecessarytoknowwhat relationanxietyalreadyhaswithEros?Whattherespective aspectsofthisanxietyarefromthesideofjouissanceandfrom thesideofdesire,iswhatwewilltrytodisengagethenext time.

13.3.63 Seminar14:Wednesday13March1963

XIV1

\j *

Severalofyouwerekindenoughtorespondtomycomplaintthe lasttimeofnotyethavingbeenabletofindtheRussianterm whichcorrespondedtothispiecebyChekovwhichIlearnedabout IamsayingthisinpassingthroughMrKaufmannIwillcome backtoitlater.ItisMrKaufmannhimselfwho,eventhoughhe isnotaRussianspeaker,broughtmetodaytheexacttextwhichI askedSmirnoffforexampleasaRussianspeakertocommenton rapidly. ImeanindeedIscarcelydaretoarticulatethesesoundsI donotknowthephonologytosavwhatisinvolvedinthetitle, CTcflXWwhichisthepluralof thewhichCTPhXBgives thewordsthatconcerndread,fear,anxiety,terror,anguish andposesforusverydifficultproblemsoftranslation.

ItisalittlebitIamthinkingaboutitasanimprovisation, Ithoughtofitjustnowlikewhatwasraisedinconnection withtheproblemofcolours,whoseconnotationsurelydoesnot overlapfromonetonguetoanother.ThedifficultyIalready signaleditforyouthatwehaveingraspingthetermwhich inRussianwouldcorrespondpreciselytoanxietybecausethis iswhereourtroublesbeginshowsitclearly.

Inanycase,ifIcorrectlyunderstood,fromthedebatesamong theRussianspeakersherethatthiswordgaveriseto,itappears thatinonewaywhatIadvancedthelasttimeherewascorrect, namelythatChekovhadnotintendedbythistospeakabout anxiety.

Atthispoint,IcomebacktowhatwantedtorendertoKaufmann, itisthenveryexactlythefollowing:Iusedthisexamplethe lasttimetoclarify,asonemightsay,inalateralfashion,the thingwhosereversalIwas'tryingtooperatebeforeyou,namely tointroducethequestion,Isaidthatitwouldbejustas legitimatetosayinfactthatfearhasnoobjectand,asI wasgoingtoannounceinanycase,asIalreadyhaddone previously,thatanxiety,foritspart,wasnotwithoutan object,thathadacertaininterestforme.Butitisobvious

13.3.63

XIV2

thatthisabsolutelydoesnotexhaustthequestionofwhatare thesefearsorfrightsordreadsorwhateverelse,whichare (2) designatedintheexamplesofChekov. Now,sinceIdonotthinkIammisrepresentinghimMr Kaufmannistryingtoarticulatesomethingquitepreciseand focussedpreciselyontheseChekovianfrights,Ithinkitis importanttounderlinethatIonlymadealateralusageofitand onethatwasdependentontheonethatwillbebroughtforwardby himinaworkthatistobedonelater.

Andonthispoint,IthinkthatbeforebeginningtodayIamgoing toallowyoutoprofitfromalittlediscovery,dueagaintoMr Kaufmann,whoisnotaRussianspeaker,whichisthatinthe courseofthisresearchhefoundanotherterm,themostcommon termfor"Iamafraid",whichitappearsisiCltOb.itisthe firstwordthatyouseewrittenthereinthetwosentencesand then,inthisconnection,heamusedhimselfbyrecognisingthat, ifIamnotmistaken,inRussianasinFrench,thenegation describedasexpletive,theoneonwhichIputsuchastress, becauseIfindinitnothinglessthanthesignifyingtracein thesentenceofwhatIcallthesubjectofenunciating,as distinctfromthesubjectoftheenunciation,thatinRussian also,thereistheaffirmativesentence,Imeanthesentence whichdesignatesintheaffirmative,theobjectofmyfear,what Ifear,itisnotthatitshouldnotcome,itisthatitshould come,andIsay:thatitwillcome(qu'ilnevienne),whereI findmyselfconfirmedbyRussian,insayingthatitisnotenough toqualifythisexpletiveneasdiscordant,namelytomarkthe discordancethatthereisbetweenmyfear:sinceIamafraidthat itwillcome,Ihopethatitwillnotcome. Wellthen,itseemsthatinRussianweseethiswithstillmore specificityandthisqoesinthedirectionofthevaluethatI givethisexpletivenenamelythatitisindeedthesubjectof enunciatingassuchthatitrepresentsandnotsimplyhis feelingforifagainIunderstoodcorrectlyalittleearlier, discordanceinRussianisalreadyindicatedbyaspecialnuance, namelythattheZT06 whichisthereisalreadyinitselfa"that not,quene",butmarkedbyadifferentnuance.IfIcorrectly understoodSmirnoff,theb whichdistinguishesthis"2.TQ&from thesimple"that"oftheZ.T0inthesecondsentence,opens, indicatesanuanceoftheverb,asortofconditionalaspect,in suchawaythatthisdiscordanceisalreadymarkedatthelevel oftheletter>thatyouseehere.Whichdoesnotpreventthe neofnegation,whichisstillmoreexpletivetherefore,fromthe simplepointofviewofthesignified,functioningallthesame inRussianasinFrenchleavingopenthenthequestionofits (3) interpretationandIhavejustsaidhowIresolveit.There weare!

AndnowhowamIgoingtogetintotoday'smaterial?Iwillsay thatthismorning,remarkablyenough,thinkingaboutwhatIwas goingtoproducehere,Istartedallofasuddentoevokethe timewhenoneofmymostintelligentanalysandsthereare stillsomeofthoseinsistentlyposedmethequestion:"What

13.3.63

XIV3

canbedrivingyouthatmakesyougotoallthistroubletotell themthat?"Itwasinthearidyearswhenlinguistics,indeed thecalculusofprobabilities,hadsomeplacehere. Inotherwords,Itoldmyselfthatafterall,itwasnotabad angleeitherforintroducingthedesireoftheanalysttorecall thatthereisalsoaquestionofthedesireoftheteacher (1'enseignant). Iwillnotgiveyouthewordhereandforgoodreasons.Butit isstrikingthatwhen,throughahintofculpabilitythatI experienceatthelevelofwhatonecouldcallhumantenderness, IthinkofthetranquillitiesthatIamstrivingfor,Iamvery readytoputforwardtheexcuseyousawitbeinghighlightedon severaloccasionsthatforexampleIwouldnotbeteachingif thesplithadnothappened. Butitisnottrue.But,indeed,obviously,Iwouldhaveliked todevotemyselftomorelimited,moreintermittentworkbut fundamentallythatdoesnotchangeanything. Inshortthefactthatonecanposethequestionofthedesireof theteachertosomeoneisthesignIwouldsay,asMonsieurdeLa Palissewouldsay,thatthequestionexistsitisalsothesign thatthereisateaching.Butthisintroducesuswhenallis saidanddonetothiscuriousremarkthat,whereonedoesnot posethequestion,itisbecausethereisaprofessor.The professorexistseverytimetheresponsetothisquestionis,as Imightsay,written,writteninhisappearanceorinhis behaviour,inthissortofconditioningthatonecansituateat thelevelofwhat,inshort,inanalysiswecallthe preconscious,namelyofsomethingthatonecanmakeemerge, whereveritcomesfrom,frominstitutionsorevenfromwhatare calledhispenchants. Atthislevelitisnotuselesstoseethenthattheprofessoris definedastheonewhoteachesaboutteachings,inotherwords: hecarvesupteachings.Ifthistruthwerebetterknown,that whatisinvolvedinfactattheleveloftheprofessoris somethinganalogoustoacollage,ifthistruthwerebetterknown (4)itwouldallowthemtodoitwithmoreconsummateart,which preciselythecollagewhichhastakenitsmeaningthroughawork ofartshowsusthewayto.Namelyiftheymadetheircollagein awaythatislessconcernedaboutfittingtogether,less restrained,theywouldhavesomechanceofendingupatthevery resultthatcollageaimsat,ofevokingproperlyspeakingthis lackwhichgivesallitsvaluetothefigurativeworkitself, whenitsucceedsofcourse.Alongthispaththereforetheywould managetoconnectupwiththepropereffectofwhatisprecisely ateaching. There you are! This then to situate, to pay homage to those who are willing to take the trouble to see by their presence what is taught here, not alone to pay tribute to them, but to thank them fortakingthistrouble.

13.3.63

XIV4

Onthis,formyownpart,IamgoingbecausemoreoverIhave sometimestodealwithlistenerswhoonlycomehereinan intermittentfashiontoattempttomakemyselfforamomentthe professorofmyownteachingandsincethelasttimeIbrought youtheelementsthatIbelievearesufficientlymassive,to recallthemajorpointofwhatIcontributedthelasttime. Startingthenfromthedistinctionbetweenanxietyandfear,I triedasIremindedyoujustnow,atleastasafirststepto upsettheoppositionatwhichtherecametoastopthelast developmentofthedistinctionbetweenthemwhichisacceptedby everyonetoday.

Itiscertainlynotinthedirectionofatransitionfromoneto theotherthatthemovementgoes.Iftracesofitremainin Freud,thatcanonlybebecauseoftheerrorofattributingto himtheideaofthisreductionofonetotheother,anerror foundedonwhatIremindedyoutherewasinhimpreciselyasa beginningofwhatinrealityisthisreversalofpositions,in thissensethatifhesaysprecisely,despitethefactthatat oneorotherdetourofhissentencesthetermobjektlosturnsup, hesaysthatanxietyis"AngstvorEtwas",ananxietyabout something,itiscertainlynottoreduceittobeinganotherform offear,becausewhatheunderlines,istheessentialdistinction betweentheprovenanceofwhatprovokestheoneandtheother. Thereforeitisindeedonthesideoftherefusalofanyemphasis thattendstoisolatefearfromtheentgegenstehen,fromwhat posesitselfinfront,fromfearasresponse,entgegenprecisely, thatwhatIsaidinpassingaboutfearhastoberetained.

(5)Onthecontrary,itisindeedtorecallatfirstthatin anxiety,thesubjectis,Iwouldsayheld,concerned,involvedin theinnermostpartofhimself,thatsimplyonthe phenomenologicalplaneweseealreadythebeginningsofwhatI triedtoarticulatefurtherinamoreprecisefashion.I recalledinthisconnectionthecloserelationshipbetween anxietyandthewholeapparatusofwhatarecalled"defences". AndonthispathIhighlightedagain,notwithouthavingalready articulated,prepareditinallsortsofways,thatitisindeed fromthesideofthereal,asafirstapproximation,thatwehave toseekanxietyasthatwhichdoesnotdeceive. Thisisnottosaythattherealexhauststhenotionofwhat anxietyaimsat.Whatanxietyaimsatinthereal,thatwith respecttowhichitpresentsitselfasasignal,isthatwhose positionItriedtoshowyouinthetablecalled,asImightsay, thatofthesignifyingdivisionofthesubjectinwhichtheXof aprimitive namelyhisbecomingassubject,thisrelationship bf0overS,accordingtothefigureofa division,ofasubjectswithrespecttothe0of theOther,insofarasitisalongthispathof theOtherthatthesubjecthastorealisehimself. ItisthissubjectIleftitundeterminedforyouasregards

13.3.63 subjectmovestowardshisbecoming(avenement),

XIV4

13.3.63

XIV5

its denomination in the first terms of these columns of division whose other terms are found posited according to the forms which IalreadycommentedonthatIinscribehereas(^). Theendofmydiscourse,Ithink,sufficientlyallowedyouto recognisehowatthismythicallevel,S,priortoanycominginto playoftheoperation,thesubjectcouldbedenominated,inso farasthistermhasasenseandpreciselyforreasonstowhich wewillreturn,thatonecannotinanywayisolateitassubject andmythicallywewillcallittodaythesubjectofjouissance. For,asyouknowIwroteitthelasttime,Ibelievethe threestagestowhichtheircorrespondthethreemomentsofthis operationarejouissance,anxietyanddesirerespectively.Itis intothesestagesthatIamgoingtoadvancetodaytoshownot themediating,butthemedian,functionofanxietybetween jouissanceanddesire.

Howcouldwecommentagainonthisimportantmomentofour presentation,exceptbysayingthefollowingthedifferent termsofwhichIwouldaskyoutotakeinthefullestsensethat canbegiventhemthatjouissancewouldnotknowtheOther,0, exceptbythisremaindero,whichhenceforth,insofarasItold youthatthereisnowayofoperatingwiththisremainder,and (6)thereforethatwhatcomesatthelowerstage,istheadvent, attheendoftheoperation,ofthebarredsubject,thesubject quaimplicatedmthephantasy,insofarthenasitisone oftermswhichconstitutethesupportofdesire.Isayonly oneofthetermsforthephantasyissinacertain relationshipofoppositiontoo,areiationsnipwnosepoiyvaience andmultiplicityaresufficientlydefinedbythecomposite characterofthisdiamondshape,O , whichisjustasmuch disjunction,V./,asconjunction,/^,whichisjustasmuchgreater, >,andlesser,<,$quatermofthisoperationhastheformof division,sinceoisirreducible,isunableinthisfashionof imagingitinmathematicalforms,canonlyrepresentthe reminder,thatifdivisionwerecarriedout,furtheron,itwould betherelationshipofotoSwhichwouldbeinvolvedinthe

Whatdoesthatmean?ThattooutlinethetranslationofwhatI amdesignatinginthisway,Icouldsuggestthatohastakenona sortofmetaphorfunctionofthesubjectofjouissance.Itwould onlybeso,itwouldnotbecorrectexceptintheverymeasure thatoisassimilabletoasignifier:andprecisely,itiswhat resiststhisassimilationtothefunctionofsignifier.Itis indeedforthatreasonthatosymboliseswhatinthesphereof thesignifierisalwayswhatpresentsitselfaslost,aswhatis losttosignification.Nowitispreciselytheresidue,this fall,whatresistssignification,thatcomestofinditself

13.3.63

XIV6

constitutingthefoundationassuchofthedesiringsubject,no longerthesubjectofjouissance,butthesubjectinsofarason thepathofhissearch,insofarasheenjoys(iljouit),which isnotthesearchforhisjouissance,butitistowanttomake thisjouissanceenterthelocusoftheOther,aslocusofthe signifier,itisthereonthispaththatthesubjectprecipitates himself,anticipateshimselfasdesiring. Now,ifthereisprecipitation,anticipationhere,itisnotin thesensethatthisstepskipsover,goesmorequicklythanits ownstages.Itisinthesensethatitapproaches,onthis hithersideofitsrealisation,thisgapbetweendesireand jouissancethisiswhereanxietyissituated.Andthisisso (7)surethatthemomentofanxietyisnotabsent,asismarked bythiswayoforderingtheterms,intheconstitutionofdesire, evenifthismomentiselided,notlocatableintheconcrete,it isessential.Iwouldaskyou,forthosetowhomIneedhereto suggestanauthorityforthemtohaveconfidencethatIamnot makinganymistakehere,torememberinthisconnectionwhatin theanalysisof"EinKindwirdgeschlagen",inthefirstnotonly structuralbutfinalistanalysisofphantasygivenbyFreud, Freudforhispartalsospeakspreciselyaboutasecondmoment, alwayselidedinitsconstitution,elidedtosuchanextentthat evenanalysiscanonlyreconstructit.Whichisnottosaythat thismomentofanxietyisalwayssoinaccessibleatmanylevels thatarephenomenologicallylocatable.Isaidanxietyqua intermediarytermbetweenjouissanceanddesire,insofarasit ishavinggonethroughanxiety,foundedonthemomentofanxiety thatdesireisconstituted. Itremainsthattherestofmydiscoursewasconstructedto illustratesomethingwhichhadbeenperceivedforalongtime, thatattheheartofwedonotknowhowtotakefulladvantage whenitisaquestionforusofunderstandingtowhatthere correspondssomethingthatinourexperienceasanalyststakeson adifferentvalue,thecomplexofcastrationthatattheheart, Iwassaying,oftheexperienceofdesire,thereissomething whichremainswhendesireis"satisfied",thatwhichremains,as onemightsay,attheendofdesire,anendwhichisalwaysa falseend,anendwhichisalwaystheresultofamistake.

Thevaluetakenonby,somethingyouwillallowmetotelescope inwhatIsufficientlyarticulatedthelasttimeinconnection withdetumescence,namelywhatismanifested,whatisrepresented ofthisfunctionoftheremainder,bythephallusinits exhaustedstage.Andthissynchronicelementwhichisasstupid asacabbage,orevenacabbagestalk,asPetroneputsit,is theretoremindusthattheobjectdropsfromthesubject essentiallyinhisrelationtodesire.Thattheobjectshouldbe inthisdrop,isadimensionthatmustessentiallybeemphasised totakethisfurtherlittlesteptowhichIwanttoleadyou today,namelywhatcould,withalittleattention,alreadyhave appearedtoyouthelasttimeinmydiscourse,whenItriedto showyoutheshapeinwhichthereisincarnatedthisobjectoof thephantasy,supportofdesire.

13.3.63

XIV7

DiditnotstrikeyouthatIspoketoyouaboutthebreastorthe eyes,makingtheseobjectsostartfromZurbaran,fromLucyand Agatha,wheretheypresentthemselvesunderwhatImightcalla (8) positiveform?ThesebreastsandtheseeyesthatIshowed youthereontheplateonwhichthetwoworthysaintscarrythem, orevenonthebittersoilwhereOedipus'feetcarryhim,appear herewithasigndifferentfromtheoneIshowedyousubsequently inthephallusasspecifiedbythefactthatatacertainlevel oftheanimalorderjouissancecoincideswithdetumescence, pointingouttoyouthatthereisnothingnecessaryaboutthis, necessarynorlinkedtotheWesenheit,theessenceofthe organism,intheGoldsteiniensenseoftheword. Atthelevelofo,itisbecausethephallus,thephallusinso farasitis,incopulation,notalonetheinstrumentofdesire, butaninstrumentfunctioninginacertainfashion,atacertain animallevel,itisforthisreasonthatitpresentsitselfin thepositionowitha()sign.

Thisisessentialtoarticulateclearly,todifferentiate, somethingthatisimportanthere,fromcastrationanxiety,from whatfunctionsinthesubjectattheendofananalysiswhenwhat Freuddesignatesasacastrationthreatismaintainedthere.If thereissomethingwhichallowsustoputourfingeronthefact thatthisisapointthatcanbegonebeyond,thatitis absolutelynotnecessarythatthesubjectremainssuspendedwhen heisamaleatthecastrationthreat,suspended,whensheisof theothersexatPenisneid,itispreciselythisdistinction.To knowhowwecouldgobeyondthislimitingpoint,whatmustbe known,thisiswhyananalysisguidedinacertaindirection culminatesatthisimpassethroughwhichthenegativewhichmarks thephysiologicalfunctioningofcopulationinthehumanbeing findsitselfpromotedtothelevelofthesubjectintheshapeof anirreduciblelack.Thisiswhatwillbefoundagain subsequentlyasaquestion,asadirectionofourpath,andI thinkitisimportanttohavemarkedithere. WhatIsubsequentlycontributedduringourlastmeeting,isthe articulationoftwoveryimportantpointsconcerningsadismand masochism,theessentialofwhichIresumehereforyou,the essentialthatitisaltogethercapitaltomaintain,tosustain, insofarasbyholdingontoit,youcangivetheirfullmeaning totheveryelaboratedthingsthataresaidinthecurrentstate ofthingsaboutwhatisinvolved,namelysadismandmasochism. WhatistoberetainedinwhatIenouncedthereconcernsatfirst masochism,asregardswhichyoucanseethat,iftheauthorshave reallylabouredagreatdealtothepointoftakingveryfar,so (9) farthatsomethingIreadrecentlyhere,wasabletosurprise memyself,Iwillmentionlateranauthorwhotookthingstomy surprise,Imustsaytomyjoyalso,ascloseaspossibletothe pointthatIwillattemptthisyear,fromourownanglehere,to leadtoyouasregardsmasochism.Thefactremainsthatthis veryarticle,whosetitleIwillgiveyoulater,remains,like alltheothers,strictlyincomprehensibleforthesimplereason thatalreadyatthebeginningthereisinawayelided,because itisthereindeedabsolutelyunderhisnose,asonemightsay,

13.3.63

XIV8

fromtheevidence,somethingthatIamgoingtoenunciateina moment.Peopletry,peoplemanagetoavoidputtingtheaccenton thatwhich,atfirstapproach,involves,collidesmostwithour finalism,namelytheinterventionofthefunctionofpain.This, peoplehavemanagedtounderstand,isnottheessentialthing. Alsopeoplehavesucceeded,thankGod,inanexperiencelikethat ofanalysis,inseeingthattheOtherisaimedat,thatinthe transferenceonecanperceivethatthesemasochisticmanoeuvres aresituatedatalevelwhicharenotwithoutarelationshipto theOther. Naturallymanyotherauthorstakeadvantageofittogono further,tojumponaninsightwhosesuperficialcharactercanbe seenataglance,howeverhandyithasshownitselftobein certaincases.Forhavingonlyarrivedatthislevel,one cannotsaythatthefunctionofnarcissism,whichanauthorwho isnotwithoutacertaintalentforpresentation,Ludwig Heidelberg,hasemphasised,issomethingthatcansufficeforus. Thisiswhat,withoutatallhavingmadeyoupenetrateforall thatintothestructureaswewillbeledtodoof masochisticfunctioning,whatIwantedsimplytostressthelast time,becausewhatthelightwhichilluminatesthedetailsofthe tableinacompletelynewway,istoremindyouofwhatisgiven apparentlyimmediatelythisiswhyitisnotseeninthe masochist'sperspective,inthemostbanalapproachtothese perspectivesthatthemasochistisaimingatthejouissanceof theOtherandwhatIstressedthelasttimeasanothertermof thatforwhichIintendtoputforwardeverythingthatwillallow theretobeundone,asonemightsay,themanoeuvrewhichis hiddenbythisidea,isthatwhatheisaimingat,whathewants, thisofcoursebeingtheeventualtermofourresearch,ofwhich hecanonlybefullyjustifiedbyaverificationofthemoments whichprovethatitisthefinalterm,thelasttermiswhathe isaimingat,theanxietyoftheOther. (10)IsaidotherthingsthatIintendtoremindyouoftoday,it istheessentialofwhatisirreducibleinitthatyoumust retain,atleastuntilyoucanmakeyourjudgementonwhatIhave organisedaroundit. Onthesideofsadism,withanentirelyanalogousremark,namely thatthefirsttermiselidedandthatithasneverthelessthe sameobviousnessasonthesideofmasochism,whatisaimedatin sadisminallitsforms,atallitslevels,issomethingwhich alsopromotesthefunctionoftheOther,andthatpreciselythere whatisopentoviewisthatwhatissoughtistheanxietyofthe Other,jujtasinmasochism,whatismaskedbythat,is,notat all,byaninverseprocessofreversal,thejouissanceofthe Othersadismisnotthereverseofmasochismforthesimple reasonthattheyarenotareversiblecouple,thestructureis morecomplex,Iinsistonit,eventhoughtoday,Iamonly isolatingtwotermsineachtoillustrateifyouwishwhatI mean,Iwouldsaythat,asyoumightassumeafterseveralofmy essentialschemas,theyarefunctionswithfourterms,theyare ifyouwishsquaredfunctions,andthatthepassagefromoneto

13.3.63

XIV9

the other is carried out by a rotation of a quarter of a turn and notbyanysymmetryorinversion. YoudonotseethisappearingatthelevelthatIamnow designatingforyou.ButwhatIpointedouttoyouthelasttime ishiddenbehindthissearchfortheanxietyoftheOther,isin sadismthesearchfortheobjecto.ItistothisthatIbrought asareference,anexpressivetermtakenfromSadeanphantasies "theskinofthecunt".Iwillnotrecallforyounowthistext fromSade'swork. Wefindourselvesthereforebetweensadismandmasochisminthe presenceofthatwhichatthesecondlevel,atthelevelhidden fromtheperspectiveofeachoneofthesetwotendencies,is presentedasthealternation,inrealitythereciprocal occultationofanxietyinthefirstcase,oftheobjectointhe other(sadism). IwillendwithabriefreminderwhichreturnstowhatIalready saidpreciselyaboutthiso,thisobject,namelytheemphasising ofwhatIcouldcall,essentially,themanifestcharacterthatwe knowwell,eventhoughwedonotperceiveitsimportance,the manifestcharacterwithwhichismarkedwhat?Themodeinwhich thereentersthisanatomywhichFreudiswrongtosaywithoutany furtherprecision,isdestiny.

(11)Itistheconjunctionbetweenacertainanatomy,theone thatItriedtocharacteriseforyouthelasttimeatthelevel oftheobjectobytheexistenceofwhatIcalledthecaduques, namelypreciselywhatexistsatonlyacertainlevel,themammal level,amongtheorganisms,theconjunctionbetweenthecaduques andsomethingwhichiseffectivelydestiny,namelytheagalma, throughwhichjouissancehastoconfrontitselfwithasignifier, namelythemainspringofthelimitationtowhichinthecaseof manthedestinyofdesireissubmitted,namelythisencounter withtheobjectinacertainfunction,insofarasthisfunction localiseshim,precipitateshimontothislevelwhichIcalled thatoftheexistenceofcaduquesandofeverythingwhichcan serveascaduques,atermwhichwillhelpusamongothersto explorebetter,Imeantohopetogiveanexhaustivecatalogue andlimitofthefrontiers,themomentsofcutting,whereanxiety canbeexpected,andtoconfirmthatitisindeedtherethatit emerges.

Then,Iended,Iremindyou,byoneofthebestknownclinical exampleswithareminderofthecloseconnection,towhichwe willhavetoreturn,andwhichbecauseofthisfactismuchless accidentalthanisbelieved,theconjunction,Iamsaying, betweenorgasmandanxietyinsofarasboththeoneandthe othertogethercanbedefinedbyanexemplarysituation,theone thatIdefinedintheformofacertainexpectationoftheother andofanexpectationwhichisnotanindifferentonetheone that,intheshapeofablankpageornot,thecandidatemust handupataparticularmomentisanabsolutelygrippingexample ofwhatcanbeforhimforaninstanttheo.

13.3.63

XIV10

Afterallthesereminders,wearegoingtotrytoadvancea littlefurther.Iwilldoitalongapathwhichisnotperhaps, asIsaid,quitetheonethatIwouldhavedeterminedonofmy ownaccord.YouwillseelaterwhatImeanbythat.Thereis somethingthatIpointedouttoyouinconnectionwithcounter transference,namelyhowwomenseemtobemoreateaseinthe area.Havenodoubtaboutit:iftheyaremoreateaseaboutit intheirwritings,theoretically,itisbecauseIpresume,they donotmanageittoobadlyeitherintheirpractice,evenifthey donotsee,donotarticulateforonthisafterallwhynot creditthemwithalittlementalrestrictioniftheydonot articulateitsmainspringinaveryobviousandclearfashion. (12)Whatisatstakehereobviouslyistoattacksomethingwhich isoftheorderoftherelationship(ressort)ofdesireto jouissance.Letusnoteatfirstthefactthatitseems,ifwe refertosomeworks,thatwomenunderstandveryverywellwhat thedesireoftheanalystis.Howdoesthathappen?Itis certainthatwehavetotakethingsuphereagainatthepoint thatIleftthemwiththistable,bytellingyouthatanxietyis themiddletermbetweendesireandjouissance.Iwillput forwardheresomeformulaethatIwillleaveeachofyoutofind yourwayaboutinfromyourownexperiencetheywillbe aphoristic.Itiseasytounderstandwhy.Onasubjectas delicateasthestillundecidedoneoftherelationshipsbetween manandwoman,toarticulateeverythingthatcouldrenderlicit, justify,thepermanenceofanecessarymisunderstanding,could notavoidhavingthealtogetherdegradingeffectofallowingeach oneofmylistenerstodrownhispersonaldifficulties,whichare verymuchonthishithersideofwhatIamgoingtoaimathere, intheassurancethatthismisunderstandingisstructural.

Now,asyouwillseeifyouknowhowtolistentome,tospeak aboutmisunderstandinghereisnotatallequivalenttospeaking aboutanecessaryfailure.Idonotseewhy,ifthisrealis alwaysimplicated,themosteffj.caciousjouissancecouldnotbe reachedalongtheverypathsofmisunderstanding.

Fromtheseaphorismsthen,Iwillchoose,Iwouldsaystrongly theonlythingthatdistinguishestheaphorismfromdoctrinal developmentisthatitrenouncesapreconceivedorderIwould advanceheresomeforms.Forexamplethisonewhichmayspeakto youinafashion,asonemightsay,lesslikelytohaveyou rollingaboutlaughing,thisformulathatonlyloveallows jouissancetocondescendtodesire.Wewillputforwardsome othersalsowhicharededucedfromourlittletablewhereitis shownthatoassuch,andnothingelse,istheaccess,notto jouissance,buttotheOther,thatitisallthatremains,from themomentthatthesubjectwantstomakehisentrythere,into thatOther.Thefollowingfinally,todissipate,itseems,to thefinalterm,thisterm,thispoisonousghostfromtheyear 1927,ofoblativityinventedbythegrammarianPichonGodknows thatIrecognisethemeritofhisgrammarregardingwhomone cannotregrettoomuchthatwhatonemightcallanabsent analysis,lefthimentirelyinthepresentationofpsychoanalytic theory,lefthimentirelycapturedintheideasthathe

13.3.165

XIV 11

previouslyhadandwhichwerenoneotherthanMaurrasianideas. WhenSreemergesfromthisaccesstotheOther,itisthe unconscious,namelythis,thebarredOther,0,asItoldyou earlier,allthatremainstohimistomakeof0somethingof whichitislessthemetaphoricalfunctionwhichisimportant thanthedroppingrelationshipinwhichheisgoingtofind himselfwithrespecttothiso.

TodesiretheOther,0,then,isneveranythingbuttodesireo. Itremains,sinceitisfromlovethatIbeganinmyfirst aphorism,thattotreatoflove,astotreatofsublimation,it mustberememberedwhatthemoralistsbeforeFreudIam speakingofthoseofthegoodtradition,andspecificallyofthe Frenchtradition,theonewhichpasses,intowhatIcalledits scansionin"Themanofpleasure"whatthemoralistshad alreadyfullyarticulated,andwhoseacquisitionitwouldbewell forusnottoconsiderasoutofdate,thatloveisthe sublimationofdesire.Fromthisitresultsthatwecannotat allmakeuseofloveasfirstoroffinalterm.However primordialitmaypresentitselftobeinourtheorisation,love isaculturalfactandasLaRochefoucauldwellarticulatedit, it.isnotsimply"howmanypeoplewouldneverhavelovedifthey hadneverheardspeakoflove",itis:therewouldbenoquestion ofloveiftherewerenoculture. Thisoughttoencourageustoposeelsewherethearchesofwhat wehavetosayconcerningbecausethisiswhatisinvolved,at thispointthatFreudhimselfsaysit,underliningthatthis detourcouldhavebeenproducedelsewhere,andIwillcomeback towhyIamdoingitnowthereforewehavetoposedifferently thearchesofthissubjectoftheconjunctionbetweenmanand woman.Icontinuemyaphoristicway.

Ifwehavetorefertodesireandtojouissancewewillsaythat, toputmyselfforwardasdesiring,eron,istoputmyselfforward aslackofo,andthatwhatmustbesustainedinouraccountis thefollowing,thefactisthatitisalongthispaththatIopen thedoortothejouissanceofmybeing.Theaporiccharacterof myposition,Ithink,cannotfailtoappeartoyou,nortoescape you.Butthereareafewmorestepstobetaken.Theaporic character,doIevenneedtounderlineitinpassing,Iwillcome backto.ForIthinkthatyouhavealreadygrasped,becauseI toldyouitalongtimeago,thatifitisattheleveloferon thatIam,thatIopenthedoortothejouissanceofmybeing,it isquiteclearthattheclosestdeclinewhichpresentsitselfto thisenterprise,isthatIshouldbeappreciatedaseronemos, namelyaslovable,somethingwhichwithoutfatuousnessdoesnot failtohappen,butinwhichtherecanbealreadyreadthat somethinghasgonewronginthebusiness.Thisisnot

13.3.63

XIV166

(14) aphoristic,butalreadyacommentary.IthoughtIoughtto giveitfortworeasons:firstofallbecauseImadeakindof littlelapsebyusingadoublenegation,whichoughttowarnme ofsomething,andsecondly,IthoughtIglimpsedthemiracleof incomprehensionshiningoncertainfaces. Icontinue.Everyexigencyforoalongthepathofthis enterprise,letussay,sinceIhavetakentheandrocentric perspective,ofencounteringawoman,cannotbutunleashthe anxietyo 2 theother,preciselybecauseofthefactthatIno longermakeheranythingbuto,thatmydesireo'sher,asI mightsay.Andhere,mylittlecircuitofaphorismsbitesits owntail:thisindeedisthereasonwhysublimationloveallows jouissance,torepeatmyself,tocondescendtodesire. Whatnoblepropositions!YouseethatIamnotafraidofthe ridiculous.Thismaysoundalittlebitlikepreachingtoyou, whichisobviouslysomethingonecannotfailtoruntheriskof everytimeoneventuresontothisterrainButitseemedtome thatallthesameyouaretakingyourtimetohaveagoodlaugh. IcanonlythankyouforitandIstartoffagain. Iwillonlystartoffagaintodayforabriefmoment.Butallow meagaintotakeafewsmallsteps:becauseitisalongthesame pathwithanairthathas,likethat,foryoualittleappearance ofheroismthatwecanadvanceintheoppositedirection,by notingverycuriouslyoncemore,confirmingthenonreversibility oftheirjourneys,thatyouaregoingtoseearisingsomething whichwillappeartoyouperhapstohavealessconqueringtone. WhattheOthernecessarilywantsalongthispathwhich condescendstomydesire,whathewantsevenifhedoesnotknow atallwhathewants,isneverthelessnecessarilymyanxiety. Foritisnotenoughtosaythatthewoman,tonameher, overcomesher'sbylove.Wewillreturntoit,wewillhaveto see. LetusproceedalongthepaththatIchosetoday.Istillleave toonesidethiswillbeforthenexttimehowthepartners aredefinedatthebeginning.Theorderofthingsinwhichwe areinvolvedalwaysimpliesthatitshouldbeso,thatweshould takethingsupenroute,andevenoccasionallyatthearrivalwe cannottakethemupatthestart.

Inanycase,itisinsofarasshewantsmyjouissance,namely toenjoymethiscanhavenoothermeaningthatthewoman (15) stirsupmyanxiety,andthisfortheverysimplereason inscribedforalongtimeinourtheorythefactisthatthere isnodesirerealisableonthepaththatwearesituatedon unlessitimpliescastration.Itisinthemeasurethat jouissanceisinvolved,namelywhensheisaimingatmybeing, thatthewomancanonlyreachmebycastratingme.Letthisnot leadyouIamspeakingtothemasculinepartofmyaudience toanyresignationasregardsthealwaysmanifesteffectsofthis primarytruthinwhatiscalledinaclassificatorytermconjugal life.Forthedefinitionofaprimaryanankehasabsolutely

13.3.63

XIV167

nothingtodowithitsaccidentalincidences.Itnevertheless remainsthatoneclarifiesmanythingsbyarticulatingthem properly.NowtoarticulateasIhavedone,eventhoughit overlapsexperienceinthemostmanifestfashion,isprecisely whatrunsthedangerthatIhavesignaledonmanyoccasions, namelythatoneseeswhatiscalledincommonlanguagea fatality,whichmeansthatitiswrittendown.Itisnotbecause Isayithatyoumustthinkthatitiswrittendown.Moreover ifIwroteitIwouldputmoreshapeonitandthisshapewould consistpreciselyinenteringintodetail,namelyingivingthe why. Letussupposesomethingwhichisobviousthatwithreference towhatImadethekeyofthisfunctionoftheobjectofdesire, thewomanwhichisquiteevidentdoesnotlackanything. BecauseonewouldbecompletelywrongtoconsiderthatPenisneid isafinalterm.Itoldyoualreadythatthiswouldbethe originalityonthispointofwhatIamtryingtoadvancebefore youthisyear.

Thefactthatshehasnothingtodesireonthispointand perhapsIwilltrytoarticulateveryverypreciselywhy anatomicallyforthisaffairoftheclitorispenisanalogyis farfrombeingabsolutelygrounded:aclitorisisnotsimplya smallerpenis,itisapartofthepenis,itcorrespondstothe cavernousbodiesandtonothingelsenow,apenis,asfarasI know,exceptinthecaseofhypospadias,isnotlimitedtothe cavernousbodiesthisisonlyaparenthesisthefactofhaving (16)nothingtodesirealongthepathofjouissancedoesnot absolutelysettleforherthequestionofdesire,preciselyin themeasurethatthefunctionofoforherasforusplaysits fullrole.Butallthesame,thisquestionofdesire,simplifies italotImeanforhernotforusinthepresenceoftheir desire.Butafteralltointerestthemselvesintheobjectas objectofourdesire,createsfarfewercomplicationsforthem.

Timeispassing.IamleavingthingsatthepointthatIwas abletobringthemto.Ithinkthatthispointissufficiently temptingformanyofmylistenerstowanttoknowwhatcomes next.

Togiveyousomeforetasteofit,toannouncetoyouthefact thatIintendtobringthingstothelevelofthefunctionofthe woman,insofarasitmayallowustoseefurtheratacertain levelintheexperienceofanalysis,Iwilltellyouthat,ifa titlecanbegiventowhatIwillenunciatethenexttime,it wouldbesomethinglike"Therelationshipbetweenthewomanas analystandthepositionofDonJuan".

20.3.63 Seminar15:

XV168 Wednesday20March1963

Todaywearegoingtomoveforward.Wewilltrytoarticulate why,inordertosituateanxietyforyou,Iamled,Iannounced thatIwillhavetodealwiththiscentralfield,already outlinedintheSeminaronEthics,asbeingthatofjouissance. Youalreadyknowthroughacertainnumberofapproaches,and specificallytheonethatImadethatyear,thatitisnecessary toconceiveofthisjouissancesomythically,thatweoughtto situateitspointasprofoundlyindependentofthearticulation ofdesire,becausedesireisconstitutedonthishithersideof thezonewhichseparatesjouissanceanddesirefromoneanother andwhichisthebreak(lafaille)whereanxietyisproduced. ItisunderstoodofcourseandIsaidenoughaboutitforyou tosenseitthatIamnotsayingthatdesireinitsstatusdoes notconcerntherealother,theonewhoisinvolvedinthe jouissanceIwouldsaythatitisnormativethatdesiredoesnot concernthisother,thatthelawwhichconstitutesitasdesire doesnotmanagetoconcernitinitscentre,thatitonly concernsiteccentricallyandtooneside,osubstituteforO.

AndthereforealltheErniedrigungen,allthedegradationsof lovelifepunctuatedbyFreudwhichcometoemerge,arethe effectsofafundamentalirreduciblestructure.Thisisthegap thatwehavenointentionofmasking,thoughontheotherhandwe thinkthatthecastrationcomplexandPenisneidwhichflourish here,arenotthemselvesthefinaltermsfordesignatingit. Thisdomain,thedomainofjouissance,isthepointwhereasI mightsay,thepointthankstowhichwomanprovesherselftobe superiorpreciselyinthis,thatherlinktotheknotofdesire ismuchlooser.Thislack,this"minus"sign,withwhichthe phallicfunctionismarkedforman,whichmeansthatforhimhis liaisontotheobjectmustpassbythisnegativingofthephallus bythecastrationcomplex,thisnecessitywhichisthestatusof the((p) atthecentreatman'sdesire,issomethingwhichfor thewomanisnotanecessaryknot.

Thisdoesnotmeanthatsheisforallthatwithouta relationshiptothedesireoftheOtherbutprecisely,itis indeedwiththedesireoftheOtherassuchthatsheisinaway affronted,confronted.Itisagreatsimplificationthat,as regardsthisconfrontation,thisphallicobjectonlycomessecond

20.3.63

XV169

forherandinsofarasitplaysaroleinthedesireofthe Other. (2) ThissimplifiedrelationshipwiththedesireoftheOther,is whatallowsthewoman,whensheworksinournobleprofession,to bewithrespecttothisdesireinarelationshipwhich,itmust besaid,ismanifestedeachtimesheapproachesthisfield designatedinaconfusingwayasthatofcountertransference,in arelationshipwhichwesenseismuchfreer,thisofcourse notwithstandingeachparticularitythatshemayrepresentinwhat Imightcallanessentialrelationship.

Itisbecause,inherrelationshiptotheOther,shedoesnot holdtoitasessentiallyastheman,thatshehasthisgreater freedomessentially,Wesentlich.Whatdoesthatmeanina particularcase? Thatmeansshedoesnotholdtoitas essentiallyasmandoesasregardsthenatureofjouissance.

AndhereIcannotavoidhavingtoremindyou,alongthesameline asthatwhichtheotherdayIincarnatedforyouatthelevelof thefall(chute)ofOedipus'eyes,thatTiresias,theseer,who oughttobethepatronofpsychoanalysts,wasblinded,byanact ofvengeanceofthesupremegoddess,Juno,thejealousoneand asOvidexplainsverywelltousinthethirdbookofthe Metamorphoses,fromverse316toverse338Iwouldaskyouto consultthistextofwhichMrTSEliotinanotetoThe Wastelandunderlineswhathecallstheverygreatanthropological interestifTiresiasoffendedJuno,itisbecause,consulted likethat,forajoketheGodsdonotalwaysmeasurethe consequencesoftheiractsbyJupiterwhoforoncewashavinga relaxedrelationshipwithhiswifeandteasingheraboutthefact thatundoubtedly"thepleasurethatyouexperienceisgreater" heistheonewhoisspeaking"thanthatexperiencedbythe man".Butthenhesays:"But,bytheway,whatamIthinkingof? Tiresiaswasawomanforsevenyears".Sevenyears,everyseven yearsthebaker'swifechangedherskin,sangGuillaume ApollinaireTiresiaschangessexnotbysimpleperiodicity,but becauseofanaccident:hemetthetwocouplingsnakes,theones weseeinourcaduceus,andhewasunwiseenoughtodisturbtheir coupling.Wewillleavetoonesidethemeaningofthesesnakes thatonecannotunknotwithoutrunningsuchgreatdanger.Itis byrenewinghisattemptthathealsorediscovershisfirst position,thatofaman.

(3) Inanycase,forsevenyearshewasawoman.Thisiswhyhe cantestifybeforeJupiterandJuno,thatwhatevermightbethe consequenceshemusttestifytothetruthandcorroboratewhat Jupitersays:itiswomenwhoenjoy(jouissent).

Theirjouissanceisgreater,whetheritisaquarteroratenth morethanthatofthemantherearemorepreciseversions.The proportiondoesnotmattermuchbecauseitonlydepends,in short,onthelimitationhisrelationshiptodesireimposeson man,namelywhatIamdesignatingassituatingtheobjectforhim inthenegativecolumn,the($>).Contrarytowhattheprophet ofabsoluteknowledgeteachesthisman,namelythathemakeshis

20.3.63

XV170

holeinthereal,whichiscallednegativityinHegel,whatis involvedissomethingelse:theholebeginsatthebottomofhis belly,atleastifwewanttoremounttothesourceofwhat constitutesforhimthestatusofdesire.Obviouslyitishere thatapostHegelianSartre,withwhatIwouldcallhis marvelloustalentformisleading,hasslippedinhisownimage, theonethatyouknowwell,theimageofthelittlechildthathe makesabornbourgeoisforus,asawaynaturallyofgiving flavourtotheaffair,whostickshisfingerintothe sandofthebeach,mimicinginhiseyesandforourintentionan actwhichissupposedtobethefundamentalact.Ofcourse startingfromthereawelldeservedderisioncanbeexercised againstthepretentionofthisnewshapethatwehavegivento thelittlemanwhichisinman,namelythatnowweincarnatethis littlemaninthechild,withoutnoticingthatthechilddeserves allthephilosophicalobjectionsthatweremadeagainstthe littleman. ButafterallbeneaththisfigureinwhichSartrerepresentsit forus,itworks,becausewhatdoesitmakeresonateinthe unconscious?Wellthen,byGod,nothingotherthanthis engulfmentintothewombofmotherearthdesiredbyhiswhole body,whosemeaningFreudunveilsinapropersensewhenhesays textuallyattheendofoneofthechaptersofHemmung,Symptom undAngstthatthereturntothematernalwombisthephantasyof someonewhoisimpotent [cfSEXX139].

ThustheorphanchildthatSartretriestohatchoutinthisman andwhomthroughallhiswork,heurgestosharetheonlyglueof existence,willallowitselftobethisphallustheaccenthere isonthetobethephallusthatyoucanseebyincarnatingit inanimagewhichiswithintherangeofyourresearch,theone thatisfoundhiddeninthevalvesoftheselittleanimalsthat arecalledrazorfishandifthatislackinginyourexperience, (4)Ihopethatallofyouhavebeenabletoseethemonoccasion suddenly.stickingouttheirtonguesatyouinthesouptureen whereyouputthoseyouhavecollected,aprocedurecarriedout thewayyoucollectasparaguswithalongpenknifeandasimple lengthofwirethatonehooksunderthesand. Idonotknowwhetheryouhaveallseenthatalready,inthe opisthotones,thesetonguesemergingfromtherazorbackinany caseitisauniquespectaclethatyoushouldtreatyourselfto ifyouhavenotalreadyseenit,andwhoserelationshipappears tomequiteobviouswiththisphantasy,onwhichyouknowSartre insistsinLaNausee,ofseeingsuchtonguesdartoutsuddenly fromawallorfromanyothersurface,thisaccordingtothe thematicthatrejectstheimageoftheworldintoanunfathomable facticity. Wellthen,onemightask:"Sowhat?"Idonotbelievethatin ordertoexorcisethecosmosbecausewhenallissaidanddone thatiswhatisinvolveditistoundermine,afterthe fundamentaltermsoftheology,thecosmologywhichisofthesame natureofcourseIdonotbelievethatitisthiscurioususage oftongueswhichistherightpath,butmuchmoreratherthanto

20.3.63

XV171

believeittobe,likeearlier,essentiallyredoubledby WesentlichandIwouldliketohavebeenabletoscoreitfor youinmanyothersIfindmyselfinaBabellikeatmosphere whichwillendup,ifIamroused,bymakingitoneofthekey pointsofwhatIhavetodefend. Inanycase,thisreferenceindicatestoyouwhymyown experienceofwhatoneseesonthebeach,whenoneisasmall childonthebeach,whereonecannotmakeaholewithoutwater risingupinit,wellthen,tobefrank,itisanirritation whichalsorisesbutinmeatthisobliqueapproachofacrab alwaysreadytohidehisintentionofpinchingyourfingers. Acrabisveryskillful!Youcouldgivehimapackofcardsto shuffleitismuchlessdifficultthanopeningamussel,which issomethinghedoeseverydaywellthen,evenifthereare onlytwocards,hewillalwaystrytomixthemup. Soitissaidforexample:therealisalwaysfull.Thathasan effect,thatsoundsalittlebitlikewhatissaidherewhich lendscredencetoit,thatofagenuineLacanism.Whospeaks likethataboutthereal.Ido.

Theproblemforme,isthatIneversaidthat.Therealis fullofholesandonecanevenmakeavacuuminit.WhatIsay, isthatitdoesnotlackanything,whichisquitedifferent.

(5)Iaddedthatifyoumakespots,eveniftheyareallthe same,itisquitecertainthattheyaredifferentpots.Itis evenquiteextraordinarythat,underthenameoftheprincipleof individuation,thisstillgivesjustasmuchtroubletoclassical thought.

LookwherewearestillatinBertrandRussell:tosustainthe distinctionbetweenindividuals,itisnecessarytomobilisethe wholeoftimeandspace,which,youmustadmit,isarealjoke. The next phase for my pots, is that the identity, namely what is substitutable between the pots, is the void around which the pot is made. The third phase is that human action began when this void was barred, to be filled with what is going to constitute the void of the pot next to it, in other words when to be half full is the same thing for a pot as to be half empty, in other wordswhenitisnotleakingallovertheplace.

Andineveryculture,youcanbesurethatacomplete civilisationalreadyobtainswhentherearethefirstceramics. Isometimescontemplateinmyhouseinthecountryavery beautifulcollectionthatIhaveof ..........vases.Obviously, . forthesepeople,atthattime,asmanyotherculturesbear witness,itwastheirprincipalwealthbutinthesevases, obviously,evenifwecannotreadwhatismagnificently, luxuriously,paintedontheirsides,translateitintoan articulatedlanguageofritualsandmyths,weknowthatinthese vasesthereiseverything,thatthisisenough,thatthe

20.3.63 relationshipbetweenmanandtheobjectanddesireishere completelytangibleandsurviving.

XV172

Thisiswhatmoreover,totakeastepbackwards,legitimisesthis famousmustardpotwhichmadeoneofmycolleaguesgnashhis teethformorethanayeartothepointthatI,niceasIalways am,endedupbyputtingitbackontheshelfwiththepotsof glue,eventhough,asItoldhimfromthebeginning,thismustard potservedmeasanexample,bythefactthatitisyouknow well,itissomethingstrikinginexperiencethatonthetable itisalwaysempty,thatthereisneveranymustardexceptwhen itgetsupyournose.

Thereweare!Nowthishavingbeensaid,itremainsthatonthe usageofthesepots,sincerecentlytherewasposedforusa problemofthisorder,Iamnotlookingatallasyoumightthink atPieraAulagnier,whoisaclearheadedpersoninthewaythat womenknowhowtobeandthatisevenwhatsheisblamedfor knowsverywellthatitisallowabletoputthelabel"gooseberry jam"onthepotwhichcontainstherhubarb.Itisenoughtoknow (6)whatonewantstopurgebythismeansandwaittocollect whatonewantedfromthesubject. Allthesame,whenIbringyouherebatteriesoftarteduppots fordonotbelievethatitiseverwithouthavingbrokenalotof themIalso,inmytime,gavewholediscoursesinwhichthe action,thethought,theword,didtheroundsinawaythatmade symmetrystink,wellthen,ithasbeenthrowninthewastepaper basket.

WhenIputimpedimentontopofthecolumnwhichcontains actingout,embarrassmentatthetopofthenextonewhich containsthepassageal'acte,ifyouwish,Piera,todistinguish thecasesofactingoutthatyouhavesocarefullyobserved,if youwishtodistinguishitasbeingwhatyoucalltransferencein act(transfertagi)whichisofcourseadistinctideaofyour own,whichdeservesdiscussionitneverthelessremainsthatit istomytablethatyourefersinceyouinvokeinthetextthe embarrassmentthatyoursubjectfoundhimselfin.Andsincethis termisscarcelyusedoutsideofthisplace,itisherethatyou havenoteditdown.

Nowitismanifestintheobservationthatthepatienthadbeen impededbythemidwifefromattendingthebirthofhisoffspring, outsidethematernalgates,anditisthedismayofbeing incapableofovercominganewimpedimentofthisorderwhich threatenshim,whichprecipitateshimtothrowthepoliceinto anxietybythewrittenclaimoftherightofthefathertowhatI wouldcallilliophagia,tospecifythenotionwhichisthereto representtheimageofthedevouringofSaturn:becauseafterall itiswritteninthisobservationthatthisgentlemanpresents himselfatthepolicestationtosaythatthereisnothinginche lawwhichimpedeshimfromeatinghisbabywhohadjustdied.On thecontraryitisobviouslytheembarrassmentintowhichheis plungedonthisoccasionbythecalmnessofthepolicemanwho didnotcomedowninthelastshowerandtheshockofthe

20.3.63

XV173

dismaythathewantedtoprovokewhichmakeshimactimpulsive]y (passeral'acte),withactsofakindthathavehimputin prison. Sothen,nottorecognise,whenobviouslyyouareinvolved,that Icouldnotfindabetterobservationtoexplainwhatyouknow, thatyouarereallyinvolved,thatyouhaveputyourfingeron it,thisisacertainbetrayalofyourself,whichofcoursecould notbereproachedtoapersonwhenwhatisinvolvedishandling somethinglikethatwhichhasbeenfreshlyminted.Onecould wellputalittle ....... init.Butthisallthesame authorisesmetorecallthatmyownworkisonlyofinterestwhen itisproperlyusedthisisnotaddressedtoyou,Piera,itis (7)notamatterofusingit,aspeoplehavegotintothehabit, thebadhabitofdoingwithrespecttonotionswhicharein generalgroupedtogetherinteachinginasortofcollecting togetherwhichisonlydonefordecoration.Havingrecalledthis aboutwhatgivesyoutherighttowatchoverwhatIbringyou, whatIhavechosenforyouwithsomuchcare,Itakeupmy remarksagain. Andtocometothewoman,Ialsoamgoingtotrywithoneofmy observations,tomakeyousensewhatImeanasregardsher relationshiptojouissanceandtodesire. Herethenisawomanwhoonedaythecoordinatesoflongitude andlatituderemarkstomethatherhusband,whoseinsistence, asImightsay,isthefoundationoftheirmarriage,has abandonedherforalittletoolongatimeforhernottonotice it.Giventhewaythatshealwaysreceiveswhatshesensesfrom himasbeingmoreorlessclumsy,thisisratheramatterof relieftoher.

Nevertheless,Iamallthesamegoingtoextractasentencein whichdonotrushimmediatelytosmellanironywhichitwould bequitewrongtoattributetomesheexpressesherselfas follows:"Itdoesnotmattertomewhetherhedesiresmeornot, providedhedoesnotdesiresomeoneelse".

Iwouldnotgosofarastosaythatthisisthecommonorthe regularposition.Thiscanonlytakeonitsvaluefromwhat followsixitheconstellationasitisgoingtobeunfoldedbythe associationswhichmakeupthismonologue.Herethensheis goingtospeakaboutherownstate,shespeaksaboutitone swallowdoesnotmakeasummerwithaparticularprecision. Tumescencenotbeingtheprivilegeoftheman,Ithink,Iamnot surprisedthatshe,whohasaquitenormalsexualityIam speakingaboutthiswomanshouldtestify,shouldsaythat,if forexamplewhensheisdrivingsomethingalarmsherwhichmoves hersay:"GoodGod!acar!",wellthen,inexplicably,thisis whatstrikesherthatday:shebecomesawareoftheexistenceof avaginalswellingwhichshenotesasrespondingatcertaintimes tothesuddenemergenceinherfieldofanyspecificobject whatsoeverwhichinappearanceisquiteforeigntosexualimages orspace.Thisstate,shesays,whichisnotdisagreeable,but ratherinconvenientinitsnature,goesawaybyitself.

20.3.63

XV174

Atthatpoint,shesays,itbothersmetolinkupwithwhatIam goingtotellyou,becauseofcourseitisnotrelated.She tellsmethenthateveryoneofherinitiativesisdedicatedto me,tomyself."Isayitis"Ithinkyouhaveunderstoodfora sometime:Iamheranalyst"Icannotsayconsecrated,that (8) wouldmeandoingitwithacertainaim.No,anyobject whatsoeverobligesmetoevokeyouasawitness,noteventohave theapprovalofwhatIsee.No,simplythelook.Insaying that,Iamevengoingalittletoofar.Letussaythatthis lookhelpsmetogetitsmeaningfromeverything." At this point, the ironic evocation of the theme encountered at a younger stage of her life, of the wellknown title of the play by Steve Fasseur "Je vivrai un grand amour". Had she experienced at other moments of her life this reference to the other? This made her refer back to the beginning of her married life, then go further and testify in effect to the one who had been in effect, theonewhoisneverforgotten,herfirstlove. Itwasastudentfromwhomshewasquicklyparted,withwhomshe remainedincorrespondenceinthefullsenseoftheterm.And everythingthatshewrotetohim,shesays,wasreally"atissue oflies".

"Icreatedacharacterbitbybit,whatIwantedtobeinhis eyes,andwhatIinnowaywas.Itwas,Ifear,apurely romanticenterprisewhichIpursuedinthemostobstinateway". Toenvelopmyself,shesays,inakindofcocoon.Sheaddsvery gently:"Youknow,itwasnoteasyforhimtogetoverit ......." .

Atthispoint,shecomesbackonwhatshedoeswithreferenceto mepersonally:"WhatIamstrivingtobehereisthecomplete opposite:Itryalwaystobetruewithyou.Iamnotwritinga novelwhenIamwithyouIwriteitwhenIamnotwithyou". Shereturnstotheweaving,alwaysthreadbythread,ofthis dedicatingofeverygesturewhichisnotnecessarilyagesture whichshethinkswouldpleaseme,norevenonewhichis necessarilyonethatagreeswithme.Itcannotbesaidthatshe forceshertalent.Whatshewantsafterall,isnotsomuchthat Ishouldlookather,itisthatmylookshouldcometo substituteforherown:"ItisthehelpofyourselfthatI summon.Myownlookisnotenoughtocaptureeverythingthatis tobeabsorbedfromtheoutside.Itisnotamatterofwatching medoingsomething,itisamatterofdoingsomethingforme."

Inshort,IwillfinishherewithsomethingthatIstillhavea largepageonfromwhichIonlywishtoextracttheonlywordof badtastewhichoccursonthisfinalpage:

"Iam,"shesays,"operatedbyremotecontrol,whichisnotin anywayametaphor,believeme.Thereisnofeelingofbeing influenced.ButifImakeuseofthisformula,itisinorderto remindyouthatyoumayhavereadinthepapersaboutthisleft (9) wing figure who after being conned in a bogus assassination attempt, thought he ought to give this immortal example that in politicstheleftisineffectalwaysremotelycontrolled

20.3.63

XV175

by the right. This is the way moreover that a strict relation of paritycanbeestablishedbetweenthesetwoparts." Sothenwheredoesallofthisleadus?Tothevase,tothe femininevase:isitempty,isitfull?Itdoesnotmatter, sinceevenifitis,asmypatientsays,tobeconsummed stupidly,itissufficientinitself.Itlacksnothing.The presenceoftheobjectthereis,asonemightsay,anaddition. Why?Becausethispresenceisnotlinkedtothelackofthe to objectcauseofdesire,tothe whichitislinkedinman. Theanxietyofmanislinkedtothepossibilityofnotbeing able,hencethemythwhichmakesofthewomanitisa completelymasculinemyththeequivalentofoneofhisribs: thisribhasbeentakenoutofhim,itisnotknownwhichone, andmoreover,heisnotmissinganyofthem.Butitisclear thatinthemythoftheribwhatisinvolvedpreciselyisthis lostobject,thatwomanformanisanobjectwhoismadewith that.

Anxietyexistsinthewomanalso.AndevenKierkegaard,whomust havehadmoreofthenatureofTiresiasprobablythanIhaveI amfondofmyeyesKierkegaardsaysthatthewomanismoreopen toanxiety.Mustwebelievethis?Intruthwhatisimportant forus,istograspitslinktowhatwecancalltheinfinite, indeterminatepossibilitiesofdesirearoundherinherfield. Shetemptsherselfintemptingtheother,whichisawaythatthe mythcanalsobeofusetoushere.Afterall,anythingcanbe usedtotempthim,asthecomplementoftheearliermythshows, thefamoushistoryoftheappleanyobjectwhatsoever,evenone thatissuperfluousforher.Forafterall,whatisshedoing withthatapple?Shedoesnotknowwhattodowithitanymore thanafishwould.Butithappensthatthisappleisalready goodenoughtohookforherthelittlefish,tohookthe fishermanontheline.Itisthedesireoftheotherwhich interestsher.Toputtheaccentalittlebitbetter,Iwould saythatitisthepriceofthisdesireinthemarketfor desireisamercantilething:thereisasharelistingofdesire whichrisesandfallsculturallyitisonthepricethatone givestodesireonthemarketthattheredependsateverymoment thestyleandtheleveloflove. Insofarasititselfisavalue,asthephilosophersputit verywell,itisfromtheidealisationofdesirethatitismade up.Isaytheidealisation,foritisnotatallasasick (10)personthatourpatientearlierspokeinthiswayaboutthe desireofherhusband.Thatitisimportanttoherislove. Thatitisnotallthatimportantforhimtomanifestitisnot necessary,butitisintheorderofthings. Inthisrespect,experienceteachesusthatinthejouissance properlyspeakingofthewoman,whichmeritsanditisperhaps agoodthingtherebeingconcentratedonherallsortsof attentionsfromherpartner,theimpotence,properlyspeaking, thetechnicalmistakes,theimpotenceofthispartnermaybevery wellaccepted.Andthiscanalsobeseenwhenafiascooccurs, asStendhalpointedouttousalongtimeago,thatinthe

20.3.63

XV176

relationshipswherethisimpotenceislonglasting,andwhereit seemsthatifonoccasion,aftersometime,oneseesthewoman takingtoherselfsomeassistantwithareputationforbeingmore efficacious,thisisratherthroughakindofshame,sothatit willnotbesaidthatsheisbeingrefusedit,forwhatever reason. Inpassing,IremindyouofmyformulaeaboutmasochismthatI gavethelasttime.Theyaredesigned,asyouwillsee,to restoretomasochism,whetheritisthemasochismofthepervert, ormoralmasochism,orfemininemasochismthatisinvolved,a unitythatisotherwisedifficulttograsp.Andyouwillsee thatfemininemasochismtakesonaquitedifferent,rather ironic,meaningifthisrelationshipofoccultationintheother ofthealleged,apparentjouissanceoftheother,theoccultation bythissortofjouissanceoftheotherofananxietywhichitis undoubtedlyaquestionofawakening.

This gives to feminine masochism a quite different import which can only be laid hold of by clearly grasping first what must be positedatthebeginning,namelythatitisamasculinephantasy. Thesecondthing,isthatinthisphantasyinshort,itisby procurationandinrelationtothisstructureimaginedinthe woman,thatmanmakeshisjouissancebesustainedbysomething whichishisownanxiety,somethingwhichoverlapsformanthe objectandtheconditionofdesire. Jouissancedependsonthis condition.Nowdesireforitspart,onlycoversanxiety.You seethenthedistancethatremainsforittotraveltohave jouissancewithinitsrange.Forthewoman,thedesireofthe otheristhemeansforwhat?ForherjouissancetohavewhatI mightcallanappropriateobject!Heranxietyisonlybeforethe desireoftheotherwhichshedoesnotknowveryclearlywhenall issaidanddonewhatitcovers.Andtogofurtherinmy formulae,Iwouldsaythatbecauseofthisfactinthekingdomof themanthereisalwayssomeimposturepresent. (11)Inthatofthewoman,aswealreadysaidatonetime rememberthearticlebyJoanRiviereifsomethingcorresponds toit,itisthemasqueradebutitissomethingquitedifferent. Womaningeneralismuchmorerealandmuchtruerinthefact thatsheknowswhattheellshedealingwithindesireisworth, thatshepassesthroughthisinaverytranquilmanner,thatshe has,asImightsay,acertaincontemptforhermisapprehension, aluxurywhichthemancannotofferhimself.Hecannothave contemptforthemisapprehensionaboutdesire,becauseitishis qualityasamantoprizeit.Toallowhisdesiretobeseenby awomanisobviouslyanxietyprovokinginsomecases.Why? Becauseitistoallowtheretobeseen(laisservoir)andI wouldaskyouinpassingtonotethedistinctionbetweenthis dimensionofallowingtheretobeseencomparedtothevoyeurism exhibitionismcouple,itisnotsimplytoshowitandtoseeit: thereistheallowingittobeseenforthewoman,forwhomat mostthedangercomesfromthemasqueradewhatistobeallowed tobeseen,iswhatisthereofcourse.Ifthereisnotmuch,it isanxietyprovoking:butitisalwayswhatisthere,insteadof

20.3.63

XV177

letting her desire for the man be seen, it is essentially letting therebeseenwhatisnotthere. So,yousee,thatyoushouldnotbelieveforallthatthatthis situation,theproofofwhichmayappearrathercomplextoyou, istobeseenasallthathopeless.Ifundoubtedlyitdidnot representittoyouaseasy,couldyouignoreinittheaccess formantojouissance.Itremainsnonethelessthatthisisquite manageableifoneisonlyexpectinghappinessfromit. This remark being conclusive, we will go into the example which I find myself in short in a position to allow you to take advantage of, from the favour that we all owe Granoff for having introduced ithere,namelyLuciaTower.

AsItoldyou:inordertounderstandwhatLuciaTowertellsus abouttwomalesshewasdealingwith,IdonotbelieveIcanfind abetterpreamblethantheimageofDonJuan.

Ihaveworkedoverthequestionagainagooddealthesedaysfor you.Icannotmakeyougothroughthelabyrinthagain.Read thisappallingbookwhichiscalled:DieDonJuanGestaltby Rankacatcouldnotfindherkittensinitbutifyouhaveche threadthatIamgoingtogiveyou,itwillappearmuchclearer. DonJuanisafemininedream.Whatisnecessaryinthiscase,is amanwhoisperfectlyateasewithhimself,whoinacertain fashionwithrespecttomen,thewomancanprideherselfon (12)being,amantowhomnothingislacking.Thisisperfectly tangibleinthetermtowhichIwillhavetoreturninconnection withthegeneralstructureofmasochism,whichisthatDonJuan thissoundsreallybanaltosayittoyoutherelationshipof DonJuantothisimageofthefather,quauncastrated,namelya pureimage,afeminineimage.

Therelationshipcanbeclearlyreadinwhatyoufindinthe labyrinthandinthedetoursofRank,thatwhatisinvolvedin DonJuan,ifwecanmanageto,linkhimtoacertainstateof mythsandofrituals:DonJuanrepresents,Ranktellsusand hereheisfollowinghisnosetheonewhoinoldendaysis capableofdamningasoulwithoutlosinghisownforallthat. Thefamousjusprimaenoctisissupposedtobebasedonthis,the existence,whichyouknowismythical,ofthepriestwho deflowersonthefirstnight,ishereinthiszone.

ButDonJuanisabeautifulstorywhichworksandhasitseffect, evenforthosewhodonotknowallitsniceties,which undoubtedlyarenotabsentfromMozart'ssongandwhichare tobefoundintheMarriageofFigaroratherthaninDon Giovanni.

ThetangibletraceofwhatIamputtingforwardtoyouaboutDon Juan,isthatthecomplexrelationshipofmantohisobjectis effacedforhim,butatthepriceofacceptinghisradical imposture.TheprestigeofDonJuanislinkedtoanacceptance ofthisimposture.Itisalwaysthere,attheplaceofanother:

20.3.63 itis,asImightsay,theabsoluteobject.

XV178

Notethatitisnotatallsaidthatheinspiresdesire.Ifhe slipsintowomen'sbeds,onedoesnotknowhowheisthere.One couldevensaythathedoesnothaveoneeither,thatheisina relationshipwithsomethingvisaviswhichhefulfillsacertain function.Thissomething,callittheodordifemina,andthat takesusagoodway.Butdesireplayssolittlepartinthe affair,thatwhentheodordifeminapassesheiscapableofnot noticingthatitisDonaElvira,namelysomeonewithwhomhehas suppedtothefull,whohasjustcrossedthestage. Ithastobesaid,heisnotwhatforthewomanisananxiety provokingcharacter.Itcanhappenthatthewomanreallysenses herselftobetheobjectatthecentreofadesire.Wellthen, believeme,itisthenthatshereallyflees!Wearenowgoing toenter,ifwecan,intoLuciaTowers'story. (13)ShehastwomenImeaninanalysis.ByGod,asshetells it,shealwayshadverysatisfyingrelationswiththemfroma humanpointofview.

DonotimagineIamsayingthattheaffairissimple,northat theydonotholdoutforalongwhile.Theyaretwoanxiety neurotics.Atleastthatisthediagnosisthatsheposits, havingexaminedeverythingcarefully.

Thesetwomenwhohavehad,asitshouldbe,somedifficulties withtheirmothers,andwithwhatarecalled"femalesiblings", whichmeanssisters,butwhichsituatesthemasbeingequivalent tobrothers,thesetwomennowfindthemselvesintimately acquaintedwithwomen,wearetold,thattheyhavewellandtruly choseninordertoexerciseacertainnumberofaggressiveand othertendencies,andtoprotectthemselvesinthiswayfrom apenchant,thatbyGodisnotanalyticallycontestable,forthe othersex. "Withbothmen",shetellsus,"Iwasquiteawareofthe contributionswhichtheythemselvesmadetothedifficultieswith theirwives,namelythatbothweretoosubmissive,toohostile, inasensetoodevoted,andbothwives",shetellsusforshe entersboldlyintoanappreciationofthepointofviewwitha lorgnette"werefrustratedforlackofsufficientuninhibited masculineassertivenessfromtheirhusbands",awayofaffirming themselvesasmeninanuninhibitedway.(cf240) Inotherwordsweimmediatelyenterintotheheartofthe subject,shehasherideasaboutthingstheydonotpretend enough.Forherpart,ofcourse,withoutknowingwhatmighttrap herinthis,sheherselffeelsvery"protective",alittletoo "protective"althoughdifferentlyin'thecaseofthefirstman: sheprotects,shetellsus,hiswifealittlebittoomuch,and inthesecondcasehimalittlebittoomuch.

Infact,whatreassuresher,isthatshehasamuchgreater attractionforthesecond,andthisyouhavetoreadthethings

20.3.63

XV179

allthesameintheirinnocenceandtheirfreshnessbecausethe firstonehasallthesamesome"psychosexualproblems"thatare nottooattractive. Thisone,thefirstone,showshimselfinawaywhichisnotall thatmuchdistinguishedfromthatoftheother.Bothreallytire herwiththeirmumbling,theirhaltingspeech,their circumstantialitythatmeanstheygoonandontheir repetitiveness,andminutiae.Butafterallsheisananalyst: whatshenoticesinthefirstone,isthistendencytoattackher ownpowerasananalyst.

Theotherhasadifferenttendency:forhimitisratheramatter oftakinganobjectfromherthanproperlyspeakingofdestroying itasfrustrating.Andofcourseinthisconnection,shesaysto herself:"Wellnow,afterall,byGod,itisperhapsbecausethe secondoneismorenarcissistic." *Infactthisdoesnotholdup,asthosewhohavealittleculture canremark,withtheotherreferencesthatwehaveabout narcissism.Forontheotherhanditisnotsomuchnarcissism whichconcernshimhereaswhatiscalledtheanacliticaspect, asshewillclearlyseefromwhatfollows. Moreoverontheotherhand,shetellsus,howeverlong,however fastidiousmaybethepathwhichistakenwiththeoneandthe otherwithoutanythingshowingtheefficacyoftheanalysisof transference,itneverthelessremainsthatthereremainsinall ofthissomethingwhichdoesnothaveanythingfundamentally disagreeableaboutit,andthatinfactallthecounter transferenceresponsesthatsheperceivesinherselfdonotat all,shesays,reasonablygobeyondthislimitwhereonecould saythatanyfemaleanalystwouldrisklosingherwayin connectionwithsuchvaluablecharactersifshewerenotonher guard.Sheisveryspeciallyso.Andveryespecially,shepays attentionatwhatishappeningonthesideofthiswomanover whomshewatchesperhapsalittlemorespecifically:thewifeof herfirstpatient.Shelearnsthatshehashadalittle psychosomaticaccident.Shesaystoherself:"ByGod,that'snot toobad.SincewhatIfeared,wasthatshewasdriftingtowards apsychosis,herewehaveananxietythatiswellbound."

Andthenshethinksnomoreaboutit.Shethinksnomoreabout itandthesituationcontinues,namelythatonemaywellanalyse everythingthathappensinthetransference,andthereforeeven theusemadeofitinhisanalysisbythepatientIamspeaking aboutthefirstonethatisinvolvedofhisconflictswithhis wife,toobtainfromhisanalystallthemoreattention,to obtainfromherthecompensationsthathehadneverfoundwith hismother,stillnoprogressismade.

Whatisgoingtoreleasethings,makethemprogress?Adream, shetellsus,whichhappenstoher,tohertheanalyst.Adream inwhichwhathappens?Inwhichsheseesthatperhapsitisnot allthatsurethatthingsaregoingsobadlyforthiswoman. Firstofallbecauseinthedreamshewelcomesher,theanalyst,

20.3.63

XV180

extremelywell,thatsheshowsherinallsortsofwaysthatshe hasnointentionthisisinthedreamoftorpedoeingthe analysisofherhusbandwhichwasoneofthepresuppositionsof thebusinessandthatthiswomanisthereforepreparedtoshow (15) adispositionthatwewouldcall,totranslatethe atmosphereofthedream,acooperativeone. Thismakesouranalyst,LuciaTower,prickupherears.She understandsthatthereissomethingtobecompletelyrevised. Thischapisreallysomeonewhoinhishomereallytriestodo everythingnecessarytomakehiswifemorecomfortable,inother words,thedesireofthisgentleman,isinnowayasaimlessas allthat.Ourlittlepaltakeshimselfseriouslyallthesame thereisawayofdealingwithhim,inotherwords,heiscapable oftakinghimselfforwhatisatstake,thedignityofwhichhad beenrefusedhimuptothen:totakehimselfforaman,toget involvedinthegame.Whenshemakesthisdiscovery,whenshe reorientsherrelationshiptothedesireofherpatient,when sheperceivesthatshehasmiscogniseduptonowwherethings weresituated,shecanreallyundertakewithhimarevisionof everythingthathadbeenplayedoutwithheruptothenina deceptiveway.Theclaimsofthetransferencewerethemselvesan imposture.And,shetellsus,fromthatmomentoneverything changes.Buthowdoeseverythingchangeandinwhatsense? Youhavetoreadhertounderstandthatitisatthatmomentthat theanalysisbecomessomethingparticularlydifficultto tolerate.For,shesays,fromthatmomentoneverythinghappens inthemidstofthisstormofdepressivemovementsandofnaked rage,asifhewereputtingmetheanalysttothetestineach oneofmysmallestfragments. Ifamomentofinattention,shetellsus,meantthateachoneof theselittlefragmentsdoesnotsoundright,ifoneofthemwas sham,Ihadthefeelingthatmypatientwouldshatterinto pieces. Sheherselfqualifiesasbestshecanshedoesnotsee everythingbutsheclearlynameswhatshemeetsupwiththat whatisinvolvedissomething,shetellsus,whichreallybelongs tophallicsadismcouchedinorallanguage. Whatarewegoingtoretainfromthis?Twothings:firstlythe confirmationbytheverytermsthatareusedofwhatIdesignated foryouasbeingthenatureofsadismforthenotentirely attractiveanomaliesofthepatientarecertainlyofthisorder thatwhatissoughtforinthesadisticsearchisthislittle fragmentwhichislackingintheobject:itistheobject,andit isasearchfortheobjectthatisinvolvedinthewayinwhich, oncethetruthofhisdesirehasbeenrecognised,thepatient behaves. (16) Thistoshowyoualsothatitisinnowaymasochisticto putoneselfinthelinethroughwhichthesearchforthesadistic objectpasses.OurLuciaTowerdoesnotaccuseherselfofany suchthingandwehavenoneedeithertoimputeittoher.

20.3.63

XV181

Simplyshedrawsastormdownonherself,andsheunderlinesit withaparticularcouragewithrespecttoacharacterwithwhom sheonlyenteredintoarelationshipfromthatmomentwhenhis desireinterestedher.

Shedoesnotconcealthatitisinfunctionofthefactthatshe herselfisinapostureofrivalrywiththecharactersofhis historyandthatobviouslythathisdesirewasnotentirely involvedinher,thatshesupportsthereforetheconsequencesof thisdesiretothepointthatsheexperiencesthisphenomenon thattheanalystscircumscribeandhavecalled"carryover", whichmeansreportordesignatewheremostobviouslyonecan denotetheeffectsofthecountertransferencewhenyoucontinue tothinkaboutapatientwhenyouarewithanotherone.And nevertheless,shetellsus,allofthis,whenIhadalmost reachedtheendofmytether,disappearedbychance"amusingly", reallyinthemostamusingandsuddenfashion,whichmeansthat goingoniiolidaysduringoneoftheannualbreaks,well,by God,goodness,shenoticesthatnothingremainsofthisbusiness, thisbusinessisofabsolutelynointeresttoher,namelythat sheisreallyincarnatinginthefreestandmostairymythical positionDonJuanasheleavestheroomwherehehascommitted hisusualidiocies. Afterthisbreak,herefficacity,heradaptationinthiscase and,asImightsay,theimplacablenakednessofherlookisvery essentiallypossibleinthemeasurethatarelationshipwhichfor onceisonlyarelationshiptoadesireassuch,howevercomplex moreoveryoumaysupposeittobeandsheindicatesthatshe alsohasherproblemsisneverwhenallissaidanddone anythingbutarelationshipwithwhichshecankeepherdistance. ItisonthispointthatIwillcontinuethenexttime.

26.3.63 Seminar16:

XVI182 Wednesday26March1963

....[itis]becauseofourLuciaTowerthatIfindmyselftohave takenhereasanexample,fromacertainangleofwhatIwould callthe"facilitiesofthefeminineposition"thisterm facility(facilite)havinganambiguousimportasregardsits relationshiptodesireletussaythatwhatIformulated consistedinthissortoflesserimplicationwhich,assomeonein theanalyticposition,allowedhertoreasonitoutforus,let ussay,inherarticleon"Countertransference",ifnotmore soundly,atleastmorefreely.Itiscertain, ifyoureadthis text,thatitisinthemeasureandthroughwhatIwouldcallher "internalselfcriticism"shenoticedthatthroughtheeffectof whatshecallsheresoundlyenoughhercountertransference shehadneglectedsomethingaboutwhatonecouldcallthecorrect appreciationororientationofthedesireofherpatient,that, withoutherproperlyspeakingtellinguswhatshesaidtohimat thatmoment,becauseshedoesnottellusanything,exceptthat shereturnedonceagaintothe"transferencerequirements"of thispatient,butbystraighteningthingsoutforhim,therefore shewasonlyableindoingthistogivehimtheimpressionthat shewassensitivetowhatsheherselfhadjustdiscovered,namely thatthispatient,inbrief,waspayinggreatattentiontohis wife,wasmore"themanager"ofwhatwashappeninginthe conjugalcirclethanshehadsuspected.Itseemsindeedthat becauseofthiswecanonlytrusther,forthisisthewayshe expressesherselfthatthepatientisonlyableonthis occasiontotranslatethisrectificationinthesetermswhich arethoseofLuciaTowerherselfthatinshortthepatient's owndesireismuchlessdeprivedofaholdonhisanalystthanhe believed,thateffectivelyitisnotruledoutthatuptoa certainpointhecanmakesomethingofthiswomanwhoishis analyst,bendher(lacourber)"tostoop"inEnglish"She stoopstoconquer",isthetitleofoneofSheridan's [Goldsmith's]comediesbendhertohisdesire.Thisatleast iswhatLuciaTowertellsusinherownwords.Thisdoesnot meanofcourseshealsounderlinesthisthatthereisany questionevenforamomentofthishappeningsheis,inthis respect,asshetellsus,verysufficientlyonherguard,sheis notababyindeed,whenisawomanone!inanycase"too awareof....."thisisthetermsheusessheiswelland trulyonherguard.Butthatisnotwherethequestionlies. Throughthisintervention,thisrectificationwhichappearedto

26.3.63

XVI183

theanalysandhereasaconcession,asanopeningout,thedesire ofthepatientistrulyputbackinitsplacewhatisreallythe wholequestion,isthathehadneverbeenabletofindthis place.Thisiswhathisanxietyneurosisis.Whatshe encountersatthatmoment,iswesaiditthelasttimethis unleashinginthepatientofwhatsheexpresses,namely:from thismomenton,Iwassubjectedtoapressure,whichmeansthatI wasscrutee,scrutinsee,astheysayinEnglish"toscrutinise", inawaythatfelttomethatIcouldnotmaketheslightest falsemove.IfitappearedforasingleinstantthatIwasnot uptorespondingtowhatIwasbeingtestedon,cellbycell, wellthen,itismypatientwhowouldfallapart. Havingtherefore,forherpart,soughtthedesireoftheman, whatsheencountersasaresponse,isnotthesearchforherown desire,itisthesearchforo,fortheobject,forthetrue object,forwhatisinvolvedindesirewhichisnottheOther,0, whichisthisremainder,thiso,thetrueobject.

Itisherethereliesthekey,thereliestheaccentofwhatI wouldliketoday,amongotherthings,todemonstratetoyou.The factthatshesustainsthissearch,thisiswhatshecalls herselfhavingmoremasochismthanshehadbelieved.HereI toldyouthisbecauseshewroteityoushouldclearly understandthatsheiswrong:sheisnotatallsuitedtoenter intothemasochisticdialogue,asherrelationshipwiththeother patient,theothermalethatshefailssowellwithasyouare goingtoseesufficientlydemonstrates.Shesimplyholdsout verywell,eventhoughitisexhausting,thatsheisableforno more,asItoldyouthelasttime,ashervacationapproaches, luckilytherearevacations,and,asItoldyou,inawaythatis forherassurprisingasitisamusing,"amusingly",inits suddenness,suddenlysheperceivesthatafterallallofthis, onceithasstopped,itdoesnotlastverylong.Shegives herselfashakeandthinksaboutsomethingelse,why?Itis becauseafterallsheknowsverywellthathecanalwayssearch, thattherehasneverbeenanyquestionofhimfinding.Thisis preciselywhatisinvolved:forhimtorealisethatthereis nothingtofind.Thereisnothingtobefoundthere,because thatwhichfortheman,formaledesireinthiscase,isthe objectofthesearchonlyconcerns,asImightsay,himself. Thisistheobjectofmylecturetoday. Whathesearchesfor,isthe(0)itis,asImightsay,whathe islacking.Itisamaleoramens'affair.Sheknowsverywell letmesayitanddonotgettooworkedupaboutitsheknows verywellthatsheisnotmissinganythingorratherwewill returntoitlaterthemodeinwhichlackoperatesinfemale developmentisnottobesituatedatthislevel,attheplace thatitissoughtbythedesireofthemanwhenwhatisinvolved properlyspeakingandthisiswhyIemphasiseditatfirstis asadisticsearch:tomakesproutupwhatoughttobeatthe place,inthepartner,atthesupposedplaceofthelack.This (3)iswhathehastogiveupaslost.Iamsayingthatbecause inthetextshearticulatesextremelywellthatwhattheydid together,isthisworkofmourning.Oncehehasgivenupthis

26.3.63

XVI184

searchaslost,namelythehopeoffindingonthisoccasionin hispartner,insofarasshehadposedherself,withoutknowing toowellithastobesaidwhatshewasdoing,asafemale partner,whenhehasgivenupaslostthehopeoffindinginthis partnerhisownlack,($>),theprimaryfundamentalcastrationof theman,asIhavedesignateditforyouhereyoushouldnote atthelevelofitsbiologicalroot,oftheparticularitiesof theinstrumentofcopulationatthisleveloftheanimalscale, whenhehasgivenitupaslostitisLuciaTowerwhotellsus thiseverythingisgoingtoworkoutwell,namelythatweare going,withthisgentlemanwhohadneveruptothenreachedthis level,tobeabletoenterintowhatyouwillallowmeonthis occasionz o call"theOedipalcomedy",inotherwordsweare goingtobeabletoenjoyourselves:itisDaddywhodidall that!Becausewhenallissaidanddonethisiswhatis involved,ashasbeenknownforalongtime,rememberJonesand themoralischesEntgegenkommen,theconcessiontomoral intervention:ifheiscastrated,itisbecauseofthelaw.We aregoingtoplayoutthecomedyofthelaw,wearemuchmore comfortablethereitiswellknownandithasbeenmappedout. Inshort,weseethedesireofourgentlemantakingthepaths alreadytracedbywhat?Preciselybythelaw,demonstratingonce morethatthenormofdesireandofthelawareoneandthesame thing.

DoImakemyselfsufficientlyunderstood?Notsufficiently, becauseIhavenottoldyouthedifference,whatwastherebefore andwhatisgonebeyondatthislevelasastageandthanksto thismourning.Whatwastherebefore,wasproperlyspeaking transgression(lafaute):hecarriedalltheburden,allthe weightofhis(^>).HewasremembertheusethatImadeatone timeofthepassageofStPaulhewas"asinnerbeyondall measure".

Itakechenextstepthen:thewomanhasindeed,asyousee,no troubleand,letussay,uptoacertainpoint,runsnoriskin seekingwhatisinvolvedinthedesireoftheman.ButIcannot dolessonthisoccasionthantoremindyouofthecelebrated passageofthetextattributedtoSolomonwhichIquotedalong timebeforethisseminar,andwhichIgiveyouhereinLatin whereittakesonallitssavour:"Triasuntdifficiliamihi," saysthewiseking,"etquartumpenitusiqnoro"therearefour thingsaboutwhichIcansaynothing,becausetheyleaveno trace:"viamaquilaeincoelo"thetrackoftheeagleinthe heavens,thatofthesnakeontheearth,thatoftheshipinthe sea"etviamviriinadulescentula"andthetrackofman,the accentisputevenontheyounggirl.Notrace.Whatis involvedhereisdesire,andnotwhathappenswhenitisthe objectassuchthatisputforward.Thisleavestooneside thereforetheeffects,ontheadulescentula,ofmanythings, (4)beginningwiththeexhibitionistandbehindthattheprimal scene.Butitissomethingdifferentthatisinvolvedhere.

Sothenhowshouldwetacklethingsinordertoconceiveofhow thereoperatesinthecaseofthewomanthisthingthatwe suspect,whereshealsohasawayintolackitis

26.3.63

XVI185

sufficientlydinnedintoourearswiththisbusinessof Penisneid?ItisherethatIbelieveitnecessarytoemphasise thedifference:forhertooofcoursethereisalsothe constitutionoftheobjectoofdesire,sinceasithappenswomen alsospeak.Onemayregretit,butitisafact.Shealsofor herpartalsowantstheobject,andevenanobjectinsofaras shedoesnothaveit.ThisiswhatFreudexplainstous,that forherthisclaimingofthepeniswillremainuptotheend essentiallylinkedtotherelationshiptothemother,namelyto demand.Itisindependenceonthedemandthatthereis constitutedthisobjectoforthewoman.Sheknowsverywell dareIsay:somethingknowsinherthatintheOedipuscomplex whatisinvolvedisnottobestronger,moredesirablethanthe motheratbottomshenoticesquicklyenoughthattimeisonher sideitistohavetheobject.Thefundamentaldissatisfaction thatisinvolvedinthestructureofdesireis,asImightsay, precastrational.Ifithappensthatshebecomesinterestedin as castration, such,itisinsofarassheentersintothe man'sproblems,itissecondary,itisdeuterophallicasJones verycorrectlyarticulatedit,anditisaroundthisthatthere turnsthewholeobscurityofthedebatethat,whenallissaid anddone,hasneverbeendisentangled,aboutthisfamous phallicismofthewoman,adebateinwhichIwouldsay,allthe authorsareequallyright,forwantofknowingwherethe articulationreallyis.Iamnotclaimingthatyouaregoingto keepitinmindimmediatelyinasustained,present,livelyand locatablefashion,butIintendallthesametotakeyouright throughitalongasufficientnumberofpathsforyoutoendup byknowingwhereitpassesandwheresomethingisskippedover whenpeopxetheorise.Forthewoman,itisinitiallywhatshe doesnothaveassuchwhichisgoingtobecome,toconstituteat thebeginningtheobjectofherdesirewhileatthebeginning forthemanitiswhatheisnot,itiswherehefails.Thatis whyImadeyouadvancealongthepathoftheDonJuanphantasy. ThephantasyofDonJuanandthisiswhyitisafeminine phantasyisthiswishinthewomanforanimagewhichplaysits function,itsphantasticalfunction,thatthereisatleastone manwhohasitfromthebeginning,whichisobviously,fromthe pointofviewofexperience,anobviousmiscognitionofreality, butmuchbetterstill:thathealwayshasit,thathecannotlose it.WhatthepositionofDonJuaninthephantasyimplies precisely,isthatnowomancantakeitfromhim,thisiswhatis essentialanditisobviouslythisiswhyIhavesaidthatit isafemininephantasywhathehasinthiscaseincommonwith thewomanwhom,ofcourse,onecannottakeitfrom,becauseshe doesnothaveit.Whatthewomanseesinthehomageofmasculine (5)desireisthatthisobject,letussay,letusbeprudent, becomessomethingbelongingtoher.Thismeansnothingmorethan whatIhavepreviouslyputforward:thatitshouldnotbelost. ThelostmemberofOsiris,suchistheobjectofthequestandof theprotectionofthewoman.Thefundamentalmythofthesexual dialecticbetweenmanandwomanisheresufficientlyaccentuated byawholetradition,andmoreoverwhat"psychological"(in invertedcommas)experience,inthesensethatthiswordhasin thewritingsofPaulBourget,aboutthewomandoesnottellusis thatawomanalwaysthinksthatamanloseshimself,goesastray

26.3.63

XVI186

withanotherwoman.DonJuanreassuresherthatthereisaman whoneverloseshimselfinanycircumstance. Obviouslythereareotherprivileged,typicalfashionsof resolvingthedifficultproblemoftherelationshiptooforthe woman,anotherphantasy,ifyouwish.Butintruth,thisisnet thegenuinearticle,sheisnottheonewhoinventedit.She findsitreadymade.Ofcoursetobeinterestedinit,itis necessarythatsheshouldhave,asImightsay,acertainsortof stomachIenvisage,ifImaysayhereintheorderofthe normal,thistypeofruggedfuckerwhichStTeresaofAvilagives usthemostnobleexampleof,accesstowhich,amoreimaginary one,isgivenbythetypeofthewomanwhofallsinlovewith priests,anothernotch:theerotomaniac.Thenuance,the differencebetweenthemis,asImightsay,atthelevelatwhich thedesireofmancollaboratesinamoreorlessimaginary fashionasbeingentirelyconfusedwiththeo.IalludedtoSt TeresaofAvila,IcouldalsohavespokenaboutBlessed MargueriteMaryAlacoque,shehastheadvantageofallowingusto recognisetheveryformoftheointheSacredHeart.Forthe womanwholovespriests,itiscertainthatitisinthemeasure thatsomethingthatwecannotsimplydescribecrudelyas institutionalisedcastrationisenoughtoestablish,itisall thesameinthisdirectionyouaregoingtoseethatweare goingtoadvancethatthesmalloassuchisputforwardina perfectlyisolatedway,proposedastheelectiveobjectofher desire.Fortheerotomaniac,thereisnoneedfortheworktobe prepared:shedoesitforherself.

Andnowwehavecomebacktotheearlierproblem,namelywhatwe canarticulateabouttherelationshipsofmanitishe,he alone,whocangiveusitskeyoftherelationshipofthese diverseo'swhichareproposedorimposethemselvesorwhichone moreorlessdisposesof,towhatisnotdiscerned,isnot defined,andisnotdistinguishedassuch,namelygivingits finalstatustotheobjectofdesire,inthisrelationshipto castration.

Iwouldaskyoutoreturnforamomenttomymirrorstage.Once uponatimeafilmwasshownwhichwasmadesomewhereinEngland inaschoolwhichmadeaspecialisedefforttoharmonisewhat infantobservationcouldgiveuscomparedtopsychoanalytic development,thevalueofthisdocumentbeingallthegreater (6)becausethisobservation,thisshooting,wasmadewithoutthe slightestpreconceivedidea.Itinvolved,becausethewhole fieldofwhatcanbeobservedhadbeencovered,theconfrontation ofthelictlemaleandfemalebabywiththemirror.Theinitial andterminaldatesthatIhadgivenwere,bytheway,fully confirmedinit.Irememberthatthisfilmwasoneofthelast thingstobepresentedattheSocietyPsychanalytiquedeParis beforeweseparatedfromit.Theseparationwasverynearandit wasperhapsviewedatthattimealittledistractedlybutIhad, Iassureyou,allmywitsaboutmeandIstillrememberthis grippingimageinwhichthelittlegirlconfrontedwiththe mirrorwasrepresented.Ifthereissomethingwhichillustrates thisreferencetothenonspecularisable,whichillustrates,

26.3.63

XVI187

whichmaterialises,concretisesthisreferencetothenon specularisablewhichIputforwardlastyear,itisindeedthe gestureofthislittlegirl,thishandwhichpassesrapidlyover thegammaofthejunctionofthetummyandthetwothighslikea kindofmomentofvertigobeforewhatshesees.

Thelittleboyforhispart,thepoorclown,looksathislittle problematictap.Hevaguelysuspectsthatitissomethinga littlebizarre.Forhispart,hehastolearnathisown expenseasyouknowthat,asonemightsay,whatistheredoes notexist,ImeancomparedtowhatDaddyhas,towhathisbig brothers....etc....,have,youknowthewholefirstdialectic ofcomparison.Hewillsubsequentlylearnthat,notonlydoesit notexist,butthatitwantstoknownothingormoreexactlythat itbehavesexactlyasitwishes.Inaword,itisonlystepby stepinhisindividualexperience,thathehastolearntoerase itfromthemapofhisnarcissism,preciselysothatitcanbegin tobeofsomeuse.Iamnotsayingthatitisallthatsimple, itwouldbereallysenselesstoattributethattome.Ofcourse, naturally,assoonas,asImightsay,themoreitisburied,the moreitremountstothesurfaceand,whenallissaidanddone, thatthisoperationIamonlygivingyouanindicationhere, butafterallanindicationwhichwilllinkup,Ithink, sufficientlywithwhathasbeenindicatedtoyouaboutthe fundamentalstructureofwhatisridiculouslycalledperversion thatthisoperationhere,isthesourceofhomosexualattachment. Homosexualattachmentis:Iplaythegameoftheloserwins.At everymomentinhomosexualattachment,itisthiscastration whichisatstake,andthiscastrationwhichassuresthe homosexual,thatitisreallyit,the ,whichistheobject ofthegame.Itisinthemeasurethathelosesthathewins.

NowthenIcometoillustratesomethingwhichtomyastonishment gaverisetoproblemsthelasttimeinmyreminderofthemustard pot.Oneofmyparticularlyattentivelistenerssaidtome: "Thatwentdownwell,thatmustardpot,atleasttherewerea certainnumberofuswhowerenottooputoffbyit.Butnowyou areintroducingthequestionofthecontents.Youhalffillit withwhat?"Solet'sgoatit.The(f)istheemptinessofthe vase,thesameoneasdefinesthehomofaber.Ifwoman,weare told,isorimarilyaweaver,manundoubtedlyisthepotterand thisiseventheonlyanglethroughwhichthereisrealisedin thehumanspeciesagroundingforthejinglewhichtellsus, thethreadisfortheneedlelikethegirlisfortheboythis kindofreferencewhichclaimstobenatural,isnotasnatural asallthat.

Thewoman,ofcourse,presentsherselfundertheappearanceofa vase.Andobviouslythisiswhatdeceivesthepartner,thehomo faberinquestion,thepotter.Heimaginesthatthisvasemay containtheobjectofhisdesire.Onlylookcarefullywherethat leadsus,itisinscribedinourexperience,ithasbeenspelled outstepbystepandthisiswhatremovesfromwhatIam tellingyouanykindofappearanceofdeduction,of reconstructionthethingwasperceivedwithoutinanyway startingfromtheproperplaceinthepremisses,butitwas

26.3.63

XVI188

perceivedwellbeforeunderstandingwhatitmeant.The phantasticalpresenceofthephallus,Imeanofthephallusof anotherman,atthebottomofthisvaseisadailyobjectofour analyticexperience.ItisquiteclearthatIdonotneedto returnonceagaintoSolomontotellyouthatthispresenceisan entirelyphantasticalpresence.Ofcourse,therearethings whicharefoundinthisvase,thingsthatareveryinteresting fordesire:theeggforexamplebutafterallitcomesfromthe insideandprovestousthatifthereisavase,theschemamust becomplicatedalittlebitmore.Ofcourse,theeggcantake advantageoftheencountersthatthefundamentalmisunderstanding prepares,Imeanthatitisnotuselessforittoencounterhere thesperm,butafterallparthenogenesisisnotexcludedinthe futureandmeanwhileinseminationcantakeonquitedifferent forms.Besides,itis,asImightsay,inthebackroomofthe shopthatthereisfoundinthiscasethereallyinteresting vase,theuterus.Itisobjectivelyinteresting,itisalso psychicallysotothehighestdegree,Imeanthatoncethereis maternity,itislargelysufficienttoinvestthewholeinterest ofthewoman,andwhenpregnancyarrivesallthesestoriesabout thedesireofthemanbecome,aseveryoneknows,slightly superfluous.

Sothensincewehavetodoitletuscometothepotwe mentionedtheotherday,tothehonorablelittlepotofthefirst ceramicsandletusidentifyitwith(0).Allowmeforthe purposesofdemonstrationtoputherefora momentinaneighbouringlittlepotwhat formancanbeconstitutedaso,theobject ofdesire.Itisanapologuethis apologueisdesignedtoemphasisethato onlyhasmeaningformanwhenithasbeenpouredbackintothe emptinessofprimordialcastration. (8)Thereforethiscannotbeproducedinthisform,namely constitutingthefirstknotofmaledesirewithcastration, unlesson3startsfromsecondarynarcissism,namelyatthemoment thatoisdetached,fallsfromi(o),thenarcissisticimage. ThereistherewhatIwouldcall,indicatingittodayinorderto returntoit,andbesidesIthinkthatyourememberitnot introducinghereanythingthatIhavenotalreadyemphasised,a phenomenonwhichistheconstitutivephenomenonofwhatonecan callthe"edge".AsItoldyoulastyearinconnectionwithmy topologicalanalysis,thereisnothingmorestructuringofthe shapeofthevasethantheshapeofitsedge,thanthecutby whichitisisolatedasvase.

Atatimenowdistantwhentherewasoutlinedthepossibility ofaveritablelogicremadeinaccordancewiththepsychoanalytic fielditisstilltobedone,eventhoughIhavegivenyoumore thanonebeginningforitamajorandaminorlogic,Iam sayinglogicnotdialectic,atthetimewhensomeonelikeImre Hermannhadbeguntodevotehimselftoitinwhatwascertainlya veryconfusingfashion,forwantofanydialecticalarticulation butafterallthishasbeenoutlinedthephenomenonthathe qualifiesasRandbevorzuqunq,ofchoice,ofpreferencebythe

26.3.63

XVI189

phenomenal analytic field for "edge" phenomena had already been Iwillcomebacktoitwithyouarticulatedbythisauthor. Thisedgeofthelittlepot,ofthecastrationpotisanedge, foritspart,thatiscompletelyround,asImightsay, completelystraightforward.Ithasnoneofthesecomplicating refinementstowhichIintroducedyouwiththeMobiusstripand whichitiseasymoreover,asIshowedyouyourememberit,I thinkonceontheblackboard,torealisewithaquitematerial vase:itisenoughtojoinuptwooppositepointsofitsedge whileintheprocessturningbackthesurfacesinsuchawaythat theyjoinuplikeintheMobiusribbonandwefindourselves beforeavaseonwhich,inasurprisingfashion,onecanpass withthegreatestofeasefromtheinsidefacetotheoutside facewithouteverhavingtocrosstheedge.Thathappensatthe levelofotherlittlepotsanditisherethatanxietybegins. Ofcourseametaphorlikethisisnotenoughtoreproducewhat mustbeexplainedtoyou.Butthatthisoriginallittlepothas theclosestrelationshipwithwhatisinvolvedasregardssexual potency,withtheintermittentspringingforthofitsforce,is whateverythingthatIcouldcallaseriesofimages,thatare easytoputbeforeyoureyes,ofanerotopropaedeutics,indeed evenproperlyspeakingofanerotics,givesaquiteeasyaccess to.Acrowdofimagesofthistype,Chinese,Japaneseandothers and,Iimagineonesthatarenotdifficulttofindeitherinour culture,willbearwitnesstoitforyou.Thisisnotwhatis anxietyprovoking.Thatthedecanting(transvasement)here allowsustograsphowtheotakesonitsvaluebecauseitcomes intothepotof(~<p) ,takesonitsvaluebybeinghereo,the (9)vasehalfemptyatthesametimeasitishalffullthisis whatItoldyouthelasttimeitisobviousthattoreally completemyimageitisnecessarythatIshouldunderlinethatit isnotthephenomenonofdecantingthatisessential,itisthe phenomenontowhichIhavejustalludedofthetransfigurationof thevase,namelythatthisvaseherebecomesanxietyprovoking, why?Becausewhatcomestohalffillthehollowconstitutedfrom theoriginalcastration,isthesmalloinsofarasitcomes fromelsewhere,thatitisonlysupported,constitutedthrough themediationofthedesireoftheOther.Anditistherethat werediscoveranxietyandtheambiguousshapeofthisedgewhich, becauseofthewayitismadeattheleveloftheothervase, doesnotallowustodistinguisheithertheinsideorthe outside. Anxietythereforecomestoconstituteitself,totakeitsplace inarelationshipbeyondthisemptinessofwhatImightcalla firstphaseofcastration.Andthisiswhythesubjecthasonly onedesireasregardsthisprimarycastration,whichistoreturn toit. Iwillspeaktoyouatlength,aftertheinterruptionthatweare goingtohave,aboutmasochismandthereisofcoursenoquestion ofmytacklingittoday.Ifyouwanttoprepareyourselvesfor it,tounderstandmeaboutit,Iamgivingnowitisalapseon mypartifIdidnotdoitearlierwhenIbegantospeaktoyou

26.3.63

XVI9

informationaboutanarticle,whichisextremelypreciousbecause itisthefruitofverysubstantialexperience.Itisan articlebyamanwhoisindeedoneofthoseinconnectionwith whomIfeelthegreatestsorrowthatcircumstancesdeprivedmeof hiscollaboration,itisthearticlebyGrunberger: "Esquisse d'unethoriepsychodynamiquedumasochisme"intheAprilJune 1954,number2,ofvolumeXVIIIoftheRevueFranaisede Psychanalyse.Idonotevenknowifthisarticlehasbeengiven thefateitmeritselsewherebutwhetherthisforgetfulnessis duetothefactthatitappearedintheshadowofthedisplay surroundingthefoundationoftheInstitutdePsychanalyse,is somethingIwillnottrytosettle.Butyouwillseethere thisisnotatallthefinalwordyouwillseenotedIam onlyinvokingitheretoshowyourightawaythevalueofthe materialthatonecanfindinityouwillseenoted,atthe highpointofthedaybydayobservationoftheanalyticsession, howhavingrecoursetotheveryimageofcastration,tothefact thatIwouldlikethemtobecutoff,cancomeasapeaceful, salutaryoutcometotheanxietyofthemasochist.Whatwehave hereIunderlineitisnotaphenomenonwhichisthefinal wordofthiscomplexstructurebutmoreoveronthispointIhave sufficientlyinitiatedmyformulaforyoutoknowthatIam onthisoccasion,Imeanasregardsthelinkbetweenanxietyand masochism,aimingatapointwhichisquitedifferenttothis pointwithinwhatIcouldcallthemomentarydismayofthe subject.ItisonlyanindicationthatIfindthere.Butthis phaseofcastrationinsofarasthesubjectreturnstoit,inso farasitbecomesapointheaimsat,bringsusbacktowhatI (10)alreadyemphasisedattheendofoneofmylastseminars aboutcircumcision.

Idonotknow,Stein,whereyouhavegottointhecommentary thatyouarepursuingofTotemandTabooandwhetherthishasyet ledyoutotackleMosesandMonotheism.Ithinkthatyoucannot butcometoitandbestruckinitthenbythetotalavoidanceof whatisneverthelessastructuringproblemifoneistofindin theMosaicinstitutionsomethingwhichreflectstheinaugural culturalcomplex,namelywhatwasonthispointthefunctionof theinstitutionofcircumcision.Youshouldnoticethatinany casethereissomethinginthisremovaloftheprepucewhichyou cannotfailtoconnectwiththisfunnylittletwistedobjectthat Ionedaypassedaroundamongyouinamaterialway,sothatyou couldseehowitisstructuredoncetherehasbeenrealisedin theshapeofalittlepieceofcardboard,thisresultofthe centralcutonwhatIillustrated,incarnatedforyouhereinthe shapeofthecrosscap,inordertoshowyouhowthisisolation ofsomething,whichisdefinedpreciselyasashapeincarnating assuchthenonspecularisable,canhavetodowiththe constitutionoftheautonomyoftheo,oftheobjectofdesire.

Thatsomethinglikeanordercanbebroughtintothishole,this constitutivefailureofprimordialcastration,iswhatIbelieve circumcisionincarnatesinthepropersenseoftheword.The circumcisedperson,andcircumcision,havebyalltheir coordinates,alltheritual,indeedmythicalconfiguration,the primordialinitiatoryentranceswhicharethosewhereit

26.3.63

XVI10

operates,themostobviousrelationshipwiththenormativingof theobjectofdesire.Thecircumcisedpersonisconsecrated, thoughlessconsecratedtoalawthantoacertainrelationship totheOther,tothebigO,andthatisthereasonwhythesmall oisinvolved.Itremainsthatweare,atthepointthatI intendtobringthefireofsunlight,namelyatthelevelthatwe canfindintheconfigurationofhistorysomethingwhichis supportedbyabig0,whoistheremoreorlesstheGodofthe JudaeoChristiantradition,itremainstobeseenwhat circumcisionsignifies.Itisextremelyastonishingthatina milieuasJudaeicasthepsychoanalyticmilieu,thattextsgone overahundredthousandtimes,fromtheFathersoftheChurchto theFathersoftheReformation,thatistosayuptothe eighteenthcenturyandagain,totellyouthefruitfulperiods oftheReformationthatthesetextshavenotbeen reinterrogated.NodoubtwhatwearetoldinChapterXVIIofthe BookofGenesis,concerningthefundamentalcharacterofthelaw ofcircumcisioninsofarasitformspartofthepactgivenby Yahwehinthebush,thereferenceofthislawtothetimeof AbrahamthisiswhatChapterXVIIconsistsof,itistodate theinstitutionofcircumcisionfromAbraham,nodoubtthis passageis,itseems,anadditionaccordingtocriticalexegesis, aPriestlyaddition,namelyverynoticeblylaterthanthe YahwisticandtheElohistictradition,namelythanthetwo primitivetextsfromwhichthebooksofthelawarecomposedwe haveneverthelessinChapterXXXIVthefamousepisodewhichdoes notlackhumourwhichconcernsasyouknowtherapeofDinah, thesisterofSimeonandLevi,thedaughterofJacob.Together becauseitisamatterforthemanfromShechemwhokidnapped herofgettingherfromherbrothersSimeonandLevidemand thattheyshouldbecircumcised:"Wecannotgiveoursistertoan uncircumcisedman,wewouldbedishonoured".Wehaveobviously herethesuperimpositionoftwotexts,andwedonotknowwhether itisasinglemanoralltheShechemiteswhoaredoneatthe sametime,inthispropositionofanalliancewhich,ofcourse, couldnotbemadeinthenameofjusttwofamilies,butoftwo races,alltheShechemiteshavethemselvescircumcisedthe resultisthattheyareoutofactionforthreedayswhichthe otherstakeadvantageofinordertocomeandbutcherthem.It isoneofthosecharmingepisodeswhichMonsieurVoltairecould notunderstandandwhichmadehimsaysomanybadthingsabout thisbookwhichissoadmirableasregardstherevelationofwhat iscalledthesignifierassuch. Thisisallthesamedonetomakeusthinkthatitisnotsimply fromMosesthatthelawofcircumcisiondates.HereIamonly highlightingtheproblemsraisedinthisconnection. Undoubtedlyallthesame,becauseMosesisinvolvedandbecause MosesinourdomainisrecognisedasbeinganEgyptian,itwould notbealtogetheruselessforustoposethequestionofwhatis involvedasregardstherelationship'ofJudaeiccircumcisionwith thecircumcisionoftheEgyptians. Thiswillmakemeapologiseforprolongingagain,letussayby fiveorsevenminutes,whatIhavetosaytoyoutodaysothat

26.3.63 whatIhavewrittenontheboardwillnotbelostforyou.

XVI11

Wehavetheassurance,throughacertainnumberofauthorsin antiquityandspecificallythisoldHerodotuswhonodoubttalks nonsenseinsomeplaces,butwhoisoftenveryprecious,andin anycasewholeavesnokindofdoubtthatathistime,namelyat averylowtimefortheJews,theEgyptiansonthewhole practicedcircumcisionheevenmakessuchaprevalentstateof itthathesaysthatitistotheEgyptiansthatalltheSemites ofSyriaandofPalestineowethisusage.Alothasbeensaidon thispointafterallwearenotatallforcedtobelievehim. ThishebizarrelyputsforwardinconnectionwiththeColohidians whichhepretendsareanEgyptiancolony.Butletusleavethat tooneside.

Hemakesofit,Greekasheisandafterallathistime,he couldscarcelyhavemadeanythingelseofitameasureof cleanliness.HeunderlinesforusthattheEgyptiansprefer beingclean,katarrinao,towhatisdescribedasabeautiful appearance,henceHerodotus,Greekasheis,doesnotconceal fromusthatitseemstohimthattocircumciseoneselfisalways (12)todisfigureoneselfalittle. Wehaveluckilymoredirecttestimoniesandsupportsabout Egyptiancircumcision.WehavetwotestimoniesthatIwill describeasiconographicyouwilltellmethatthisisnota lot:oneisfromtheoldempire,itisatSaqqarahinthetomb ofDoctorAnkMaror(?).Itissaidthatheisadoctorbecause thewallsofthetombarecoveredwithfiguresofoperations. Oneofthesewallsshowsustworepresentationsofcircumcision, theotheristotherightofthisone,Ihaverepresentedforyou theoneontheleftIdonotknowhowIsucceededinmaking readableorwhetherIsucceededinmakingreadablemydrawing whichhasasanambitiontolimititselfandtoemphasiseperhaps alittleinthiscasethelinesastheyarepresentedhereis theboywhoisbeingcircumcisedandhereistheorgan.Aboy, whoisbehindhim,holdshishandsbecauseitisnecessarya personagewhoisapriest,aboutwhosedescriptionIwillsayno moretoday,ishereinonehanditisthelefthandheholds theorganoftheother,thisoblongobjectisastoneknife. Thisstoneknife,werediscoverinanothertextwhichhas remaineduptonowcompletelyenigmatic,abiblicaltextwhich saysthataftertheepisodeofthe.BurningBush,whenMosesis advisedthatnobodyinEgyptremembers,moreexactlythatallof thosewhorememberedthemurderthathecarriedoutofan Egyptian,havedisappeared,thathecanreturnhereturnsand, ontheway,thebiblicaltexttellsusontheroadwherehe stops,itusedtobetranslatedinahostelrybutletusleave thatYahweattackshiminordertokillhim.Thisisallthat issaid.Zipporah,hiswife,thencircumciseshersonwhoisa smallchildandtouchingMoses,whoisnotcircumcised,withthe prepuceprotectshimmysteriouslybythisoperation,bythis contact,fromtheattacksofYahwehwhothengoesawayandleaves him,bringshisattacktoahalt.ItissaidthatZipporah circumcisedhersonwithastoneknife.

193.3.62

XVI12

Somefortyyearslaterbecausethereisalsothewholeepisode ofthetrialsimposedontheEgyptiansandthetenplaguesat thetimeofenteringintothelandofCanaan,Joshuareceivesthe order:"Takeastoneknifeandcircumciseallthosewhoarehere, whoaregoingtoenterintothelandofCanaan".Itisthoseand onlythosewhoarebornduringtheyearsinthedesertduring theyearsinthedesert,theywerenotcircumcised.Yahweadds: "NowIwillhaverolledawayfromontopofyou"whichis translatedbylifted,suspended"thecontemptofthe Egyptians".(JoshuaV:VI) Iremindofyouofthesetexts,notbecauseIhavetheintention ofusingthemall,buttostimulateinyouatleastthedesire, theneed,toconsultthem.Forthemoment,Iwillstopatthe stoneknife.

Thestoneknifeindicatesinanycaseaveryancientoriginfor thisceremony,whichisconfirmedbythediscoverybyElliot Smith,nearLuxor,ifIrememberrightly,probablyatMagadeh(?) whichhassomanyotherreasonsforattractingourinterestas (13)regardsthisveryquestionofcircumcision,ofcorpsesfrom theprehistoricperiodnamelynotcorpseswhicharemummified accordingtonormswhichallowsthemtobedatedinEgyptian historywhichcarrythetracesofcircumcision.Thestone knife,allbyitself,shoulddesignateforusadate,anorigin forthisceremonywhichisatleastattheepochthatisdefined astheNeolithicAge.

Besidessothatthereshouldbenodoubt,threeEgyptianletters, thesethree,whicharerespectivelyanS,aB,andaT, S(e)B(e)T,expresslyindicatetousthatitiscircumcisionthat isinvolved.Thesignmarkedhereisanhapax,itisfound nowherebutthereitseemsthatitisaneffaced,aworndown lormeofthedeterminantofthephallus.Wefinditinother inscriptionswhereyouseeitinscribedmuchmoreclearly.

Anotherwayofdesignatingcircumcisionistheonewhichisin thislineandwhichisread"FaHeT",F,theaspiratedHwhichis herethissignwhichisheretheplacentaandheretheTwhichis thesameaswhatyouseehere.Hereadeterminantwhichisthe determinantoflinge(?),itisnotpronounced.Iwouldaskyou totakenoteofittodaybecauseIwillcomebacktoit.Here anotherFdesignates"he"andherethePaNwhichmeansthe prepuce,PaNmeans"tobeseparatedfromone'sprepuce".This hasalsoallitsimportance,forcircumcisionisnottobetaken uniquelyaswhatImightcallatotalitarianoperation,asign. The"tobeseparatedfromsomething"isfromthatmomenthere,in anEgyptianinscription,articulatedproperlyspeaking.AsI toldyou,Iamonlygoingsofarinordernottohavewastedmy timewritingthatheretoday. Thisfunctionoftheprepuce,whichisinawaythegoal,the valuewhichintheseinscriptionsisgiven,asonemightsayto theweightoftheleastword,themaintenance,asImightsay,of theprepuceastheobjectoftheoperation,justasmuchasthe onewhoundergoesit,issomethingwhoseemphasisIwouldaskyou

26.3.63

XVI194

toretainherebecausewerediscoveritinatextofJeremiah whichisjustasenigmatic,justasuninterpreteduptothe present,astheonetowhichIhavejustalludedbeforeyou, specificallytheoneaboutthecircumcisionbyZipporahofher son,Iwillthenhaveanopportunitytocomebacktoit. IthinkIhavealreadysufficientlyinitiatedthefunctionof circumcision,Imeannotsimplyinitscoordinatesof celebration,ofinitiation,ofintroductiontoaspecial consecration,butinitsverystructureasareference,whichis essentiallyinterestingforus,tocastrationasregardsits relationshipswiththestructuringoftheobjectofdesire,I thinkhavesufficientlyinitiatedthingsinthisdirectiontobe ableeffectivelytotakethemfurtherwithyouonthedaythatI havegivenyouforournextappointment.

8.5.63 Seminar17:

XVII195 Wednesday8May1963

Ileftyouonaremarkwhichputinquestionthefunctionof circumcisionintheeconomyofdesire,intheeconomyofthe object,inthesensethatanalysisgroundsitasanobjectof desire.Thislectureendedonatext,onapassagefromJeremiah verses24and25ofChapter9whichintruthhasposedsome difficultiesfortranslatorsthroughouttheages,becausethe HebrewtextIhavetoomuchtosaytoyoutodaytodelayonthe letterofthetextfortheHebrewtext,Iamsaying,shouldbe translated:"Iwillpunisheverycircumcisedmaninhisprepuce", aparadoxicaltermthatthetranslatorshavetriedtogetaround, evenoneofthebestofthem,PaulDorn,bytheformula:"Iwill punisheverycircumcisedmanasifhewereuncircumcised". Iamonlyrecallingthispointheretoindicatetoyouthatitis indeedsomepermanentrelationshiptoalostobjectassuchthat isinvolvedandthatitisonlyinthedialecticofthisobjecto ascutandasnowsustaining,presentifyingarelationship essentialtothisrelationitself,thateffectivelywecan conceiveofwhatisinvolvedatthispointintheBible,whichis notunique,butapointwhichilluminatesbyitsextremeparadox whatisinvolvedeverytimethetermofcircumcisedand uncircumcisediseffectivelyemployedintheBible.Itisnotat allineffect,farfromit,limitedtothislittlebitofflesh whichconstitutestheobjectoftheritual."Uncircumcised lips","uncircumcisedheart",thesearetermswhichrightthrough thistext,appearnumerous,almostcurrent,almostcommon, underliningthatwhatisinvolvedisalwaysanessential separationfromacertainpartofthebody,acertainappendix, fromsomethingwhichinafunctionbecomessymbolicofa relationshiptothebodyitselfhenceforthalienated,and fundamentalforthesubject.

Iwillta!'.ethingsuptodayfromabroader,higher,moredistant pointofview.Youknow,someofyouknow,thatIhavejust returnedfromajourneywhichbroughtmesomenewexperiencesand whichalsobroughtme,initsessenceinanycase,theapproach, theview,theencounterwithsomeoftheseworkswithoutwhich themostattentivestudyoftexts,o.ftheletter,ofthe doctrine,specificallythatofBuddhisminthiscase,mustremain insomewayincompleteandlifeless.

Ithinkthattogiveyousomereportofwhatthisapproachwas, (2)ofthewayinwhich,formeandforyoualsoIthink,itcan

8.5.63

XVII196

beinsertedintowhatisthisyearourfundamentalquestion,the pointwherethedialecticofanxietytakesplace,namelythe questionofdesire,whichinourapproachcanfromnowonbe,can representforusfromnowon,acontribution. Desireineffectconstitutestheessentialbasis,thegoal,the aim,thepracticealsoofeverythingherethatisdenominatedand announcedabouttheFreudianmessage.Somethingabsolutely essential,new,passesthroughthismessage.Thisisthepath alongwhichwhoamongyou,thereissurelysomeoneamongyou, somepeople,Ihope,whocanpickitupalongwhichthis messagepasses.Weshouldjustifyatthepointthatweareat, namelyateverypointofarenewalofourremotivatedelan,what isinvolvedinthislocusthisyear,thissubtlelocus,this locusthatwearetryingtocircumscribe,todefine,to coordinate,thatthislocusneverlocateduptonowinwhatwe couldcallitsultrasubjectiveinfluence,thiscentrallocusof whatonecouldcallthepurefunctionofdesire.Thislocusinto whichweareadvancingalittlefurtherthisyearwithour discourseaboutanxiety,isthelocuswhereIamdemonstrating foryouhowoisformed.

o,theobjectofobjects,theobjectforwhichourvocabularyhas putforwardthetermobjectalityinsofarasitisopposedto thatofobjectivity. TosumupthisoppositioninsomeformulaeIapologisethat theyhavetobesorapidwewillsaythatobjectivityisthe finaltermofWesternscientificanalyticthinking,that objectivityisthecorrelateofapurereasonwhich,whenallis saidanddone,isthefinaltermwhichforusisexpressed,is resumedby,isarticulatedin,alogicalformalism.

Objectality,ifyouhavebeenfollowingmyteachingofaboutthe pastfiveorsixyears,objectalityissomethingelseandto highlightitatitsmostcrucialpoint,Iwouldsay,Iwould formulate,thatincontradistinctiontotheprecedingformula whichIhavejustgiven,objectalityisthecorrelateofapathos aboutthecut,andpreciselyoftheonethroughwhichthissame formalism,logicalformalism,intheKantiansenseofthisterm, thissameformalismrejoinsitsmiscognisedeffectinthe Critiqueofpurereason,aneffectwhichaccountsforthis formalismeveninKant,inKantespeciallyIwouldsay,remains hewnoutofcausality,remainssuspendedonthejustification thatnoapriorihasuptonowmanagedtoreduce,ofthis functionwhichisneverthelessessentialtothewholemechanism ofthelivedexperienceofourmentallife,thefunctionofthe cause.Everywherethecauseanditsfunctionprovetobe (3)irrefutableevenifitisirreducible,almostungraspablefor criticalthinking.Whatisthisfunction?Howcanwejustify itssurvivalagainsteveryattempttoreduceit,anattemptwhich constitutesalmostthesustainedmovementofthewholecritical progressofWesternphilosophy,amovementofcoursewhichwas nevercompleted.Ifthis,thiscause,provestobeso irreducible,itisinsofarasitissuperimposed,asitis identicalinitsfunctiontowhatIamteachingyouthisyearto

8.5.63

XVII197

circumscribe,tohandle,namelypreciselythispartofourselves, thispartofourfleshwhichnecessarilyremains,asImightsay, caughtupintheformalmachine.Thatwithoutwhichthislogical formalismwouldbeabsolutelynothingforus,namelythatitdoes notjustprovideuswith,thatitdoesnotjustgiveusthe framework,notaloneofourthinking,butofourown transcendentalaesthetic,thatitlaysholdofussomewhereand that,thispartthatwegive,notalonethematerial,notalone theincarnationasthinkingbeing,butthefleshypieceassuch tornfromourselves,itisthispieceinsofarasitiswhat circulatesinlogicalformalismasithasalreadybeenelaborated byourworkontheuseofthesignifier,itisthispartof ourselvescaughtupinthemachine,thatcanneverbe recuperated,thisobjectaslostatdifferentlevelsofcorporal experiencewherethecutisproduced,isthesupport,the authenticsubstratumofeveryfunctionassuchofthecause. Thispartofourselves,thiscorporalpartistherefore essentiallyandbyfunctionpartial.Ofcourseitiswellto recallthatitisbody,thatweareonlyobjectal(objectaux) whichmeansobjectofdesireasbodies,anessentialpoint,an essentialpointtorecallbecauseitisoneofthecreative fieldsofnegationtoappealtosomethingelse,tosome substitutethisiswhatneverthelessalwaysremainsatthefinal term,thedesireforthebody,thedesireforthebodyofthe other,andnothingbutthedesireforhisbody.Onecansay,one certainlysays,"ItisyourheartthatIwant,nothingelse",and bythisoneintendstosaysomethingspiritual:theessenceof yourbeingoragainyourlovebuthere,asalways,language betraysthetruth.Thishearthereisonlyametaphorifwedo notforgetthatthereisnothinginthemetaphorwhichjustifies thecommonusageofbooksofgrammarinopposingthepropersense tothefigurativesense.Thisheartcanmeanmanythings, differentthingsaremetaphorisedaccordingtoculturesand tongues.FortheSemites,forexample,theheartistheorganof (4)intelligenceitself.Anditisnotthesenuances,these differencesthatareatstake,thatisnotwhatIwanttodraw yourattentionto.Thisheart,inthisformula:"Itisyour heartthatIwant",ishere,likeeveryotherorganmetaphor,to betakenliterally.Itisasapartofthebodythatit functions,itis,asImightsay,asguts. Afterall,whyhavesomemetaphorssubsistedforsolongandwe knowtheplaces,Ihavealludedtothem,wheretheystilllive, specificallyinthecultoftheSacredHeartwhy,sincethe timeofthelivingliteratureofHebrewandAkkadianregarding whichthislittlebookbyEdouardDornremindsusofthedegree towhichthemetaphoricaluseofnamesofthepartsofthebody isfundamentaltoanyunderstandingoftheseancienttexts,why thisremarkablelackinTouteslespartiesducorps,whichI recommendtoyou,whichcanbefound,whichhasjustbeen reissuedbyGallimard:ifallthepartsofthebodyareparaded intheirproperlymetaphoricalfunctions,thesexualorganand especiallythemalesexualorgan,eventhoughallthetextswhich Ievokedearlieroncircumcisionweretheretobeevoked,the malesexualorganandtheprepuceareremarkably,verystrangely omitted,theyarenoteveninthetableofcontents.

8.5.63

XVII198

Howcanthestillliving,metaphoricalusageofthispartofthe bodytoexpressthatwhichindesire,beyondappearances,is properlywhatisrequiredinthishauntingmemoryofwhatIwould callcausalguts(latripecausale),howcanitbeexplained,if notbythefactthatthecauseisalreadylodgedinthegut,asI mightsay,figuredinthelackandmoreoverinallthemythical discussionofthefunctionsofcausality,itisalwaystangible thatreferencesgofromthemostclassicalpositionstothose whicharethemostmodernised,forexamplethatofMainede Biran:whenitisbythesenseofeffortthathetriestomakeus sensethesubtlebalancearoundwhichthereisplayedoutthe positionofwhatisdetermined,ofwhatisfreewhenallissaid anddone,itisalwaystothiscorporalexperiencethatwerefer. WhatIwillstillputforwardtogiveasenseofwhatisinvolved intheorderofthecauseiswhat,whenallissaidanddone?My arm,butmyarminsofarasIisolateit,thatconsideringitas such,asanintermediarybetweenmywillandmyact,ifIdwell onitsfunction,itisinsofarasitisisolatedforan instant,andthatImustatallcostsandfromwhateverangleI recuperateit,thatImustrightawaymodifythefactthat,ifit (5)isaninstrument,itisneverthelessnotfree,thatImust remainonmyguard,asImightsayagainstthefact,not immediatelyofitsamputation,butofitsnoncontrol,against thefactthatsomeoneelsemaytakeitover,thatImaybecome therightarmortheleftarmofsomeoneelse,orsimplyagainst thefactthatlikeavulgarumbrella,justlikethecorsets whichitappearswerefoundthereinabundanceafewyearsago ImayforgetitintheMetro.

Weanalystsforourpartknowwhatthatmeanstheexperienceof thehystericissomethingsufficientlysignificantforuswhich meansthatthiscomparisoninwhichitcanbeglimpsedthatthe armcanbeforgotten,neithermorenorlesslikeamechanical arm,isnotaforcedmetaphor.ThisisthereasonwhyIreassure myselfofitsbelongingwiththefunctionofdeterminism:itis veryimportanttomethatevenwhenIforgetitsfunctioning, Iknowthatitfunctionsinanautomaticfashion,thatan inferiorstageassuresmethatwhethertonicorvoluntary,all sortsofreflexes,allsortsofconditioningsassuremethatit willnotescape,evenwhenonetakesintoaccountaninstantof inattentiononmypart. Thecausetherefore,thecausealwaysarisesincorrelationwith thefactthatsomethingisomittedintheconsiderationof knowledge,somethingwhichispreciselythedesirewhichanimates thefunctionofknowledge.Everytimethecauseisinvoked,in itsmosttraditionalregister,isinawaytheshade,the pendant,ofwhatistheblindspotinthefunctionofthis knowledgeitself.Thisofcourseissomethingthatwedidnot havetowaitforFreudtoinvoke.AlreadywellbeforeFreuddo IneedtoevokeNietzscheandothersbeforehimothershadput inquestionthedesireinvolvedinthefunctionofknowledge, othershadquestionedwhatPlatohadinmindthatmadehim believeinthecentral,original,creativefunctionofthe "SovereignGood",whatAristotlehadinmindwhichmadehim believeinthissingularprimemoverwhichcomestoputitselfin

8.5.63

XVII199

theplaceoftheAnaxagoriannous,whichneverthelesscanonlybe forhimadeafandblindmovertowhatitsustains,namelythe wholecosmos.Thedesireforknowledgewithitsconsequenceshad beenputinquestion,andalwaysinordertoputinquestionwhat knowledgebelievesitselfobligedtoforgepreciselyasfinal cause. Thissortofcritiqueculminatesatwhat?AtwhatImightcalla sortofsentimentalputtinginquestionofwhatappearstobe moststrippedofsentiment,namelyelaborated,purified,inits (6)finalconsequences.Itcontributestothecreationofamyth whichwillbethemythofthepsychologicaloriginofknowledge: theseareaspirations,instincts,needs:byallmeansaddon religious,youwillonlybetakinganotherstep:wewillbe responsibleforallthedeviationsofreason,theKantian Schwarmereinwithallitsimplicitopeningsontofanaticism. Isthisacritiquethatwecanbesatisfiedwith?Canwenot takefurtherwhatisinvolved?Articulateitinamoredaring fashionbeyondthepsychological,whichisinscribedinits structure.Itishardlynecessarytosaythatthisisexactly whatwearedoing.Whatisinvolvedisnotsimplyafeeling whichrequiresitssatisfaction.Whatisinvolvedisa structuralnecessity:therelationshipofthesubjecttothe signifiernecessitatesthestructuringofdesireinthephantasy. Thefunctioningofthephantasyimpliesatemporallydefinable syncopeofthefunctionofowhichnecessarilyatsomephaseof phantasticalfunctioningiseffacedanddisappears.This aphanisisoftheo,thisdisappearanceoftheobjectinsofaras itstructuresacertainlevelofthephantasy,thisiswhatwe havethereflectionofinthefunctionofthecauseandevery timewefj.ndourselvesconfrontedwiththesameunthinkable handlingofcriticalthinkingwhichneverthelessisirreducible, eventocriticalthinkingeverytimewefindourselves confrontedwiththisfinalfunctioningofthecause,weoughtto searchforitsfoundation,itsrootinthishiddenobject,in thisobjectquasyncopated.Ahiddenobjectisatthesource ofthisfaithintheprimemoverofAristotlewhichIpresented toyouearlierasdeafandblindtowhatcausesit.The certainty,thisverycontestablecertainty,alwayslinkedto derision,thiscertaintywhichisattachedtowhatIwouldcall theessentialistproof,whichisnotonlythatofSaintAnselm becauseyouwillalsorediscoveritinDescartestheonewhich tendstofounditselfontheobjectiveperfectionoftheideain ordertofoundinititsexistence,ifthisprecariousand derisorycertaintymaintainsitselfdespiteallcriticism,ifwe arealwaysforcedfromsomeangletocomebacktoit,itisonly becauseitistheshadowofsomethingelse,ofanothercertainty andthiscertaintyhere,Ialreadynamedit,youcanrecognise it,becauseIalreadycalleditbyitsname:itisthatofthe anxietylinkedtotheapproachtotheobject,thisanxietywhich Itoldyoumustbedefinedasthatwhichdoesnotdeceive,the onlycertainty,whichisfounded,unambiguous,thatofanxiety: anxietypreciselyinsofaraseveryobjectescapesit.Andthe certaintylinkedtotherecoursetotheprimarycauseandthe shadowofthisfundamentalcertainty,itsshadowlikecharacteris

8.5.63

XVII200

whatgivesitthisessentiallyprecariousaspect,thisaspect whichisonlyreallysurmountedbythisaffirmativearticulation whichalwayscharacteriseswhatIhavecalledtheessentialist argument,thissomethingwhichforeverisforitwhatisinit, whatdoesnotconvince.Thiscertainty,therefore,bybeing soughtinthisway,initstruefoundationproveswhatitis:it isadisplacement,asecondarycertainty,andthedisplacement involvedisthecertaintyofanxiety. Whatdoesthisimply?Undoubtedlyamoreradicalputtingin questionthanhaseverbeenarticulatedinourWestern philosophy,theputtinginquestionassuchofthefunctionof knowledge,notatallthatthisputtinginquestionIhopeto makeyouglimpsethishasnotbeendoneelsewhere.Withus,it canonlybegintobedoneinthemostradicalfashionifwe graspwhatismeantbythisformulathatthereisalready knowledgeinthephantasy.

Andwhatisthenatureofthisknowledgewhichisalreadyinthe phantasy?ItisnothingotherthanthefollowingwhichIrepeat rightaway:man,ifhespeaks,thesubjectoncehespeaksis alreadyimplicatedinhisbodybythisword.Therootof knowledgeisthisengagementofhisbody.Butitisnotthis sortofengagementthatundoubtedly,inafruitfulfashion,ina subjectivefashion,contemporaryphenomenologyhastriedto engagewithbyremindingusthatineveryperception,the totalityofthecorporalfunctionthestructureoftheorganism ofGoldstein,thestructureofbehaviourofMauriceMerleau Pontythatthetotalityofcorporalpresenceisengaged.

Noticethatwhatishappeningalongthispath,issomethingwhich undoubtedlyhasalwaysappearedtoustobeverydesirable:the solutionofthebodyspiritdualism.Butitisnotbecausea phenomenology,whichhasmoreoverreapedarichharvestoffacts, makesforusofthisbody,takenatthefunctionallevel,asI mightputit,asortofdouble,ofoppositetoallthefunctions ofthespirit,thatweoughttofindourselvessatisfied. Becauseindeedthereishereallthesamesomeevasion.And moreovereveryoneknowsthatthereactionswhichareundoubtedly ofaphilosophicalnatureorevenofafideistnaturethat contemporaryphenomenologyhasbeenabletoproduceamongthe servantsofwhatcouldbecalledthematerialistcause,that thesereactionsthatithasgivenrisetoareundoubtedlynot (8)unjustified.Thebodyasitisthusarticulated,indeed banishedfromexperienceinthesortofexplorationinaugurated bycontemporaryphenomenology,thebodybecomessomething altogetherirreducibletomaterialmechanisms.Afterlong centuriessucceededinmakingaspiritualisedbodyforusinart, thebodyofcontemporaryphenomenologyisacorporalisedsoul. Whatinterestsusinthequestionofwhatthedialecticinvolved mustbebroughtbackto,insofarasitisthedialecticofthe cause,isnotthatthebodyparticipatesinit,asonemight say,initstotality.Itisnotthefactofpointingoutthat eyesarenotallthatarenecessaryinordertosee,butthat undoubtedlyourreactionsaredifferentaccordingasourskin,as

8.5.63

XVII201

waspointedoutbyGoldstein,whowasnotlackinginperfectly validexperiments,accordingasourskinisbathedornotina certainatmosphereofcolour.Thatisnottheorderofevents involvedhereinthisreminderofthefunctionofthebody.The engagementofthemanwhospeaksinthechainofthesignifier withallitsconsequences,withthishenceforthfundamental springingforth,thiselectivepointthatIearliercalledthat ofanultrasubjectiveradiation,thisfoundationofdesireina word,itisinsofaras,itisnotthatthebodyinits functioningwouldallowustoreduceeverything,toexplain everythinginareductiontothedualismoftheUmweltandthe Innenwelt,itisbecausethereisalwaysinthebody,andbythe veryfactofthisengagementinthesignifyingdialectic, somethingseparated,somethingstatuefied,somethinginertfrom thenon:thatthereisapoundofflesh.

Onecannotbutbeastonishedonceagainatthisturn,atthe unbelievablegeniuswhichguidedthepersonwecallShakespeare tofixinthefigureoftheMerchantofVenicethisthemeofthe poundoffleshwhichremindsusofthislawofdebtandofgift, thistotaLsocialfact,asitisexpressed,hasbeenexpressed sinceMarcelMaussbutitwascertainlynotadimensionthat wasallowedtoescapeatthedawnoftheseventeenthcentury: thislawofdebtdoesnottakeitsweightfromanyelementthat wecouldconsiderpurelyandsimplyasathird,inthesenseof anoutsidethird,theexchangeofwomenorofgoodsasLvi StraussrecallsinhisElementaryStructures.Whatisatstake inapact,canonlybeandonlyisthispoundofflesh,asitis putinthetextofTheMerchant:"tobecutoffbyhimnearest theheart".

(9)Undoubtedlyitisnotfornothingthatafterhavinganimated oneofhismostfieryplayswiththisthematic,Shakespeare pushedbyasortofdivinationwhichisnothingbutthe reflectionofsomethingalwaystouchedonandneverattackedat itsdeepestlevel,attributesit,situatesitwithrespectto thismerchantwhoisShylock,whoisaJew.Thefactismoreover thatIbelievethatnohistory,nowrittenhistory,nosacred book,noBible,tosaytheword,isbetterdesignedthanthe HebrewBibletomakeussensethissacredzoneinwhichthe momentoftruthisevoked,thatwecanexpressinreligiousterms bythisimplacableaspectoftherelationshiptoGod,thisdivine wickednesswhichensuresthatitisalwayswithourfleshthatwe mustdischargeourdebt.

ThisdomainwhichItoldyouisscarcelytouchedonmustbe calledbyitsname.Thisdesignationpreciselyinsofarasi x . givesforusthevalueofdifferentbiblicaltexts,is essentiallycorrelativetowhatsomanyanalystsfeltobliged, andsometimesnotwithoutsuccess,toquestionthemselvesabout, namelythesourcesofwhatiscalledantiSemiticfeeling.Itis preciselyinthesensethatthissacredandIwouldalmostsay forbiddenzoneistheremorelively,betterarticulatedthanany otherplace,andthatitisnotonlyarticulated,butafterall aliveandstillcarriedinthelifeofthispeopleinsofaras itpresentsitself,insofarasitsubsistsofitselfinthe

8.5.63

XVII202

functionthat,inconnectionwitho,Ialreadyarticulatedwitha namewhichIdescribedasthatoftheremainderitissomething whichsurvivestheordealofthedivisionofthefieldofthe Otherbythepresenceofthesubjectofsomethingwhichisthat whichinaparticularbiblicalpassageisformallymetaphorised intheimageofthestump,ofthecuttrunkfromwhichanew trunkreemergesinthislivingfunctioninthenameofIsaiah's secondsonShearJashub,aremainder,aremnant,willcomeback inthisShoritthatwealsofindinaparticularpassageof Isaiah,thefunctionoftheremainder,theirreduciblefunction, theonewhichsurviveseveryordealoftheencounterwiththe puresignifier,thisisthepointwherealreadytheendofmy lastlecturewiththeremarksofJeremiah,ofthepassageof Jeremiahaboutcircumcision,thisisthepointthatIhaveled youtoalready.

ThisisalsotheoneofwhichIindicatedtheChristiansolution andImustsayattenuation,namelythewholemiragewhichinthe Christiansolutioncanbesaidtobeattachedatitsroottothe masochisticoutcome,canbeattributedtothisirreducible relationshiptotheobjectofthecut. (10)InsofarastheChristianhaslearntthroughthedialectic ofredemptiontoidentifyhimselfideallytotheonewhoata particulartimeidentifiedhimselftothisveryobject,tothis refuseleftbydivinevengeance,itisinsofarasthissolution hasbeenlived,orchestrated,ornamented,poeticised,thatI wasable,nolaterthan48hoursago,tohaveonceagainsucha comicencounterwiththeWesternerwhoreturnsfromtheEastand whofindsthatovertheretheylackheart.Theyarewilypeople, hypocrites,dealers,evencheats.GoodGod,theygetinvolvedin allsortsoflittleschemes.TheWesternerwhowastalkingto me,wasaveryaverageillustrator,eventhoughinhisowneyes heconsideredhimselftobearathersuperiorsortofstar.He thoughtthatoverthere,inJapan,ifhehadbeenwellreceived, mygoodness,itwasbecauseinthefamiliesitwasadvantageous forthemtoshowthattheyhadrelationswithsomeonewhohad almostwonthePrixGoncourt.Thesearethings,hetoldme, whichofcourseinmyhereIcensorthenameofhisprovince, letussayaprovincewithhasnochanceofbeingmentionedlet ussayinmynativeCamarguewouldneverhappen.Everyoneknows thathereweallwearourheartsonoursleeves,wearemuchmore honest,youneverhavetheseunderhandmanoeuvres. SuchistheillusionoftheChristianwhoalwaysbelieveshehas moreheartthantheothers,andGodknowswhythisis?The matternodoubtappearsmoreclearlythisiswhatIbelieveI havehelpedyoutoseeasbeingessential,itisthebasisof masochismthisattempttoprovoketheanxietyoftheOther, becomeheretheanxietyofGod,iseffectivelysecondnaturefor theChristian,namelythatthishypocrisyandeveryoneknows thatinotherperversepositions,wearealwayscapablein experienceofsensingtheplayfulnessandtheambiguitythatare alwaystherenamelythatthishypocrisyismoreorlessthe sameaswhatheexperiencesforhispartmoreasoriental hypocrisy.

8.5.63

XVII203

Heisrighttofeelthatitisnotthesame,becausetheOrient isnotChristianised.Andthisiswhatwearegoingtotryto advanceinto. IamnotgoingtodoaKaiserlinhere,Iamnotgoingtoexplain toyouwhatorientalpsychologyis,firstofallbecausethereis noorientalpsychology.Nowadays,thankGod,onegoesdirectly toJapanbytheNorthPole.Thishasoneadvantage:itisto makeussensethatitcouldveryeasilybeconsideredasa peninsula,asanislandoffEurope.Iassureyouthatthisisin (11)effectwhatitis.AndIpredictthatonedayyouwillsee appearingsomeJapaneseRobertMusil.Hewillshowuswherewe havegotto,andthedegreetowhichthisrelationshipofthe Christiantotheheartisstillaliveorwhetheritis fossilised.

ButthisisnotwhereIwanttoleadyoutoday.Iwanttotake anangle,useanexperience,styliseanencounterIhadandwhich Iindicatedtoyouearlier,toapproachsomethingfromthefield ofwhatisstillaliveintermsofBuddhistpracticesand specificallythoseofZen.Youmaywellsuspectthatitisnot duringsuchashortraidthatIcouldhavebroughtyouback anything.Iwilltellyouperhaps,attheendofwhatwearenow goingtogothrough,asentencesimplygatheredfromthepriest ofoneoftheseconvents,atKamakuraprecisely,withwhoma meetingwasarrangedforme,andwho,Iassureyou,withoutany urgingonmypart,broughtmeasentencewhichdoesnotappearto meoutofplaceinwhatwearetryingtodefinehereaboutthe relationshipofthesubjecttothesignifier.Butthisisrather afieldtobereservedforthefuture.TheencountersIspoke aboutearlierweremoremodest,moreaccessibleencounters,more possibletoinsertintothissortoflightningjourneywhichare theonesthetypeoflifeweleadreducesusto.Itis specificallytheencounterwithworksofart.

ItmayseemastonishingtoyouthatIspeakaboutworksofart whilewhatisinquestionarestatues,andstatueswhichhavea religiousfunction,whichwerenotconstructedinprinciplewith thegoalofrepresentingworksofart.Theyundoubtedlyareso howeverintheirintention,intheirorigin.Theyhavealways beenacceptedandfelttobesuch,independentlyofthis function.

Itisthereforeabsolutelynotoutofplaceforustotakethis wayin,inordertoreceivefromthemsomethingwhichleadsus,I wouldnotsay,totheirmessage,buttowhatpreciselytheycan represent,whichisthethingwhichinterestsus:acertain relationshipofthehumansubjecttodesire. I made in haste, with the aim of preserving an integrity which I think is important I recall it to you as I am passing them out to you a little montage of three photos of a single statue, of a statue which is among the most beautiful which can I believe be seen in this zone which has no lack of them, what is involved is astatuewhosequalifications,denominationsIamgoingtogive

8.5.63

XVII204

youandwhosefunctionIamgoingtomakeyouglimpse,andwhich isfoundatthewomen'smonastery,atthenunneryofTodaiJiat Nara.ThiswillallowmetoinformyouthatNarawasthelocus oftheexerciseofimperialauthorityforseveralcenturies, whichareplacedmodestlybeforethe10thcentury.Thereare statuestherewhichdatefromthe10thcentury.Itisoneof thesestatues,oneofthemostbeautiful,theonewhichisfound inthewomen'smonasteryofTodaiJi.Iwilltellyouina momentwhatfunctionisinvolved.Sohandlethemcarefully. BecauseIwouldliketogetthethreephotographsbacklater. Therearetwoofthemwhicharecopiesofoneanother,theyare thesamewithoneenlargedwithrespecttotheother.

WearegoingintoBuddhism.Youalreadyknowenough,Ithink,to knowthattheaims,theprinciplesofthedogmaticsourceaswell astheasceticalpracticewhichcanbereferredtoit,canbe resumed,moreoverareresumedinthisformulawhichinterestsus inthekeenestpossiblewayintermsofwhatwehaveto articulatehere,thatdesireisillusion.Whatdoesthatmean? Theillusionherecannotbutbereferredtotheregisterof truth.Thetruthinvolvedcannotbeafinaltruth. The enunciatingof"isillusion"inthiscaseistobetakeninthe directionwhichremainstobespecifiedofwhatthefunctionof thecreature(1'etre)mayormaynotbe.Tosaythatdesireis illusionistosaythatithasnosupport,thatithasnooutcome innoraimtowardsanything.

Youhaveheardspeak,Ithink,ifonlyinFreud,aboutthe referencetoNirvana.Ithinkthatyoumayhavehereandthere heardspeakofitinsuchafashionthatyoucouldnotidentify ittoapurereductiontonothingness.Theveryusageof negationwhichiscurrentinZenforexample,andtherecourseto thesign"mou"whichisthatofnegationhere,shouldnotdeceive you,thesign"mou"involvedbeingmoreoveraveryparticular negationwhichisa"nottohave".Thisjustbyitselfshouldbe enoughtoputusonourguard.Whatisinvolved,atleastinthe medianstageoftherelationshiptoNirvana,iswellandtruly articulatedinanabsolutelywidespreadfashioninevery formulationofBuddhisttruth:itisalwaysarticulatedinthe senseofanondualism.

Ifthereisanobjectofyourdesire,itisnothingotherthan yourself.Iunderlinethatamnotgivingyoutheoriginal featureofBuddhismhere"Tattuamasi",the"itisyourself" thatyourecogniseintheotherisalreadyinscribedinthe Vedanta.

LetussaythatIamrecallingithere,notbeingableinanyway togiveyouthehistory,oracriticism,ofBuddhism,thatIam onlyrecallingithereinordertoapproachbytheshortestpaths thattowhichbythisexperience,whichyouaregoingtoseewas (13)veryparticular,thatifIlocaliseitthereitisbecause thisexperienceconstitutedaroundthisstatue,anexperienceI hadmyself,ischaracteristicandisusablebyus. TheBuddhistexperience,insofarasbystagesandbyadvances,

8.5.63

XVII205

ittendstomakefortheonewholivesit,whobecomesengagedin itspaths,andalsomoreoverthosewhoengageinitinaproperly asceticfashionasceticsareararitypresupposesastriking referencetothefunctionofthemirrorinourrelationshipto theobject.Effectivelythismetaphorishabitual.Alongtime agoImadeanallusioninoneofmytexts,becauseofwhatI alreadyknewaboutit,anallusiontothissurfacelessmirrorin whichnothingisreflected.Suchwastheterm,thestageifyou wish,thephasetowhichIintendedtoreferfortheprecisegoal thatIwasaimingatatthattime:itwasinanarticleon psychiccausality.

Youshouldnoticeherethatthismirrorlikerelationshiptothe objectisabsolutelycommontoeverygnosology.Theabsolutely commoncharacterofthisreferenceiswhatmakeseveryreference tothenotionofprojectionsoeasyforustoaccedetoandalso soeasytomakeanerrorabout.Weknowhoweasyitisfor outsidethingstotakeonthecomplexionofoursoul,andeven itsform,andevenforthemtocometowardsusintheshapeofa double. Butifweintroducetheobjectoasessentialinthis relationshiptodesire,thebusinessofdualismandof nondualismtakesonacompletelydifferentrelief.Ifthat whichismostmyselfintheoutsideisthere,notsomuchbecause Iprojecteditthere,butbecauseitwascutofffromme,the factofmyrejoiningitornotandthepathsthatIwilltaketo ensurethisrecuperationtakeonallsortsofpossibilities,of eventualvarieties.

Itishere,togiveasensewhichisnotoftheorderof trickery,ofconjuring,ofmagic,tothefunctionofthemirror, Imeaninthisdialecticabouttherecognitionofwhatwe contributeornotwithdesire,thatitisworthwhilemakingsome remarks,thefirstofwhichisthatinafashionwhichIwould askyoutonotedoesnotmeantakingthepathofidealism, thereforethefirstisthisremarkthattheeyeisalreadya mirror,thattheeye,Iwouldgosofarastosay,organisesthe worldinspace,thatitreflectswhatinthemirroris reflection,butwhichreflectionisvisibletothemostpiercing eye,thereflectionthatititselfcarriesoftheworldinthis eyethatitseesinthemirror,thatinawordthereisnoneed (14)fortwoopposingmirrorsfortheretobealreadycreatedthe infinitereflectionsofthehallofmirrors.

Thisremarkabouttheinfinitedeploymentofinterreflected images,whichareproducedoncethereisaneyeandamirror,is notheresimplyfortheingeniousnessoftheremark,whichone cannotseitoowellmoreoverwhereitwouldendup,butonthe contrarytobringusbacktotheprivilegedpointwhichisatthe origin,whichisthesameastheoneinwhichthereisboundup theoriginaldifficultyofarithmetic,thefoundationoftheone andthezero.

Theoneimage,theonewhichismadeintheeye,Imeantheone thatyoucanseeinthepupil,requiresfromthebeginningof

8.5.63

XVII206

thisdevelopmentacorrelatewhichforitspartisnotanimage atall.Ifthesurfaceofthemirrorisnottheretosupportthe world,itisnotbecausenothingreflectsthisworld,the consequencesofwhichwehavetodraw,itisnotbecausethe worldvanisheswiththeabsenceofthesubject,itisproperly whatIsaidinmyfirstformula:itisthatnothingisreflected thatmeansthatbeforespace,thereisaonewhichcontains multiplicityassuch,whichispriortothedeploymentofspace assuch,whichisneveranythingbutachosenspacewherethere canonlybesustainedjuxtaposedthingsaslongasthereisroom. Whetherthisroomisindefiniteorinfinitedoesnothingto changethequestion.ButinordertomakeyouunderstandwhatI meanasregardsthisonewhichisnotmonobutpoly,allinthe pluralIwillsimplyshowyouwhatyoucanseeatKamakurait istheworkofasculptorwhosenameiswellknownKamakurais uptheendofthe12thcentury:itisBuddharepresented, materiallyrepresentedbyastatuethreemetreshigh,and materiallyrepresentedbyathousandothers.Itcreatesa certainimpression,andallthemoresobecauseonepassesin frontofthemalongarathernarrowcorridorandathousand statuestakeupsomeroom,especiallywhentheyareallofhuman size,perfectlymadeandindividualisedthisworktookthe sculptorandhisschoolahundredyears.Youaregoingtobe abletoconsiderfromthefrontandherefromanoblique perspectivetheeffectthathasasyouadvancealongthe corridor.

Thisisdonetomaterialisebeforeyouthatthemonotheism polytheismoppositionisperhapsnotsomethingasclearasitis usuallyrepresentedforyou.Forthethousandandonestatues whicharethereareallproperlyandidenticallythesameBuddha. Besides,byright,eachoneofyouisaBuddha,Isaybyright (15)becauseforparticularreasonsyoumayhavebeenthrowninto theworldwithsomedefectwhichmayconstituteamoreorless irreducibleobstacletogainingaccesstoit.

Itneverthelessremainsthatthisidentityofthesubjectiveone initsmultiplicity,itsinfinitevariability,toafinalone withitscompletedaccesstonondualism,initsaccesstothe beyondofeverypatheticvariation,tothebeyondofeverycosmic wordlychange,issomethinginwhichwehavelessreasonto interestourselvesinasaphenomenon,thanthefactthatit allowsustoapproachtherelationshipsthatitdemonstratesby theconsequencesthatithadhistorically,structurallyinthe thoughtsofmen.

Intruth,Isaidthatwhatisthereunderathousandandone supports,inrealitythesethousandandonesupports,thanksto theeffectsofmultiplicationinscribedinwhatyoucansee,the multiplicityoftheirarmsandofsomeheadswhichcrownthe centralhead,oughttobemultipliedinsuchawaythatthereare inrealityhere33,333ofthesameidenticalbeings.Thisis onlyadetail.

ItoldyouwhataBuddhawas.Itisnotabsolutelyspeakinga God,itisabodhisattva,whichmeanstogoquicklyandcreatea

8.5.63

XVII207

void,asImightsay,analmostBuddha.Itwouldbecompletelya Buddhaifpreciselyitwasnottherebutsinceitisthere,and underthismultipliedform,whichhasdemanded,asyousee,alot oftrouble,thisisonlytheimageofthetroublethatheforhis parttakestobethere.Heisthereforyou.HeisaBuddhawho hasnotyetsucceededindisinterestinghimself,nodoubtbecause ofoneoftheseobstaclestowhichIalludedearlier,to disinteresthimselfinthesalvationofhumanity.Thatisthe reasonwhy,ifyouareBuddhists,youprostrateyourselfbefore thissumptuousgathering.Itisbecauseineffectyouowe,I think,recognitiontotheunitywhichhastroubleditselfinsuch agreatnumbertoremainwithinrangeofbringingyouhelp.For thereisalsosaidtheiconographyenumeratesitthecasesin whichtheywillbringyouhelp.

ThebodhisattvainquestioniscalledinSanscrityouhave alreadyheardtellofhim, Ihopehisnameiswidelyknown, especiallyinourowndayallofthisturnsaroundthissphere vaguelycalledtheelementforanyonewhodoesyogathe bodhisattvainquestionhereisAvalokitesvara. Thefirstimage,theoneofthestatuethatIpassedaroundamong you,isahistoricalavatarofthisAvalokitesvara.Ithustook (16)therightpathbeforebecominginterestedinJapanese.Fate decreedthatIshouldhaveelucidatedwithmygoodmaster Demieville,intheyearswhenpsychoanalysisallowedmemore leisure,thisbook,thisbookwhichiscalledThelotusandthe truelawwhichwaswritteninChinesetotranslateaSanscrit textbyKumarajiva.Thistextismoreorlessthehistorical turningpointatwhichthereappearstheavatar,thesingular metamorphosisthatIamgoingtoaskyoutoremember,namelythat thisbodhisattva,Avalokitesvara,theonewhohearsthetearsof theworld,istransformedfromthetimeofKumarajiva,whoseems tobealittleresponsibleforit,istransformedintoafemale divinity.ThisfemaledivinitywithwhomIthinkyouarealso eversolittleinaccordwith,inharmonywith,iscalledKuan yinoragainKuanshihyin,thisisalsothemeaningthat Avalokitesvarahas:itistheonewhoconsiders,whogoes,whois inagreement.ThatisKuanthisisthewordIspoketoyou aboutearlierandthatisherwailingorhertears. Kuanshihyinthe"shih"cansometimesbeeffacedthe Kuanyinisafemaledivinity.InChinathereisnoambiguity: theKuanyinalwaysappearsinafemaleformanditisatthis transformationandonthistransformationthatIwouldaskyouto dwellforamoment.InJapanthesesamewordsarewritten KannonorKannzenon,accordingtowhetheroneinsertsthereor notthecharacteroftheworld.NotalltheformsofKannonare feminine.Iwouldevensaythatthemajorityofthemarenot. Andbecauseyouhavebeforeyoureyestheimageofthestatuesof thistemple,thesamesanctity,divinityatermwhichistobe leftinsuspenseherewhichisrepresentedinthismultiple form,youcanseethatthecharactersareprovidedwithlittle moustachesandwithtinyoutlinesofbeards.Herethereforethey areinamasculineform,whichcorrespondsineffecttothe canonicalstructurethesestatuesrepresent,the numberofarmsandofheadsinvolved.

8.5.63

XVII208

But it is exactly the same being that is involved as in the first statue whose representations I circulated among you. It is even this form which is specified, can be seen as "NioiYin", Kannon or Kannzenon. "Nioiyin" in this case, which is therefore to be remembered here there is a character which is going to be a little stifled, but after all not too much so "Nioiyin" means "like the wheel of desires". It is exactly the meaning that its correspondentinSanscrithas. Heretheniswhatwefindourselvesconfrontedwith:whatis (17) involvedisrediscoveringinthemostwellattestedfashion theassimilationofpreBuddhicdivinitiesintothedifferent stagesofthishierarchywhichthenceforthisarticulatedasthe levels,thestages,theformsofaccesstothefinalrealisation ofbeauty,namelytothefinalunderstandingoftheradically illusorycharacterofalldesire.

Neverthelesswithinwhatonemightcallthismultiplicity convergingtowardsacentre,whichisinessenceacentreof nowhere,youseeherereappearing,reemerging,Iwouldsayalmost inthemostincarnatedfashion,whatcanbedescribedasmost living,mostreal,mostanimated,mosthuman,mostpatheticina firstrelationshiptothedivineworld,foritspartessentially nourishedandasitwerepunctuatedbyallthevariationsof desire,that[in]whichthedivinity,asonemightsay,orthe HolinesswithacapitalH,whichisalmostthemostcentralfor accedingtobeauty,isincarnatedintheshapeofthefemale divinitywhichhasgonesofarastobeidentifiedattheorigin withneithermorenorlessthanthereapparitionoftheIndian Shakti,namelysomethingwhichisidenticaltothefemale principleoftheworld,thesouloftheworldthisissomething whichoughttomakeuspauseforamoment.

Inaword,Idonotknowwhetherthisstatue,thephotographsof whichIbroughtyou,hassucceededinestablishingforyouthis vibration,thiscommunicationinwhosepresenceIassureyouone canbesensitive,onecanbesensitivenotsimplybecauseas chancewouldhaveitaccompaniedbymyguide,whoisoneofthose JapaneseforwhomneitherMaupassantnorMerimeehaveany secrets,norindeedanythingelseinourliteratureIwillpass overValrybecausepeopletalkaboutnothingelsebutValry allovertheworld,thesuccessofthisMallarmofthenouveaux richesisoneofthemosttroublingthingsthatonecanmeetwith inourtimethereforeletusrecoverourserenityIenterthe littlehallwherethisstatueisandIfindthereonhiskneesa manofthirtytothirtyfiveyearsold,asortofverylowgrade employee,perhapsacraftsman,alreadyreallyverywornoutby existence.Hewasonhiskneesbeforethisstatueandobviously hewaspraying.Thisafterallisnotsomethingthatwewouldbe temptedtoparticipatein.Butafterhavingprayed,hecamevery closetothestatuebecausethereisnothingtopreventit beingtouchedontheright,ontheleftandunderneathhe lookedatitinthiswayforatimethatIcouldnotmeasure,I didnotreallyseetheendofit,itwassuperimposeditselfon thetimeofmyownlook.Itwasobviouslyanoverflowinglook (18) whosecharacterwasallthemoreextraordinarybecauseit

8.5.63

XVII209

wasamatterthere,notIwouldsayofanordinarymanbecause amanwhobehavesinthiswaycouldnotbesuchbutofsomeone thatnothingseemedtopredestine,ifonlybecauseoftheevident burdenthathewascarryingonthisshouldersfromhiswork,for thissortofartisticcommunion. TheothervoletofthisapprehensionIamgoingtogiveyouin anotherform.Youhaveseenthestatue,itsface,this expressionwhichisabsolutelyastonishingbecauseofthefact thatitisimpossibletoreadinitwhetheritiscompletelyfor youorcompletelyinwardlooking.Ididnotknowthenthatit wasaNioiyin,KanzenonbutIhadheardtellforalongtime oftheKuanyin.Iaskedinconnectionwiththisstatueandin connectionwithothersalso,"Isitamanorawoman?"Iwill skipoverthedebates,thedetoursofwhathappenedaroundthis questionwhichisfullofmeaning,Irepeat,inJapan,giventhat theKannonarenotallinaunivocalfashioninafemaleform. AnditistherethatIcansaythatwhatIcollectedisalittle bitlikeasurveyattheleveloftheKinseyReport,thefactis thatIacquiredthecertaintythat,forthisculturedyoungman, familiarwithMerimeeandMaupassantandforagreatnumberof hisfriendswhomIquestioned,thequestionbeforeastatueof thiskind,astowhetheritismaleorfemale,neverarosefor them.

Ithinkthereishereahighlyimportantfactfortacklingwhat wecouldcallthevarietyofsolutionswithrespecttothe problemoftheobject,ofanobjectwhichIthinkIhave sufficientlyshownyou,byeverythingthatIhavejusttoldyou aboutmyfirstapproachtothisobject,thedegreetowhichitis anobjectfordesire.Becauseifyoustillneedotherdetails, youcannoticethatthereisnoopeningoftheeyesinthis statue.NowtheBuddhiststatuesalwayshaveaneyewhichone cannotdescribeasbeingeitherclosedorhalfcloseditisa positionoftheeyewhichcanonlybeacquiredbylearning:itis aloweredlidwhichonlyallowstopassthroughalineofthe whiteoftheeyeandanedgeofthepupilallthestatuesof Buddhaarerealisedinthisway.Youhavebeenabletoseethat thisstatuehasnothingofthiskind:ithassimply,atthelevel oftheeye,akindofsharpridgewhichmeansmoreoverthatwith thereflectionofthewood,italwaysseemsthatthereisaneye operatingabove,butnothinginthewoodcorrespondstoit.I assureyouthatIcarefullyexaminedthewood,Iinformedmyself, andthesolutionthatIwasgiven,withoutbeingablemyselfto settlehowmuchfaithshouldbeaccordedit,itwasgiventome bysomeonewhoisveryspecialised,veryserious,ProfessorHando togivehimhisname,thefactisthatthissplitoftheeyeon thisstatuedisappearedinthecourseofthecenturiesbecauseof therubbingitundergoesIthinkmoreorlessdailyatthehands ofthenunsoftheconvent,ofwhichitisthemostprecious treasure,whentheywanttowipeawaythetearsfromthisfigure parexcellenceofdivinerecourse.Besides,thewholestatueis treatedinthesamefashionasthisedgeoftheeyebythehands ofthereligious,andrepresentsinitspolishthisunbelievable somethingofwhichthephotoherecanonlygiveyouavague reflectionofwhatistheinvertedradiationontoitofwhatone

8.5.63

XVII210

cannotfailtorecogniseassomethinglikealongdesireborne throughoutthecenturiesbythesereclusestowardsthisdivinity ofpsychologicallyindeterminablesex. Ithinkthatthisthetimetodayhasadvancedfarenoughforme nottotakemydiscoursehereanyfurtherwillallowusto illuminatethispassagetowhichwehavenowcome. Thereisattheoralstageacertainrelationshipbetweendemand andtheveileddesireofthemotherthereisattheanalstage, thecomingintoplayfordesireofthedemandofthemother thereisatthestageofphalliccastration,the"minusphallus" theentryofnegativitywithrespecttotheinstrumentofdesire atthemomentofthearousalofsexualdesireassuchinthe fieldoftheother.Butthelimitatwhichweoughtto rediscoverthestructureofoasseparateddoesnotstopforus hereatthesethreestages.ItisnotfornothingthattodayI spoketoyouaboutamirror,notaboutthemirrorofthemirror stage,ofnarcissisticexperience,oftheimageofthebodyasa whole,butofthemirrorinsofarasitisthisfieldofthe Otherwheretheremustappearforthefirsttime,ifnottheo, atleastitsplace,inshorttheradicalmainspringwhichcauses thepassagefromthelevelofcastrationtothemirageofthe objectofdesire. Whatisthefunctionofcastrationinthisstrangefactthatthe mostmovingtypeofobject,becauseitisatonceourimageand somethingelse,canappearatthislevelinacertaincontext,in acertaincultureasbeingunrelatedtosex,hereisthefact, whichIbelievetobecharacteristic,towhichIintendedleading youtoday.

15.5.63 Seminar18:

XVIII211 Wednesday15May1963

IfwebeginfromthefunctionoftheobjectinFreudiantheory, theoralobject,theanalobject,thephallicobjectyouknow thatIquestionwhetherthegenitalobjectishomogeneouswith theserieseverythingthatIalreadyinitiated,asmuchinmy pastteachingasmoreespeciallyinthatoflastyear,indicates toyouthatthisobjectdefinedinitsfunctionbyitsplaceas o,theremainderofthedialecticbetweenthesubjectandthe Other,thatthelistoftheseobjectsoughttobecompleted.It isquitesurethatwehavetodefinetheobjecto,functioningas aremainderofthisdialectic,inthefieldofdesireatother levelsaboutwhichIhavealreadyindicatedenoughforyouto sense,ifyouwish,thatingeneralitissomecuthappeningin thefieldoftheeye,ofwhichthedesireattachedtotheimage isafunction.Anotherthing,beyondwhatweknowalreadyand wherewerediscoverthischaracteroffundamentalcertainty alreadylocatedbytraditionalphilosophyandarticulatedbyKant intheshapeofconsciousness,thefactisthatthismethodof approachintheshapeofowillallowustosituateinitsplace whatuptonowhasappearedasenigmaticintheshapeofa certainimperativedescribedascategorical.

Thepathalongwhichweareproceeding,whichrevivifiesthis wholedialecticbyourveryapproach,namelydesire,thispath alongwhichweareproceedingthisyear,whichisanxiety,I chosebecauseitistheonlyonewhichallowsustoproduce,to introduceanewclarityasregardsthefunctionoftheobject withrespecttodesire.

Howthisiswhatmylastlecturewasintendedtopresentify beforeyouhowwasawholefieldofhumanexperience,an experiencewhichputsitselfforwardasthatofaform,ofasort ofsalvation,theBuddhistexperience,abletopositatits originthatdesireisillusion?Whatdoesthatmean?Itiseasy tosmileattherapidityoftheassertionthateverythingis nothing.Moreover,asItoldyou,thisisnotwhatisinvolved inBuddhism.

Butifforourexperiencealsothisassertionthatdesireisonly illusioncanhaveasense,itisamatterofknowingwherethe sensecanbeintroducedandinawordwherethelureis.

Iteachyoutolocatedesire,tolinkittothefunctionofthe cut,toputitinacertainrelationwiththefunctionofthe

15.5.63

XVIII212

remainder.Thisremainderiswhatsustainsit,whatanimatesit (2) and it is what we learn to locate in the analytic function of thepartialobject. Neverthelessthelacktowhichsatisfactionislinkedisa differentthing.Thisdistancebetweenthelocusofthelackin itsrelationshiptodesireasstructuredbythephantasy,bythe vacillationofthesubjectinhisrelationshiptothepartial object,thisnoncoincidencebetweenthelackthatisinvolved andthefunctionofdesire,asImightsay,inact,iswhat createsanxiety,andanxietyalonefindsitselfaimingatthe truthofthislack.Thisiswhyateverylevel,ateverystage ofthestructuringofdesire,ifwewishtounderstandwhatis involvedinthisfunctionofdesire,weoughttolocatewhatI willcalltheanxietypoint(lepointd'anqoisse).

Thisisgoingtomakeusretraceourstepsalittle,andina movementdeterminedbyallourexperience,becauseeverything happensasif,havingcomewithFreud'sexperiencefacetoface withanimpasse,animpassewhichIputforwardasbeingonly apparentanduptonowneverbrokenthrough,thatofthe castrationcomplex,everythinghappensasifthisobstaclewhich hastobeexplainedwhichperhapswillallowustodayto concludeonsomeaffirmationregardingwhatismeantbyFreud's beingbroughttoahaltonthecastrationcomplexandforthe momentletusrememberitsconsequencesinanalytictheory: somethinglikeareflux,likeareturnwhichleadsthetheoryto searchinthefinalresortforthemostradicalfunctioningof thedriveattheorallevel.

Itisasingularfactthatinanalysis,aglimpsewhichinitially wasthatofthenodalfunctionofwhatisproperlysexualinthe wholeformationofdesire,hasbeenledmoreandmoreinthe courseofitshistoricalevolutiontosearchfortheoriginof alltheaccidents,ofalltheanomalies,ofallthegapswhich canbeproducedatthelevelofthestructuringofdesirein somethingwhichisnotfullyexplainedbysayingthatitis chronologicallyoriginal,theoraldrive,butwhichmuststillbe justifiedasstructurallyoriginal,itistoitthatwhenallis saidanddone,weoughttobringbacktheoriginandthe aetiologyofallthedifficultiesthatwehavetodealwith.

MoreoverIhavealreadytackledwhat,Ibelieve,oughttoreopen forusthequestionofthisreductiontotheoraldrive,in showingthewayitcurrentlyfunctions,namelyasametaphorical modeoftacklingwhatishappeningatthelevelofthephallic object,ametaphorwhichallowstheretobeeludedtheimpasse createdbythefact,whichwasneverresolvedbyFreudinthe (3) finalterm,ofwhatthefunctioningofthecastrationcomplex is,whichveilsitinaway,whichallowsittobespokenof withoutencounteringtheimpasse. But if the metaphor is correct, we ought, at its very level, to see the beginnings of what is involved, of what explains why it is here only a metaphor. And that is why it is at the level of thisoraldrivethatoncealreadyItriedtotakeuptherelative

15.5.63

XVIII213

functionofthecutoftheobject,ofthelocusofsatisfaction andofanxiety,totakethestepwhichisnowproposedtous,the onethatIledyoutothelasttime,namelythepointofjunction betweentheofunctioningas(<P),namelythecastrationcomplex andthislevelthatwewillcallvisualorspatial,accordingto theaspectwearegoingtoenvisageitunder,whichisproperly speakingtheonewherewecanbestseewhatthelureofdesire means.Inordertomakethispassage,whichisourgoaltoday, work,weoughtforamomentmakeabackwardsreference,returnto theanalysisoftheoraldrive,toaskourselves,tospecify clearlywhereatthislevelthefunctionofthecutis.The nurslingandthebreast,itisaroundthesethattherehavecome tobeconfrontedforusallthecloudsofanalytictheatre,the originofthefirstaggressivedrives,theirreflection,indeed theirretortion,thesourceofthemostfundamentalhandicapsin thelibidinaldevelopmentofthesubject.Letusthereforetake upthisthematicwhichitoughtnottobeforgottenis foundedonanoriginalact,essentialforthebiological subsistenceofthesubjectintheorderofmammals,thatof sucking.

Whatisitabout,whatisitthatfunctionsinsucking? Apparentlythelips,thelipsinwhichwerediscoverthe functioningofwhathasappearedtousasessentialinthe structureoferotogeneity,thefunctionofanedge. Thatthelippresentstheappearanceofsomethingwhichis,ina waytheveryimageoftheedge,ofthecut,thisisineffect somethingthatoughttoindicatetous,afterItriedtopicture, todefineoforyoulastyearinthetopology,hereissomething whichoughttomakeussensethatweareonsolidground.

Moreoveritisclearthatthelip,itselftheincarnation,asone mightsayofacut,thatthelipinasingularwayevokeswhat (4)existsataquitedifferentlevel,atthelevelofsignifying articulation,atthelevelofthemostfundamentalphonemes, thosemostlinkedtothecut,theconsonantalelementsofthe phoneme,thesuspensionofacut,beingfortheirmostbasic stockessentiallymodulatedatthelevelofthelips.

Iwillreturnperhaps,ifwehavethetime,towhatIalready indicatedonseveraloccasionsaboutthequestionoffundamental wordsandtheirapparentspecificity,"mama"and"papa".These areinanycaselabialarticulations,evenifsomethingmayput indoubttheirapparentlyspecific,apparentlygeneral,ifnot universaldistribution.

Thatthelip,ontheotherhand,shouldbetheplacewhere symbolically,therecanbegraspedintheformofaritual,the functionofthecut,thatthelipshouldbesomethingwhichcan beatthelevelofinitiationrites,pierced,spreadout, trituratedinathousanddifferentways,isalsosomethingwhich providesuswithareferencethatweareindeedinalivingfield andonerecognisedforalongtimeinhumanpractices. Isthatall?ThereisbehindthelipwhatHomercalledthe

15.5.63

XVIII214

enclosureoftheteethandofthebite.Itisaroundthisthat whatwebringintoplay,inthewaythatwiththedialecticof theoraldrivewebrandishitsaggressivethematic,the phantasticalisolationoftheextremityofthebreast,ofthe nipple,thisvirtualbiteimpliedbytheexistenceofwhatis calledalactealdentition,hereisthethingaroundwhichwe havetomakerevolvethepossibilityofthephantasyofthe extremityofthebreastasisolated,somethingwhichalready presentsitselfasanobjectthatisnotsimplypartialbut sectioned.Itisthroughthisthatthereareintroducedintothe firstphantasieswhichallowmetoconceiveofthefunctionof fragmentationasinaugural,thisisintruthwhatwehavebeen contentwithuptothis.

Doesthatmeanthatwecanmaintainthisposition?Asyouknow, sinceIalreadyemphasisedinaseminarwhichwas,ifIremember rightly,theonethatIgaveon6March,howthewholedialectic ofwhatiscalledweaning,ofseparationoughttobetakenup againinfunctionevenofwhatourexperiencehasallowedusto enlarge,hasappearedtousasitsresonances,asitsnatural reverberations,namelyweaningandtheprimordialseparation, namelythatofbirth.Andthatofbirth,ifwelookatit closely,itweputabitmorephysiologyintoit,issomething (5)welldesignedtoilluminatethingsforus. Thecut,asItoldyou,issomewhereotherthanwhereweputit. Itisnotconditionedbyaggressiontowardsthematernalbody. Thecut,asanalysisteachesus,ifweholdandquitecorrectly soifwehaverecoqnisedinourexperiencethatthereisan analogybetweenoralweaningandtheweaningofbirth,thecutis insidetheindividual,primordialunityasitispresentedatthe levelofbirth,wherethecutismadebetweenwhatisgoingto becometheindividualthrownintotheoutsideworldandthese envelopeswhichformpartofhimself,whicharequaelementsof theegghomogeneouswithwhathasbeenproducedinovular development,whicharethedirectprolongationofhisectoderm, asofhisendoderm,whichformpartofhimself,theseparationis madeinsidetheunitoftheegg.

NowtheemphasisthatIintendtoputhere,dependsonthe specificityintheorganismicstructureofwhatiscalledthe mammalorganisation.Thatwhich,foralmostthetotalityof mammals,specifiesthedevelopmentoftheegg,istheexistence oftheplacentaandevenofaveryspecialtypeofplacenta,the onethatiscalledchorioallantoidian,theonebymeansofwhich forawholephaseofitsdevelopmenttheegginitsintrauterine positionpresentsitselfinasemiparasiticrelationshiptothe organismofthemother. Thereissomethingsuggestive,indicativeforusinthestudyof thetotalityofthismammalorganisation.Atacertainlevelof theappearanceofthisorganismicstructure,specificallythatof twoorders,asonemightsay,thatarecalledthemostprimitive oftheclassofmammals,theonespecificallyofthemonotremes andthemarsupials.Wehavethenotioninthecaseofthe marsupialsoftheexistenceofadifferenttypeofplacenta,

15.5.63

XVIII215

whichisnotchorioallantoid,butchoriovitellin.Wewillnot dwellonthisnuancebutinthemonotremesIthinkthatsince childhoodyouhaveatleastanimageofthemintheshapeof theseanimalswhichinthePetitLarousseswarmintroops,asif theywerepressingatthedoorofanewNoah'sArk,namelythat therearetwo,andsometimesonlyoneofthemperspeciesyou havetheornithorphynchusandalsotheimageofwhatiscalled theechinoideatype.Theyaremammals.Theyaremammalsinwhom (6) theegg,eventhoughplacedintheuterus,hasnoplacental relationshipwiththematernalorganism.Themammary neverthelessalreadyexists,themammaryinitsessential relationshipasdefiningtherelationshipoftheoffspringtothe mother,themammaryalreadyexistsatthelevelofthe monotremes,oftheornithorphynchusandallowstheretobeseen betteratthislevelwhatitsoriginalfunctionis.Toclarify immediatelywhatIintendtosayhere,Iwouldsaythatthe mammarypresentsitselfassomethingintermediary,andthatitis necessaryforustoconceivethatthecutliesbetweenthe mammaryandthematernalorganism.Evenbeforetheplacenta showsusthatthenourishingrelationshipatacertainlevelof thelivingorganismisprolongedbeyondthefunctionoftheegg which,chargedwithallthebaggagewhichallowsitsdevelopment, willmaketheinfantrejoinhisbegettersinacommonexperience ofseekingforfood,wehavethisfunctionoftherelationship thatIhavecalledparasitic,thisambiguousfunctionwherethere intervenesthisamboceptororgantherelationshipofthechild inotherwordstothemammary,ishomologousandwhatallowsus tosayit,isthatitismoreprimitivethantheappearanceof theplacentaishomologouswithsomethingwhichmeansthat thereisononesidethechildandthemammaryandthatthe mammaryisinacertainwaystuckonto,implantedonthemother itisthiswhichallowsthemammarytofunctionstructurallyat thelevelofo.

Itisbecausetheoissomethingfromwhichthechildis separatedinafashionthatisinawayinternaltothesphereof hisownexistence,thatitiswellandtrulythesmallo.

Youaregoingtoseewhatresultsasaconsequenceofthis:the linkoftheoraldriveismadetothisamboceptorobject.What constitutestheobjectoftheoraldriveiswhatweusuallycall thepartialobject,themother'sbreast.Whereatthislevelis whatIearliercalledtheanxietypoint?Itispreciselybeyond thissphere.Fortheanxietypointisatthelevelofthe mother.Theanxietyofthelackofthemotherinthechild,is theanxietyaboutthedryingupofthebreast.Theanxietypoint isnotconfusedwiththelocusoftherelationtotheobjectof desire.

The thing is imaged in a singular way by these animals that in a quite unexpected way I brought out here effectively in the shape of these representatives of the order of monotremes. Everything happens as if this image of biological organisation had been fabricated by some farseeing creator in order to manifest for us thetruerelationshipwhichexistsattheleveloftheoraldrive (7) withthisprivilegedobjectwhichthemammaryis.For,

15.5.63

XVIII216

whetheryouknowitornot,thesmallornithorphynchus,afterits birth,spendsasometimeoutsidethecloacainaplacesituated onthestomachofthemothercalledtheincubatorium.Itis stillatthattimeinitsenvelopes,whicharetheenvelopesofa sortofhardeggfromwhichitemerges,fromwhichitemerges withthehelpofatoothcalledahatchingtoothreduplicated, becauseonemustbeprecise,withsomethingwhichissituatedat theleveloftheupperlipandwhichiscalledthecaronculus. Theseorgansarenotspecialtoit.Theyexistalreadybefore theappearanceofmammalstheseorganswhichallowafoetusto emergefromtheeggexistalreadyatthelevelofthesnakewhere theyarespecialised,snakesonlyhaving,ifIrememberrightly, thehatchingtoothwhiletheothervarietiesofreptilesmore exactlytheyarenotsnakesnamelytortoisesandcrocodiles haveonlythecaronculus.

Theimportantthingisthefollowing:itseemsthatthemammary, themammaryofthemotheroftheornithorphynchus,needsthe stimulationofthislittlearmouredpointthatthemuzzleofthe littleornithorphynchuspresents,tounleash,asonemightsay, itsorganisationanditsfunctionandthatitseemsthatfora weekorsoitisnecessaryforthislittleornithorphynchusto workattheunleashingofthatwhichappearsindeedmuchmore dependentonhispresence,onhisactivitythanonsomething whichbelongsasamatteroffacttotheorganismofthemother, forthatmatterbesides,itgivesuscuriouslytheimageofa relationshipinawaytheinverseoftheoneofthemammary protuberance,becausethesemammariesoftheornithorphynchusare mammariesofahollowkindintowhichthebeakofthebabyis inserted.Heremoreorlessistheplacewheretheglandular elements,themilkproducinglobulesexist.Itisherethatthis snoutwhichisalreadyarmoured,whichhasnotyethardenedin theformofabeakasitwilllaterbecome,thatthissnoutcomes tolodgeitself.

Theexistence,therefore,ofthedistinctionbetweentwooriginal pointsinthemammalorganisation,therelationshiptothe mammaryassuchwillremainstructuringforthesubsistence,the supportoftherelationshiptodesire,forthemaintenanceofthe mammaryspecificallyasanobjectwhichwillsubsequentlybecome thephantasticalobject,andontheotherhandthesituation moreoverintheOther,atthelevelofthemotherandinaway notcoinciding,displaced,oftheanxietypointasbeingthatby whichthesubjecthasarelationshipwithwhatisinvolved,with hislack,withwhatheissuspendedon,theexistenceofthe (8)mother'sorganism,iswhatwemaybeallowedtostructurein amorearticulatedfashionbythissimpleconsiderationofa physiologywhichshowsusthattheoisanobjectseparatedfrom thechild'sorganism,thattherelationshiptothemotherisat thislevelnodoubtanessentialrelationshipwhichisisolated withrespecttothisorganismictotalitywheretheois separated,andismoreovermiscognisedassuchashavingisolated itselffromthisorganism,thisrelationshiptothemother,the relationshipoflackissituatedbeyondthelocuswheretherehas beenplayedoutthedistinctionofthepartialobjectas

15.5.63 functioningintherelationshipofdesire.

XVIII217

Ofcoursetherelationshipisstillmorecomplexandthe existenceinthefunctionofsuckingonthesideofthelips,the existenceofthisenigmaticorganwhichhaslongbeennotedas suchrememberAesop'sfablewhichisthetongue,alsoallows ustobringintoplayatthislevelthesomethingwhichinthe underpinningsofouranalysisistheretonourishthehomology withthephallicfunctionanditssingularasymmetry,oneto whichwewillreturninamoment,namelythatthetongueplaysin suckingthisessentialroleoffunctioningthroughwhatonecan callaspiration,supportsavoid,whosepowerofappealis essentiallywhatallowsthefunctiontobeeffective,andonthe otherhandtobethissomethingwhichcangiveustheimage ofthemostintimateemergence,ofthissecretofsucking,to giveusinafirstformthissomethingwhichwillremainIhave markeditoutforyouinthestateofphantasy,atbottom everythingthatwecanarticulatearoundthephallicfunction, namelytheturninginsideoutofaglove,thepossibilityofan eversionofwhatisatthemostprofoundpointofthesecretof theinterior.

Thattheanxietypointisbeyondthelocuswherethereoperates thefunction,thelocuswherethephantasyisfixedinits essentialrelationshiptothepartialobject,thisiswhat appearsinthisprolongationofthephantasywhichisanimage thatalwaysremainsmoreorlessasanunderlaytothecredence weputinacertainmodeoforalrelationship,theonewhichis expressedintheimageofafunctiondescribedasvampirism.

Itistruethatifinoneorothermodeofhisrelationshipto themotherthechildisalittlevampire,ifheposeshimselfas anorganismsuspendedforatimeintheparasiticposition,it neverthelessremainsthatheisnotthisvampireeither,namely thatatnomomentisitwithhisteeth,oratsourcethatheis goingtosearchinthemotherforthehotandlivingsourceof hisfood.

(9)Neverthelesstheimageofthevampire,howevermythicalit maybe,istheretorevealtous,bytheauraofanxietythat surroundsit,thetruthofthisrelationshipbeyond,whichis profiledintherelationshipofthemessage,theonewhichgives ititsmostprofoundaccent,theonewhichaddsthedimensionof thepossibilityoftherealisedlackbeyondwhatanxietyconceals intermsofvirtualfearsthedryingupofthebreast.What putsinquestionthefunctionofthemotherassuch,isa relationshipwhichisdistinguished,insofarasitisprofiled intheimageofvampirism,isdistinguishedasananxiety provokingrelationship.Adistinctiontherefore,Iunderlineit well,betweentherealityoforganismicfunctioningandwhatis outlinedofitbeyond,thisiswhatisgoingtoallowusto distinguishtheanxietypointfromthepointofdesire.Which showsusthatattheleveloftheoraldrivetheanxietypointis attheleveloftheOther,thatitistherethatweexperience it.

15.5.63

XVIII218

Freudtellsus:"Anatomyisdestiny".Asyouknow,Ihave rebelledatcertainmomentsagainstthisformulabecauseofits incompleteness.Itbecomestrue,asyousee,ifwegivetothe term"anatomy"itsstrictand,Imightsay,etymologicalsense, theonewhichhighlightsanatomythefunctionofthecut, whichmeansthateverythingthatweknowaboutanatomyislinked tovivisection.Andinsofarasthereisconceivablethis fragmentation,thiscuttingofone'sownbody,whichthereisthe locusofelectivemomentsoffunctioning,itisinsofaras destiny,namelytherelationshipofmantothisfunctionwhichis calleddesire,takesonallitsanimation.

Thefundamental"separtition",notseparation,butpartition within,thisiswhatisfoundattheoriginandfromthelevel fromtheoraldriveon,inscribedinwhatwillbethestructuring ofdesire.Hencetheastonishmentatthefactthatwehavegone tothisleveltofindsomemoreaccessibleimageforwhathas alwaysremainedforusandwhy?aparadoxuptonow,namely thatinphallicfunctioning,intheonelinkedtocopulation,it isalsotheimageofacut,ofaseparation,ofwhatwe improperlycallcastration,becauseitisanimageofgelding thatfunctions.Itisnodoubtnotbychance,nornodoubtina misguidedway,thatwewentsearchinginolderphantasiesforthe justificationofwhatwedidnotknowverywellhowtojustifyat thelevelofthephallicphase,itmustneverthelessbenoted thatatthislevelsomethinghasbeenproducedwhichisgoingto (10)allowustofindourbearingsinthewholesubsequent dialectic.

Howineffect,asIhavejustannouncedittoyou,howineffect hasthereoccurredthedivision,thatIhavetaughtyouto distinguishatthetopologicallevel,betweendesire,betweenits function,andanxiety?Theanxietypointisatthelevelofthe Other,atthelevelofthebodyofthe mother.Thefunctioningofdesire,namelyof phantasy,ofthevacillationwhichclosely unitesthesubjecttoo,thatthroughwhich thesubjectfindshimselfessentially suspended,identifiedwiththisalways elided,alwayshiddeno,thatwehaveto detectunderpinningeveryrelationshipofthe subjecttoanyobjectwhatsoever.Youseeit here,andtocallarbitrarilyhereSthe levelofthesubject,thatwhichinmyschema,ifyouwish,my schemaofthevasereflectedinthemirroroftheOther,isfound onthehithersideofthemirror,hereiswhereatthelevelof theoraldrivetherelationshipsarefound.

Thecut,asItoldyou,isinsidethefieldofthesubject desirefunctionswerediscoverheretheFreudiannotionof autoerotisminsideaworldwhich,eventhoughfragmented,bears thetraceofitsfirstenclosurewithinwhatremainsimaginary, virtual,theenvelopeoftheegg.

What is going to happen to it at the level that the castration complexisproduced?Atthislevelwewitnessaveritable

15.5.63

XVIII219

reversalofthepointofdesireandthelocusofanxiety.If somethingispromotedbythenodoubtstillimperfectstyle,but onechargedwithallthereliefofapainfulconquest,madestep bystep,andthissincetheoriginoftheFreudiandiscovery, whichrevealeditinthestructure,itisthecloserelationship betweencastration,betweentherelationtotheobjectinthe phallicrelationship,asanimplicitcontaineroftheprivation oftheorgan. IftherewerenoOtheranditdoesnotmatterwhetherweshould callthisOtherherethecastratingmotherorthefatherofthe originalprohibitiontherewouldbenocastration.

Theessentialrelationshiphenceforthbetweencastrationandall copulatoryfunctioninghasalreadyurgedustotryafterall, followingtheindicationofFreudhimselfwhoindeedtoldus, withoutjustifyingitinanyway,thatatthislevelitissome biologicalrockthatwearetouchinghasthusstimulatedusto (11)articulateaslyinginaparticularityofthefunctionof thecopulatoryorganatacertainbiologicallevelIpointed outtoyouatotherlevels,inotherorders,inotheranimal branches,thecopulatoryorganisahook,itisanorganof fixation,andcanbecalledthemaleorganinthemostsummarily analogicalfashionitsufficientlyindicatestousthatitis importanttodistinguishtheparticularfunctioning,atthelevel oftheorganisationsofwhatarecalledsuperioranimals,ofthis copulatoryorganitisessentialnottoconfuseitsavatars, specificallythemechanismoftumescenceandofdetumescence, withsomethingthatis,initself,essentialfororgasm. Withoutanydoubtwefindourselveshere,asImightsay,inwhat couldbecalledanimitationofexperience.Wearenotgoing,as Ihavealreadytoldyou,totrytoconceiveofwhatorgasmmaybe inacopulatoryrelationshipthatisdifferentlystructured. Besidesthereareenoughimpressivenaturalspectaclesitis enoughforyoutotakeastrollsomeeveningontheedgeofa pondtoseetwodragonfliesflyingcloselyintertwinedandthis spectaclealonesaysenoughaboutwhatwecanconceiveofas beinga"longorgasm"ifyouwillallowmetoconstructaword, byinsertingahyphen.AndmoreoveritisnotfornothingthatI evokedherethephantasticalimageofthevampirewhichisnotat alldreamtoforconceivedofbyhumanimaginationotherwisethan asthismodeoffusionorofprimarysubtractionatthevery sourceoflife,wheretheaggressorsubjectcanfindthesource ofhisjouissance.Undoubtedlytheveryexistenceofthe mechanismofdetumescenceinthecopulationoforganismsmost analogoustothehumanorganism,isalreadysufficientbyitself tomarkthelinkbetweenorgasmandsomethingwhichwelland trulypresentsitselfasthefirstimage,outline,ofwhatcanbe calledthecut,separation,weakening,aphanisis,disappearance atacertainmomentofthefunctionoftheorgan. Butthen,ifwetakethingsfromthisangle,wewillrecognise thatthehomologueoftheanxietypointinthiscaseisfoundin astrictlyinvertedpositiontotheonewhereitwasfoundatthe leveloftheoraldrivethehomologueoftheanxietypointis

15.5.63

XVIII220

theorgasmitselfasasubjectiveexperience.Andthisiswhat allowsustojustifywhatclinicalexperienceshowsusvery frequently,thesortoffundamentalequivalencethereisbetween orgasmandatleastcertainformsofanxiety.Thepossibilityof (12) theproductionofanorgasmatthehighpointofananxiety provokingsituation,theeroticisation,wearetoldfromevery side,theeventualeroticisationofananxietyprovoking situationsoughtforassuch,andinverselyamodeofclarifying, whichmeansthatifwebelievetheuniversallyrenewedhuman testimonyitisworththetroubleafteralltonotethat someoneandsomeoneofFreud'sleveldarestowriteitthe attestationofthisfactthatthereisnothingwhichwhenallis saidanddone,whichrepresents,whenallissaidanddone,for thehumanbeingagreatersatisfactionthanorgasmitself,a satisfactionwhichundoubtedlygoesbeyond,becauseitcanbe articulatedinthisway,asbeingnotsimplyputinthebalance, buttobegiventhefunctionofprimacyandprecedencewith respecttoanythingthatmanisgiventoexperience.Ifthe functionoftheorgasmcanreachthiseminence,isitnotbecause atthebasisoftherealisedorgasmthereissomethingthatI calledthecertaintylinkedtoanxiety,isitnotinthemeasure thattheorgasmistheveryrealisationofwhatanxietyindicates asapointofreference,asadirectionofthelocusof certainty,thattheorgasm,amongallanxieties,istheonlyone whichisreallycompleted.Moreover,itisindeedforthis reasonthatorgasmisnotsuchacommonattainmentandthat,if wemaybepermittedtoindicateitseventualfunctioninthesex inwhichthereispreciselynophallicrealityexceptintheform ofashadow,itisalsointhisverysexthatorgasmremainsfor usmostenigmatic,mostshutoff,andperhapsuptonownever authenticallysituatedinitsfinalessence.

Whatisindicatedtousbythisparallel,thissymmetry,this reversionestablishedintherelationshipbetweentheanxiety pointandthepointofdesire,ifnotthatinneitherofthetwo casesdotheycoincide.Anditishere,nodoubt,thatweought toseethesourceoftheenigmathatisbequeathedtousby Freudianexperience. Inthewholemeasurethatthesituationofdesirevirtually impliedinourexperience,whoseentiretextureasImightsayis notneverthelesstrulyarticulatedinFreud,theendofanalysis comesupagainstsomethingwhichmakesthesignimpliedinthe phallicrelationshiptakeonitsform:the(<p) insofarasit functionsstructurallyas(>)whichmakesittakeonthisform whilebeingtheessentialcorrelateofsatisfaction. IfattheendofFreudiananalysisthepatientwhoeverhemaybe, (13) maleorfemale,laysclaimtothephallusthatweowehim, itisinfunctionofthisinsufficiencythroughwhichthe relationshipofdesiretotheobjectwhichisfundamental,isnot distinguishedateverylevelfromwhatisinvolvedasalack constitutiveofsatisfaction.

Desireisillusory.Why?Becauseitisalwaysaddressed elsewhere,toaremainder,toaremainderconstitutedbythe

15.5.63

XVIII221

relationshipofthesubjecttotheOtherwhocomestosubstitute himselfthere. Butthisleavesopenthelocuswheretherecanbefoundwhatwe designateunderthenameofcertainty.Nofixedphallus,no omnipotentphallusiscapableofclosingthedialecticofthe relationshipofthesubjecttotheOtherandtotherealby anythingwhatsoeverthatisofapacifyingorder.Doesthatmean thatifwetouchherethestructuringfunctionofthelure,we oughttoremainthere,toadmitthatourimpotence,ourlimitis thepointwherethedistinctionbetweenfiniteandindefinite analysisisbroken?Idonotbelieveitisanythingofthekind. Anditisherethatthereinterveneswhatisconcealedinthe mostsecretcoreofwhatIputforwardalongtimeagobeforeyou intheformofthemirrorstage,andwhichobligesustotryto orderinthesamerelationship,desire,objectandanxietypoint, whatisinvolvedwhenthereintervenesthisnewobjectofor whichthelastlecturewastheintroduction,thebringinginto play,namelytheeye. Ofcourse,thispartialobjectisnotnewinanalysis,andIwill hereonlyhavetoevokethearticleofthemostclassicauthor, theonemostuniversallyacceptedinanalysis,namelyMr Fenichel,onthesubjectoftherelationshipsofthescoptophilic functiontoidentification,andeventhehomologiesthatheis goingtodiscoverbetweentherelationshipsofthisfunctionand theoralrelationship.

Neverthelesseverythingthathasbeensaidonthissubjectcan justlyappearinsufficient.Theeyeisnotanaffairwhichonly refersustotheoriginjustofmammalsorevenofvertebrates orevenofchordatatheeyeappearsintheanimalscaleinan extraordinarilydifferentiatedfashionandinitswhole anatomicalappearanceessentiallysimilartotheonethatwe haveattheleveloforganismswhichhavenothingincommon withus.

ThereisnoneedIalreadyrepeateditonseveraloccasions, andtheimagesthatItriedtomakefunctionaltorecallthat theeyeexistsattheleveloftheprayingmantis,butalsoat thelevel,whatismoreattheleveloftheoctopus.Imeanthe eyewiththisparticularityaboutwhichweoughttointroduce (14)fromthebeginningthisremark:itisalwaysadoubleorgan, andanorganwhichingeneralfunctionsinadependencyona chiasma,namelythatitislinkedtotheintersectingknotwhich linkstwopartsofthebodythatwecall"symmetrical".

Therelationshipoftheeyetoamoreorlessapparentsymmetry fornoorganismisentirelysymmetricalissomethingthatought tobetakenintoaccountbyusinthehighestdegree.Ifthere issomethingthatmyreflectionsofthelasttime,ifyou rememberthem,namelytheradicalfunctionofthemiragewhichis includedfromthefirstfunctioningoftheeye,thisfactthat theeyeisalreadymirrorandalreadyimpliesinawayinits structure,thetranscendentalaestheticfoundationasonemight sayofaconstitutedspaceissomethingthatmustyielditsplace

15.5.63

XVIII222

tothis:thefactisthat,whenwespeakaboutthis transcendentalstructureofspaceasanirreduciblegivenof aestheticapprehensionofacertainfieldoftheworld,this structureonlyexcludesonething:thatofthefunctionofthe eyeitself,ofwhatitis. Itisamatteroffindingthetracesofthisexcludedfunction whichisalreadysufficientlyindicatedforusasahomologueof thefunctionofointhephenomenologyofvisionitself.Herewe canonlyproceedbypunctuation,indication,remark.

Undoubtedlyforalongtimeallofthose,specificallythe mystics,whohaveattachedthemselvestowhatIcouldcallthe realismofdesire,forwhomeveryattempttoreachtheessential isindicatedasovercomingthisgluelikestickinessthatthere isinanappearancewhichisalwaysconceivedofasvisual appearance,thesealreadyputusonthepathofsomethingwhich moreoverallsortsofnaturalphenomenabearwitnessto,namely thefactthat,outsidesucharegister,thereremainsenigmatic, namely,Iamsaying,whatarecalledmimeticappearanceswhich manifestthemselvesintheanimalscaleexactlyatthesame level,atthesamepointthattheeyeappears.Atthelevelof insectswherewemightbeastonishedwhynotthatapairof eyesshouldbeapairconstructedlikeourown,atthesamelevel thereappearsthisexistenceofadoublestainwhichthe physiologists,whethertheyareevolutionistsornot,torment themselvesaboutbyaskingwhatisitthatcancondition somethingwhosefunctioninginanycaseisthatofexercisinga fascinationontheotherwhetheritisapredatorornot. Thelinkingofthepairofeyesand,ifyouwish,thelook,toan (15)elementoffascinationthatisenigmaticinitself,tothis intermediarypointatwhicheverysubjectivesubsistenceseemsto belostandtobeabsorbed,togooutoftheworld,thisindeed iswhatiscalledfascinationinthefunctionofthelook.Here is,ifImaysay,thepointofradiationwhichallowsustoput inquestionwhatthefieldofvisionrevealstousinthe functionofdesire.Moreoveritisstrikingthatintheattempt toapprehend,toreason,tologicizethemysteryoftheeye,and thisatthelevelofallthosewhohaveattachedthemselvesto thisformofmajorcaptureofhumandesire,thephantasyofthe thirdeyeiseverywheremanifest.Idonotneedtotellyou, thatontheimagesoftheBuddhawhichIgaveanaccountofthe lasttime,thethirdeyeinsomemannerisalwaysindicated.Do Ineedtoremindyouthatthisthirdeyewhichispromulgated, promoted,articulatedinthemostancientmagicoreligious tradition,thatthisthirdeyereboundsuptothelevelof Descarteswho,acuriousthing,onlyfindsitssubstratumina regressive,rudimentaryorganthatoftheepiphysis,ofwhichone cansayperhapsthatatapointoftheanimalscalesomething appears,isrealised,whichwillcarrythetraceofanancient emergence.Butthisafterallisonlyareverie.Wehaveno testimony,fossilorotherwise,oftheexistenceoftheemergence ofthisapparatusdescribedasathirdeye. Inthismethodofapproachingthefunctionofthepartialobject

15.5.63

XVIII

223

whichistheeye,inthisnewfieldofitsrelationshipto desire,whatappearsascorrelativeofthesmallofunctionof theobjectofthephantasy,issomethingthatwecancallazero pointwhoseinfluenceoverthewholefieldofvisioniswhat givestothisfield,asourceforusofasortofpacification expressedforalongtime,fromearliesttimes,intheterm contemplation,ofsuspensionfromthetearingapartofdesire,a fragilesuspensioncertainly,asfragileasacurtainalways readytobepulledbacktounmaskthemysterythatithides. ThiszeropointtowardswhichtheimageoftheBuddhaseemsto carryusintheverymeasurethathisloweredeyelidsprotectus fromthefascinationofthelookwhileatthesametime indicatingtousthisfigurewhichinthevisibleisalways turnedtowardstheinvisible,butwhosparesusit,thisfigure inawordtakesentirechargeofthepointofanxietyhere,itis notfornothingthatitsuspends,thatitapparentlycancelsout themysteryofcastration.

(16)ThisiswhatIwantedtoindicatetoyouthelasttimebymy remarksandthelittlesurveythatIhadmadeabouttheapparent psychologicalambiguityofthesefigures.Doesthatmeanthat thereisinanywaythepossibilityofentrustingoneself,of assuringoneself,inasortoffieldwhichhasbeencalled Apollinian,youcanseeitalsoasnoetic,contemplative,where desirecouldbesupportedbyasortofpunctualcancellationfrom itscentralpoint,byanidentificationofowiththiszeropoint betweenthetwoeyeswhichistheonlylocusofuneasewhich remains,inourrelationshiptotheworld,whenthisworldisa spatialworld?Undoubtedlynot,becausepreciselythereremains thiszeropointwhichpreventsusfromfindingintheformulaof desireillusionthefinaltermofexperience. Herethepointofdesireandtheanxietypointcoincide,butthey arenotconfused,theyevenleaveopentousthis"nevertheless" onwhichthereeternallyreboundsthedialecticofour apprehensionoftheworld.Andwealwaysseeitreemergingin ourpatients,andneverthelessIlookedtoseehowonesays "nevertheless"inHebrew,thatwillamuseyouandnevertheless thisdesirewhichhereisresumedinthenullificationofits centralobject,isnotwithoutthisotherobjectthatsummons anxiety:itisnotwithoutobject.Itisnotfornothingthatin this"notwithout,passans"Igaveyoutheformula,the essentialarticulationoftheidentificationtodesire.Itis beyond"itisnotwithoutanobject"thatthereisposedforus thequestionofknowingwheretheimpasseofthecastration complexcanbegonebeyond.Thisiswhatwewilltacklethenext time.

22.5.63 Seminar19:

XIX224 Wednesday22May1963

Roughlyspeaking,toprovideasummaryorientationforsomeone whomightarrivebychanceinthemiddleofthisdiscourse,I wouldsay,thattocomplete,asIannouncedtoyou,whatcouldbe calledtherange(gamme)ofobjectrelationsseenintheschema whichisbingdevelopedthisyeararoundtheexperienceof anxiety,hemightthinkthatwewererequiredtoaddtotheoral object,theanalobject,thephallicobject,preciselyinsofar aseachoneisgeneratorofandcorrelativetoatypeofanxiety, twootherstagesoftheobject,bringingtofivethenthese objectalstagesinthemeasurethattheywillallowustofind ourbearingsthisyear. Youhave,Ithink,sufficientlyunderstoodthatforourlasttwo meetingsIhavebeendealingwiththeeyestage,Iwillnotfor allthatleaveittodaybutratherfindmybearingsfromthereby makingyoupassontothestagethatmustbetackledtoday,that oftheear.

Naturally,asItoldyou,myfirstwordwas"roughly"andI repeated"summarily"inthefollowingsentence,itwouldbe completelyabsurdtobelievethatthisiswhatisinvolvedexcept inagrosslyesotericandobscurantistfashion.

Itisamatteratalloftheselevelsofmappingoutwhatthe functionofdesireisandnoneofthemcanbeseparatedfromthe repercussionsthatithasonalltheothersandfromamore intimatesolidarity,theoneexpressedinthefoundationofthe subjectintheOtheralongthepathofthesignifier,withthe completionofthisfunctionofmappingoutintheadventofa remainderaroundwhichthereturnsthedramaofdesire,adrama whichwouldremainopaquetousifanxietywerenottherein ordertoallowustorevealitsmeaning.

Thisoftenleadsus,apparently,towhatImightcallerudite kindsofdigressions,inwhichcertainpeoplemayseesomecharm orothertobeexperiencedorreprovedinmyteaching.Believe methatitisnotwithoutreticencethatIadvanceintothem,and thatmoreoverthemethodaccordingtowhichIproceedinthe teachingthatIgiveherewillbestudieditissurelynotfor metospellouthereitsrigourthedaywhenpeoplewill search,inthetextsthatmayexist',betransmissible,bestill understoodofwhatIamgivingyouhere,itwillbeseenthat thismethodisnotessentiallydistinguishedfromtheobject whichisbeingtackled.

22.5.63

XIX225

(2)OnlyIremindyouthatitarisesfromanecessity.Thetruth ofpsychoanalysisisonly,atleastinpart,accessibletothe experienceofthepsychoanalyst.Theveryprincipleofapublic teachingstartsfromtheideathatitisnevertheless communicableelsewhere.Thishavingbeenposited,nothingis resolved,sincethepsychoanalyticexperienceitselfmustbe oriented,otherwiseitgoesastray.Itgoesastrayifitbecomes partial,aswehavenotceasedfromthebeginningofthis teachingtopointoutindifferentpartsoftheanalytic movement,specificallyinthatwhich,farfrombeingadeepening, acomplementgiventotheindicationsofFreud'slastdoctrinein theexplorationofthemainspringsandofthestatusoftheego, farfrombeingacontinuationofhisindicationsandofthis work,wehaveseentherebeingproducedwhatisproperlyspeaking adeviation,areduction,averitableaberrationofthefieldof experience,nodoubtdeterminedalsobysomethingthatwecan callacertainopacitywhichoccurrredinthefirstfieldof analyticexploration,theonewhichforuscharacterises,which ischaracterisedbythestyleofillumination,thesortof brilliancewhichremainsattachedtothefirstdecadesofthe diffusionofFreudianteaching,totheformoftheresearchesof thisfirstgenerationoneofwhomIwillmakeintervenetoday morequicklystill,TheodoreReikIbelieve,andspecifically amongthenumerousandimmensetechnicalandclinicalworks,one oftheseworksquiteincorrectlydescribedasapplied psychoanalysis,theonesthatheproducedonritual. Wewillseeinitwhatisinvolvedherespecificallyisthe articlewhichappearedinImagosomewhere,IthinkIremember aroundtheeighthyear,Ithinkmoreorless,Iforgottobring thetextheretoday,whichappearedinImagoaroundtheeighth yearIbelieve,onsomethingwhosenameyousee herewritteninHebrewlettersastudyonthe shofarofsuchverve,ofsuchbrilliance,ofsuch fecundity,ofwhichonecansaythatthestyle, thepromises,thecharacteristicsoftheepochin whichitisinscribed,sawthemselvessuddenly extinguished,thatnothingequivalenttowhatwasproducedat thatperiodwentonafterwards.Andthereforeithastobe asked,whythisinterruptionitself.

Thefactisthoughthat,ifyouwish,inthisarticleyouwill seetherebeingmanifested,Iwouldsay,despiteallthepraise thatImightgivetoitspenetration,toitshighsignification, youwillseetherebeingmanifestedtothehighestdegreethis sourceofconfusion,thisprofoundlackofgroundingwhosemost (3)tangibleandmostmanifestformisinwhatIwouldcallthe purelyanalogicaluseofthesymbol.IbelievethatImustfirst ofallclarifywhatthisshofaris,unsureasIamthateverybody hereknowswhatitdesignates.IfIbringforwardthisobject today,foritisanobjectwhichisgoingtoservemeasapivot, asanexample,tomaterialise,tosubstantiatebeforeyouwhatI meanaboutthefunctionofo,theobjectpreciselyatthisstage, thefinalone,whichinitsfunctioningwillallowustoreveal thefunctionofsustentationwhichlinksdesiretoanxietyin whatisitsfinalknot.

22.5.63

XIX226

Youwillunderstandwhy,ratherthanimmediatelynamingwhatthis 0 infunctionis,atalevelwhichgoesbeyondthatofthe occultationofanxietyindesire,sinceitislinkedtoaritual object,ratherthannamingitimmediatelyyouwillunderstandwhy 1 approachitbyhandlinganobject,aritualobject,this shofar,whichiswhat?Ahorn,ahornintowhichoneblowsand whichallowsasoundtobeheard,which,undoubtedly,Icanonly saytothoseherewhohavenotheardit,totreatthemselvesat theritualdetourofJewishfeasts,theoneswhichfollowtheNew Year,whichiscalledRoshhaShanah,whichendonthedayofthe GreatPardon,theYomKippur,totreatthemselvestoanaudition, inthesynagogue,ofthethricerepeatedsoundoftheshofar. Thishorn,whichinGermaniscalledtheWidderhorn,isalso calledtheram'shorn,Qurenhayobel,inhiscommentary,his explanationintheHebrewtext.Itisnotalwaysaram'shorn besidestheseexamplesofitwhicharereproducedinReik'stext, whicharethreeparticularlypreciousandcelebratedShofars belongingifIrememberrightly,tothesynagoguesofLondonand ofAmsterdamrespectively,presentthemselvesasobjectswhose generaloutline,whichismoreorlesslikethis,makesonethink ratherofwhatitis,forthisishowitisclassically.The Jewishauthors,whohavebeeninterestedinthisobject,andh?.ve madeacatalogueofthediverseshapes,notethatthereisaform oftheshofarwhichisasortofhorn,whichismadeofthehorn ofawildgoat.

Naturallythisobjectwhichundoubtedlyhasthisappearancemust muchmoreprobablybetheresultofmanufacture,ofalteration, ofreductionwhoknows?Itisanobjectofconsiderablelength, biggerthantheonethatIampresentingforyouthereonthe blackboardtheresultthereforeperhapsofthe instrumentalisationofagoat'shorn.

(4)Thosethenwhohavetreatedthemselves,orwhowilltreat themselves,tothisexperiencewillbearwitness,Ithink,asis generallythecase,tothecharacter,toremainwithinlimits whicharenotatalllyrical,totheprofoundlymoving,stirring character,tothearousalofanemotionwhoseresonancespresent themselvesindependentlyoftheatmosphereofrecollection,of faith,indeedofrepentanceinwhichitmanifestsitself,which resonatesalongthemysteriouspathsofproperlyauricularaffect whichcannotfailtotouchtoareallyunusual,inhabitualdegree allofthosewhocomewithinrangeofhearingitssound. AroundthequestioningwhichReikcarriesonaroundthefunction ofthisshofar,onecannotfailtoperceiveandthisiswhat seemstomecharacteristicoftheepochtowhichthiswork belongstobestruckatoncebytherelevance,bythesubtlety, bythedepthofthereflectionswithwhichthisstudyteems.It isnotsimplystrewnwiththem,reallyitproducesthemround aboutsomecentreorotherofintuition,offlair.Thereiseven thedatethatthisappeared.Nodoubtwehavesincelearnt perhapsbysomeresiftingorother,alsobytheerosionofthe method,theresonanceofwhatishappening,ofwhatemergesfrom thesefirstblaseworksatthetimeandIcanbearwitness toyouofitcomparedtoeverythingthatwasproducedinterms

22.5.63

XIX227

oferuditeworks,andbelieveme:youknowthateverythingI bringhereisnourishedonmypartbywhatareoftenin appearanceenquiriescarriedtotheverylimitsofthe superfluous.Believeme:becauseofthedifferenceineffectof thismodeofinterrogatingthebiblicaltexts,thoseinwhichthe shofarisnamedascorrelativetothemajorcircumstancesofthe revelationgiventoIsrael,onecannotfailtobestruckthat Reik,fromapositionwhichinprinciple,attheveryleast repudiatesalltraditionalattachments,indeedplacesitselfeven inanalmostradicalandcriticalposition,nottosayoneof scepticism,howmuchmuchmoreprofoundlythanalltheapparently morerespectfulcommentators,theonesmorecarefultopreserve theessentialofamessagegoesforhispart,goesmoredirectly towhataopearsessentiallytobethetruthofthehistorical adventinthesebiblicalpassageswhichIceaselesslyevoked,and reportedbythem.

Iwillreturntothis.Butitisnonethelessalsostriking,if youconsultthesearticles,toseethedegreetowhichatthe end,hegetshimselfandundoubtedlyforwantofanyofthese (5)theoreticalsupportswhichallowastyleofstudytogive itselfitsproperlimitsintoinextricableconfusion.Itis notenoughfortheshofarandthevoicethatitsupportstobe presentedasananalogyofthephallicfunctionandineffect whynotbuthowandatwhatleveliswherethequestionbegins, itisalsotherethathecomestoahalt.Itisnotenoughthat suchanintuitive,analogicalhandlingofthesymbol,leavesthe interpreter,atacertainlimit,strippedofallcriteriafor therenottoappearatthesametimethedegreetowhichthereis telescopedtogether,thedegreetowhichthereturnsintoasort ofmixtureandconfusionthatisproperlyspeakingunnameable, everythingthatTheodoreReikendsupwithatthefinaltermin hislastchapter.Togiveyouanideaofit,Iwillonly indicatetoyouthatthesepoints,stepbystepandthroughthe intermediarypreciselyoftheram'shorn,oftheindicationwhich isgiventousbythisofwhatisquiteobvious,ofthe underpinning,moreexactlyofthecorrelation,whynotsayfor thatmatteroftheconflictwithawholereality,withawhole socialtotemicstructureinthemidstofwhichthewhole historicaladventureofIsraelisplunged.How,alongwhatpath, howdoesithappenthatnobarrierstopsReikinhisanalysisto preventhimattheendfromidentifyingYahwewiththegolden calf?MosescomingdownfromSinai,radiatingwiththesublimity oftheloveofthefather,hadalreadykilledhim,andtheproof, hetellsus,iswhathebecomes:thisveritableenragedbeingwho isgoingtodestroythegoldencalfandmaketheHebrewseatit inapowderedform.Inthis,ofcourse,youwillrecognisethe dimensionofthetotemicmeal.Thestrangestthing,isthat sincetherequirementsoftheproofhavetopassthoughthe identificationofYahwenotwithacalf,butwithabull,,the calfinquestionwillthereforenecessarilyrepresentason divinityalongsideafatherdivinity.Weweretoldaboutthe calfonlytoconfusetheissue,toleaveusinignoranceofthe factthattherewasalsoabull.Sotherefore,sinceMoseshere istheson,murdererofthefather,whatMoseshasdestroyedin thecalfthroughthesequenceofallthedisplacementsfollowed

22.5.63

XIX228

inawaythatquiteobviouslymakesussensethatwelackany referencepoints,anycompasscapableoforientatingus,thisis supposedto.bethereforeMoses'ownensign:everythingis consumedinasortofselfdestruction.Thisisonlyindicated toyou,Iamonlygivingyouhereacertainnumberofpoints whichshowyoutheextremesatwhichacertainformofanalysis canarrivebyitsexcesses.Wewillhaveotherexamplesinthe (6) lectureswhichfollow. Forourpart,wearegoingtoseewhatseemstoustodeserveto beretainedhere,andforthisreasontoknow,toknowwhatwe aresearchingfor,thisiswhatemergesfromwhatIwas introducingearlierasconstitutingthenecessityofour research,namelynottoabandonwhatinacertaintext,whichis noneother,afterall,thanthefoundationaltextofasociety, myown,theonewhichisthereasonwhyIamhereintheposition ofgivingyouthisteaching:thefactisthatintheprinciple whichdeterminestheverynecessityofateaching,ifthereisin thefirstplacethenecessityofcorrectlysituating psychoanalysisamongthesciences,thiscanonlyhappenby submittingitstechniquetotheexaminationofwhatitreally presupposesandaccomplishes.

Asregardsthistext,IindeedhavetherighttorememberthatI hadtodefenditandtoimposeit,evenifthoseafterallwho allowedthemselvestobedrawnalongbyitsawinitperhaps nothingbutemptywords.Thistextappearstometobe fundamentalforwhatthistechniquepresupposesandaccomplishes infactisoursupportingpoint,theonearoundwhichweoughtto makerevolvethewholearrangement,eventhestructuralone,of whatwehavetodeploy. Ifweoverlookthefactthatwhatisinvolvedinourtechnique, isahandling,aninterference,indeedatthelimita rectificationofdesire,butwhichleavesentirelyopenandin suspensethenotionofdesireitselfandwhichnecessitatesits perpetualputtinginquestion,wewillundoubtedly,ontheone handwanderaboutintheinfinitenetworkofthesignifieror, goingbacktothebeginning,relapseintothemostordinarypaths oftraditionalpsychology.WhatReikdiscoversinthecourseof thisstudy,whichisalsowhathecannotdrawanyadvantagefrom inhisday,forwantofknowingwheretoputtheresultofhis discovery,isthefollowing:hediscoversthroughtheanalysisof biblicaltextsIwillnotenumerateallofthemforyoubut thosewhicharehistoricalImeanthosewhichclaimtoreferto arevelatoryeventandareinTheBookofExodusinChapter19 and20,respectively,verses16to19forChapter19,verse18 forChapter20.Itissaidinthisfirstreferencethatinthis thunderingdialoguecarriedonveryenigmaticallyinasortof tumult,averitablestormofsoundsbetweenMosesandtheLord, thereismentionedthesoundoftheshofar,anenigmaticfragment (7) ofthisversealsoindicatesthatatthattimeitwas severelyprohibited,andnotonlyforanyman,butforanyliving being,toapproachthecirclesurroundedbylightningand flashes,inwhichthisdialogueistakingplace.Thepeoplecan goupwhentheyhearthevoiceoftheshofar.

22.5.63

XIX229

Apointthatissocontradictoryandenigmaticthatinthe translationthesenseisweakened,anditissaidthatsomecan comeup.Asregardswho,theaffairremainsobscure.Theshofar isalsoexpresslymentionedagainafterthedescriptionofthe dialogue.Itisthepresenceineverythingthatisperceivedby thepeoplewhoaresupposedtobeassembledaroundthismajor event,thesoundoftheshofarismentionedagain. Reik'sanalysiswhichhecannotfindanythingtosayto characterise,tojustify,otherthanthefollowing,whichisthat ananalyticexplorationconsistsinseekingthetruthindetails, undoubtedlythischaracteristicisneitherfalsenorinexact,but wecannotfailtoseethat,ifitisasortofexternal criterion,that,ifthisistheassuranceofastyle,itisnot forallthateithersomethingwhichcarriesinitselfthis criticalelement,thatofdiscerningwhatdetailoughttobe retained.

Undoubtedlywehavealwaysknownthatthisdetailwhichguides us,istheveryonewhichappearstoescapeeventheintentionof theauthor,appearstoremaininawayopaque,shutoffwith respecttotheintentionofhispreaching,butagainitisnot necessarytofindamongthemacriterion,ifnotofhierarchy,at leastoforder,ofprecedence.

Inanycase,wecannotfailtosenseIamforcedtogothrough thestepsofhisproofthatsomethingcorrectistouched,as regardsordering,articulating,thefundamentaloriginaltexts mentioningthefunctionoftheshofar,thosewhichcompletethose ofExoduswhichIhavejustnamedforyouwhichthoseofSamuel, thesecondbookinChapterVI,withthoseofthefirstbookof Chronicles,ChapterXIII,thefunctionoftheshofarbeing mentionedeverytimeitisamatterofrefounding,ofrenewingin somenewdeparture,whetheritisperiodicorwhetheritis historical,thealliancewithGod.Thecomparisonofthesetexts with,inaddition,otheroccasionalusesoftheinstrument,at firstthosewhichareperpetuatedinthesefeasts,annualfeasts insofarastheythemselvesrefertotherepetition,andthe rememberingproperlyspeakingofthealliance,anexceptional occasionalso,thefunctionoftheshofarinwhatiscalledthe (8)ceremonyofexcommunication,theoneunderwhich,asyou know,on27July1656Spinozafell,wasexcludedfromtheHebrew communityaccordingtothemostcompleteforms,thosewhich specificallyinvolved,inadditiontotheformulaofmalediction pronouncedbythehighpriest,thesoundingoftheshofar.

Thisshofar,throughtheilluminationwhichiscompletedby bringingtogetherdifferentoccasionswhenitisbothsignalled forusandeffectivelyentersintooperation,iswellandtruly andnothingother,ReiktellsusthanthevoiceofGod,of Yahwe,ImeanthevoiceofGodhimself.

Thispoint,whichdoesnotappearfromaquickreadingtobe somethingopentoexploitationbyus,takesoninaperspective whichistheonepreciselytowhichIamformingyouherefor itisnotthesamethingtointroducesomemoreorless

22.5.63

XIX230

wellmarkedcriterionorforthesecriteriamoreoverintheir novelty,withtheefficacytheyinvolve,toconstitutewhatis calledaformation,thatistosayareformationofthemindin itscapacityfortacklingthings. Undoubtedlyforus,suchaformulacandelayusonlyinsofaras itmakesusperceivesomethingwhichcompletestherelationship ofthesubjecttothesignifierinwhatfromacertainfirst grasponecouldcallhis[its?]passageal'acte.

Ofcourse,Ihavehereattheextremeleftoftheaudience someonewhocannotfailtobeinterestedbythisreference,itis ourfriendStein,andIcantellyouonthisoccasionthe satisfactionIexperiencedinseeingthathisanalysisofTotem andTaboo,andofwhatcanberetainedforusinit,ledhimto thissortofnecessitywhichmakeshimspeakaboutsomethingthat hecallsbothprimordialsignifiers,andthathecannotdetachat thesametimefromwhathealsocallsact,namelywhathappens whenthesignifierisnotsimplyarticulated,whichonlysupposes itsliaison,itscoherencewiththeothersinachain,butwhen itisproperlyspeakingutteredandvocalised.

I,formypart,here,wouldhavesome,evenmanyreservations abouttheintroductionofthetermactwithnofurther commentary.Ionlywantforthemomenttoretainthefollowing whichputsusinthepresenceofacertainform,notoftheact, butoftheobjectoinsofaraswehavelearnedtolocateit, insofarasitissupportedbythissomethingwhichmustbe detachedfromthephonematicisationassuch,whichis linguisticshastaughtustonoticeitwhichisnothingother thanasystemofoppositionwithwhichitintroduces (9)possibilitiesofsubstitution,ofdisplacement,ofmetaphor andofmetonymies,andwhichmoreoverissupportedbyany materialwhatsoevercapableofbeingorganisedinthese distinctiveoppositionsbetweenoneandall.Theexistenceof theproperlyvocaldimension,ofthepasssagetosomethingof thissystem,intoanutterancewhichispresentedeverytimeas isolated,andasadimensioninitselffromthemomentthatwe perceiveintowhatthereisplungedcorporallythepossibilityof thisdimensionofutterance.Anditisherethatyouwill understand,ifyouhavenotalreadyguessedit,thattheretakes onitsvalueasanexemplaryintroductionyoucanwellimagine thatitisnottheonlyonethatIcouldhavemadeuseofthis exemplaryobjectwhichItookthistimeintheshofar,becauseit iswithinourreach,becauseitis,ifitistrulywhatitis saidtobe,thatitisatasourcepointfromwhichtheresprang forthatraditionwhichisourown,becausealreadyoneofour ancestorshasbusiedhimselfwithitandhashighlighteditin analyticenunciatingbutforthatmatterthetuba,thetrumpet, andotherinstrumentsforitisnotnecessary,eventhoughit cannotbejustanyinstrumentwhatsoever,thatisshouldbea windinstrument:intheAbyssiniantraditionitisthedrum.If IhadcontinuedtogiveyouanaccountofmytripsinceI returnedfromJapan,Icouldhavegivenanaccountofthevery particularfunctionwhichinJapanesetheatre,initsmost characteristicform,thatoftheNo,isplayedpreciselybythe

22.5.63

XIX231

style,theform,ofcertaintypesofpulsationsinsofarasthey have,withrespecttowhatwecouldcalltheprecipitationand thekernelofinterest,areallyprecipitatingandbinding function.Icouldalso,inreferringtotheethnographical field,findmyself,asmoreoverReikhimselfdoes,remindingyou ofthefunctionofwhatiscalledthe"bullroarer",namelythis instrumentwhichisveryclosetoakindoftop,eventhoughit isconstructedverydifferently,thatintheceremoniesof certainAustraliantribes,givesrisetoacertaintypeof droningthatthenameoftheinstrumentcomparestonothingother thanthebellowingofanox,thenamedesignatesit,andwhich deservesineffecttobelinkedinReik'sstudytothisfunction oftheshofarinsofarasittooismadeequivalenttowhat otherpassagesofbiblicaltextscalltheroaring,thebellowing ofGod.Theinterestofthisobjectistoshowusthelocusof thevoiceandofwhatvoice,wewillseeitsmeaningbytaking ourbearingsinitsconnectioninthetopographyofthe relationshipofthebigOtherletusnotgotooquicklybut bythuspresentingthisvoicetousintheexemplaryformwhere (10)itisinacertainfashioninpotency,inaseparatedform becauseitiswhatisgoingtoallowusatleasttogiveriseto acertainnumberofquestionswhicharehardlyeverraised.

Thefunctionoftheshofarentersintoactionatcertain periodicmomentswhicharepresentedatfirstsightasthe renewalsofwhat?Ofthepact,oftheAlliance.Theshofarsdo notarticulatethebasicprinciples,thecommandmentsofthis pact.Itisneverthelessquiteobviouslypresented,evendownto thedogmaticarticulationinscribed,initsconnection,inthe verynamethatiscurrentofthemomentthatitintervenes,as havingthefunctionofremembering,Zikor,toremember. Zikor,toremember,afunctionsupportedbythreesigns. wnicnsupporttnerunctionormemoryinsotarasitappears appropriatehere.WhatImightcallthemedianmomentinthese threesolemnblastsoftheshofar,attheendofthedaysof fastingofRoshHashanah,iscalledZikronandwhatisinvolved, ZikronTerway,designatesproperlythesortoftremolowhichis propertoacertainwayofsoundingtheshofarletussaythat itisthesoundoftheshofar,theZikronot,whichisthe remembrancethatislinkedtothissound.Theremembrance,isno doubttheremembranceofsomething,ofsomethingonwhichone meditatesintheprecedingmoments,theremembranceofthe Hakada.

TheHakada,isthemomentofAbraham'ssacrifice,thepreciseone atwhichGodstopshisalreadyconsentinghandtosubstitutefor thevictim,Isaac,theramthatyouknowaboutorthinkyouknow about.Doesthatmeanneverthelessthatthisverymomentofthe pactisentirelyincludedinthesoundoftheshofar,thememory ofthesoundoftheshofar,thesoundoftheshofarassustaining thememory?Isthequestionnotposedofwhohastoremember? Whythinkthatitisthefaithful,sincetheyhavejustspenta certaintimeofrecollectionaboutthismemory? Thequestionhasaverygreatimportance,becauseitleadsus

22.5.63

XIX232

properlyspeakingontotheterrainwheretherewasoutlined,in themindofFreud,inthemoststrikingway,thefunctionof repetition.Isthefunctionofrepetitiononlyautomaticand linkedinawaytothereturn,tothenecessarytransportinginto thebatteryofthesignifier,orhasitindeedanotherdimension whichitdoesnotappearinevitabletomeetwithinour experience,ifithasameaningandtheonewhichgivesmeaning tothisinterrogationcarriedbythedefinitionofthelocusof theOtherwhichischaracteristicofwhatIamtryingtosustain beforeyou,thattowhich,inaword,Iamtryingtoaccommodate yourmentalstyle.Istheonewhosememorymustbeawakened,I meantoensurethatheforhispartremembers,notGodhimself? Suchisthepointtowhichwearebrought,Iwouldnotsayby thisverysimpleinstrument,becauseintrutheachonecanonly experience,beforetheexistenceandthefunctionofsuchan (11)apparatus,attheveryleastaprofoundfeelingof embarrassment.

Butwhatisinvolvedforusnowistoknowwhereitistobe insertedasaseparateobject,inwhatdomain,notatallinthe oppositionofinsidetooutside,whosewholeinadequacyyousense clearlyinthiscase,butwithreferencetotheOther,inthe stagesoftheemergence,oftheprogressiveestablishmentofthe subject,withreferencetothisenigmaticfieldwhichisthe Other,atwhatmomentcanthereintervenesuchatypeofobject withitsfacefinallyunveiledinitsseparableformandwhichis nowcalledsomethingthatweknowwell,thevoice,whichweknow well,whichwebelieveweknowwellinitswastescraps,thedead leaves,intheformofvoices,thestrayvoicesofpsychosis,and itsparasiticcharacterintheformoftheinterrupted imperativesofthesuperego.Itisherethatwemustinorder toorientateourselves,tomapoutthetrueplace,thedifference ofthisnewobjectwhichrightlyorwronglyforreasonsof presentationIthoughtIshouldtackleforyoutoday,present underaformthatissomehowmanageable,ifnotexemplary,itis herenowthatwehavetomapout,toseethedifference,the newnessitintroducescomparedtothepreviouslyarticulated stage,theonewhichconcernedthestructureofdesireinanother exemplaryformbutasyoucannotbutsense,averydifferent oneandregardingwhichitseemsthateverythingwhichis revealedinthisnewdimensioncanonlybe,andcannotbutbe,at firstmaskedinthisotherpreviousstage,thatwemustfora momentreturntoittomakebetteremerge,standoutfromthenew thingthatiscontributedbythelevelatwhichthereappearsthe formofowhichiscalledthevoice.

Letusreturntotheleveloftheeyewhichisalsothatof space,notthespacethatwequestionintheshapeofafixed transcendentalaesthetic,eventhoughundoubtedlythereference towhatKantcontributedinthisterrainisveryusefultous,or asleastveryhandy,butinwhatspacepresentsforusas characteristicinitsrelationshiptodesire. The origin, the basis, the structure of the function of desire as suchis,inastyle,inaformeachtimetobespecified,this

22.5.63

XIX233

centralobjectoinsofarasitisnotaloneseparated,but elided,alwayselsewherethanwheredesiresupportsitand neverthelessinaprofoundrelationshipwithit.Thischaracter ofelisionisnowheremoremanifestthanatthelevelofthe functionoftheeye.Andthisiswhythemostsatisfyingsupport ofthefunctionofdesire,thephantasy,isalwaysmarkedbya relationshipwiththevisualmodelsinwhichitfunctions commonly,asonemightsay,inwhichitgivesthetoneofour desiringlife.

Inspaceneverthelessanditisinthis"nevertheless"that (12)therebelongsthewholeimportoftheremarkapparently nothingisseparated.Spaceisalwayshomogeneous,whenwethink intermsofthespaceofthisbody,ourown,fromwhichits functionemerges.Itisnotidealism,itisnotatallbecause spaceisafunctionofthemindthatitcannotjustifyanykind ofBerkeleyianismspaceisnotanidea,spaceissomethingwhjoh hasacertainrelationshipnotwiththemindbutwiththeeye. Eventhisbodyhasafunction.Whatone?Thisbodyisappended. Oncewethinkaboutspace,wemustinawayneutraliseitby localisingitthere.Thinksimplyofthewayinwhichthe physicistmentionsontheblackboardthefunctionofabodyin space.Abodyisanythingwhatsoeveranditisnothingitisa point,itissomethingwhichallthesamemustbelocalisedthere bysomethingforeigntothedimensionsofspace,exceptby producingthereinsolublequestionsabouttheproblemof individuation,inconnectionwithwhichyouhavealreadyheardon morethanoneoccasion,Ithink,themanifestation,the expressionofmyderision.

Abodyinspace,issimplysomethingwhichattheveryleastis presentedasimpenetrablethereisacertainrealismaboutspace thatiscompletelyuntenableandasyouknowbecauseIamnot goingtospelloutitsantinomiesforyouherenecessary.The veryusageofthefunctionofspace,howeverpunctualyoumay supposeittobe,supposesanindivisibleunity,atonce necessaryandunsustainable,whichiscalledtheatom,completely impossibleofcoursetoidentifywithwhatisdescribedin physicsbythistermwhich,asyouknow,hasnothingatomicabout it,Imeanthatitisinnowayindivisible.

Spaceisofnointerestunlessthereissupposedthisfinal resistancetodivision,becauseithasnorealusageunlessitis discontinuous,namelyiftheunitwhichoperatestherecannotbe intwopointsatthesametime.

Whatdoesthatmeanforus?Itisthatthisspatialunit,the point,canonlyberecognisedasinalienable,whichmeansforus thatitcannotinanycasebeo.

WhatdoeswhatIamintheprocessoftellingyoumean?Ipress forwardtomakeyoufallagainintothenetsofwhatyouhave alreadyheard.Thismeansthatthroughtheformi(o),myimage, mypresenceintheOtheriswithoutaremainder.Icannotsee whatIamlosingthere.Thisisthemeaningofthemirrorstage

22.5.63

XIX234

andthemeaningofthisschemathatwasforgedforyou,whose placeyounowseeexactly,sinceitistheschemadestinedto groundthefunctionoftheidealego/egoidealinthefashionin whichtherelationshipofthesubjecttotheOtherfunctions, whenthespecularrelationship,calledinthiscasethemirrorof thebigOther,dominatesit.

(13)Thisimagei(o),thespecularimage,thecharacteristic objectofthemirrorstage,hasmorethanoneseductionwhichis notsimplylinkedtothestructureofeachsubject,butalsoto thefunctionofknowledge.Itiscomplete,Imeanclosed,itis Gestaltlike,namelymarkedbythepredominanceofthegood shape,andisalsointendedtoputusonourguardagainstthis functionoftheGestalt,insofarasitisfoundedonthe experienceofthegoodshape,anexperiencepreciselythatis characteristicofthisfield.Fortorevealthedegreeof "appearance"inthissatisfyingcharacteroftheformassuch, indeedoftheideaofitsrootednessinthevisualeidos,tosee andtearapartwhatisillusoryinit,itisenoughtomakea stainonit:toseewherethispointofdesireisreally attached,toperform"thefunction",ifyouwillallowmethe equivocalusageofacurrenttermtosupportwhatIwanttoget youtohear,astainisenoughtoperformthe"function"of beautyspot(graindebeaut). Thespotsandoutcomesyouwillallowmeheretocontinuethe equivocationofbeautyshowtheplaceofo,herereducedto thiszeropointwhosefunctionIevokedthelasttime.The beautyspot,morethantheshapethatitstains,iswhatlooksat me.Anditisbecauseitlooksatmethatitdrawsmeso paradoxically,sometimesmoreandwithmorerightthanthe lookofmypartnerforthislookreflectsmeafteralland insofarasitreflectsme,itisonlymyreflection,an imaginarybuoy.Thereisnoneedforthecrystallinelenstobe thickenedbyacataracttoblindvision,toblinditinanycase tothefollowing:theelisionofcastrationatthelevelof desireinsofarasitisprojectedintotheimage. Theblanknessoftheeyeoftheblindman,ortotakeanother imageinthismoment,whichIhopeyouremember,eventhoughit isanechoofanotheryear,thejetsettersofLadolcevita,at thefinalphantasticalmomentsofthefilmwhentheyadvanceas itwerejumpingfromoneshadowtoanotherofthepinewood throughwhichtheymaketheirwaytogettothebeach,theysee theinerteyeofthemarinecreaturethatthefishermenarein theprocessofdraggingashore,itisbythisthatwearemost lookedat,anditshowshowanxietyemergesinthevisionofthe locusofdesirethatitdetermines.

Thisisthevirtueoftattooing,andIdonotneedtorecallfor youthisadmirablepassageofLeviStrauss,whenheevokesthe outbreakofdesireoftheparchedcoloniserswhentheygetto thiszoneofParanawherethereawaitthemthesewomenentirely coveredwithshimmeringoverlappingdrawingsinthegreatest varietyofshapesandofcolours.

22.5.63

XIX235

Attheotherend,whatIwouldevoke,isthat,asImightsay, inreferringtotheemergencewhich,asyouknow,ismoremarked (14)formebycreationistratherthanevolutioniststyleof forms,theappearanceofthevisualapparatusitself,atthe levelofthefringesofthelamellibranchiata,beginswitha pigmentarystain,thefirstappearanceofadifferentiatedorgan inthesenseofasensibilitywhichisalreadyproperlyspeaking visual.Andofcoursethereisnothingmoreblindthanastain! Tothespot(mouche)mentionedearlier,Iwouldaddthespots beforetheeyes(mouchevolante)whichgivethefirstwarningof organicdangertopeopleintheirfifties.

Zeroofo,itisthroughthisthatvisualdesiremasksthe anxietyofwhatisessentiallylackingtodesire,ofwhat determinesuswhenallissaidanddone,ifweremainwiththis fieldofvision,tograsponly,tobeeveronlyabletograspany livingbeingaswhatheisinthefieldofthepurevisual signal,whatethologycallsadummy,apuppet,anappearance. o,whatislacking,isnonspecular,itisnotgraspableinthe image.Ihighlightedforyoutheblankeyeoftheblindmanas beingatoncetherevealedandtheirremediablyhiddenimageof scoptophilicdesire.Theeyeofthevoyeuritselfappearstothe otheraswhatitis:asimpotent.Thisindeediswhatallowsour civilisationtoputinaboxwhatsupportsitindifferentforms thatareperfectlyhomogeneouswiththedividendsandthebank reservesthatitdetermines. Thisrelationshipofdesiretoanxietyinthisradicallymasked form,linkedbythatveryfacttothestructure,ofdesireinits mostdeceptivefunctions,dimensions,isthespecificallydefined stagetowhichwehavenowtoopposehowmuchopennessisbrought toitbytheotherfunction,thatwhichIintroducedtodaywith thisaccessory,whichisnotneverthelessaccidental,ofthe shofar.

DoIneed,inclosingmydiscourse,toanticipateonwhatIwill articulatestepbystepthenexttime,namelyhowourmost elementarytradition,thatofFreud'sfirststeps,commandsusto distinguishthisotherdimension.Whatdoesittellus?Here againIwouldpayhomagetomyfriendSteinforhaving articulateditverywellinhisdiscourse:ifdesire,hesays andIsubscribetohisformula,becauseIfinditmorethan brilliantifdesirewereprimordial,ifitwerethedesireof themotherwhichdeterminedthebringingintotheplayofthe originalcrime,wewouldbeinthefieldofvaudeville.The origin,Freudtellsusinthemostformalfashionandby forgettingitthewholechainisundoneanditisbecauseofnot havingsecuredthisbeginningofthechainthatanalysis,Iam speakingaboutanalysisintheoryasinpractice,seemsto undergothisformofdispersionwhereonecanaskoneselfon certainoccasionswhetherthereisanythingthatcanstill preserveitscoherenceitisbecausethemurderofthefather andeverythingthatitdeterminesiswhatreverberatesifone istounderstandwhatonehopesisonlyametaphorinReik's mouthasthebellowingofafelledbullwhichstillmakes

22.5.63

XIX236

itselfheardinthesoundoftheshofar,letussaymoresimply thatitisfromtheoriginalfactinscribedinthemythofmurder asthestartingpointofsomethingwhosefunctionwehave henceforthtograspintheeconomyofdesire,itisstartingfrom thatasaprohibitionimpossibletotransgressthatthereis constitutedinthemostfundamentalformtheoriginaldesire. Itissecondarywithrespecttoadimensionthatwehaveto tackleherewithrespecttotheessentialobjectwhichfunctions aso,thisfunctionofthevoiceandwhatitcontributesinterms ofnewdimensionsintherelationshipofdesiretoanxiety.This isthedetourthroughwhichthefunctionsofdesire,object, anxietyaregoingtoregaintheirvalueateverystage,rightup tothestageoftheorigin.Andinordernottofailto anticipateyourquestionsandtotellyoualsoperhaps,totell thosewhohaveposedthem,thatIamnotforgettingthisfield andthefurrowsthatIhavetotraceinitinordertobe complete,youmayhavenoticedthatIhavenotgivenanaccount eitheroftheanalobjectoroftheanalstage,atleastsincewe havetakenupourtalksagain:itisasamatterbecauseitis properlyspeakingimpossibleifitisnotwithinthecontextofa totalreworkingofthefunctionofdesire,startingfromthis pointwhichbecauseitwasenouncedherethelasttimeisthe mostoriginal,theonethatIwilltakeupthenexttimearound theobjectofthevoice.

29.5.63 Seminar20:

XX237 Wednesday29May1963

Onreading,thesedays,someworkswhichhaverecentlyappeared abouttherelationshipsoflanguagetothought,Iwasledto representformyselfwhatafterallIcanindeedateverymoment putinquestionformyself,namelytheplaceandthenatureof theanglefromwhichIamtryingtoattacksomething,whichin anycasecanonlybe,withoutthatwhatwouldIhavetotell youaninevitable,necessarylimittoyourunderstanding.This doesnotpresentanyparticulardifficulty,initsobjective principle,allprogressofasciencedependingasmuchandmore onthephasichandlingofitsconceptsasontheextensionofits grasp,whichmaygiverisehereImeaninthepsychoanalytic fieldtoanobstaclewhichdeservesparticularreflectionit isnotaseasilysolubleasthepassagefromoneconceptual systemtoanother,forexamplefromtheCopernicansystemtothe Einsteiniansystem.Forafterallonemaysupposethatfor sufficientlywelldevelopedminds,thatdoesnotcreatea difficultyforverylong.Formindssufficientlyopento mathematics,itdoesnottaketoolongforittobecomeclear thattheEinsteinianequationsholdup,areincludedintheones whichprecededthem,thatitsituatesthemasparticularcases, thereforecompletelyresolvesthem.

Thatdoesnotmeanthattheremaynotbe,astheexperienceof historyproves,amomentofresistance,butitisshort.Inthe wholemeasurethat,asanalystsImeaninthewholemeasureof ourimplication,whetheritismoreorless:tointerestoneself alittleinpsychoanalysisisalreadytobealittleimplicated initinthewholemeasureofourimplicationinpsychoanalytic technique,wehavetoencounterinthedevelopmentofconcepts thesameobstacledesignated,recognised,asconstitutingthe limitsofanalyticexperience,namelycastrationanxiety. Iti s asifwhatreachesmefromdifferentdistancesfromwhereI amspeakingandnotnecessarilyalwaystorespondtowhatIam saying,butcertainlyinacertainzoneofresponseitisasi f atcertainmomentsahardeningtakesplaceincertaintechnical (2)positions,strictlycorrelativeinthismattertowhatIcan callthelimitsofunderstandingitisalsoasiftoovercome theselimitsIhadchosenapaththatisperfectlydefined,at thelevelofschoolgoingage,byapedagogicalschoolthatposes inacertainfashiontheproblemsoftherelationshipbetween teachinginschoolandthematurationofthethinkingofthe child,itisasifIwereadheringandIadhereineffect,if

29.5.63

XX238

onelookscloselyatthispedagogicaldebatetothisstyleof pedagogicalprocedurewhichisfar,believeme,youcancheckit out,therearesomeofyouwhoareclosertoitthanothers,more requiredtobeinterestedinthesepedagogicalprocedures,you willseethattheschoolsarefarfrombeinginagreementonthe procedurethatIamnowgoingtoarticulateanddefine.Forone school,ifyouwish,putitwhereveryoulike,forthemomenton myleft,thatmeansnothingmore,everythingisdeterminedbyan autonomousmaturationofintelligence,allonedoesisfollowit, Imeanatschoolgoingagefortheothersthereisafault,a gap.Thefirst,letusdesignateitforexamplebythetheories ofSternIdidnotsayitimmediatelybecauseIthinkthata goodnumberofyouhaveneveropenedtheworksofthis psychologistwhoisneverthelessuniversallyrecognisedforthe others,letussay,takePiaget,thereisagap,afaultbetween whatchildishthinkingiscapableofformingandwhatcanbe broughttoitalongthesescientificpaths.Itisclear,ifyou lookcarefullyatit,itmeansinbothcasesreducingthe efficaciousnessofteachingassuchtozero.

Teachingexists:whatmakesnumerousspiritsinthescientific arenaabletooverlookit,isthateffectively,inthescientific field,onceonehasreachedit,whatisproperlyoftheorderof teaching,inthesensethatIamgoingtospecifyit,canbe,in effect,consideredelidible,namelythat,whenonehasbroken throughacertainstageofmathematicalunderstanding,onceitis done,itisdoneonenolongerneedstosearchoutitspaths. Onecan,asImightsay,reachitwithoutanydifficultyprovided onebelongstothegenerationtowhomthesethingsweretaughtin thisform,inthisformalisation,asaprimaryintention. Extremelycomplicatedconcepts,ormoreexactlyoneswhich (3)appearedatanearlierstageofmathematicstobeextremely complicated,areimmediatelyaccessibletoveryyoungminds.It iscertainthatoneneedsnointermediarywhenoneisof schoolgoingageandthatthewholeinterestofschoolpedagogy dependsongrasping,onascertainingthiscentralpointorto anticipate,byproblemswhichgoslightlybeyondthem,whatare calledthementalcapacitiesofthechild.Andbyhelpinghim Iamsaying:simplybyhelpinghimtotackletheseproblems, onedoessomethingwhichhasaneffect,notsimplyprematuring theeffectofhasteonmaturation,butaneffectwhichincertain periodsthatonecancalltheyhavebeencalledthat "sensitive"thosewhoknowalittleaboutthissubjectcansee whereIcontinue,becausetheimportantthingismydiscourse, andnotmyreferencesonecanobtainveritableeffectsof unleashing,ofopeningoutofcertainapprehensiveactivitiesin certaindomains,effectsofaquitespecialfecundity.

Itisexactlywhatseemstomecanbeobtainedinthedomainthat weareadvancingintotogetherhereinsofaras,becauseofthe specificityofitsfield,thereisalwaysinvolvedinit somethingwhichitwouldbewellforpedagoguestomapoutone day.Therehavealreadybeenbeginningsintheworksofauthors whosetestimonyisallthemoreinterestingtoretaininthat theyhavenonotionofwhattheirexperiencemaycontributeto

29.5.63

XX239

us:thefactthatonepedagoguewasabletoformulatethatthere isrealaccesstotheconceptonlyfromtheageofpubertyonI meanexperimenterswhoknownothingabout,whodonotwantto recogniseanythingaboutanalysisissomethingwhichwould meritourtakingourownlookatit,stickingournoseintoit, graspingintheplacewhereIamspeakingtoyou,therearea thousandtangibletracesthatitisproperlyspeakingin functionofalinkwhichcanbemadeaboutthematurationofthe objectoassuch,namelyasIdefineit,atthisageofpuberty thatonecanconceiveofaquitedifferentmappingoutthanthe onewhichismadebytheseauthorsofwhattheycall"thelimit moment"whenthereistrulythefunctioningoftheconcept,and notthissortofuseoflanguagethattheycallinthiscase,not conceptual,but"complexual",byasortofhomonymywhichisa pureencounterwiththeterm"complex"thatweuse. (4)Thispositionofoatthemomentofitspassage,throughwhat Isymbolisewiththeformulaof(<p)isoneofthegoalsofour explanationsthisyear.Itcannotbevalorised,takenupbyyour ears,itcannotbevalidlytransmitted,exceptbysomeapproach, whichcanhereonlybeadetour,towhatconstitutesthismoment characterisedbythenotation(<P),andwhichisandcanonlybe castrationanxiety.

Itisbecausethisanxietyherecannotinanywaybemadepresent assuch,butonlymappedoutbythissortofconcentricpath whichmakesme,asyousee,oscillatebetweentheoralstageand somethingwhichIsaidthelasttimewassupportedbythe evocation,inaseparatedform,materialisedinanobjectwhich isthevoice,ofthisshofaryouwillallowmetodaytotakeit upandtoputitasideinamomentthatwecannowreturnto thecentralpointthatIevokeinspeakingaboutcastration. Whatreallyisthisrelationshipbetweenanxietyandcastration? Itisnotenoughforustoknowthatitisexperiencedassuch, atoneorotherphaseofanalysiswhichisdescribedasterminal ornonterminal,forustoreallyknowwhatitis.

Tosaythingsimmediatelyastheyaregoingtobearticulatedat thenextstep,Iwouldsaythatthefunctionofthephallusas imaginary,functionseverywhereateverylevel,highupandlow down,thatIdefined,characterisedbyacertainrelationshipof thesubjecttoo,thephallusfunctionseverywhere,exceptwhere oneexpectsit,asamediatingfunction,specificallyatthe phallicstage,anditisthislackassuchofthephallus whichispresent,detectable,oftentoourgreatsurprise everywhereelse,itisthisvanishingofthephallicfunctionas such,atthislevelwhereitisexpectedtofunction,whichis theprincipleofthiscastrationanxiety.

Hencethenotation(<p)denotingwhatImightcallthispositive absence,andsincethiswasneverformulatedinsuchamannerin thisform,noplacewasallowedeitherforitsconsequencestobe drawn.

To make tangible the truth of this formula, I will take different pathsinaccordancewiththemodewhichIdescribedearlieras

29.5.63

XX240

(5)thatofturningaround.AndsincethelasttimeIrecalled toyoutheproperstructureofthevisualfieldconcerningwhatI calledboththesustentationandtheoccultationinthisfieldof theobjecto,Icannotdolessthanreturntoitwhen,ina fashionthatweknowtobetraumatic,itisinthisfieldthat thereispresentedthefirstapproachtothephallicpresence, namelywhatiscalledtheprimalscene. Everyoneknowsthatdespitethefactthatitispresent,visible intheshapeofafunctioningofthepenis,thatwhatisstriking intheevocationoftherealityofthephantasisedformofthe primalscene,isalwayssomeambiguityconcerningpreciselythis presence. Howoftencanonesaypreciselythatitisnotseenatitsplace, andevensometimesthattheessentialofthetraumaticeffectof thesceneispreciselytheformsunderwhichitdisappears,is conjuredaway.

MoreoverIwouldonlyhavetoevoke,initsexemplaryform,the modeofapparitionwhereinanycase,forourpurposes,we shouldnotdeceiveourselves,theanxietywhichaccompaniesit sufficientlysignalsthatweareindeedonthepaththatweare seekingthemodeofapparitionofthisprimalsceneinthe storyoftheWolfman.Wehavehearditsaidsomewherethatthere wassomethingobsessional,itappears,inthefactthatwereturn hereIdonotthinkeverytimethatIaminyourpresence,butin thefactthatwereturntotheseoriginalexamplesofthe Freudiandiscoverytheseexamplesaremorethanthesupports, moreeventhanthemetaphors,theymakeusputourfingeronthe verysubstanceofwhatwehavetodealwith.

TheessentialintherevelationofwhatappearstotheWolfman throughthegapwhichprefiguresinawaywhatImadeintoa function,thatoftheopenwindow,thatwhichappearsinits frameidentifiableinitsformtotheveryfunctionofphantasy initsmostanxietyprovokingmode,itismanifestthatthe essentialinitisnottoknowwherethephallusisitisthere, asImightsay,identicaleverywheretowhatIcouldcallthe "catatoniaoftheimage":thetree,thewolvesperchedonitwho youcanfindinthistheechoofwhatIarticulatedforyouthe lasttimelookfixedlyatthesubject,thereisnoneedto searchinthisfur,repeatedfivetimes,inthetailofthefive animals,forwhatisinvolvedandwhichisthereasItoldyou intheveryreflectionthattheimagesupportsofacatatonia whichisnothingotherthanthatofthesubjecthimself,ofthe childpetrified,fascinatedbywhathesees,paralysedbythis fascinationtothepointthatwhatislookingathiminthescene andwhichisinawayeverywhereinvisible,wecanindeed conceiveofasanimagewhichhereisnothingotherthanthe transpositionofhisarrestedstate,ofhisownbodytransformed hereintothistree,thatwemightdescribeas,toechoa celebratedtitle,"thetreecoveredwithwolves,l'arbrecouvert deloups". Thatwhatisinvolvedissomethingthatechoesthisexperiential

29.5.63

XX241

polethatwehavedefinedasthatofjouissance,appearstometo beunquestionable.Thissortofjouissance,akintowhat moreoverFreudcallsthehorrorofthejouissancetheRatmanis unawareof,ajouissancegoingbeyondanypossiblemappingoutby thesubject,isherepresentifiedinthiserectform,thesubject isnolongeranythingbuterectioninthisgripwhichmakesof himaphallus,makesatreeofhim,horrifieshim(1'arborifie, 1'arbhorrifie),whichcompletelyimmobiliseshim. SomethinghappenswhichFreudtestifiestousasonlyhavingbeen reconstructedonthisoccasion:essentialthoughitmaybe,the symptomaticdevelopmentoftheeffectsofthissceneisso essentialthattheanalysisFreudgivesofitcouldnotevenbe putforwardforamoment,ifwedonotadmitthiselementwhich remainstheonlyonenotintegrateduptotheendbythesubject andpresentifyingonthisoccasionwhatFreudarticulatedlater aboutreconstructionassuch:itistheresponseofthesubject tothetraumaticscenebyadefecation.Thefirsttime,orthe quasifirsttime,thefirsttimeinanycasethatFreudhasto noteinaparticularfashionthisfunctionoftheappearanceof theexcrementalobjectatacriticalmoment,noteconsultthe textthatinathousandformshearticulatesitasafunction towhichwecangivenoothernamethantheonethatitwas thoughtnecessarytoarticulatelaterascharacteristicofthe genitalscage,namelyasafunctionofoblativity.Itisagift, hetellsus.MoreovereveryoneknowsthatFreudunderlinedfrom thefirstthecharacterofgiftonalltheoccasionsthatyou willallowmetocallinpassingandwithnofurthercommentary, (7)ifyouremembermyreferencepoints,thecasesofpassagea. 1'acteinwhichthelittlechildinopportunelyreleasessomeof hisintestinalcontents.

AndinthetextoftheWolfmanthingsgoevenfurther,givingits truesense,theonethatwehavedrownedunderawaveof moralisingassumptionsaboutoblativity,Freudspeaksinthis connectionaboutsacrifice,somethingwhichyouwilladmit givenFreud'sreadingforexample,weknowthathehadreadfor example,RobertsonSmiththat,whenhespokeaboutsacrifice, hewasnotspeakingaboutsomethingupintheair,akindof vaguemoralanalogy,Freudspeaksaboutsacrificeinconnection withtheapparitionofthisexcrementalobjectinthefield. Afterallthatmustmeansomething.

Itisherethatwewilltakeupthethingatthelevel,ifyou wish,ofthenormalact,oftheactrightlyorwronglyqualified asmature,thatatthelevelofwhichIthoughtIcouldinmy seminarbeforelast,ifIrememberrightly,articulateorgasmas beingtheequivalentofanxietyandsituatingitselfintheinner fieldofthesubject,whileIprovisionallyleftcastrationwith thissinglemark.Itisquiteobviousthatonecouldnotdetach fromitthesignoftheintervention.oftheotherassuchthis characteristicinrealityhavingalwaysbeen,fromthebeginning, attributedtoit,itisthereforetheotherwhothreatens castration. Ipointedoutinthisconnectionthatbyassimilating,bymaking

29.5.63

XX242

equivalentorgasmassuchandanxiety,Iwastakingupthe positionwhichrejoinedwhatIhadpreviouslysaidaboutanxiety asareference,asignaloftheonlyrelationshipwhichdoesnot deceive,thatwecouldfindinitthereasonforwhatcouldbe satisfyinginorgasm.Itisfromsomethingthathappensinthe perspectiveinwhichitisconfirmedthatanxietyisnotwithout anobject,thatwecanunderstandthefunctionoforgasmandmore especiallywhatIcalled"thesatisfactionthatitcarrieswith it".

IbelievedatthattimethatIcouldnotsayanymoreifIwasto beunderstood.Itneverthelessremainsthatanechohascometo me,letussaytoputitmildly,ofsomeperplexityintheterms thatwereinterchanged,ifthisechoiscorrect,preciselyinthe caseoftwopeoplethatIbelievedIhadformedparticularly well.Itisallthemoresurprisingthattheycouldinterrogate themselvesinthiscaseaboutwhatImeantbythissatisfaction.

(8) Iswhatisinvolvedthen,theyaskedoneanother, jouissance? Isitawayofreturninginacertainfashiontothisderisory absolutethatcertainpeoplewanttoputintogenitalfusion,so called?Andthen,sinceitwasamatterofseeingthe relationshipbetweenthisanxietypointputintothispointall theambiguitythatyouwishapointwherethereisnolonger anxietyiftheorgasmcoversitover,andthispointofdesirein sofarasitismarkedbytheabsenceoftheobjectointheform of(<P),whathappens,theyaskedthemselvestothisrelationship inthecaseofthewoman?Answer:Ididnotsaythatthe satisfactionoforgasmwasidentifiedwithwhatIdefinedinthe seminaronEthicsaboutthelocusofjouissance.Answerit evenappearsironictounderlineit:thelittlesatisfaction, evenifitissufficient,broughtbyorgasm,whyshoulditbethe sameandatthesamepointasthisotherlittlewhichisoffered toawomaneveninasuccessfulcopulation?Thisiswhatshould bearticulatedinthemostprecisefashion.Itisnotenoughto sayvaguelythatthesatisfactionoforgasmiscomparabletowhat Icallelsewhere,ontheoralplane,thecrushingofdemandunder thesatisfactionofneed.Atthisorallevel,thedistinction betweenneedanddemandiseasytosustain,andbesidesdoesnot failtoposeustheproblemofwherethedriveissituated.If bysomeartificeonecanequivocateattheorallevelaboutwhat isoriginalinthegroundingofdemandinwhatweanalystscall drive,thisiswhatwedonotinanycasehaveanyrighttodoat thegenitallevel.Andpreciselytherewhereitwouldseemthat wearedealingwiththemostprimitiveinstinct,thesexual instinct,itistherelessthananywhereelsethatwecannotfail torefertothestructureofthedriveasbeingsupportedbythe formula$<?D:$relationshipofdesiretodemand. Whatisdemandedatthegenitallevelandfromwhom?That effectivelytheexperiencewhichissocommon,fundamentalthat itendsupinitsobviousnessbynolongernoticingitsrelief, effectivelyinterhumancopulationwiththetranscendencyithas comparedtoindividualexistenceweneededthedetourofa ratheradvancedbiologytobeabletonoticethestrict (9) correlationbetweentheappearanceofbisexualityandthe

29.5.63

XX243

emergenceofthefunctionofindividualdeath,butafterall peoplealwayshadapresentimentthatinthisactwherethereis boundclosely,then,whatweoughttocallthesurvivalofthe speciesconjoinedwithsomethingwhichcannotfail,ifthewords haveameaning,toinvolvewhatwehavelocatedatthefinalterm asthedeathdrive,afterallwhyshouldwerefusetoseewhatis immediatelytangibleinfactsthatweknowquitewell,whichare signifiedinthemostcommonusagesofthetonguewedemandI havenotyetsaidfromwhom,butafterallsinceitisnecessary alwaystodemandsomethingfromsomeone,ithappensthatitis fromourpartner,isitquitesurethatitisfromher,wewill havetoseeinasecondphasebutwhatwedemandiswhat?It istosatisfyademandwhichhasacertainrelationshipwith death.Whatwedemanddoesnotgoveryfar:itisthelittle death(lapetitmort)butafterallitisclearthatwe demandedit.Thatthedriveisintimatelymingledwiththis driveofthedemand,thatwedemandtomakelove(1'amour),if youwishtomake"l'amourir",itistodie(mourir),itiseven todielaughing(derire)2ItisnotfornothingthatI underlinethatwhichinloveparticipatesinwhatIcallthe comicfeeling.Inanycaseitisindeedherethatthereoughtto residepostorgasmicrelaxation.Ifwhatissatisfiedisthis demand,wellthenGodknows,itistobereallysatisfied,one getsoutofit!

Theadvantageofthisconceptionistomakeappear,togivethe reason,whyanxietyappearsinacertainnumberofwaysof obtainingorgasm.Inthewholemeasurethatorgasmisdetached fromthisfieldofthedemandoftheotheritisthefirst apprehensionthatFreudhadofitincoitusinterruptusanxiety appears,asonemightsay,inthismarginofthelossof signification.Butassuch,itcontinuestodesignatewhatis aimedatintermsofacertainrelationshiptotheother.Iam preciselynotintheprocessofsayingthatcastrationanxietyis ananxietyaboutdeathitisananxietywhichreferstothe fieldwheredeathiscloselyboundupwiththerenewaloflife, itisananxietywhich,ifwelocaliseitatthispoint,allows ustounderstandverywellwhyitisequivalentlyinterpretable asthereasonwhyitisgiventous,inFreud'sfinalconception, asthesignalofathreattothestatusofthedefended"I".It referstoabeyondofthisdefended"I",atthispointofappeal (10)forajouissancewhichgoesbeyondourlimits,insofaras heretheotherisproperlyspeakingevokedinthisregisterof therealwhichishowacertaintype,acertainformoflifeis transmittedandissustained. Callthatwhateveryouwish,God orthegeniusofthespecies.IthinkthatIhavealready sufficientlyimpliedinmydiscoursethatthisdoesnotcarryus towardsanymetaphysicalheights.Whatisinvolvedhereisa real,thissomethingwhichmaintainswhatFreudarticulatedat thelevelofhisNirvanaprincipleasbeingthispropertyof life,ofhaving,inordertoreachdeath,torepassbyforms whichreproducetheoneswhichhadgiventotheindividualform theoccasionofappearingthroughtheconjunctionoftwosexual cells. Whatdoesthatmean?Whatdoesthatmeanasregardswhathappens

29.5.63

XX244

attheleveloftheobject?Whatdoesitmean,ifnotthatin shortthisresult,thatIcalledsuchasuccessfulresult,is onlyrealisedinsuchasatisfactoryfashioninthecourseofa certainautomaticcyclethatremainstobedefinedandbecause preciselyofthefactthattheorganisneverabletoholdup verylongonthepathoftheappealforjouissance.Withregard tothisendofjouissanceandtoreachingthisappealofthe otherinatermwhichwouldbetragic,theamboceptororgancan alwaysbesaidtogivewayprematurely. Atthemoment,Imightsay,thatitcouldbethesacrificial object,wellthen,letussayintheordinarycaseithaslong disappearedfromthescene.Itisnolongeranythingbuta littlerag,itisnolongerthereexceptasatestimony,asa memoryforthepartnerintenderness.Inthecastrationcomplex, thisiswhatisinvolved,inotherwordsthisonlybecomesa dramainsofarasthereisraised,pushedinacertaindirection onewhichplacesallitstrustingenitalconsummationthe puttinginquestionofdesire.

Ifweletgoofthisidealofgenitalachievement,byseeingwhat isstructurally,happilyalluringinit,thereisnoreasonwhy theanxietylinkedtocastrationshouldnotappeartousina muchmoresupplecorrelationwithitssymbolicobject,andwith anopeningoutthatisquitedifferenttotheobjectsofother levels,asthismoreoverhasalwaysbeenimpliedbythepremises (11)ofFreudiantheory,whichputdesireinacompletely differentrelationshiptoapurelyandsimplynaturalonetothe naturalpartnerasregardsitsstructuring. Iwouldlike,tomakeyoubettersensewhatisatstake,to recallallthesamewhatisinvolvedinwhatonemightsayare, atfirst,savagerelationshipsbetweenmanandwoman.Afterall, awomanwhodoesnotknowwhomsheisdealingwith,itisindeed, inaccordancewithwhatIputforwardtoyouaboutthe relationshipbetweenanxietyandthedesireoftheOther,because sheisnotbeforethemanwithoutacertainuneaseaboutwhere exactlythispathofdesireisgoingtoleadher.Whentheman, byGod,makeslovelikeeveryoneelseandisdisarmed,ifthe womansomethingwhichasyouknowisveryconceivabledoes notdraw,Iwouldsay,anyobviousprofitfromit,thereisin everycasesomethingthatshehasgained,itisthatsheis henceforthaltogetherateaseabouttheintentionsofher partner.

InthesamechapterofTheWasteland,byTSElliot,towhichI referredonaparticulardaywhenIthoughtitwelltoconfront withourexperiencetheoldtheoryaboutthesuperiorityofwoman ontheplaneofjouissance,theoneinwhichTSElliotallows Tiresiastospeak,wefindtheseverseswhoseironymadeit alwaysseemtomethattheyoughtonedaytohavetheirplace hereinourdiscoursewhenthecarbuncularyoungdandy,the littleclerkfromthebuildingsociety,hasfinishedwiththe typistwhosesurroundingsareallalongdepictedforus,has finishedhislittleaffair,TSElliotexpresseshimselfas follows:

29.5.63 "Whenlovelywomanstoopstofollyand Pacesaboutherroomagain,alone, Shesmoothsherhairwithautomatichand, Andputsarecordonthegramophone."

XX245

Whatismeantby:"Whenlovelywomanstoopstofolly",isnotto betranslated,itisasongfromtheVicarofWakefield,whena beautifulwomanabandonsherselftofolly"stoops"isnotthe samethingas"s'abandonne"lowersherselftofolly,andthen finallyfindsherselfalone,shestridesacrosstheroomstroking herhairautomaticallywithherhand,andchangestherecord. Thisbywayofresponsetothequestionmypupilswereposing amongstthemselvesaboutwhatisinvolvedinthequestionofthe desireofthewoman.Thedesireofthewomanisdeterminedby (12) thequestion,forheralso,ofherjouissance.Thefact thatsheisnotsimplymuchcloserthanmantojouissance,but doublydeterminedbyit,issomethingthatanalytictheoryhas alwaystaughtus.Thatthelocusofthisjouissanceislinked forustotheenigmatic,unsituatablecharacterofherorgasm,is somethingthatouranalyseshavebeenabletotakefarenoughfor ustobeabletosaythatthislocusisaratherarchaicpoint sinceitisolderthanthepresentseparationofthecloaca, somethingthatwasperfectlywelllocatedfromacertainanalytic perspectivebyaparticularanalystofthefemalesex. Thatdesire,whichisnotatalljouissance,isinhercase naturallywhereitoughttobeaccordingtonature,tubular (tubaire) issomethingthatthedesireofthosewecall hystericsdesignatesperfectly.Thefactthatweshouldhave classifiedthesesubjectsashystericschangesnothinginthe factthatdesirethussituatedistrue,isorganicallytrue.

Itisbecausemanwillnevercarrythepointofhisdesireto thatextreme,thatonecansaythatthejouissanceofthemanand ofthewomanarenotorganicallyconjoined.Itisindeedinthe measureofthefailureofthedesireofmanthatthewomanis led,asImightsay,normallytotheideaofhavingtheman's organ,insofarasitissupposedtobeaveritableamboceptor: thisiswhatiscalledthephallus.Itisbecausethephallus doesnotrealise,exceptinitsevanescence,themeetingof desires,thatitbecomesthecommonlocusofanxiety.

Whatthewomandemandsfromusanalysts,attheendofan analysisconductedinaccordancewithFreud,isnodoubtthe penis,Penisneid,butinordertodobetterthantheman.There issomething,therearemanythings,thereareathousandthings whichconfirmallofthat.Withoutanalysiswhatistherefor thewomanasawayofovercomingthisPenisneid,ifwesupposeit tobealwaysimplicitweknowitverywell,itisthemost ordinarymodeofseductionbetweenthesexes,itistoofferto thedesireofmantheobjectinvolvedinphallicclaims,the nondetumescentobjecttosustainhisdesire,itistomakeof herfeminineattributesthesignsoftheomnipotenceofman.And (13) itisthisthatIwouldaskyoutorefertomyold seminarsthisiswhatIthoughtitworthwhilevalorisingby

29.5.63

XX246

underlining,afterJoanRiviere,thecorrectfunctionofwhatshe calls"Womanlinessasmasquerade".Shehassimplytoforget aboutherjouissance. Inthemeasurethatweleaveherinawayonthispath,wefind ourselvessigningthedecreeoftherenewalofthephallic claim,whichbecomes,Iwouldnotsaythecompensation,butasit werethehostageofwhatonedemandsfromherinfactfortaking chargeofthefailureoftheother. Sucharethepathsonwhichtherearepresented,inconsidering thegenitalplane,genitalrealisationasaterm,whatwecould calltheimpassesofdesire,iftherewerenottheopeningupof anxiety.Wewillsee,restartingfromthepointthattodayI haveledyouto,howthewholeanalyticexperienceshowsusthat itisinthemeasurethatitissummonedasobjectof propitiationinafailedconjunction,thatthephalluswhich provestobemissing,constitutescastrationitselfasapoint thatitisimpossibletogetroundintherelationshipsofthe subjecttotheOther,andasapointthathasbeenresolvedas regardsitsanxietyfunction.

5.6.63 Seminar21:

XXI247 Wednesday5June1963

WhatItoldyouthelasttimeended,Ibelieve,significantly withthesilencewhichgreetedmyremarks,nooneitseemshaving preservedenoughsangfroidtorewardthemwithalittleapplause. EitherIamwrongorperhapsafterallitisnottoomuchtosee inthistheresultofwhatIhadexpresslyannouncedinbeginning theseremarks,namelythatitwasnotpossibletotackle castrationanxietyheadonwithoutprovoking,letussay,some echoofit.Andafterallthisisnotanexcessivepretension, sincewhatItoldyouis,iffact,somethingthatcouldbe qualifiedasnotveryencouraging,becauseitconcernedtheunion betweenmanandwoman,aneverpresentproblemallthesame,and onethatquitecorrectlyalwayshas,andIhopethatitstill finds,aplaceinthepreoccupationsofpsychoanalysts. Jonescircledforalongtimearoundthisproblemmaterialised, incarnatedbywhatissupposedtobeimpliedinthe phallocentricperspectiveofprimalignorance,notonlyofman, butofwomanherself,aboutthelocusofconjunction,thevagina. Andallthepartlyfruitful,eventhoughincompletedetoursthat Joneswentintoonthispath,showverywelltheiraiminwhathe invokesasIrecalledforyouatonestagethefamous"Man andwomanhecreatedthem"whichmoreoverissoambiguous.For afteralloneisentitledtosayJonesdidnotmeditateon theHebrewtextofthisverse27ofBook1ofGenesis.

Inanycase,totrytosupportwhatIsaidthelasttimeonmy littleschemaconstructedbyusingtheseEulercircles,this couldbesupportedasfollows:thefieldopenedupbymanand womaninwhatonecouldcall,inthebiblicalsense,their knowledgeofoneanother,onlyintersects becausethezoneinwhichtheycould effectivelyoverlap,wheretheirdesires carrythemtoreachoneanother,isqualified bythelackofthatwhichwouldbetheir middleterm,thephallus.Foreachofthem, itisthatwhich,whenitisattained, alienatesitpreciselyfromtheother. Thewomancanundoubtedlybethesymboloftheman,inhisdesire forphallicomnipotence,andpreciselyinsofarassheisno longerthewoman.Asregardsthewoman,itisquiteclear throughallthatwehavediscovered,whatwehavecalled Penisneid,thatshecanonlytakethephallusforwhatitisnot,

5.6.63

XXI248

(2) namelyeitherotheobject,orherowntoosmall(jp),which onlygivesherajouissanceapproximatingtowhatsheimaginesis thejouissanceoftheother,whichshecannodoubtsharethrough asortofmentalphantasy,butonlybystrayingfromherown jouissance. Inotherwords,shecanonlyenjoy(&)becauseitisnotatits place,attheplaceofherjouissance,whereherjouissancecan berealised.Iamgoingtogiveyoualittleillustrationofit thatisalittlecontroversial,somewhatmarginal,but contemporary.Inanaudiencelikethis,howoften,dowe analysts,howoften,tothepointthatitbecomessomething constantinourpractice,dowomenwanttobeanalysedliketheir husbands,andoftenbythesamepsychoanalyst?Whatdoesthat mean,ifnotthatthesupposedlyrewardeddesireoftheirhusband whichtheyhavetheambitiontoshare,the( ( P ) the repositivingof(<p)thattheysupposeoperatesintheanalytic field,thisiswhattheyhavetheambitiontoattain. Thatthephallusisnotfoundwhereitisexpected,whereitis required,namelyontheplaneofgenitalmediation,iswhat explainsthatanxietyisthetruthofsexuality,namelywhat appearseverytimeitsflowretreats,runsintothesand. Castrationisthepriceofthisstructure,itsubstitutesitself forthiscruth.Butintruth,thisisanillusorygamethereis nocastrationbecause,attheplacewhereithastohappen,there isnoobjecttocastrate.Forthat,itwouldbenecessaryfor thephallustobethere.Butitisonlytheresothattherewill benoanxiety. Thephallus,whereitisexpectedassexual,neverappearsexcept aslack,andthisisitslinkwithanxiety.Andallofthis meansthatthephallusiscalledontofunctionasaninstrument ofpotency.Nowpotency,Imeanwhatwearespeakingaboutwhen wespeakaboutpotency,whenwespeakaboutitinafashionwhich vacillatesaboutwhatisinvolvedforitisalwaysto omnipotencethatwereferourselvesnowthatisnotwhatis involved,omnipotenceisalreadytheslippage,theevasionwith respecttothispointatwhichallpotencyfailsonedoesnot demandpotencytobeeverywhere,onedemandsittobewhereitis present.Itisprecisely,becauseitfailswhereitisexpected, (3) thatwebegintofomentomnipotence.Inotherwords:the phallusispresent,itispresenteverywhereitisnotuptoit.

Foritistheaspectwhichallowsustopiercethisillusionof theclaimengenderedbycastration,insofarasitcoversthe anxietypresentifiedbyeveryactualisationofjouissanceitis thisconfusionbetweenjouissanceandtheinstrumentsofpotency. Humanimpotence,withtheprogressofinstitutions,becomes betterthanthisstateoffundamentalmiserywhereitconstitutes itselfintoaprofession,Imeanaprofessionineverysenseof theword,fromthesenseoftheprofessionoffaith,uptothe term,totheaimthatwefindintheprofessionalideal. Everythingthatsheltersbehindthedignityofanyprofession,is

5.6.63

XXI249

alwaysthiscentrallackwhichisimpotence.Impotence,asone mightsay,initsmostgeneralformula,iswhatdestinedmanto beonlyabletoorgasm(jouir)fromhisrelationshiptothe supportof(+<p),namelyfromadeceptivepotency.IfIremind youthatthisstructureholdsupafterwhatIarticulatedthe lasttime,itistoleadyoutowardssomeremarkablefactswhich controlthestructurearticulatedinthiswaythefamousterm homosexuality,whichinourdoctrine,ourtheory,theFreudian one,isseenastheprincipleofsocialbonding,letusnotethat Freudalwaysremarked,neverraisedadoubtonthepoint,thatit istheprivilegeofthemale.Thislibidinalcementofthe socialbond,insofarasitisonlyproducedinthecommunityof males,islinkedtotheaspectofsexualfailurewhichis impartedtoitveryspeciallybecauseofthefactofcastration. Onthecontraryfemalehomosexualityhasperhapsagreatcultural importance,butnovalueasasocialfunction,becauseitis broughttobear,foritspart,ontheproperfieldofsexual rivalry,namelytherewhereinappearanceitwouldhavetheleast chanceofsucceeding,wereitnotforthefactthatpreciselyin thisfieldthosewhoareatanadvantage,arepreciselythosewho donothavethephallus,namelythatomnipotence,thegreatest livelinessofdesireisproducedatthelevelofthislovewhich iscalledUranian,whichIbelievehasmarkedbyitsbondingthe mostradicalaffinitytowhatonecancallfemalehomosexuality. Anidealisticlove,thepresentificationoftheessential mediationofthephallusas(>).This(jP)therefore,forboth sexes,iswhatIdesireandwhatIcanonlyhavequa( j p ) . Itis (4)thisminuswhichisfound,inthefieldofsexual conjunction,tobetheuniversalthirdterm,tobethisego,my dearReboul,whichisnotatallthereciprocalHegelianone,but insofarasitconstitutesthefieldoftheOtheraslack,I onlyaccedetoinsofarasItakethisverypath,thatIattach myselftothefactthatthis"I"makesmedisappear,thatIonly rediscovermyselfinwhatHegelperceivedofcourse,butwhichhe justifieswithoutthisinterval,onlyinageneralisedo,onlyin thisideaoftheegoinsofarasitiseverywhere,namelyinso farasitisnowhere.Thesupportofdesireisnotdesignedfor sexualunionforgeneralised,itdoesnotspecifymemoreasa manorawoman,butasoneortheother.Thefunctionofthis fielddescribedhereasthatofsexualunion,posesforeachof thetwosexesthealternative:theotheriseithertheotheror thephallusinthesenseofexclusion.Thisfieldhereisempty, butthisfieldhere,ifImakeitpositive,the"or"takeson thisothermeaningwhichmeansthatoneissubstitutableforthe otherateverymoment. ThisisthereasonwhyitwasnotbychancethatIintroducedthe fieldoftheeyehiddenbehindeveryspatialuniverse,witha referencetothesebeingsimagesontheencounterwithwhomthere isplayedoutacertainpathofsalvation,specificallythe Buddhistpath,byintroducingtheonethatIdesignatedforyou asKuanYinorinotherwordsAvalokitesvarawithitscomplete sexualambiguity.ThemoretheAvalokitecvaraispresentifiedas male,themoreittakesonfemaleaspects.Iwillshowyou,if

5.6.63

XXI250

thatamusesyou,someotherdaytheimagesofTibetanpaintings orstatues,thereisasuperabundanceofthemandthetraitthat Idesignatedtoryouisabsolutelyobvioushere.Whatis atstaketodayistograsphowthisalternativebetweendesire andjouissancecanfinditsway.Thedifferencebetween dialecticalthinkingandourexperience,isthatwedonot believeinthesynthesis.Ifthereisawaythroughwherethe antinomyisclosedoff,itisbecauseitwasalreadytherebefore theconstitutionoftheantinomy. Fortheobjecto,inwhichtheimpasseoftheaccessfromdesire tothethingisincarnated,togivehimpassage,itisnecessary toreturntothebeginningthereisnothingwhichpreparesthis passagebeforethecaptureofdesireinspecularspace,thereis nowayout.Forletusnotomittosaythatthepossibilityof thisveryimpasseislinkedtoamomentwhichanticipatesand conditionswhathascometobemarkedinthesexualfailureof man.Itisthebringingintoplayofthespeculartensionwhich eroticisessoprecociouslyandsoprofoundlythefieldof insight. (5)Whatisoutlinedintheanthropoidabouttheconductive characterofthisfieldhasbeenknownsinceKohlerthatheis notwithoutintelligence,becausehecandoalotofthings providedhecanseewhathehastoreach. Ialludedlastnighttothefactthatthisisthewholepoint,it isnotthattheprimateisanymoreincapableofspeakingthan ourselves,buthecannotmakehiswordenterintothis operationalfield.Butthatisnottheonlydifference.The difference,markedbythefactthatfortheanimalthereisno mirrorstage,iswhathasgoneunderthenameofnarcissism,from acertainubiquitoussubtractionoflibido,fromaninjectionof thelibidointothefieldofinsight,ofwhichspecularised visiongivestheform.Butthisformhidesfromusthe phenomenonoftheoccultationoftheeye,whichhenceforthought tolookfromeverywhereattheonethatweare,withthe universalityofsight. Weknowthatthiscanhappenanditiswhatiscalledthe Unheimlich,butveryparticularcircumstancesarenecessary. Usually,whatissatisfyingpreciselyinthespecularformisthe maskingofthepossibilityofthisapparition.Inotherwords, theeyeestablishesthefundamentalrelationshipofthedesirable inthefactthatitalwaystendstomakeitmiscognised,inthe relationshiptotheother,thatunderthisdesirablethereisa desirer. LetusreflectalittleontheimportofthisformulawhichI believeIcangiveasbeingthemostgeneraloneofwhat constitutesthearousaloftheUnheimlich.Imaginethatyouare dealingwiththemostrelaxingofdesirablethings,initsmost pacifyingform,thedivinestatuewhichisonlydivine.What wouldbemoreUnheimlichthantoseeitcomingtolife,namelyto seeitshowingitselfasdesiring!

251.6.63

XXI251

Now,notaloneisitthestructuringhypothesisthatweposefor thegenesisofothatitisbornelsewhereandbeforethis, beforethiscapturewhichhidesit,itisnotsimplythis hypothesis,itselffoundedonourpraxis,itisofcoursefrom thisthatIintroduceit:(1)eitherourpraxisisfaulty,Imean faultywithrespecttoitselfor(2)itsupposesthatourfield, whichisthatofdesire,isengenderedfromthisrelationshipof Sto0whichistheoneinwhichwecannotrediscoverwhatisour goalexceptinthemeasurethatwereproduceitsterms.Either ourpraxisisfaultywithrespecttoitselforitpresupposes (6)this.Whatourpraxisengenders,ifyouwish,isthis universehere,symbolisedhereinthefinalterminthefamous divisionwhichhasbeenguidingusforsometimethroughthe threephasesinwhichthesubjectSthatisstillunknownhasto constitutehimselfintheOther,andinwhichtheoappearsas theremainderofthisoperation. Iwouldpointouttoyouinpassingthatthealternative:either ourpraxisisfaultyoritpresupposesthis,isnotanexclusive alternative.Ourpraxiscanallowitselftobefaultyinpart withrespecttoitself,andthatthereshouldbearesiduesince preciselythisiswhatispredicted. Abigpresumptionthatweriskverylittlebyengagingourselves inaformalisationwhichisimposedasalsobeingnecessary*But thisrelationshipofStoO,mustindeedbesituatedasgoingfar beyondinitscomplexity,whichisneverthelesssosimple, inaugural,whatthosewhobequeathedtousthedefinitionofthe signifierbelievedittobetheirdutytoposeatthebeginning oftheoperationtheyorganise,namelythenotionof communication.Communicationassuchisnotwhatisprimal since,attheoriginShasnothingtocommunicateforthereason thatalltheinstrumentsofcommunicationareontheotherside, inthefieldoftheOther,andbecausehehastoreceivethem fromhim.AsIhavealwayssaid,thishasasaresultand consequencethatitisalwaysprincipallyfromtheOtherthathe receivesnisownmessage,thefirstemergence,theonewhichis inscribedontheboardisonlyanunconscious,because unformulatable,"Whoam1?",towhichthererespondsbeforeitis formulated,a"Youare",namelythathereceivesfirstofallhis ownmessageinaninvertedform,asIhavesaidforalongtime. Iamaddingtodayifyouunderstandit,thathereceivesitina formthatisatfirstinterrupted,thathehearsfirstofalla "Youare..."withoutattribution.And,nevertheless,however interruptedthismessagemaybeandthereforehowever insufficient,itisneverunformed,startingfromthisfactthat languageexistsinthereal,thatitisonajourney,in circulation,andthatforitsparttheS,initssupposedly primalinterrogation,thatwithregardtoit,manythingsinthis languagearealreadyregulated. NowtotakeupaphraseIusedearlier,itisnotsimplyby hypothesis,ahypothesisthatIfoundedinourveryownpractice, identifyingitwiththispraxisanduptoitslimits,totake thisphraseupagain,Iwouldsaythatobservablefactsandwhy sobadlyobserved,thisisthemajorquestionthatexperience

5.6.63

XXI6

presentstousobservablefactsshowustheautonomous operationofthewordasitispresupposedinthisschema.I thinkthattherearehereenoughmothersnotafflictedwith deafnesstoknowthataverysmallchild,attheagewhenthe mirrorphaseisfarfromhavingfinisheditswork,thatavery smallchild,oncehehasafewwords,monologuesbeforehegoes tosleep. Timepreventsmetodayfromreadingforyouabigpage.I promiseyousomethingsatisfyingfromitthenexttimeortheone afterthatforundoubtedlyIwillnotfailtodoit.Asluck wouldhaveit,aftermyfriendRomanJakobsonhadfortenyears beggedallhispupilstoputataperecorderinthenursery,it onlyhappenedtwoorthreeyearsago.Thankstothis,wefinally haveapublicationofoneofthoseprimordialmonologues,andI repeatthatyouwillgetsomesatisfactionfromit.IfImake youwaitalittle,itisbecause,intruth,itisusefulfor showingyoualotofotherthingsthatIwanttooutlinetoday. ItisnecessaryallthesameforwhatIhavetooutlinetoday,to evokethereferencesofexistence,asregardswhichthefactthat Icanonlydosowithoutknowingtoomuchaboutwhatmay (7)correspondtoitinyourownknowledge,showsthedegreeto whichwearefatedtomovearoundinafieldinwhich,whatever onethinksaboutitandwhateverexpenseintermsofcoursesand conferencesaboutitaremade,youreducationisnothingless thanadequate. Inanycase,ifsomepeoplehererememberwhatPiagetcalls egocentriclanguage,towhichIdonotknowwhetherwewillbe abletoreturnthisyearIthinkthatyouknowwhatitisand thatunderanamethatisperhapsdefensible,butisundoubtedly opentoallsortsofmisunderstandingsthereisforexample, thischaracteristicthategocentriclanguage,namelythesesorts ofmonologuesachildcarriesonaloud,whenheissettoa commontaskwithsomecomrades,whichisveryobviouslya monologuedirectedathimself,canonlybeproducedpreciselyin acertaincommunity.Thisisnottoobjecttothequalification ofegocentric,ifonespecifiesthemeaningofthis"egocentric" inanycase,asregardsegocentrism,itmayappearstriking thatthesubjectasenunciatedissooftenelidedinit.I recallthisreference,itisperhapstoencourageyoutomake contactagainandgettoknowthephenomenoninthetextof Piagetforanyusefulenditmayhaveinthefuture,butalsoto notethatatleastaproblemisposed:thatofsituating,of knowingwhatisthishypnopompicmonologue,whichisquite primalcomparedtothismanifestation,asyouknow,ofamuch laterstage. Hereandnow,Iindicatetoyouthatasregards theseproblems,asyousee,ofgenesisandof development,thisfamousschemawhichhasbored yousomuchthroughouttheseyears,willregain itsvalue.Inanycase,thismonologueofthe smallchildthatIamspeakingtoyouabout,never happenswhensomeoneelseisthere:ayoungerbrother,another

5.6.63

XXI7

babyintheroom,isenoughforitnottohappen.Manyother characteristicsindicatethatwhatishappeningatthislevel, which,asyouwillsee,issoastonishinglyrevelatoryofthe precociousnessofwhataredescribedastheprimordialtensions intheunconscious,wecannotdoubtthatwehaveheresomething thatisateverypointanalogoustothefunctionofthedream. Everythinghappenson"anotherstage"withtheaccentthatIhave giventothisterm.Andoughtwenottobeguidedherebythe littledooritselfitisneveranythingbutabadwaythrough whichIintroduceyouheretotheproblemnamelyconcerning whatisinvolved,whichistheconstitutionofoasremainder, thatinanycase,ifitsconditionsareindeedtheonesIhave (8)toldyouabout,weforourpartonlyhavethisphenomenonin thestateofaremainder,namelyonthetapeoftherecorder.In otherwords,wehaveattheverymostthedistantmurmurthatis alwaysreadytobeinterruptedwhenweappear. Doesthisnotpromptustoconsiderthatawayispresentedtous tograspthatforthesubjectwhoisintheprocessof constitutinghimself,itisalsoinavoicedetachedfromits supportthatweoughttosearchforthisremainder. Payverycarefulattention:wemustnotgotooquicklyhere. Ordinaryexperienceisthateverythingthesubjectreceivesfrom theOtherthroughlanguageisreceivedinavocalform.Butwe knowverywell,inanexperiencewhichisnotallthatrare,even thoughoneevokesalwaysthemostspectacularcases,Helen Keller,thattherearewaysotherthanthevocalonetoreceive language,thereareotherwaysforreceivinglanguage,language isnotvocalisation(cfthedeaf). Nevertheless,Ibelievethatwecanadvanceinthedirectionthat arelationshipthatismorethanaccidentallinkslanguageto sonority.Andwewillbelieveperhapsthatweevenareadvancing alongtherightpathintryingtoarticulatethingscloselyin qualifyingthissonority,forexample,asinstrumental.Itisa factthatphysiologyopensthepathhere.Wedonotknow everythingaboutthefunctioningoftheear,butweknowallthe samethatthecochleaisaresonator,acomplexorcomposite resonator,ifyouwish,butafterallacompositeresonatoris decomposedintoacompositionofelementaryresonators.This leadsusalongapathwhichisthefollowing,thatwhatisproper toresonanceisthatitistheapparatuswhichdominatesinit. Itistheapparatuswhichresonates.Itdoesnotresonateto justanything,itonlyresonates,ifyouwish,inordernotto complicatethingstoomuch,toitsownnote,toitsown frequency. This leads us to a certain remark about the sort of resonator that we are dealing with, I mean concretely, in the sensory apparatus in question, our ear: to a resonator which is not an indifferent one, to a resonator which is a kind of tube. The distance of the journey involved in a certain return that the vibration makes, always carried from the oval window, passing fromthescalatympanitothescalavestibuli,appearstobe

5.6.63

XXI8

closelylinkedtothelengthofthespacetravelledinaclosed conduit.Itoperatesthereforeinthesameway,ifyouwish,as sometube,whateveritmaybe,afluteoranorgan. (9) Obviouslythematteriscomplicated,thisapparatusdoesnot resembleanyothermusicalinstrument.Itisatubewhichcould be,asImightsay,atubewithkeys,inthissensethatitseems thatitisthecellputinthepositionofacord,butwhichdoes notfunctionlikeacord,whichisinvolvedatthepointofthe returnofthewave,whichtakeschargeofconnotingtheresonance involved. Iapologiseallthemoreforthisdetourbecauseitisquite certainthatitisnotinthisdirectionthatwewillfindthe lastwordonthematter.Thisreminderisallthesamedesigned toactualisethefactthatintheform,theorganicform,there issomethingwhichappearstousakintotheseprimary, topological,transpatialdatawhichmadeusinterestourselves veryespeciallyinthemostelementaryformofthecreatedor creativeconstitutionofavoid,theonethatwehaveincarnated intheformofanapologeticforyouinthestoryofthepot. Apotalsoisatube,andonethatcanresonate.Andthe questionofwhatwehavesaid,thattenabsolutelysimilarpots absolutelydonotfailtoimposethemselvesasindividually different,butthequestioncanbeposedastowhetherif,when oneputsoneintheplaceoftheother,thevoidwhichwas successivelyattheheartofeachoneofthemisalwaysthesame. Now,itisindeedfromthecommandmentwhichimposesthevoidat theheartoftheacoustictubeforanythingofthisrealitywhich mayresonatetherewhichopensoutontoafurtherstepofour progress,whichisnotsosimpletodefine,namelywhatiscalled abreath,namelythatforallpossiblebreaths,afluteatthe levelofoneofitsopeningsimposesthesamevibration.Ifit isnotthelaw,indicatingforusthissomethingwheretheo involved,functionswitharealfunctionofmediation.

Wellnowletusnotyieldtothisillusion.Allofthisisonly ofinterestasametaphor.Ifthevoice,inthesensethatwe understandit,hasanimportance,itisnotthatofresonatingin anyspatialvoid,itisinsofarastheformula,themostsimple elisioninwhatiscalledlinguisticallyitsphaticfunction, whichisbelievedtobeasimplemakingcontact,whichisindeed somethingelse,resonatesinavoidwhichisthevoidofthe Otherassuch,theexnihiloproperlyspeaking.Thevoice respondstowhatissaid,butitcannotanswerforit.Inother words:inorderforittorespond,wehavetoincorporatethe voiceasothernessofwhatissaid. (10) Itisindeedforthisreason,andnotforanyother,that detachedfromourselves,ourvoiceappearstoustohavea strangesound.ThestructureoftheOther,initself, constitutesacertainvoid,thevoidofitslackofguarantee. Thetruthenterstheworldwiththesignifierandbeforeany control.Itisexperienced,itrefersitselfononlybyits

5.6.63

XXI9

echoesintothereal.Now,itisinthisvoidthatthevoicequa distinctfromsonorities,thenotmodulatedbutarticulatedvoice resonates.Thevoiceinvolved,isthevoicequaimperative,in sofarasitcallsforobedienceorconviction,thatitsituates itself,notwithrespecttomusic,butwithrespecttotheword. Itwouldbeinterestingtoseethedistancethatexists,in connectionwiththiswellknownmiscognitionoftherecorded voice,betweentheexperienceofthesingerandthatofthe orator.Iproposetothosewhoarewillingtodosomeresearch forfreeonthis,todoit:Idonothavethetimetodoit myself. ButIbelievethatitisherethatweputourfingeronthis distinctformofidentificationthatIwasnotabletoapproach lastyear,whichensuresthattheidentificationofthevoice givesusatleastthefirstmodelwhichensuresthatincertain caseswearenotspeakingaboutthesameidentificationasinthe others,wespeakaboutEinverleibung,ofincorporation. Thepsychoanalystsoftherightgenerationwereawareofthis. TherewasacertainMrIsakoverwhowroteinthe20thyearofthe InternationalJournalaveryremarkablearticlewhichmoreoverto mymindisonlyofinterestbecauseoftheneedhefelttogivea reallystrikingimageofwhatwasdistinctinthistypeof identification.Because,asyouwillsee,heisgoingtolook foritinsomethingwhoserelationshipsasyouwillseeare singularlymoredistantfromthephenomenonthan .............. Forthatpurpose,ifheinterestshimselfinthelittleanimal whichiscalledthe[Palaemon],ifIrememberrightly,becauseI havenothadtimetocheckthismemorywhichiscalled,I believe,Daphniaandwhichwithoutbeingatallashrimpyoucan presentittoyourselfasgreatlyresemblingit.Inanycase, thisanimalwhichlivesinsaltwaterhasthecurioushabit,as wewouldsayinourlanguage,ofpluggingtheshellduringits metamorphoseswithtinygrainsofsand,ofintroducingtheminto whatithasintermsofareducedapparatusdescribedas (11)statoacoustic,inotherwordsintotheutriclesforit doesnothaveourextraordinarycochleaintotheutricles, havingintroducedtheselumpsofsandbecauseithastoput theminfromoutside,becauseitdoesnotproducethemofitself inanywaytheutricleclosesagainandhereitisinsidethese littlebellsthatarenecessaryforitsequilibrium.Itbrings theminfromoutside.Youmustadmitthattherelationshipwith theconstitutionofthesuperegoisratherdistantnevertheless whatinterestsme,isthatMrIsakoverdidnotthinkhecould findanybettercomparisonthantoreferhimselftothis operation.Youhaveallthesame,Ihope,heardbeingawakened inyourselvestheechoesofphysiology,andyouknowthat maliciousexperimenterssubstitutedgrainsofsteelforgrainsof sand,asawayofamusingthemselvessubsequentlywiththe Daphniaandamagnet. Avoicethereforeisnotassimilatedbutitisincorporated,this iswhatcangiveitafunctioninmodellingourvoid.Andwe rediscoverheremyinstrumentoftheotherday,theshofarofthe

5.6.63

XXI10

synagogue.Whatgivesitsmeaningtothispossibilitythatfor aninstantitcanbeentirelymusicalisthiselementaryfifth evenmusic,thisdeviationofafifthinit?thatitcanbea substitutefortheword,bypowerfullywrenchingourearaway fromallitscustomaryharmonies.Itmodelsthelocusofour anxiety,but,letusnote,onlyafterthedesireoftheOtherhas takentheformofacommandment.Thatiswhyitcanplayits eminentfunctionofgivingtoanxietyitsresolution,whetherit iscalledguiltorpardon,andwhichispreciselythe introductionofadifferentorder.Thefactthatdesireisa lackisfundamentalhere,wewillsaythatitisits"primordial fault",faultinthesensethatsomethingislacking(fait defaut).Changethemeaningofthisfaultbygivingitacontent inthearticulationofwhat?Letusleaveitinsuspense.And thisiswhatexplainsthebirthofguiltanditsrelationshipto anxiety. Inordertoknowwhatcanbemadeofit,itisnecessaryforme toleadyouintoafieldwhichisnotthatofthisyear,but whichwemustengagealittlewithhere.IsaidthatIdidnot knowwhat,intheshofar,letussaytheclamourofguilt,is articulatedfromtheOtherwhocoversanxiety.Ifourformulais correct,somethinglikethedesireoftheOthermustbeinvolved init. Iwillgivemyselfthreemoreminutestointroducesomething whichpreparesthewayandnexttimewewillbeabletotakeour nextstep,namelytotellyouthatwhatisheremostfavourably preparedtobeilluminatedreciprocally,isthenotionof (12)sacrifice. Manyotherpeoplebesidesmehavetriedtotacklewhatis involvedinsacrifice.Iwilltellyouweareshortoftime briefly,thatsacrificeisdestined,notatalltobeanoffering oragiftwhichspreadsitselfintoaquitedifferentdimension, buttobethecaptureoftheOtherassuchinthenetworkof desire. Themattershouldalreadybeperceptible,namelywhatitis reducedtoforusontheethicalplane.Itisacommon experiencethatwedonotliveourlives,whoeverweare,without ceaselesslyofferingtosomeunknowndivinityorotherthe sacrificeofsomelittlemutilationthatweimposeonourselves, validlyornot,inthefieldofourdesires Notalltheunderpinningsoftheoperationarevisible.Thatit isamatterofsomethingwhichreferstooaspoleofourdesire isnotindoubt.Butitwillbenecessary,thenexttime,forme toshowyouthatsomethingmoreisnecessary,andspecifically IhopethatatthismeetingIwillhavealargeconventof obsessionalsandspecificallythatthisoissomethingalready consecrated,whichissomethingthatcannotbeconceivedof exceptbytakingupagaininitsoriginalformwhatisinvolved insacrifice. Wenodoubthaveforourpart,lostourgodsinthegreatfairof

5.6.257

XXI11

civilisation,butaratherprolongedtimeattheoriginofall peoplesshowsthatthereislinkedintothemfromthebeginning likerealpersons,notomnipotentgods,butgodspowerfulwhere theywere.Thewholequestionwastoknowwhetherthesegods desiredsomething.Sacrificeconsistedinbehavingasifthey desiredlikeus:thereforeohasthesamestructure.Thatdoes notmeanthattheyaregoingtoeatwhatissacrificedtothem, noreventhatitcanbeofanyusetothembuttheimportant thingisthattheydesireitand,Iwouldsayfurther,thatthis doesnotprovokeanxietyinthem. Forthereissomethingelsethatuptothepresentnoone,I believe,hasresolvedinasatisfactoryfashion:thevictims alwayshadtobewithoutstain.NowrememberwhatItoldyou aboutthestainatthelevelofthespecularfield:withthe stainthereappears,thereispreparedthepossibilityofthe resurgence,inthefieldofdesire,ofwhatishiddenbehind, namelyinthiscasethiseyewhoserelationshipwiththisfield mustnecessarilybeelidedinorderthatdesirecanremainthere withthisubiquitous,evenvaqabondpossibility,whichinany caseallowsittoescapefromanxiety.Totamethegodinthe snareofdesireisessential,andnottoawakenanxiety. Timeforcesmetoend.Youwillseethat,howeverlyricalthis lastdiversionmayappeartoyou,itwillserveusasaguidein themuchmoredaytodayrealitiesofourexperience.

12.6.63 Seminar22:

XXII258 Wednesday12June1963

Anxiety lies in this fundamental relationship that the subject is inwithwhatIhavecalleduptonowthedesireoftheOther. Analysishas,hasalwayshadandkeepsasitsobjectthe discoveryofadesire.Itisyouwilladmitforsome structuralreasonsthatIamled,thisyear,todisengage,to bringintofunctionassuchinacircumscribed,articulatedway, andthisjustasmuchbywhatwecouldcallanalgebraic definition,asbyanarticulationinwhichthefunctionappears inasortofgap,ofresidueofthesignifyingfunctionassuch butIalsodiditpiecebypiece,thisisthepaththatIwill taketoday.

Ineveryadvance,ineverybecomingofthisoassuch,anxiety appearspreciselyinfunctionofitsrelationshiptothedesire oftheOther.Butwhatisitsrelationshiptothedesireofthe subject?ItisabsolutelysituatableintheformthatIalready advancedattheappropriatetime:oisnottheobjectofdesire, theonethatwesearchtorevealinanalysis,itisitscause.

Thisfeatureisessentialforifanxietymarksthedependencyof everyconstitutionofthesubjecthisdependencyontheOther thedesireofthesubjectisthusfoundappendedtothis relationshipthroughthemediationofthefirst,antecedent constitutionofo. Thisistheinterestthatpushesmetoremindyouhowthis presenceofoascauseofdesireannouncesitself.Fromthe firstdataofanalyticresearch,itannouncesitselfinamoreor lessveiledfashionpreciselyinthefunctionofthecause.

Thisfunctioncanbemappedoutinthedataofourfield,theone inwhichresearchengages,namelythefieldofthesymptom.In everysymptom,insofarasatermofthisnameiswhatinterests us,thisdimensionthatIamgoingtotrytobringintoplay todaybeforeyoumanifestsitself.Tomakeyousenseit,Iwill startfromasymptomwhichitisnotfornothinghasasyou willseeaftertheeventthisexemplaryfunction,namelythe symptomoftheobsessional.ButIamindicatingitrightaway ifIputitforward,itisbecauseitallowsusonceagainto gointothismappingoutofthefunctionofo,insofarasit unveilsitselffunctioninginthefirstgivensofthesymptomin

12.6.63 thedimensionofthecause.

XXII259

(2)Whatdoestheobsessionalpresenttousinthepathognomic formofhisposition?Theobsessionorthecompulsion, articulatedornotasamotivationinhisinnerlanguage:"Do thisorthatcheckwhetherthedoorisclosedornot,whether thetapison".Aswewillseelaterperhaps,itisthesymptom whichtakesinitsmostexemplaryform,impliesasImightsay, thatnotfollowingthelineawakensanxiety.Itisthiswhich bringsitaboutthatthesymptom,Iwouldsay,indicatesinits veryphenomenonthatweareatthemostfavourableleveltolink thepositionofoasmuchtotherelationshipsofanxietyasto therelationshipsofdesire.

Anxiety,infact,appearsbecausedesire,atthebeginning, historicallybeforeFreudianresearch,beforetheanalysisofour praxis,ishidden,andweknowthetroublewehavetounmaskit, ifweeverdounmaskit!

Butheretheredeservestobehighlightedthisdatumofour experiencewhichappearsfromtheveryfirstobservationsof Freudandwhich,Iwouldsay,constitutes,evenifithasnot beensituatedassuch,perhapsthemostessentialstepinthe advanceintoobsessionalneurosis,itisthatFreud,andwe ourselveseverydayhaverecognised,canrecognisethisfactthat theanalyticproceduredoesnotbeginfromtheenunciationofthe symptomasIhavejustdescribedittoyou,namelyaccordingto itsclassicalform,theonewhichhadalreadybeendefinedmuch earlier,thecompulsionwiththeanxiousstrugglewhich accompaniesit,butintherecognitionofthefollowing:thefact isthatitfunctionslikethat.Thisrecognitionisnotan effectdetachedfromthefunctioningofthissymptom,itisnot epiphenomenallythatthesubjecthastoperceivethatit functionslikethat.

Thesymptomisonlyconstitutedwhenthesubjectbecomesawareof itbecauseweknowfromexperiencethatthereareformsof obsessionalbehaviourinwhichthesubject,notonlyhasnot noticedhisobsessions,buthasnotevenconstitutedthemas such.Andthefirststep,inthiscase,oftheanalysisthe passagesofFreudonthispointarecelebratedisthatthe symptomisconstitutedinitsclassicalform.Withoutthis, thereisnomeansofgettingoutofitandnotsimplybecause thereisnowayofspeakingaboutit,butbecausethereisnoway ofcatchingitbytheear.Whatisthisearinquestion?Itis thissomethingofthesymptomthatwecansayisunassimilatedby thesubject.

(3)Inorderforthesymptomtoemergefromthestateofanas yetunformulatedenigma,thestepisnotthatitshouldbe formulated,itisthatinthesubjectsomethingshouldbe outlinedwhosecharacteristhatitissuggestedtohimthat thereisacauseforthat.Thisistheoriginaldimensiontaken onhereintheformofthephenomenon,andIwillshowyou besideswhereonecanrediscoverit.

12.6.63

XXII260

Thisdimensionthatthereisacauseforthatinwhichsimply theimplicationofthesubjectinhisbehaviourisbroken,this ruptureisthenecessarycomplementforthesymptomtobe approachablebyus.WhatIintendtosaytoyouandtoshowyou, isthatthissigndoesnotconstituteastepinwhatIcouldcall theunderstandingofthesituation,thatitissomethingmore, thatthereisareasonwhythisstepisessentialinthe treatmentoftheobsessional. Thisisimpossibletoarticulateifwedonotdisplayinan altogetherradicalfashiontherelationshipbetweenthefunction ofo,thecauseofdesire,andthementaldimensionofcauseas such.This,IalreadyindicatedinwhatImightcallsomeasides inmydiscourse,andIwroteitsomewhereatapointthatIcould findagaininthearticle"KantwithSade"whichappearedinthe AprileditionofthejournalCritique.Itisonthispointthat Iintendtodaytobringtobearthemainpartofmydiscourse. Fromnowonyouseetheinterestinmarking,inmakingit likely,thatthisdimensionofthecauseindicatesandonly indicatestheemergence,thepresentification,inthestarting dataoftheanalysisoftheobsessional,ofthisoaroundwhich thisisinthefutureofwhatIamtryingforthemomentto explaintoyouaroundwhichtherehastoturnthewhole analysisofthetransferenceinordernottobeobliged,required toturninacircle.Acirclecertainlyisnotnothinq,the circuitisgonethroughbutitisclearthatthereisandIam nottheonewhoenounceditaproblemabouttheendofthe analysis,onewhichisenouncedasfollows:theirreducibilityof atransferenceneurosis. Thistransferenceneurosisisorisnot thesameastheonewhichwasdetectableatthebeginning. Undoubtedlyitisdifferentinbeingentirelypresent,itappears toussometimesinanimpasse,thatistosaysometimes culminatesinacompletestagnationoftherelationshipsbetween theanalysandandtheanalyst.Itsonlydifferencetoeverything thatisproducedinananalogousway,atthebeginningofthe analysis,isthatitiscompletelycollectedtogether.

(4)Oneentersanalysisthroughanenigmaticdoor:forthe transferenceneurosisisthereineachandeveryone,evenin Alcibiades:itisAgathonthatheloves.Butinabeingasfree asAlcibiades,thetransferenceisobvious.Eventhoughthis loveiswhatiscalledareallove,whatwetoooftencalla lateraltransference,thisiswherethetransferenceis.The astonishingthingisthatonegoesintoanalysisdespiteallthe thingsthatholdusbackinthetransferencefunctioningasreal.

Therealsubjectofastonishmentasregardsthecircuitofthe analysis,ishow,goingintoitdespitethetransference neurosis,onecanobtainthetransferenceneurosisitselfonthe wayout.Nodoubtitisbecausethereissomemisunderstanding abouttheanalysisoftransference.Withoutthisonewouldnot seetherebeingmanifestedsometimes,thissatisfactionwhichI haveheardexpressed,thattohavegivenenergytothis transferenceneurosisisnotperhapsperfection,butitisall thesamearesultitistruebutitisallthesamearesult

12.6.63 thatisitselfratherperplexing.

XXII261

IfIenouncethatthepathpassesthrougho,theonlyobjectto beproposedforanalysis,fortheanalysisoftransference,this doesnotmeanthatthisdoesnotleaveopen,asyouwillsee, anotherproblem.Itispreciselyinthissubtractionthatthere canappearthisessentialdimension,thatofaquestionalways posed,inshort,butcertainlynotresolvedforeverytimeit isposedtheinadequacyoftheanswersisreallytangible, evident,strikingtoeveryeyethatofthedesireofthe analyst.

Thisshortremindertoshowyoutheinterestofwhatispresently atstake,thisshortreminderhavingbeengiven,letusreturnto o.oisthecause,thecauseofdesire.Ipointedouttoyou thattoreturntotheenigmawhichthefunctioningofthe categoryofthecauseproposestousisnotabadwayof understandingit.Forafterallitisquiteclearthatwhatever critique,whatevereffortofreduction,phenomenologicalornot, thatweapplytoit,thiscategoryfunctions,andnotsimplyas anarchaicstageofourdevelopment. WhatisindicatedbythewayinwhichIintendtoreferithere totheoriginalfunctionoftheobjectoascauseofdesire, signifiesthetransferenceofthequestionofthecategoryof causality,fromwhatIwouldcallwithKantthetranscendental aesthetic,tothatwhichifyouarewillingtoagreetoitI wouldcallmy"transcendentalethics".

(5)AndhereIamforcedtoadvanceontoaterrainthatIam forcedtoproposesimply,inordertosweepthesidesofitwith asearchlight.Withoutbeingableeventoinsist,itwouldbe well,Iwouldsay,forthephilosopherstodotheirworkand noticeforexample,anddaretoformulatesomethingwhichwould allowustrulytosituateinitsplacethisoperationwhichIam indicatinginsayingthatIextractthefunctionofcausefrom thefieldof"thetranscendentalaesthetic",fromthatofKant, itwouldbefittingforotherstoindicatetoyouthatthisis onlyasortofcompletelypedagogicalextraction,becausethere aremanythings,otherthings,thatitwouldbefittingto extractfromthis"transcendentalaesthetic".

HereIhavetodo,atleastbywayofindication,whatI succeededineludingthelasttimebyaconjuringtrick,whenI spoketoyouaboutthescopicfieldofdesire.Icannotavoid it.ItisnecessaryallthesamethatIsay,thatIindicate here,attheverymomentthatIamadvancingfurther,whatwas impliedinwhatIwastellingyou,namelythatspaceisnotat allanaprioricategoryofsensibleintuition,thatitisvery astonishingthatatthepointofadvancementthatweareatin sciencenoonehasyetattackeddirectlysomethingthat everythingencouragesustodo:toformulatethatspaceisnota featureofoursubjectiveconstitutionbeyondwhichthethingin itselfwouldfind,asonemightsay,afreefield,namelythat spaceformspartofthereal,andthat,afterall,inwhatI enounced,articulated,drewherebeforeyoureyeslastyearwith

12.6.63

XXII262

allthistopology,thereissomethingwhosenotesomeofyou certainlyfelt:thistopologicaldimension,inthesensethatits symbolichandlingtranscendsspace,evokedformany,notonlyfor some,somanyshapeswhicharepresentifiedforusbytheschemas ofthedevelopmentoftheembryo,shapesthataresingular throughthiscommonsingularGestaltwhichistheirsandwhich carriesusveryveryfarfromthedirectioninwhichtheGestalt hasadvanced,namelyinthedirectionofthegoodshape,shows us,onthecontrarysomethingwhichiseverywherereproduced,and regardingwhich,inanimpressionisticnotation,Iwouldsaythat itistangibleinasortoftorsiontowhichtheorganisationof lifeseemstobeobligatedinordertolodgeitselfinreal space.

ThethingiseverywherepresentinwhatIexplainedtoyoulast year,andalsomoreoverthisyear,foritispreciselyatthese pointsoftorsionthattherearealsoproducedthepointsof (6)rupturewhoseimportanceItriedtoshowyouinmorethanone caseinafashionlinkedtoourowntopology,thatoftheS,of the0andtheoftheo,inafashionwhichismoreefficacious, moretrue,moreconformtotheoperationoffunctionsthan anythingthatismappedoutinthedoctrineofFreud,intheway thatthedifferences,thevacillationsarethemselvesalready indicativeofthenecessityofwhatIamdoingthere,whichis linkedtotheambiguityonhispartforexampleaboutthe relationshipsbetweenego/nonego,container/contained, ego/outsideworld.Itleapstotheeyesthatallofthese divisionsdonotoverlap.Why? Itisnecessarytograspwhatisinvolvedandtohavefoundother referencepointsofthissubjectivetopologythatweare exploringhere.Iwillfinishwithitwiththisindication, whoseimportIknowthatatleastsomeofyouknowverywellfrom havingheardmenow,thattherealityofspacequathree dimensionalspaceissomethingessentialtograspinorderto definetheformtakenatthelevelofthestagethatItriedto illuminateinmyfirstlecture,asthefunctionofthescopic stage,theformtakenontherebythepresenceofdesire, specificallyasphantasy,namelythatwhatItriedtodefinein thestructureofthephantasy,namelythefunctionoftheframe understandbythatthewindowisnotametaphor.Iftheframe exists,itisbecausespaceisreal. Asregardsthecause,letustrytograspintheverythingwhich isthecommonundergrowthoftheunderstandingsyouhavewhich arebequeathedtoyoufromacertainhubbubofphilosophical discussionsbecauseofhavingpassedthroughaclassdesignated bythisname,LaPhilosophie,becauseitisquiteclearthatan indexofthisoriginofthefunctionofthecauseisveryclearly givenusinhistorybythefollowing:thefactisthatitisin themeasureofthecritiqueofthisfunctionofcause,ofthe attempttoremarkthatitisungraspable,thatwhatitis necessarily,isalwaysatleastacausebehindacause,andwhat isnecessaryforittobeotherinordertobeequivalenttothis incomprehensible,withoutwhichmoreoverwecannotevenbeginto articulateanythingwhatsoever.Butofcourse,thiscritiquehas

12.6.63

XXII263

itsfecundityandoneseesitinhistory:themorethecauseis criticised,themoretheexigenciesthatonecandescribeas thoseofdeterminismimposethemselvesonthought.Thelessthe causeisgraspable,themoreeverythingappearscaused,andupto (7) thefinalterm,theonethathasbeencalledthemeaningof history. Onecansaynothingotherthanthat"everythingiscaused", exceptforthefactthateverythingthathappenstherepresides andalwaysbeginsfroma"sufficientlycaused",inthenameof whichthereisreproducedinhistoryabeginning,anuncaused whichIwouldnotdaretocallabsolute,butwhichwascertainly unexpectedandwhichclassicallyleaveslotsofworktobedone nachtrglichbytheprophets,whichisthedailybreadofthe aforesaidprophets,whoaretheprofessionalinterpretersofthe meaningofhistory. Nowletussayverysimplyhowweenvisagethisfunctionofthe cause.Weenvisageit,thisfunctioneverywherepresentinour thinkingaboutthecause,Iwouldsayfirstofalltomakemyself understood,astheshadowcast,butverypreciselyandbetterthe metaphorofthisprimordialcause,substanceofthisfunctionof thecausewhichispreciselytheoquaanteriortoallthis phenomenology.Wehavedefinedoastheremainderofthe constitutionofthesubjectatthelocusoftheOtherinsofar asithastoconstituteitselfasaspeakingsubject,abarred subject,$.

Ifthesymptomiswhatwearesaying,namelyentirely implicatableinthisprocessoftheconstitutionofthesubject, insofarashehastoconstructhimselfinthelocusofthe Other,theimplicationofthecauseinthebecomingofthe symptomasIdefineditforyouearlier,isalegitimatepartof thisbecoming.Thismeansthatthecauseimplicatedinthe questionofthesymptomisliterally,ifyouwish,aquestion, butoneofwhichthesymptomisnottheeffect.Itistheresult ofit.Theeffectisthedesire.Butitisauniqueeffectand quitestrangeinthatitiswhatisgoingtoexplaintous,orat theveryleastmakeusunderstand,allthedifficultiesthat arosefromlinkingthecommonrelationshipwhichisimposedon themindbetweenthecauseandtheeffect.Thefactisthatthe primordialeffectofthiscause,o,atthelevelofdesire,this effectwhichiscalleddesireandthiseffectwhichIhavejust qualifiedasstrangesince,youshouldnote,sinceitis preciselydesire,itisaneffectwhichhasnothingeffected aboutit.

Desiretakeninthisperspectiveissituatedineffect essentiallyasalackofeffect.Thecauseisthusconstituted assupposingtheeffectsofthefactthatprimordiallytheeffect islackingthere.Andthisisrediscovered,youwillrediscover it,ineveryphenomenonology.Thegapbetweencauseandeffect, inthemeasurethatitisfilledthisindeediswhatiscalled inacertainperspectivetheprogressofsciencemakesthe (8) functionofthecausevanish,Imeantherewhereitis filled.

12.6.63

XXII264

Moreovertheexplanationofanythingwhatsoeverculminatesinthe measurethatitiscompleted,inleavingonlysignifying connections,involatilisingwhatanimateditatitsorigin,what waspushingtobeexplained,namelywhatonedoesnotunderstand, namelytheeffectivegap.Andthereisnocausewhichis constitutedinthemindassuch,whichdoesnotimplythisgap. Allofthismayseemtoyouquitesuperfluous.Neverthelessthis iswhatallowstheretobegraspedwhatIwouldcallthenaivety ofsomeoftheresearchdonebypsychologistsandspecifically thatofPiaget. ThepathsalongwhichIamleadingyouthisyearyouhave alreadyseenitannouncingitselfpassbywayofacertain evocationofwhatPiagetcalls"egocentriclanguage".AsPiaget himselfrecogniseshehaswrittenit,Iamnotinterpretinghim herehi3ideaoftheegocentricityofacertainchildish discoursestartsfromthissupposition:hebelieveshehas demonstratedthatchildrendonotunderstandoneanother,that theyspeakforthemselves.

Theworldofsuppositionsthatliesbeneaththisis,Iwouldnot sayunfathomableonecanspecifythemforthegreaterpart:it isanexcessivelywidespreadsupposition,namelythattheword ismadetocommunicate.Thatisnottrue.IfPiagetcannot graspthissortofgapthereagainwhichhehimselfnevertheless designatesandthisisreallywhatisimportantinreadinghis works,IbegyoubetweennowandthetimethatIreturnorIdo notreturn,togetholdofThelanguageandthoughtofthechild whichisanaltogetheradmirablebookitillustratesatevery momentthedegreetowhichwhatPiagetcollectsintermsoffacts inthisapproach,whichisaberrantinprinciple,demonstrates somethingquitedifferenttowhathethinksnaturallysincehe isfarfrombeingafool,ithappensthatPiaget'sownremarksgo alongthatverypath,inanycaseforexampletheproblemasto whythislanguageofthesubjectisessentiallymadeforhim, neverhappensinagroup.

Whathelacks,IwouldaskyoutoreadthesepagesbecauseI cannotgothroughthemwithyou,butateverymomentyouwillsee howhisthinkingslips,clingstoapositionofthequestion whichispreciselytheonewhichveilsthephenomenonwhich,asa matteroffact,isveryclearlydisplayed,andtheessentialof itisessentiallythefactthatitisadifferentthingtosay thatthewordhasessentiallyforeffecttocommunicate,while (9)theeffectoftheword,theeffectofthesignifieristo giveriseinthesubjecttothedimensionofthesignified essentially.Iwillreturntoitagainifnecessary.

Thatthisrelationshiptotheotherthatisdepictedforushere asbeingthekey,underthenameofthesocialisationof language,thekeytotheturningpointbetweenegocentric languageandcompletedlanguage,this'turningpointisnot,in itsfunction,apointofeffect,ofeffectiveimpact,itis nameableasadesiretocommunicate.Itisindeedmoreover becausethisdesireisdisappointedinPiagetitisquite tangiblethathiswholepedagogyheregivesrisetosystems

12.6.63

XXII265

andghoststhatare,infact,ratheraffected.Thatthechild appearstohimtoonlyhalfunderstandhim,headds:"Theydonot evenunderstandoneanother".Butisthatwherethequestion lies?

Oneseesverywellinhistexthowthequestionisnotthere. Oneseesitinthewaythathearticulateswhathecalls understandingbetweenchildren.Asyouknowthisishowhe proceedshebeginsbytakingforexamplethefollowingschema whichisgoingtobedepictedonanimage whichisgoingtobethesupportofthe explanations,theschemaofatap.That givesussomethingmoreorlesslikethat, thisbeingthecrosssectionofthetapyou saytothechild,asoftenasnecessary:"You seethelittletubehereitwillalsobe calledthedooritisblockedwhichmeans thatthewatertherecannotgetthroughin ordertoflowhereintowhatwillalsobe calledinacertainfashiontheoutlet,etc". Heexplains.Hereisthisschema,ifyouwanttotestit.He thoughtmoreoverIpointthisouttoyouinpassingheshould completeithimselfwiththepresenceofthebasinwhichwill absolutelynotinterveneinthesixornine,sevenpointsof explanationthathegivesus.

Hewillbeverystruckbythefollowing:thefactisthatthe childrepeatsverywellallthetermsoftheexplanationthathe, Piaget,hasgivenhim.Heisgoingtomakeuseofthischildas anexplainerforanotherchild,whomhewillbizarrelycallthe reproducer.

Firstphase:henotices,notwithoutsomeastonishment,thatwhat thechildhasrepeatedsowell,whichmeansforhimthathe obviouslyhasunderstoodIamnotsayingthatheiswrong,Iam sayingthatPiagetdoesnotevenaskhimselfthequestionthat whatthechildhasrepeatedtohim,Piaget,inthetestthathe carriedoutwithaviewtoseeingwhatthechildhadunderstood, (10)isnotgoingtobeinanywayidenticaltowhatheisthen goingtoexplain.AtwhichPiagetmakesthisverycorrect remark,thatwhatheelidesinhisexplanations,isprecisely whatthechildhasunderstood,withoutseeingthatingivingthis explanationthiswouldimplythatthechildforhispartwould explainnothingifhehadreallyunderstoodeverything,asPiaget says.Itisofcoursenottruethathehasunderstoodeverything asyouaregoingtoseeanymorethananybodyelse. Withtheseveryinsufficientexplanationsthattheexplainer givestothereproducer,whatastonishesPiaget,isthatina fieldlikethatoftheseexamples,namelythefieldthathecalls thatofexplanationsbecauseIamleavingtooneside,forlack oftime,thefieldthathedescribesasthatof"stories".

Forstoriesthingsfunctiondifferently.ButwhatdoesPiaget callstories?Iassureyouthathehasawayoftranscribingthe

12.6.63

XXII266

storyofNiobewhichisapurescandal.Becauseitdoesnotseem eventooccurtohimthatinspeakingaboutNiobe,oneis speakingaboutamythandthatthereisperhapsadimensionof mythwhichimposesitself,whichabsolutelyclingstothesimple termwhichisputforwardunderthispropernameNiobe,andthat totransformitintoasortofemollienthogwashIwouldask youtoconsultthistextwhichissimplyincredibleoneis proposingperhapstothechildsomethingwithinhisrange,which issimplysomethingwhichsignalsaprofounddeficitinthe experimenter,Piagethimself,withregardtowhatarethe functionsoflanguage.Ifoneisproposingamyth,letitbe one,andnotthisvaguelittlestory:"Onceuponatimetherewas aladycalledNiobewhohadtwelvesonsandtwelvedaughters. Shemetafairywhohadonlyonesonandnodaughternowthe ladymockedthefairybecauseshehadonlyoneboythefairy thenbecameangryandtiedtheladytoarock.Theladycried fortenyears,andthenshewaschangedintoastream,hertears hadmadeastreamwhichstillflows".

Thishasreallynoequivalentexceptthetwootherstoriesthat Piagetproposes,thatofthelittleblackboywhobreakshiscake onthewayoutandmeltsthepatofbutteronthereturnjourney, andthestillworseoneofchildrentransformedintoswans,who remainalltheirlivesseparatedfromtheirparentsbecauseof thiscurse,butwho,whentheyreturn,notalonefindtheir (11)parentsdead,butregainingtheirfirstshapethisisnot indicatedinthemythicaldimensioninregainingtheirfirst shape,theyhaveneverthelessaged.Idonotknowifthereisa singlemythwhichallowstheagingprocesstocontinueduringa transformation.Inaword,theinventionofthesestoriesof PiagethaveonethingincommonwiththoseofBinetinthatthey reflecttheprofoundwickednessofeverypedagogicalposition. Iapologisetoyouforwanderingoffintothisparenthesis.Let uscomebacktomyexplanations.Atleastyouwillhave graspedinitthisdimensionnotedbyPiagethimselfofthissort ofwastage,ofentropy,asImightput,ofcomprehensionwhichis goingtobenecessarilydegradedbytheveryfactofthe explanationbeingnecessarilyverbal.Hehimselfnotestohis greatsurprisethatthereisanenormouscontrastbetweenthe explanations,whenwhatisinvolvedisanexplanatoryonelike that,andwhathappensinhis"stories","stories",thatIrepeat Iputininvertedcommas.Becauseitisveryprobablethatif the"stories"confirmhistheoryregardingtheentropy,ifImay expressmyselfthus,ofcomprehension,itispreciselybecause theyarenot"stories",andthat,iftheywere"stories",the truemyth,therev/ouldprobablybenowastage.

Inanycase,Iformypartproposealittlesigntoyou,itis that,whenoneofthesechildren,whenhehastorepeatthestory ofNiobe,makesemerge,atthepointthatPiagettellsusthat theladyhadbeentiedtoarocknever,inanyform,hasthe mythofNiobearticulatedsuchamomentofcourse,itiseasy, playing,youwillbetold,onsomethingmisheardandonapun, butwhypreciselythisonemakesemergethedimensionofarock whichhasastain,restoringthedimensionthatinmyprevious

12.6.63

XXII267

seminar I made emerge for you as being essential for the victim of sacrifice, that of not having any. But let us leave it. It isofcoursenotaproof,butsimplyasuggestion. IreturntomyexplanationandtotheremarkofPiagetthat, despitethedefectsoftheexplanation,Imeanthefactthatthe explainerexplainsbadly,theonetowhomheisexplaining understandsmuchbetterthantheexplainer,byhisinadequate explanations,bearswitnesstohavingunderstood.Ofcoursehere theexplanationalwaysarises:hehimselfdoestheworkagain. Becausehowdoeshedefinetherateofunderstandingbetween children?Whatthereproducerhasunderstood Whattheexplainerhasunderstood (12)Idonotknowifyounoticethatthereisonethinghere thatisneverspokenabout,itiswhatPiagethimselfhas understood!Itisneverthelessessential,becausewedonot leavethechildrentospontaneouslanguage,namelytoseewhat theyunderstand.

NowitisclearthatwhatPiagetseemsnottohaveseen,isthat hisownexplanation,fromthepointofviewofanyoneatall,of someotherthirdperson,cannotbeunderstoodatall.ForasI toldyouearlier,ifthislittleblockedtubehereisswitched on,thankstosomethingthatPiagetgivesallitsimportanceto, theoperationofthefingerswhichmakethetapturninsucha waythatthewatercanflow,doesthatmeanthatitflows?There areabsolutelynodetailsaboutthisinPiagetwhoofcourse knowswellthatifthereisnopressure,nothingwillcomeoutof thetapevenifyouturniton,butwhobelievesheisableto omitthisbecauseheisplacinghimselfattheleveloftheso calledmindofthechild.Letmecontinue.Thisseemstobe completelystupid,allofthis,butyouaregoingtosee.The comingintoview,thespringingforththemeaningofthewhole adventuredoesnotemergefrommyspeculations,butfrom experience.Youwillsee. ItemergesallthesamefromthisremarkthatIhavemadetoyou Iwhodonotclaimtohaveunderstoodexhaustivelythatthere isonethingthatisverycertain:itisthattheexplanationof thetapisnotwelldone,ifwhatisinvolvedisthetapas cause,bysayingthatitoperatessometimesonandsometimes off.Atapismadetobeturnedoff.Itisenoughthatonce, becauseofastrike,younolongerknowwhenthepressureis goingtocomebacktoknowthat,ifyouhaveleftiton,there arelotsofinconveniences,thatitoughtthereforetobeturned offevenwhenthereisnopressure. Nowwhatismarkedinwhathappensinthetransmissionfromthe explainertothereproducer?ItissomethingthatPiaget deplores,whichisthatthesocalledreproducerchildnolonger hastheslightestinterestinanythingthatisinvolved concerningtwobranches,theoperationofthefingersand everythingthatfollowsfromit.Nevertheless,hepointsout, theotherhastransmittedacertainpartofittohim.The wastageincomprehensionseemstobeenormoustohimbutI

12.6.63

XXII268

assureyou,ifyoureadtheexplanationsofthelittlethird party,ofthelittlereproducer,oflittleRivinthetextin question,youwillnoticethatwhathepreciselyputsthestress on,aretwothings:namelytheeffectofthetapassomething (13) whichcanbeturnedoffandtheresult,namelythatthanks toataponecanfillabasinwithoutitoverflowing,the emergenceassuchofthedimensionofthetapascause.Whydoes Piagetsocompletelymissthephenomenonwhichisproduced,if notbecausehetotallyfailstorecognisethatwhatthereisfor achildinatapascause,arethedesiresthatthetapprovokes inhim,namelythatforexampleitmakeshimwanttohaveapee or,likeeverytimeoneisinthepresenceofwater,thatoneis withrespecttothatwateracommunicatingvesselandthatitis notfornothingthatinordertospeaktoyouaboutlibidoItook thismetaphorofwhathappensbetweenthesubjectandhis specularimage.

Ifmanhadatendencytoforgetthatinthepresenceofwaterhe isacommunicatingvessel,thereisinthechildhoodofmostthe washtubtoremindhimthateffectively,whathappensinachild oftheageofthosethatPiagetdesignatesforus,inthe presenceofatap,isthisirresistibletypeofactingoutwhich consistsindoingsomethingwhichrunsthegreatestriskof upsettingit,andthusthetapfindsitselfonceagaininthe placeofthecause,namelyatthelevelalsoofthephallic dimension,asthatwhichnecessarilyintroducesthefactthatthe littletapissomethingwhichcanhavearelationshipwiththe plumber,thatonecanunscrew,dismantle,replace...etc:itis (^).Itisnotthefactofomittingtheseelementsof experiencethatmoreoverPiaget,whoisverywellinformed aboutanalyticalmatters,isnotignorantofthatIintendto underline,itisthathedoesnotseethelinkbetweenthese relationshipsthatwecall,forourpart,"complexual"andthe wholeoriginalconstitutionofwhatheclaimstoquestion,the functionofthecause.

Wewillreturntothislanguageofthechild.Ipointedoutto youthatthenewevidenceoforiginalworks,whichonecanonly beastonishedwerenotperformeduptonow,allowsusnowto graspinstatunascendithefirstoperationofthesignifierin thesehypnopompicmonologuesoftheverysmallchild,almosttwo yearsold,andtograspinthemIwillreadyouthesetextsat thepropertimeinthefascinatingformoftheOedipuscomplex itselfhereandnovalreadyarticulated,givingherethe experimentalproofoftheideathatIalwaysputforwardtoyou thattheunconsciousisessentiallytheeffectofthesignifier.

(14) Iwillfinishinthisconnectionwiththepositionofthe psychologists,fortheworkthatIamspeakingtoyouaboutis prefacedbyapsychologistwhoisveryattractiveatfirst sightinthesensethatheadmitsthatithasneverhappenedthat apsychologisthasinterestedhimselfinthesefunctionsstarting from,hetellsusapsychologist'sownadmissionfromthe suppositionthatnothinginterestingisnotableaboutthecoming intoplayoflanguageinthesubject,exceptatthelevelof education:ineffectitissomethingthatislearned.

12.6.63

XXII

269

Butwhatmakeslanguage,outsidethefieldoflearning?It requiredthesuggestionofalinguistforaninteresttobeginto betakeninit,andwebelievethatherethepsychologist laysdownhisarms.Foritiscertainlywithsomehumourthathe highlightsthisdeficitinpsychologicalresearchuptonow. Wellthatisnotatallthecase.Attheendofhispreface,he makestworemarkswhichshowthepointtowhichthehabitofthe psychologistisreallyinveterate.Thefirstisthat,sincethis constitutesavolumeofaboutthreehundredpagesandisa considerableweightsincethesemonologueswerecollectedfor amonthandacompletechronologicallistofthemwasmade,at thisrateofgoingthinkofalltheresearchthatwearegoingto havetodo!Thisisthefirstremark. Andthesecondoneisevenbetter.Itisextremelyinteresting tonoteallthatbutitseemstomeformypart,saysthis psychologistwhoiscalledGeorgeMiller,thattheonlything thatwouldbeinteresting,istoknow:"Howmuchofthatdoeshe know?"Whatdoesthechildknowaboutwhatistellingyou?Now itispreciselytherethatthequestionlies.Itisprecisely, ifhedoesnotknowwhatheissaying,thatitisveryimportant tonotethathesaysallthesame,whathewillknoworwillnot knowlateron,namelytheelementsoftheOedipuscomplex. Itistenminutespasttwo.Iwouldlikeallthesametogive youthelittleschemaofwhatIamgoingtoadvancetowardstoday concerningtheobsessional.Infiveminutes,thequestionasit presentsitself.

Ifthefivestages,ifIcanexpressmyselfthus,ofthe constitutionofointhisrelationshipofSto0,whosefirst operationyouseehere,thesecondphaseherenotbeingoutside therangeofyourunderstandingafterthedivisionIalready addedonasbeingthefollowingitisfarfromthe transformationofSintowhenitpa'ssesfromthisparttothat (15)one,theEulercirclehavingobviouslytobespecifiedif thefivestagesthereforeofthisdefinitionofoaredefinable asIamgoingtotellyounow,if,Ithink,itissufficiently positedfromthisresumeofwhatIadvancedstepbystepinthe

12.6.63

XXII270

precedinglecturesattheleveloftherelationshiptotheoral object,thatitis,letussaytobecleartoday,notneedofthe Otherthisambiguityisrichandwewillcertainlynotrefuse ourselvestheuseofitbutneedintheOther,atthelevelof theOther,itisinfunctionofthedependenceonthematernal beingthatthereisproducedthefunctionofthedisjunction betweenthissubjectando,thenipple,whoseveritableimport youwillonlybeabletoperceiveif,asIverysufficiently indicatedtoyou,youseethatthenippleformspartoftheinner worldofthesubjectandnotofthebodyofthemother.Ipass on ... . Atthesecondstageoftheanalobject,youhavethedemandin theOther,theeducativedemandparexcellenceinsofarasit referstotheanalobject.Thereisnowayofgrasping,of seizingwhattheveritablefunctionofthisanalobjectis,if youdonotsenseitasbeingtheremainderinthedemandofthe Other,whichIamcallingheretomakemyselfclearlyunderstood "demandintheOther".ThewholedialecticofwhatIhavetaught youtorecogniseinthefunctionof f afunctionunique comparedtoalltheotherfunctionsofJoinsofarasitis definedbyalack,bythelackofanobject,thislackmanifests itselfassuchinthiseffectivelycentralrelationshipand thisiswhatjustifiesthewholeaxingofanalysisonsexuality thatwewillcallherejouissanceintheOther.

(-0)

TherelationshipbetweenthisjouissanceintheOtherassuch, andanyintroductionofthemissinginstrumentthat(<p) designates,isaninverserelationship.ThisiswhatT articulatedinmytwolastlecturesandwhichisthesufficiently solidbaseofeverysufficientlyeffectivesituationofwhatwe arecallingcastrationanxiety.

Atthescopicstagewhichisproperlythatofphantasy,theone withwhichwehavetodealwithatthelevelof0,itisthe powerintheOther,thispowerintheOtherwhichisthemirage ofhumandesirethatwecondemninwhatisforitthemajor dominantformofeverypossession,contemplativepossession, becauseitfailstorecognisewhatisinvolved,namelyamirage ofpower.

AsyouseeIamgoingveryquickly.Atthefifthandfinal stage,whatisthereatthelevelof0?Provisionallywewill saythatitistherethatthereoughttoemergeinapureform Iamsayingthatthisisonlyaprovisionalformulation somethingwhichisofcoursepresentatallthestages,namely thedesireintheOther.Whatconfirmsitforus,inanycase (16)whatsignalsitforusintheexamplethatwestartedfrom, namelytheobsessional,istheapparentdominanceofanxietyin itsphenomenology.Itisthestructuralfactthatwearethe onlyonestoperceiveuptoacertainmomentofanalysis,that whateverhedoes,thatatwhateverrefinementthereculminate,as therearebeingconstructed,hisphantasiesandhispractices, whattheobsessionalgraspsinthemcheckoutthebearingof thisformulaisalwaysthedesireintheOther.Itisinthe measureofthereturnofthisdesireintheOther,insofaras

12.6.63

XXII271

inhiscaseitisessentiallyrepressed,thateverythingis determinedinthesymptomatologyoftheobsessional,and specificallyinthesymptomswherethedimensionofthecauseis glimpsedasanxietyprovoking.Thesolutionisknown:tocover thedesireoftheOther,theobsessionalhasoneway:itisto haverecoursetohisdemand.Observeanobsessionalinhis biographicalbehaviour,whatIcalledearlierhisattemptsat gettingbywithrespecttodesire.Hisattempts,however audacioustheymaybe,arealwaysmarkedbyanoriginal condemnationagainstrejoiningtheirgoal.Howeverrefined, howevercomplicated,howeverluxuriantandperversehisattempts atgettingby,healwayshastohavethemauthorised:itis necessaryfortheOthertodemanditofhim.Thisisthe mainspringofwhatisproducedatacertainturningpointin everyanalysisofanobsessional.

Inthewholemeasurethattheanalysissustainsananalogical dimension,thatofdemand,somethingsubsistsuptoavery advancedpointcanitevenbegonebeyond?ofthismodeof escapeoftheobsessional.Butseewhattheconsequencesofit are.Itisinthemeasurethattheavoidanceoftheobsessional isthecoveringupofthedesireintheOtherbythedemandin theOther,itisinthismeasurethato,theobjectascause, comestobesituatedwheredemanddominates,namelyattheanal stagewhereois,notpurelyandsimplyexcrement,butlikethat: itisexcrementquademanded.

Nownothinghadeverbeenanalysedaboutthisrelationshiptothe analobjectinthesecoordinateswhichareitsveritable coordinates.Tounderstandthesourceofwhatonecancallanal anxiety,insofarasitemergesfromananalysisofan obsessionalpursuedtothatpointsomethingthatneverhappens theveritabledominance,thecharacterofirreducibleand almostincertaincasesunmasterablekerneloftheapparitionof anxietyatthispointwhichoughttoappearafinalpoint,this issomethingthatwewillbeabletolocatethenexttimeonlyon conditionthatwearticulateeverythingthatresultsfromthe relationshipbetweentheanalobjectascauseofdesireandthe demandwhichrequiresit,whichhasnothingtodowiththismode ofdesirewhichis,throughthiscause,determining.

19.6.63 Seminar23

XXIII272 Wednesday19June1963

Assomeonepointedouttomeaftermylasttalk,thisdefinition thatIampursuingthisyearbeforeyouofthefunctionofthe objecto,tendstoopposetothelinkingofthisobjectto stages,towhatonemightcallthe"Abrahamic"Imeanthe psychoanalystconceptionofitsmutations,whatonemightcall itscircularconstitution,thefactthatatalltheselevelsit holdsupquaobjecto,thatunderthedifferentformsinwhichit manifestsitself,itisalwaysthesamefunctionthatis involved,namelyhowoislinkedtotheconstitutionofthe subjectatthelocusoftheOtherandrepresentsit.

Itistruethatitscentralfunction,atthelevelofthephallic stagewherethefunctionofoisessentiallyrepresentedbya lack,bytheabsenceofthephallusasconstitutingthe disjunctionwhichjoinsdesiretojouissancethisiswhatis expressedbywhatIremindyouwearecallingherebyconvention level3ofthedifferentstagesoftheobjectthatwehave describeditistrue,Iamsaying,thatthisstagehaswhatwe couldcallanextremeposition,thatstage4andstage5,ifyou wish,areinareturnpositionwhichbringsthemintocorrelation withstage1andstage2.Everyoneknowsandthisisallthat thislittleschemaisdesignedtorecallthelinksbetweenthe oralstageanditsobjectandtheprimarymanipulationsofthe superego,regardingwhichIhavealreadyindicatedtoyouby recallingtoyoutheobviousconnectionwiththisformofthe objectowhichisthevoicealreadyrecalled,thattherecannot beavalidanalyticconceptionofthesuperegowhichforgets thatatitsdeepestphasethevoiceisoneoftheformsofthe objecto.

Thesetwosigns"an"foranal and"scop"forscoptophilic recalltoyouthelongremarked connectionbetweentheanalstage andscoptophilia.Itnevertheless remainsthat,howeverconjoined, twobytwo,thestageforms1,2,3, 4,5maybe,theyarealloriented inaccordancewiththismounting andthendescendingarrow.This iswhatensuresthatinevery analyticphaseofthereconstitution

19.6.63

XXIII273

ofthedataofrepresseddesireinaregression,thereisa progressiveaspect,thatineveryprogressiveaccesstothestage hereposedbytheveryinscriptionasbeingsuperior,thereisa regressiveaspect. (2) Suchis,sucharetheindicationsthatIwanttorecallto yousothattheymayremainpresentinyourmindthroughoutthe wholeofmydiscoursetoday,withwhichIamnowgoingto continue. AsItoldyouthelasttime,itisamatterofillustrating, explainingthefunctionofacertainobjectwhichis,ifyou wish,shit,tocallitbyitsname,intheconstitutionofanal desire.Youknowafterall,thatitistheprivilegeofanalysis tohavemadeemergeinthehistoryofthoughtthedetermining functionofthisunpleasantobjectintheeconomyofdesire. Ipointedouttoyouthelasttimethatwithrespecttodesire, theobjectoalwayspresentsitselfasacausefunction,tothe pointofpossiblybeingforus,ifyouunderstandme,ifyouare followingme,therootpointatwhichthereiselaboratedinthe subjectthefunctionofthecauseitself.Ifthisprimordial formisthecauseofadesire,aboutwhichIunderlinedforyou thatherethereismarkedthenecessitythroughwhichthecause cansubsistinitsmentalfunction,alwaysrequirestheexistence ofagapbetweenitanditseffect,agapthatissonecessary thatweareonlyabletostillthinkcausewherethereisarisk ofitbeingfilledin,wehavetomakeaveilsubsistoverthe tightdeterminism,overtheconnectionsthroughwhichthecause acts,somethingthatIillustratedthelasttimebytheexample ofthetap,namelythatonlythechildwhoneglectedinthat case,aswassaid,becausehedidnotunderstand,thenarrow mechanismthatwasrepresentedtohimintheshapeofasection, ofaschemaofthetap,onlytohimwhodispensedwithorfailed atthislevelofwhatPiagetcallsunderstanding,tohimalone isthererevealedtheessenceofthefunctionofthetapas cause,namelyasconceptoftap.

Theoriginofthisnecessityforthesubsistenceofthecause liesinthefactthatinitsprimaryform,itiscauseofdesire, namelyofsomethingessentiallynoteffected.Itisindeedfor thisreasonthatconsistentlywiththisconception,wecan absolutelynotconfuseanaldesirewithwhatmothers,asmuchas thepartisansofcatharsis,mightcallinthiscase,theeffect: hasithadaneffect?Excrementdoesnotplaytheroleofeffect ofwhatwearesituatingasanaldesire,itisthecauseofit.

Intruth,ifwearegoingtodwellonthissingularobject,itis asmuchbecauseoftheimportanceofitsfunction,always reiteratedforourattention,andespeciallyasyouknowin theanalysisoftheobsessional,asforthefactthatit (3) illustrates for us, once more, how appropriate it is to conceive that there subsist, for us, different modes of the objecto. Itisineffect,atfirstsight,alittleapartcomparedtothe

19.6.63

XXIII274

restofthesemodes:themammaryconstitution,thephallic functioningofthecopulatoryorgan,theplasticityofthehuman larynxtothephonematicimprint,theanticipatoryvalueofthe specularimagetotheneonatalprematurationofthenervous system,alltheseanatomicalfactswhichIhaverecalledtoyou recently,oneaftertheother,toshowyouthewayinwhichthey conjoinwiththefunctionofo,alltheseanatomicalfacts regardingwhichyoucansee,bysimplyenumeratingthem,the degreetowhichtheirplaceisdispersedunderthetreeof organicdeterminations,onlytakeoninmantheirvalueas destiny,asFreudsays,becausetheycome,thisIshowedyoufor eachone,toblockoutakeyplaceonthechessboardwhose squaresarestructuredfromthesubjectifyingconstitutionasit resultsfromthedominanceofthesubjectwhospeaksoverthe subjectwhounderstands,overthesubjectofinsightwhoselimits weknowintheshapeofthechimpanzee. Whatever may be the supposed superiority of the capacities of man over the chimpanzee, it is clear that the fact that he goes further is linked to this dominance I have just spoken about, the dominance of the subject who speaks, which has for result in practice that the human being undoubtedly goes further. In doing this, he believes he reaches the concept, namely he believes that he is able to grasp the real by a signifier which determines this realaccordingtoitsinnermostcausality.

Thedifficultiesthatweanalystshaveencounteredinthefield ofintersubjectiverelationshipswhichthepsychologistsdonot seemtomakesomuchofaproblemof,theyconstitutearather greateroneforusthesedifficulties,providedweclaimto accountforthewayinwhichthefunctionofthesignifieris originallymixedintotheseintersubjectiverelationships,these difficultiesaretheoneswhichleadustoanewcritiqueof reasonwhichitwouldbeakindofscholasticnonsensetoseeas somesortofrecessionintheallconqueringmovementofthe aforesaidreason. Thiscritiqueineffectisdirectedtowardsmappingouthowthis reasonisalreadywoveninatthelevelofthemostopaque dynamismofthesubject,wherethereismodifiedwhathe experiencesinthisdynamismasneedintoalwaysmoreorless paradoxicalIsayparadoxicalasregardstheirsupposed (4)naturalnessformsofwhatiscalleddesire.

Thiscritiquethusproves,inwhatIhaveshownyoutobethe causeofdesireisittoohighapricetopay?thatithasto beconjoinedtothisrevelationthatthenotionofcauseisfound becauseofthistorevealitsoriginthere.Obviously,itwould betoopsychologistic,withalltheabsurdconsequencesthatthis hasconcerningthelegalityofreason,toreduceittoa recourse,toadevelopmentofsomeeventsorother.But preciselythisisnotwhatwearedoing,becausethe subjectificationthatisinvolvedisnotpsychologicalor developmental.Itshowswhatjoinstotheaccidentsof developmentthosewhichIfirstofallenumeratedjustnowby remindingyouofthelistofthem,theanatomicalparticularities

19.6.63

XXIII275

thatareinvolvedinthecaseofmanjoiningthereforetothese accidentsofdevelopmenttheeffectofasignifierwhose transcendenceishenceforthevidentwithrespecttotheaforesaid development. Transcendence,andthenwhat?Thereisnoneedtobestartled! Thistranscendenceisneithermorenorlessmarked,atthis level,thananyotherincidenceofthereal,thisrealthatin biologyiscalledonthisoccasiontheUmweltasawayoftaming it.Andpreciselytheexistenceofanxietyintheanimal completelydismissesthespiritualistimputationswhich,from whateverquarter,mayappearinmyregardinconnectionwiththis situationofthesignifierthatIpositastranscendentonthis occasion.

Oneveryoccasionofanimalanxietywhatisinvolvedisindeeda perceptionofabeyondoftheaforesaidUmwelt.Itisbecause somethinghasshakenthisUmwelttoitsfoundationsthatthe animalshowsitselftobeawarewhenheisstampededbyan earthquakeforexampleoranyothertypeofmeteoricaccident. Andoncemorethereisrevealedthetruthoftheformulathat anxietyiswhatdoesnotdeceive.Theproofis,thatwhenyou seeanimalsbecomingexcitedinthiswayintheregionswhere theseincidentscanoccur,youwoulddowelltotakeaccount, beforeyouareawareofityourself,ofwhattheyaresignalling toyouaboutwhatishappening,whatisimminent.Forthemas forus,itisthemanifestationofalocusoftheOther,of somethingelsewhichmanifestsitselfhereassuch,whichdoes notmeanthatIamsayingandwithgoodreasonthatthereis anywhere,ontheotherhand,thatthislocusoftheOthercan lodgeitselfoutsiderealspace,asIrecalledthelasttime.

(5)Wearenowgoingtogointothefollowing:intothe particularityofthecasewhichensuresthatexcrementcancome tofunctionatthispointwhichisdeterminedbythenecessityin whichthesubjectfindshimselfofconstitutinghimselffirstof allinthesignifier.Thepointisimportantbecauseafterall hereperhapsmorethanelsewhereasortofshadowof confusionreignsinasingularway.Oneissupposedtoget closertothematterasitisappropriatelycalledorthe concrete,insofarasweforourpartknowhowtotakeinto accountthemostdisagreeableaspectsoflifethatitisthere, andnotintheEmpyreanthatwehavetoseekpreciselythedomain ofcauses.Itisveryamusingtograspinthefirstintroductory remarksofJones,inanarticlewhosereadingcannotbetoo highlyrecommendedtoyoubecauseitisoneinathousand:itis thearticlewhichinthecollectionofhisSelectedPapersis called"TheMadonna'sconceptionthroughtheyear",the conceptionoftheMadonna,thevirginalconception,the conceptionoftheVirginthroughtheear.Thisisthesubject thatthisWelshman,whoseProtestant.malice,Ihavetosay,can absolutelynotbeeliminatedfromthebackgroundofcomplacency thatheputsintoit,towhichthisWelshmanattacheshimselfin a1914article,asheemergedhimselfpreciselyfromhisfirst apprehensions,whichhadreallybeenilluminatingforhim,about theprevalenceoftheanalfunctioninthefirstfewserious

196.63

XXIII276

obsessionalsthathehadinhand,afewyearsafterFreud's obsessionalstheyareobservationsIsoughtthemoutintheir originaltext,thetwoeditionspreciselywhichprecedethe publicationofthisarticleintheJahrbuchtheyareobviously sensationaldates,eventhoughwehaveseenotherssince. HererightawayJonestacklesthesubjectbytellingusthatthe fertilisingbreathisalovelyidea,andthateverywhereinmyth, inlegend,inpoetry,wehavetracesofit.Whatcouldbemore beautifulthanthisawakeningofbeingatthepassageofthe breathoftheeternal!Jonesforhispartwhoknowsalittlebit moreaboutititistruethathisscienceisstillofrecent date,butinanycaseheisfullofenthusiasmisgoingtoshow uswhatsortofwindisinvolved:whatisinvolvedisanalwind. And,ashetellsus,itisclearthatexperienceprovestous thattheinterest,andthisisapresupposition,thatthe interestitisthelivinginterest,itisthebiological interest,itistheinterestthatthesubject,asheis discoveredinanalysis,showsinhisexcrements,intheshitthat heproducesisinfinitelymorepresentmoreadvanced,more (6)evident,moredominantthanthissomethingwhichnodoubthe wouldhavealotofreasonstobepreoccupiedwith,namely respiration,whichscarcelyseems,accordingtoJones,toattract hisattention,andthisforthesimplereason,ofcourse,that respirationishabitual.

Theargumentisweak.Theargumentisweakinafield,a discipline,whichallthesamecannotfailtohighlight, and whichsubsequentlyhighlighted,theimportanceofsuffocation,of respiratorydifficulty,inthealtogetheroriginalestablishment ofthefunctionofanxiety.Thatthelivingsubject,eventhe humansubject,thatthelivingsubjecthasnotinthisrespect anywarningabouttheimportanceofthisfunctionissurprising ImeansurprisingasaninitialintroductoryargumentbyJones, especiallysinceitisatthetimewhereallthesametherewas alreadysomethingwelldesignedtohighlighttheeventual relationshipbetweentherespiratoryfunctionandwhatis involved:thefruitfulmomentofthesexualrelationshipitis thatthisbreathing,intheformofpaternalormaternalpanting, formedpartindeedofthefirstphenomenologyofthetraumatic scene,tothepointofenteringquitelegitimatelyintothis sphereofwhatcouldemergefromitforthechildintermsof sexualtheory.

SothatwhatevermaybethevalueofwhatJonessubsequently deploys,onecansaythatwithoutithavingtoberefutedfor itisafactthatthepathonwhichheengagesherefindssomany correlatesinamassofanthropologicaldomainsthatonecannot saythathisresearchindicatednothing,Iamnotspeakingabout thefactthatonecaneasilyfindall.sortsofreferencesin mythologicalliteraturetothefunctionofthislowerbreath,and evenintheUpanishhadswhereunderthetermApanaitissupposed tobespecifiedthatitisfromthebreathingofhisbehindthat Brahmageneratedthehumanspeciesinparticulartherearea thousandothercorrelatesdesignedtoremindusonthisoccasion

19.6.63

XXIII277

ofthetimelinessinsuchatextoftheseremindersintruthon theparticularsubject,ifyouconsultthisarticle,youwillsee thatitsveryextension,whichbordersondiffluence, sufficientlyshowsthatintheenditisnotfarfromit absolutelyconvincing.

Butthisisforusonlyafurtherstimulation,whenitisa matterofquestioningthesubjectabouthowitisthatthe functionofexcrementcanplaythisprivilegedroleinthismode (7) ofsubjectiveconstitutionwhichwedefine,towhichwegive theterm,asbeingthatofanaldesire. Wewillseethatbytakingitupagain,wewillseethatthiscan onlybesettledbymakinginterveneinamoreordered,more structuralfashion,whichisinaccordwiththespiritofour research,whyitcancometooccupythisplace.

Itisobviousthat,apriori,thisfunctionofexcrementwhichas comparedtothedifferentaccidentsthatIevokedearlier,from theanatomicalplaceofthemammarytotheplasticityofthe humanlarynx,andinbetweenthespecularimageofcastration linkedafterall,inshort,totheparticularconformityofthe copulatoryorganataratherelevatedleveloftheanimalscale, excrementhasbeentherefromthebeginningandevenbeforethe differentiationbetweenthemouthandtheanus:atthelevelof theblastopore,wealreadyseeitfunctioning.Butitseemsthat ifweconstructforourselvesitisalwaysinadequatea certainbiologicalideaabouttherelationshipsoftheliving beingandhismilieu,excrementischaracterised,allthesame, assomethingrejectedandasaconsequenceitisratherinthe sense,inthecurrent,intheflowofthatwhichthelivingbeing assuchtendstodisinteresthimselfin.Whatinterestshimis whatenterswhatgoesout,seemstoimplyinthestructurethat hehasnotendencytoretainit.

Sothatstartingpreciselyfrombiologicalconsiderations,itmay beindicated,itseemsinterestingtoaskourselvesexactlyhow atthelevelofthelivingbeingittakesonthisimportance, thissubjectifiedimportance,becauseofcourseitispossible anditisevenprobable,anditisevenobservablethatatthe levelofwhatonecouldcallthelivingeconomy,excrement continuestohaveitsimportanceinthemilieuthatitcanmanage alsoincertainconditionstosaturate,tosaturatesometimesto thepointofrenderingitincompatiblewithlifeothertimes, whenitsaturatesitinafashionwhichatleastforother organismsonlytakesonafunctionofsupportintheexternal milieu.Thereisawholeeconomy,ofcourse,ofthefunctionof excrement,anintralivingandaninterlivingeconomy. Noristhisabsentfromhumanhappenings,andIsearchedinvain inmylibrarytoshow,togetyoustartedonthistrackIwill finditagain,itislost,likeexcrement,anadmirablelittle book,likemanyothersbymyfriendAldousHuxley,calledAdonis andtheAlphabet.Withinthispromisingcontaineryouwillfind (8) a superb article about a factorytype organisation, in a town intheAmericanWest,fortherecuperationofexcrementatthe

19.6.63 urbanlevel.

XXIII278

Thishasvalueonlyasanexample,thishappensinmanyother placesbesidesindustrialAmerica.Youcertainlyhavenotthe slightestsuspicionoftherichesthatcanbereconstituted simplywiththehelpoftheexcrementsofamassofhumans. Besidesitisnotuntimelytorecallinthisconnectionwhata certainprogressofinterhumanrelationships,ofhumanrelations, whichissomuchinvoguesincethelastwar,wasabletodo duringtheaforesaidlastwarintermsofthereductionofentire humanmassestothefunctionofexcrement.Thetransformationof numerousindividualsofapeople,chosenpreciselybecausethey wereapeoplechosenamongothers,bymeansofthecrematory furnace,tothestateofsomethingwhichfinally,itappears,was distributedinMitteleuropaassoap,isalsosomethingwhich showsusthatintheeconomiccircuittheperspectiveofmanas beingreducibletoexcrementisnotabsent.

Butweanalystsforourpartwelimitourselvestothequestion ofsubjectification.Alongwhatpathdoesexcremententerinto subjectification?Well,thisisquiteclearintheanalytic references,whereatleastatfirstsightitappearsquiteclear, throughthemediationofthedemandoftheOtherrepresentedin thiscasebythemother.Whenwehavefoundthat,wearequite contentherewehaveconnectedupwithobservationaldata:it involveseducationinwhatiscalledcleanliness,whichcommands thechildtoretainthisissomethingthatisnotallthat obviouschechoice:thenecessitytoretainfortoolongatime toretaintheexcrementandbecauseofthisalreadytooutline itsintroductionintothedomainofbelonging,ofapartofthe body,whichforatleastacertaintimemustbeconsideredasnot tobealienated,thenafterthattoreleaseit,alwaysondemand. Weknowthefamiliarscenes.Theyarefundamental,incommon use:thereisnoneedtocriticise,nortorefrain,norabove all,goodGod,toaccompanyitwithalotofrecommendationsthe educationofparents,alwaysontheagenda,causesalltoomuch damageinallthesedomains.Afterall,inshort,thankstothe factthatthedemandalsobecomeshereadeterminingpartinthe releasinginquestion,todosomethingdifferenthere,which (9)quiteobviouslyisdestinedtovalorisethisthingrecognised foramomentandhenceforthelevatedtothefunction,allthe same,ofapartwhichthesubjecthassomeapprehensionheis takingon,thispartbecomingatleastvalorisedbythefactthat itgivesitssatisfactiontothedemandoftheOther,besides beingaccompaniedbyallthecaringweknowabout,inthemeasure thattheother,notonlypaysattentiontoit,butaddstoitall thesesupplementarydimensionsthatIdonotneedtoevokeit islikephysicsforfuninotherdomainsthesniffing,the approval,eventhewiping,whoseerotogeniceffectsare incontestableaseveryoneknows.Theybecomeallthemore obviouswhenithappensandasyouknowitsnotrarethata mothercontinuestowipeherson'sbottomuntilheistwelve yearsold.Thatisseeneveryday,sothatofcourse,itwould seemmyquestionisnotallthatimportantthatweseevery wellhowthecacaveryeasilytakesonthisfunctionthatIhave called,Godknows,thatofagalma,anagalmawhosepassageafter

19.6.63

XXIII279

all to the register of the nauseating only occurs as an effect of thedisciplineitselfofwhichitisanintegralpart. Wellthen,itispreciselythatleapstotheeyessomething thatwouldnotallowyoutostateinanyway,nevertheless,ina waythatcouldsatisfyus,thefullnessoftheeffectswhichare attachedtothisspecialagalmaticrelationshipofthemotherto theexcrementofherchild,ifitwerenotnecessary,to understandit,toputit,whichisthefactualdataofanalytic understanding,toputitintoconnectionwiththeotherformsof o,withthefactthattheaqalmainitselfisnotconceivable withoutitsrelationshiptothephallus,toitsabsenceandto phallicanxietyassuch.Inotherwords,itisquasymbolising castrationweknowitrightawaythattheexcrementalohas comewithintherangeofourattention. Ipropose,Iadd,thatwecanunderstandnothingaboutthe phenomenologywhichissofundamentalforallourspeculation ofobsession,ifwedonotgraspatthesametimeinamuchmore intimate,motivated,regularwaythanwehabituallydo,thislink betweenexcrementand,notjustthe(-<p) ofthephallus,butwith theotherformsevokedhereinwhatwecouldcallthe classificationofstages,theotherformsofo. (10)Letustakethingsupregressively,withthereservation thatImadeatfirst,thatthisregressivehasnecessarilya progressiveaspect.Whatisinvolvedisgroundedatthelevelof theoralstage:thefactisthattheobjectoattheoralstage, thebreast,thenipple,asyouwish,thesubjectconstituting himselforiginally,asmuchascompletinghimself,inthe commandmentofthevoice,thesubjectdoesnotknow,cannotknow thedegreetowhichheishimselfthisbeingstuckonthebreast ofhismotherintheformofthenipple.Afteralsohavingbeen thisparasiteplunginghisvillositiesintotheuterinemucusin theformofplacenta,hedoesnotknow,hecannotknowthato, thebreast,theplacenta,istherealityofhimself,ofowith respecttotheOther,0.HebelievesthatoistheOtherthat indealingwitho,heisdealingwiththeOther,withthebig Other,themother.

Thereforecomparedtothisstage,theanallevelisthefirst timethathehasoccasiontorecognisehimselfinsomethingbut letusnotgotooquicklyinsomething,inanobjectaround whichthereturnsforitturnsthisdemandofthemother, thatisinvolved:"Holdontoitgiveitup".AndifIgiveit up,wheredoesitgo?Thereisnoneedallthesameforthose whohavetheslightestanalyticalexperience,fortheothers, goodGod,whoonlyreadaboutitprovidedtheyopenwhatIcalled thepsychoanalyticdunghill,analyticalliterature,Idonotneed dunghillmeansalittlepileofshitIdonotneedtoremind youoftheimportanceofthesetwophases,theirdetermining importanceforwhat?Thislittlepileinquestionthistime,is theoneIspokeaboutjustnowthislittlepileofshit,is obtainedondemand,itisadmired:"Whatlovelycaca!".Butthis demandalsoimpliesatthesametimethatitshouldbeasImight saydisavowed,becauseheistaughtallthesamethathemustnot

19.6.63

XXIII280

havetoomanyrelationshipswiththislovelycaca,exceptalong thewellknownpaththatanalysishasalsopickedout,of sublimatedsatisfactions:ifonesmears,obviouslyeveryoneknows thatitiswiththatthatonedoesit:butoneprefersallthe sametoindicatetothechildthatitisbettertodoitwith somethingelse,withthelittleplasticsofthechildanalysts, orwithnicecoloursthatdonotsmellsobadly. We find ourselves there then at the level of a recognition. What isthereinthisfirstrelationshiptothedemandoftheOther, (11) is at once him and something that must not be him or at the veryleastandevenmore,itisnotfromhim. Wellnowwearemakingprogress,thesesatisfactionsarebeing delineated,whichmeansthatwecouldeasilyseeherethewhole originofobsessionalambivalenceinacertainfashionthisis, ineffect,somethingthatwecanseebeinginscribedinaformula whosestructurewerecognise:oisherethecauseofthis ambivalence,ofthisyesandno:itisfrommesymptombut neverthelessitisnotfromme.ThebadthoughtsthatIhave visavisyoutheanalyst,obviouslyIindicatethem,butafter allitisnotatalltruethatIconsideryoutobeashit,for example.Sothatinshortweseehere,inanycase,anorderof causalitywhichisbeingsketchedout,thatwecannot,allthe same,immediatelyratifyasbeingthatofdesire.

Butinanycaseitisaresult,asIwassayingthelasttime,in speakingpreciselyinageneralfashionaboutthesymptom,at thislevel,ifyouwish,astructureisoutlinedwhichisof somethingwhichwouldgiveusimmediatelythatofthesymptom,of thesymptompreciselyasresult.Ipointoutthatitstill leavesoutsideitscircuitthethingthatinterestsus,what interestsusifthetheorythatIexposetoyouiscorrect, namelytheliaisontowhatisproperlyspeakingdesire.Wehave thereacertainrelationshipoftheconstitutionofthesubject asdivided,asambivalent,inrelationtoademandoftheOther. Wedonotseewhyallofthis,forexample,shouldnotpass completelyintothebackground,shouldnotbesweptawaywiththe introductionofthedimensionofsomethingwhichissupposedto behenceforthcompletelyexternal,foreign,therelationshipof desireandspecificallythatofsexualdesire.

Infactwealreadyknowwhysexualdesiredoesnotsweepitaway, farfromit.Thefactisthatthisobjectmanages,byitsvery duplicity,tosymbolisemarvellously,atleastthroughoneofits phases,whatisinvolvedwiththeadventofthephallicstage, namelythissomethingwhichitispreciselyamatterof symbolising,namelythephallus,insofarasitsdisappearance, itsaphanisistoemployJonesterm,theoneJonesappliesto desireandwhichdoesnotapplytothephallusthathis aphanisisisthegobetweeninmanoftherelationshipsbetween thesexes.

(12) Isthereanyneed,inordertojustifywhatbeginsto functionhere,namelythattheevacuationoftheresultofthe analfunctionquacommanded,isgoingtotakeonallitsimport

19.6.63

XXIII

281

atthephalliclevelasimagingthelossofthephallus.Itis clearlyunderstoodthatallofthisisonlyvalidwithinthe reminderthatIhavetogiveoncemoretothethinkingofsome peoplewhomayhavebeenabsentfromwhatIpreviouslysaid, abouttheessentialnatureofthiscentral(<P)phase,central withrespecttoalltheseschmasthroughwhichIwouldaskyou toretaintheseformulaethemomentoftheadvanceof jouissance,ofthejouissanceoftheOtherandtowardsthe jouissanceoftheOther,involvestheconstitutionofcastration asapledgeofthisencounter.

Thefactthatmaledesireencountersitsowncollapsebeforethe entryintothejouissanceofthefemininepartner,justas,as onemightsaythejouissanceofthewomaniscrushed(s' e c r a . s e ) totakeupatermborrowedfromthephenomenologyofthebreast andofthenurslingiscrushedinphallicnostalgiaand henceforthisrequired,Iwouldsayalmostcondemnedtoonlylove themaleotheratapointsituatedbeyondtheoneatwhich,she also,stopshimasdesire:thisbeyondisaimedatinloveitis abeyondletussayitclearlyeithertransverberatedby castration,ortransfiguredintermsofpotency.Itisnotthe otherasifitwereamatterofbeingunitedtotheother.The jouissanceofthewomanisinherselfandisnotconnectedtothe Other.IfIrecallinthiswaythecentralfunctionletussay asobstacle,itisnotatallanobstacle,itisthelocusof anxietyofwhatonemightcallthecaducityoftheorgan,inso farasitencountersinadifferentfashionfromeachsidewhat onecancalltheinsatiabilityofdesire,itisbecauseitis onlythroughthisreminderthatweseethenecessityof symbolisationswhichinthisconnectiondisplaythemselveswitha hystericalaspectoranobsessionalaspect.

Todayweareonthesecondoftheseaspects.Andwhatthesecond oftheseaspectsremindsusof,isthatsimplybyreasonofthe structureevoked,manisonlyinwomanthroughthedelegationof hispresenceundertheformofthis.decayedorgan,ofthisorgan ofwhichheisfundamentally,inthesexualrelationshipand throughthesexualrelationship,castrated.

Thismeansthatthemetaphorsofgifthereareonlymetaphors. Andasisonlytooobvious,hegivesnothing.Thewomanneither.

19.6.63

XXIII

282

(13) Andneverthelessthesymbolofthegiftisessentialforthe relationshiptotheOtheritisthesupremeact,wearetold, andeventhetotalsocialact.Itishereindeedthatour experiencehasmadeusalwaysputourfingeronthefactthatthe metaphorofgiftisborrowedfromtheanalsphere.Foralong timeithasbeennotedinthechildthattheturd,tobeginto speakmorepolitely,isthegiftinessence,thegiftoflove. Inthisconnectionmanyotherthingshavebeenpickedout,upto andincluding,inaparticularformofdelinquency,inwhatis called,aftertheburglarhasgone,thesignaturethatevery policemanandthebooksoflegalmedicineknowwell,thisbizarre fact,butonewhichendedupallthesamebybeingnoticed,that theguywhohasbeenusingthejemmyinyourhouse,andopening thedrawers,alwayshasatthatmomentanattackofcolic. Thisobviouslywouldallowustofindourbearingsquicklyatthe levelofwhatIcalledearliermanifestconditionings.Itisat thelevelofmammalsthatwelocate,atleastinwhatweknow aboutanimalecology,thefunctionofthefecaltrace,more exactlyoffaecesastrace,andatraceherealsocertainly profoundlylinkedtotheessentialnatureoftheplaceofwhat theorganismicsubjectassureshimselfofatthesametimein termsofpossession,intheworld,ofterritoryandofsecurity forsexualunion.

Youhaveseendescribed,inplaceswhichnowallthesameare sufficientlydefused,thisfactthatthesesubjects,the hypopothamuscertainlyandeventhisgoesfurtherthanthe mammalstherobin,feelthemselvestobeinvinciblewithinthe limitsoftheterritoryandthatallofasuddenthereisa turningpoint:thelimitpreciselywherecuriouslyhebecomes verytimid.

Therelationship,inmammals,betweenthislimitandthefecal tracehasbeennoticedforalongtime.Areasononcemoreto seetherewhatprefigures,whatpreparesforthisfunctionof representingthesubject,andfindingtheretherootsinthe biologicalbackgroundoftheobjectoinsofarasitistheanal fruit.

Arewestillgoingtobesatisfiedwiththis?Isthisallthat wecandrawfromquestioningthefunctionofointhis relationshiptoacertaintypeofdesire,thatofthe obsessional?Thisiswherewetakethenextstepwhichisalso theessentialstep.Wehavejustifiednothinguptothepresent (14) otherthanthesubjectinstalledornotinhislimits,and withintheselimits,moreorlessdivided.Buttheaccesstothe symbolicfunctionthathetakesonfromthefactthatthese limits,areseen,atthelevelofsexualunioninman,tobeso singularlyrepressed,eventhisdoesnotyettellusanything aboutwhacisinvolvedandwhatweareintheprocessof requiring,namelyhowallthiswholeprocessmanagestojustify thefunctionofdesire.

Anditisexperiencewhichgivesusthetraceofthis,namely thatuptothepresentnothingexplainstoustheveryparticular relationshipsoftheobsessionaltohisdesire.Itisprecisely

19.6.63

XXIII

283

becauseuptothisleveleverythingissymbolised,thedivided subjectandtheimpossibleunion,anditappearsaltogether strikingtousthatonethingisnot,namelydesireitself. Itispreciselyinthiseffort,inthisnecessitythatthe subjectfindshimselfofhavingtocompletehispositionas desire,thatheisgoingtocompletehimselfinthecategoryof potency,namelyatthelevelofthefourthstage.The relationshipbetweenthespecularreflectionofthenarcissistic supportofthemasteryofselfandthefield,thelocus,ofthe Other,isthelinkhere.Youknowitalreadyandthiswouldonly betomakeyouretravelawelltroddenpath.ThisiswhyIwant heretomarktheoriginalityotherwiseitwouldneverhavecome toourknowledgeofourinterrogation,theoriginalityofwhat thefactsrevealtous.

Andtostartfromtheheartofthings,andfromafactthatyou knowwell,Iwouldsaywithoutdelayinganylongeronthefact thatIrecalledathousandtimesaboutwhatIcalledjustnowthe relationshipsoftheobsessionalsubjecttohisdesire,namely that,asItoldyouthelasttime,thedegreeofluxuriance reachedbyhisphantasies,whichareordinarilynevercarried out,butafterallitcanhappenthatthroughallsortsof conditionswhichpostponemoreorlessindefinitelytheputting intoaction,hegetsthere,hegetstherebetter,itevenhappens thatothersovercomeforhimthespaceoftheobstacle,asubject whodevelopsveryearlyasamagnificentobsessionalmayhappen tobeinafamilyofdissolutepeople.CaseIIinVolume5of theJahrbuch,towhichIalludedearlier,onwhichJonesbased himselfforhisphenomenologyoftheanalfunctioninthe obsessional,CaseIIandIcouldquoteathousandothersinthe literatureisoneofthose.

Allthesistersandtheyarenumerouswithoutcountingthe mother,theaunt,themother'sdifferentlovers,andevenI believeGodforgivemethegrandmotherallhadtakenturns (15)onthebellyofthislittlekidwhenhewasaboutfiveyears old.Heisneverthelessanobsessional,anestablished obsessional,withdesiresoftheonlykindthathecanmanageto constituteintheregisterofpotency:impossibledesires,in thissensethatwhateverhedoestorealisethem,heisnotin them.Theobsessionalisnever,attheendofhissearchfor satisfaction,intheseregisters.SothenthequestionthatIam posingyou,isjustaslivingandbrilliantinthisobservation asinmanyothers,itisinaformthatIcalledjustnowliving andbrilliantitistheimageofalittlefishthatisevoked here,andIcansay,undermyhand,andwithgoodreasonthis ictus,asyouseeiteverywhereinthefieldoftheobsessional, providedheisfromourculturalspaceandwedonotknowany differentonethisictus,isJesusChristhimself.Onemight speculateagooddealaboutwhatkindofblasphematorynecessity Imustsaythatuptothepresentithasneverbeenproperly justifiedassuchwhyisitthatsuchasubject,likemany otherobsessionalscannotcarryoutoneorotherofthesemoreor lessatypicalactsinwhichhissexualresearchspendsitself, withoutimmediatelyphantasisingChristasassociatedin

19.6.63

XXIII

284

it. Even though the fact may have been present to our eyes for a long time, I do not think the last word has been said about it. It is quite clear first of all that Christ on this occasion and this is why it is a blasphemy Christ is a God. He is a God for many people, and even for so many people that in truth it is very difficult even with all the manipulations of historical and psychologicalcriticism,todislodgehimfromthisplace. ButafterallheisnotjustanyGod. Youwillallowmetodoubtthatobsessionalsatthetimeof Theophrastes,theonewhowrotetheCharacters,amusedthemselves bymentallymakingApolloparticipateintheirbasedeeds. Herewecanseetheimportanceofthelittlemarkinpassing,the beginningofanexplanationthatIthoughtitworthwhilegiving inpassingthattheGod,whetherwelikeitornot,andevenif wenolongerhavewiththeGodortheGodsfortheyarerather pluralthansingularanyrelationship,thisGodisanelement ofthereal.Sothattheyarealwaysthere,itisquiteclear thattheywalkaroundincognito.Butthereisonethingthatis verycertain:itisthattherelationshipoftheGodisvery differentfromourstotheobjectofhisdesire. (16)IspokealittleearlieraboutApollo.Apolloisnot castratedeitherbeforeorafterwards.Afterwardssomethingelse happenshim.WearetoldthatitisDaphnewhowastransformed intoatree.Itisherethatsomethingishiddenfromyou.And itishiddenfromyou,itisveryastonishingbecauseitisnot hiddenfromyou.Thelaureltree,afterthetransformation,is notDaphne,itisApollo.TheproperoftheGodisthatheis transformed,onceheissatisfied,intotheobjectofhisdesire, evenifbythathebecomespetrifiedinit.

Inotherwords,aGod,ifheisreal,givesheretheimageofhis power.Hispoweristherewhereitis.Itistrueofallthe Gods,evenofElohim,evenofYahwea,whoisoneofthem,even thoughhisplaceisquiteparticular.Onlysomethingintervened therewhichhasadifferentorigin.Letuscallit,onthis occasionandbecauseitishistoricallytruebutnodoubtthis historicaltruthhastogoastepbeyondletuscallhimPlato.

Hetoldusthingswhich,asyouhaveseen,remainverymanageable withintheethicsofjouissance,becausetheyhaveallowedusto tracetheborderofentry,thebarrierthattheBeautiful constituteswithrespecttothissupremeGood.Only,mixedin withaChristianitythatwascomingtobirth,thatgave something,somethingpeoplebelievewasalwaysthere,andalways intheBible,butwewillhavetoreturntoitnodoubtlater,if weareallstillherenextyear.Thematterisdebatable,the matterthatIamgoingtotellyouabout,namelythephantasyof anomnipotentGod,whichmeansofaGodwhoispowerful everywhereatthesametime,andofaGodwhoispowerfulfor everyoneforitisindeedtothatthatoneisforcedtocome,if theworldisasitis,itisclearthatthepowerofGodis exercisedatthesametimeineverydirection.

19.6.63

XXIII

285

Nowthecorrelationbetweenthisomnipotenceandsomethingwhich is,asImightsayallseeingness,sufficientlysignalshereto uswhatisinvolved.Itinvolvessomethingwhichisoutlinedin thefieldbeyondthemirageofpower,ofthisprojectionofthe subjectintothefieldoftheideal,reduplicatedbetweenthe specularalterego,theidealego,andthissomethingbeyond whichistheegoideal. Theegoideal,whenatthislevelwhatitisamatterofcovering over,isanxiety,takestheomnipotentform.Thephantasyof ubiquityintheobsessional,thephantasywhichisalsothe supportonwhichtherecomeandgothemultiplicityofhis desires,whicharealwaystoberejectedfurtheraway,itis (17)therethatheseeksandfindsthecomplementofwhatis necessaryforhimtoconstitutehimselfindesire.

FromthisitresultsIwillonlyquotehereforyouthelittle corollariesthatcanbedrawnfromthisthataquestionwhich wasraisedinwhatIcouldcalltheheatedcirclesofanalysis, theonesinwhichtherestilllivesthemovementofaprimary inspiration,namelywhethertheanalystoughtoroughtnottobe anatheistandifthesubject,attheendofanalysis,can considerhisanalystterminatedifhestillbelievesinGod. ItisthequestionthatIamnotgoingtotreattoday,Imeanto settle.Butontheroadofsuchaquestion,Ipointouttoyou thatwhateveranobsessionaltestifiestoyouinhisremarks,if hehasnotbeenroutedoutofhisobsessionalstructure,youcan bequitepersuadedthatquaobsessionalhestillbelievesinGod, ImeanthathebelievesintheGodthateverybodyoralmost everybodyinourculturalarena,ImeanintheGodthateverybody believesinwithoutbelievinginhim,namelythisuniversaleye thatisbroughttobearonallouractions.

Herethisdimensionisassolidinitsframeasthewindowofthe phantasythatIspokeabouttheotherday.Simplyitisalso requiredbyit,Imean,evenforthegreatestbelieversthatthey donotbelieveinit.Firstofallbecauseiftheybelievedin it,itwouldbeseen.Andbecauseiftheyareasbelievingas allthat,onewouldnoticetheconsequencesofthisbelief,which infactremainsstrictlyinvisibleinevents.

Suchistheveritabledimensionofatheism:theonewhichis supposedtohavesucceededineliminatingthephantasyofthe Omnipotent.Wellthen,agentlemancalledVoltaireandwhoall thesameknewsomethingaboutantireligiouscriticism,heldvery stronglytohisdeism,whichmeanstotheexistenceofthe Almighty,andthoughtthatDiderotwasmadbecausehefoundthat inconsistent.ItisnotsurethatDiderotwasreallyanatheist tomehisworkseemsrathertobearwitnesstoit,giventheway inwhichhebroughtintooperationtheintersubjectiveatthe leveloftheOtherinhismajordialogues,LeneveudeRameauand JacquesleFataliste.Heisonlyabletodoitneverthelessin thestyleofderision. Theexistencethereforeoftheatheistinthetruesensecanonly

19.6.63

XXIII286

beconceivedofineffectatthelimitofanascesis,which indeedappearstouscanonlybeapsychoanalyticascesis,Imean (18)ofanatheismconceivedofasanegationofthisdimension ofpresence,atthebasisoftheworldofomnipotence.Thisdoes notmeanthatthetermatheismandtheexistenceoftheatheist doesnothaveitshistoricalcorrespondent.Butitisofaquite differentnature.Itsaffirmationisdirectedpreciselytowards thesideoftheexistenceofgodsquareal.Itneitherdeniesit noraffirmsit,itisdirectedatthat.Theatheistofthe tragedyL'atheeIamalludingtoElizabethantragedythe atheistgjxacombatant,quarevolutionary,isnottheonewho deniesGodinhisomnipotentfunction,itistheonewhoaffirms himselfasnotservinganyGod. Andthisisthedramatic,essentialvalue,theonewhichalways givesitspassiontothequestionofatheism.Iapologisefor thislittledigression,which,asyoumaywellimagine,isonly preparatory.

Youseewhereourlittlecircuittodayhasledus:tothe fundamentalliaisonbetweenthesetwostagesframingthe fundamentalimpossibility,theonewhichdividesatthesexual level,desireandjouissance.Thestyleofdetour,thestyleof encompassing,theimpossiblefoundationthattheobsessional givestohisdesire,hasallowedus,inthecourseofour analysistoday,toseetherebeingoutlinedsomething,namely thatthislinktoalostobjectofthemostdisgustingtype, showsitsnecessaryliaison,thereineffectwiththehighest idealisticproduction.Thiscircuitisneverthelessnotyet completed.Weseeclearlyhowdesireisappendedtothis structureoftheobject.Itstillremainsforusthisiswhat wewillarticulatethenexttimetohighlightwhatthismedian tablewhich,Ihope,youhaveallcopied,indicatestoyouas beingournextfield,tohighlighttherelationshipbetweenthe obsessionalphantasy,posedasastructureofhisdesire,andthe anxietywhichdeterminesit.

26.6.63 Seminar24:

XXIV1 Wednesday26June1963

Inordertoadvancetodayinouraccount,Iamgoingtotakeup thethingsthatconcerntheconstitutionofdesireinthe obsessionalanditsrelationtoanxiety.Andtodoit,Iam goingtoreturntoasortoftable,ofmatrix,ofdoubleentry tablethatIgaveyouduringtheveryfirstlecturesofthis year'sSeminarintheformreproducedhere,bracketedbythe whitelineandwritteninpink.

Theintentionofthistablethenwastomarkthesortof derangement,ofstaggeringrepresentedbythethreetermswhich Freudcametoandwhichheinscribedinthetitleofhisarticle Inhibitions,symptomsandanxiety.Aroundthesethreeterms,I punctuatedsomethingthatwecandesignateasmoments,asa certainnumberofdefinablemomentsinthetermswhicharehere inscribedinthistable,andwhichhaveasacharacteristic,for eachterm,ofreferringtothestartofitscolumnabove,tothe startoftherowontheleft.Youfindthereacorrelationwhich can,whenputtothetest,beproposedforinterrogationas suitableforbeingconfirmedordisprovedinitsstructural function.

Againthesetermswerepresentedtoyouatthattimeinacertain incompleteness,involvingthereforesomesuspensions,riddles specifically,thedistinctionforexamplebetween"emotion"and "dismay"mayhavebeen,despitetheetymologicalreferencesthat Imadeatthetime,mayhavebeenallthesameforyouamatter ofinterrogationwhichitwasnotentirelypossibleforyouto resolvewithyourownresources.

Assuredly,whatIwillcontributetodayseemstometobeofa naturetobringyouspecificationswhich,Ihavenodoubt,for mostofyou,ifnotforall,canonlybeneworevenunexpected. Andinparticular,tobeginwiththisdismay,whoseorigin,quite distinctfromthatofthetermemotion,isnot"motionoutwards, motionhors",movementoutsidetheorganised,adaptedfieldfor

26.6.63

XXIV2

exampleofmotoraction,asundoubtedlyemotionetymologically, Iamnotsayingthatthisissomethingthatwecanentirelytrust asemotionetymologicallyindicatesandrefersto,dismayisto besoughtquiteelsewhereifitistobeunderstoodand etymologicallyitwastheindicationthatIgaveyouforit theetymologyinesmayerreferringtoaGermanroot,tomogen,a quiteprimitiveGermanicroot,givestheindicationofsomething (2) whichpositstheprincipleofpowerasoutsideoutsideof what? Ariddletherefore,aroundsomethingwhichisnotunrelatedto power,andIwouldsaythatperhapseven,totaketheformthat ithastakeninFrench,thatitissomethingoftheorderof "outsideme,horsdemoi","outsideoneself,horsdesoi"that, inanapproachwhichhereitisalmostnecessarytoreferto thepunisnolessimportant,wehavetodirectourminds,to seeclearly,toglimpseatleast,thedirectioninwhichweare goingtogotoday. Togoimmediatelytotheheartofthingsitisbecausethe obsessionalillustratesitbyhisphenomenologyimmediatelyand inaverytangiblewayIwouldsaythatatthepointthatwe areatIcantellyouverycrudely,straightout,thatdismay, thethatisinvolved,isnothingother,atleastinthe correlationsthatwearetryingtoexplore,tospecify,to disentangle,tocreatetoday,namelytherelationsbetweendesire andanxiety,dismayinthiscorrelationisnothingotherthanthe oitself.

Intheconjuncturebetweenanxietyanditsstrangeambiguity,I taughtyoutocircumscribeintheclosestpossiblewaythroughout thediscourseofthisyear,theambiguitywhichallowsusforour part,afterthiselaboration,toformulatewhatisstrikingin itsphenomenology,whatwecanpreserveofit,andwhatauthors fromelsewheremakeslipsanderrorsabout,andwhatweintroduce adistinctioninto,thischaracteristicofbeingwithoutcause, butnotwithoutobjectthisisadistinctiononwhichIbasemy efforts.Tosituateit,Ihavedirectedyou:notaloneisit withoutobject,butitdesignatesveryprobablywhatImightcall themostprofoundobject,thefinalobject,theThing.Itisin thissensethatItaughtyoutosaythatitiswhatdoesnot deceive.

This"withoutcause",soobviousonthecontraryinits phenomenon,issomethingwhichisbetterilluminatedtoourview bythewayinwhichItriedtosituateforyouwherethenotion ofcausebegins.

Thisreferencetodismayishenceforththatthroughwhich anxiety,whilebeinglinkedtoit,doesnotdependonit,buton thecontrarydeterminesthisdismay.Anxietyfindsitself suspendedbetweenwhatonemightcallthepriorformofthe relationshiptothecause,the"whatisit?"whichisgoingtobe formulatedascause,embarrassment,andsomethingwhichcannot (3) holdontothiscause,sinceprimarilyitisanxietywhich literallyproducesthiscause.

26.6.63

XXIV3

Somethinghappenswhichillustratesinanabjectandthusallthe morestrikingfashionwhatIputattheoriginofmyexplanation oftheobsessionalintheconfrontationoftheWolfmanandhis majorrepetitivedream,intheanxietyprovokingconfrontation withsomethingwhichappearsasashowingforthofhisfinal reality,thisthingwhichisproduced,whichneverreacheshis consciousness,butcanonlybeinawayrecontructedasalink forthewholesubsequentdetermination,analdismaytocallitby itsnameanditsproduct,hereattheleveloftheobsessionalis theprimaryforminwhichthereintervenestheemergenceofthe objectowhichisattheoriginofeverythingthatisgoingto flowfromitinthemodeofeffect.

Itisbecauseheretheobjectoisfoundtobegiveninan originalmomentinwhichitplaysacertainfunctiononwhichwe arenowgoingtotrytodwellinordertospecifycarefullyits value,itsincidence,itsimport,itsprimarycoordinates,the onesbeforetheothersareaddedon,itisbecausetheoisthat initsoriginalproductionthatitcansubsequentlyfunctionin thedialecticofdesirewhichisthatoftheobsessional. Acoordinatetherefore,atthemomentofitsapparition,ofthis atthetraumaticunveiling,whereanxietyrevealsthatitis indeedwhatdoesnotdeceiveatthemomentthatthefieldofthe Other,asonemightsay,isrentandopensoutontoits foundations,whatisit,thiso,whatisitsfunctionwith respecttothesubject?

Ifwecangraspithereinawayinapurefashionwithrespect tothisquestion,itispreciselyinthemeasurethatinthis radical,traumatic,confrontationthesubjectcedes(cede)tothe situation.Butatthislevel,atthismoment,whatdoesthis "yields"mean,howisittobeunderstood?Itisnotthathe eithervacillatesorweakens,asyouknowwell.Rememberthe attitudeschematisedbythefascinationofthissubjectofthe dreamoftheWolfmanbeforethewindowopeningontothetree coveredwithwolves.Inasituationwhoseimmobilisation suspendsbeforeoureyesitsprimitivelyinarticulatable characterandbywhichneverthelesshewillremainmarked forever,whatwasproducedisliterallysomethingwhichgivesits truesensetothis"yields"ofthesubject,itisliterallya ceding(cession).

(4)Thischaracteristicofcedableobject(objetcessible)isone ofthecharacteristicsofowhichissoimportantthatIwould askyoupleasetofollowmeinabriefreviewtoseewhetherit isacharacteristicwhichmarksalltheformsofothatwehave enumerated.Ithereappearstousthatthefixationpointsof thelibidoarealwaysaroundoneofthesemomentswhichnature presentsforthiseventualstructureofsubjectiveceding. Thefirstmomentofanxiety,theonethatanalyticexperiencegot closertobitbybit,letussayatthelevel,aroundthetrauma ofbirth,henceforth,withthisremark,allowsustoaccentuate itassomethingmoreprecise,morepreciselyarticulatablethan whatwasfirstofallroughlyapproachedintheformof

26.6.63

XXIV4

frustrationandtoaskourselves,andtonotice,afterwehave askedourselves,thatthemostdecisivemomentintheanxiety involved,theweaninganxiety,isnotsomuchthatona particularoccasionthebreastismissingwhenheneedsit,itis ratherthatthislittlechildcedesthisbreastwhich,whenheis appendedtoit,isindeedlikeapartofhimself. Letusneverforget,whatIputtoyouandIamnottheonly onetohavenoticedit,IreferspecificallyheretoBergler thatthebreastformspartoftheindividualatthenursing stage,thathedoesnotfindhimself,asItoldyouinavivid expression,exceptasstuckontohismother.Thatheisablein awaytoholdontothisbreastorletitgo,iswherethereis producedthemostprimalmomentofsurprise,sometimesreally graspableintheexpressionofthenewborn,onwhichforthe firsttimetherepassesthereflectionofsomethingrelatedto thisabandonmentofthisorganwhichismuchmorethesubject himself,thansomethingwhichisalreadyanobject,something whichgivesitssupport,itsroot,towhatinanotherregister wasperceived,called,asregardsthesubject,dereliction. Butforthatmatterforus,asforalltheotherobjectso,dowe haveanyothermanifestcontrolthanthisemphasisIgivetothe possibilityofreplacingthenaturalobjectbyamechanical object,ifIcanexpressmyselfinthatway?WhatIam designatinghere,isfirstofallthepossiblereplacementof thisobjectbyanyotherobjectwhichmaybeencountered,another partner,thenursewhogaverisetosomanyquestionsforthe firstproponentsofnaturaleducation,fortheRousseaustyle themeoffeeedingbythemother,butbeyondittothissomething (5)which,Godknows,didnotalwaysexistatleastsowe imagineandwhichculturalprogresshasmanufactured,has constituted,thesoother,namelythepossibilityofputtingoin reserve,instock,incirculationintheshopsandmoreoverto isolateitinsteriletubes.

Thischaracteristicthereforeofcedingtheobjectisexpressed bytheappearanceinthechain,thefunctionofhuman manufacture,theappearanceofcedableobjects(objetscessibles) whichare,whichcanbe,theirequivalents.Andifthisreminder isnotoutofseasonhere,itisbecausefromthisangleIintend toattachtoitherethefunctiononwhichIhavelaidstressfor alongti^ie,thatofthetransitionalobject,totaketheterm, whetheritiscorrectornot,buthenceforthconsecrated,with whichitwaspinpointedbyitscreator,thepersonwhospotted it,namelyWinnicott.

Here,ineffect,atthislevel,oneseesclearlywhatconstitutes thisobjectthathecallstransitional,inthisfunctionofthe objectthatIcallacedableobject:itisalittlepiece,torn fromsomething,mostoftenapieceofcloth,andoneclearlysees whatisinvolvedasregardstherelationshipofthesubjectto thesupportthathefindsinthisobject.Heisnotdissolvedin it,heiscomfortedbyit,heiscomfortedbyitinhisquite originalfunctionassubject,fromthispositionofcollapse,as Imightsay,withrespecttothesignifyingconfrontation.Here

26.6.63

XXIV5

wehave,notaninvestmentofo,butwhatImightcallan investiture.Here,itisthesubstitute(suppleant)forthe subject,andsubstituteinposition,inaway,preceded,itis thisrelationshipowithrespecttosomethingwhichsecondarily reappearsafterthisdisappearance.Thisprimitivemythical subjectwhoisposedatthebeginningashavingtoconstitute himselfintheconfrontation,butthatwenevergraspandfor goodreasonthatitisbecausetheohasprecededhim,and becauseitisinawayitselfmarkedbythisprimitive substitution,thatithastoreemergebeyond. Thisfunctionofthecedableobjectasaseparablefragment, carryinginawayprimitivelysomethingoftheidentityofthe bodywhichantecedesthebodyitselfasregardstheconstitution ofthesubject,sinceIspokeaboutamanifestationinthe historyo^humanproductionwhichcaninawayforushavethe valueofconfirmation,ofrevelation,inthissenseIcannot possiblynotevokenow,attheextremetermofthishistorical evolution,ormoreexactlyofthismanifestationinhistoryof problemswhicharegoingtoposeus,Iamsaying,atwhatone couldcallthemostradicalessentialityofthesubject,the (6)probablyimmenseextensionalreadyengagedinmorethan,I wouldsay,commonconsciousnessandeventhatofpractitioners likeourselvesmaybeawareof,thequestionsgoingtobeposed bythefactoforgantransplants,whichtakeonanappearance whichinundoubtedlysurprisingandwelldesignedtosuspendthe mindaroundsomequestionorother:howfarshouldwe,orhowfar arewegoingto,consenttoit?Justhowfarwillgothefact whichisopenedouthere,withwhatIwouldcallthemine,the mainspring,theprincipleoftheseastonishingpossibilities,is perhapsgoingtobefoundsoonintheartificialmaintenanceof certainsubjectsinastate,whichwecannot,whichwewillno longerbeabletosayisoneoflifeorofdeath,sinceasyou knowAngstrom'smethodsallowustomakesubsistinaliving statethetissuesofsubjectsinwhomeverythingindicatesthat thefunctioningoftheircentralnervoussystemcannotbe restored,nobrainwaves,mydriasis,.unrecoverableabsenceof reflexes?Whatisinvolved,whatdowedowhenitisfroma subjectinthisstatethatweborrowanorgan?Doyounotsense thatthereishereanemergenceintothereal,ofsomethingofa kindtoreawaken,inaltogethernewterms,thequestionofthe essentialityoftheperson,andofwhatitisattachedto,tobeg thesedoctrinalauthoritieswhocanonoccasionprovidematerial forjuridicism,toearnestlyrequestthemtoseehowfar,in practicethistime,thequestionofwhetherthesubjectisasoul orindeedabodycanbetaken? Iwillnotgoanyfurtheralongthispathtodaybecauseasa matteroffactthesedoctrinalauthoritiesseemalreadytohave evokedquitesingularresponsesthatitwouldbewelltostudy verycloselyinordertoseetheir,consistencywithrespectto certainpositionswhichhavebeentakenforalongtime,and whereforexamplethereisradicallydistinguished,onthevery planeoftherelationship,oftheidentificationoftheperson withsomethingimmortalwhichissupposedtobecalledthesoul, adoctrinewhicharticulatesinitsprinciplessomethingthatis

26.6.63

XXIV6

thecontraryofthePlatonictradition,namelythattherecanbe noresurrectionotherthanthatofthebody. Moreoverthedomainevokedhereisnotsolinkedtothis industrialadvanceinsingularpossibilities,foritnottohave beenevokedforalongtimeinvisionaryfabulations,andhereI haveonlytoreferyouoncemoretotheUnheimlichfunctionof (7) theeyesinsofarastomanipulate,tomakealivingbeing changeintohisautomaton,thecharacterincarnatedbyHoffmann isputatthecentre,byFreud,ofhisarticleontheUmheimlich, thisCoppelius,theonewhohollowsouteyesockets,whoisgoing toseekdowntotheirrootwhatissomewherethecapital, essentialobjecttopresentitselfasthebeyondandthemost anxietyprovokingofthedesirewhichconstitutesit,theeye itself.

Isaidenoughinpassingaboutthesamefunctionofthevoiceand thewayinwhichitappearstous,willappeartousnodoubt withsomanytechnicalimprovements,tobeallthemoreableto behereoftheorderofthesecedableobjects,ofthese objectswhichcanbeplacedontheshelvesofalibrary,inthe formofdisksoroftapes,andregardingwhichinthiscasewe onlyneedtoevokeoneorotheroldornewepisode,toknowthe singularrelationshipitcanhavewiththearousalofa particularconjunctureofanxiety.Simply,letusaddtoit properlyspeakingthefollowing,atthemomentthatthereemerges inaculturalareainwhichitarisesforthefirsttime,the possibilityalsooftheimage,Imeanofthespecularimage,of theimageofthebody,inadetachedstate,inacedablestate, intheformofphotographsorevenofdrawings,andofthelure, oftherepugnancethatthisprovokesinthesensibilityofthose whoseeitemergingsuddenlyinthisform,atonceindefinitely multipliar>leandabletobedistributedeverywhere,the repugnance,indeedthehorrorthattheseculturalthingsinareas thatthereisnoreasonforustocallprimitive,theapparition ofthispossibilitygivesriseto,withtherefusaltoallow theseimagestobetakensinceGodaloneknows,itmustbesaid, wheretheymaygoafterwards.

Itisinthisfunction,inthisfunctionofcedableobjectand inshortthemostnaturalone,whosenaturalnesscanonlybe explainedfromhavingtakenonthisfunction,thattheanal objectintervenesinthefunctionofdesire,thathere,itis herethatwehavetograspthewayinwhichitintervenes,andto puttothetest,notforgettheguidancethatourformulagives us,thatthisobjectisthen,nottheend,thegoalofdesirebut itscause,thecauseofdesireinsofarasitisitself somethingnoneffective,thatitisthissortofeffectfounded, constitutedonthefunctionoflack,whichonlyappearsaseffect whereineffectthereissituatedalonethenotionofcause, namelyatthelevelofthesignifyingchainwherethisdesireis whatgivesitthissortofconsistencyinwhichthesubjectis constitutedessentiallyasmetonymy.Buthowarewegoingto (8) qualifythisdesirehere,attheleveloftheconstitutionof thesubject,wherewegraspitinitsincidence,inthe constitutionofthesubject?Itisnotthecontingentfact,the

26.6.63

XXIV7

facticityofeducationincleanlinesswhichgivesitthis functionofretaining,whichgivesitsfundamentalstructureto analdesire.Itisamoregeneralformthatisinvolvedhereand thatwemustgraspinthisdesiretoretain. Initspolarrelationshiptoanxiety,desireistobesituated therewhereIputitforyou,correspondingwiththisoldmatrix, atthelevelofinhibition.Thisiswhydesireasweknow cantakeonthefunctionofwhatiscalledadefence.Butletus gostepbysteptoseehowthishappenseventually.Whatis inhibition?Forus,inourexperience,itisnotenoughforus tohavethisexperienceandforustomanipulateitassuchfor usyettohavecorrectlyarticulateditsfunction,andthisis whatwearegoingtotrytodo.Whatisinhibitionifnotthe introductionintoafunctionperhapsnotanindifferentonein hisarticle,Freudtakesassupport,forexample,themotor functiontheintroductionofwhat?Ofadifferentdesireto theonethatthefunctionsatisfiesnaturally.

Thisafterallweknow,andIamnotclaimingheretodiscover anythingnewbutIbelievethatinarticulatingitinthisway, Iamintroducinganewformulation,thedeductionsflowingfrom whichescapeuswithoutthisveryformulation.

Forthislocusofinhibitionwherewelearntorecognise,whileI amunderliningit,thecorrelationsthismatrixindicates,the locusproperlyspeakingwheredesireisexercised,andwherewe grasponeoftherootsofwhatanalysisdesignatesas Urverdrangung,whatImightcallthisstructuraloccultationof desirebehindinhibitionitissomethingwhichmakesussay habituallythatifMrSoandsohaswriter'scramp,itisbecause heeroticisesthefunctionofhishand,Ithinkthisisfamiliar toeverybodyitisthiswhichurgesustobringintoplay,to appreciateinthissituationatthesameplacethesethreeterms, thefirsttwoofwhichIhavealreadynamed:"inhibition", "desire",thethirdbeingtheact.Forwhenitisaquestionfor usofdefiningwhattheactis,theonlypossible,polar correlativeintheplaceofanxiety,wecanonlydoitby situatingittherewhereitis:attheplaceofinhibitionin (9)thismatrix.

Theactcannotbedefinedforus,orforanybodyelse,as somethingwhichonlyhappensasImightsay,intherealfield, inthesensethatmovement,themotoreffect,itwillbesaid, definesit,butassomethingwhichinthisfieldandnodoubt intheformofmovementonoccasion,butnotonlythatwhatever sharetheremaystillremainthereofamotoreffectwhichis expressedinthisfield,thefieldoftherealinwhichthe movementresponseisexercised,whichisexpressedinsucha waythatthereisexpressedinitanotherfield,whichisnot simplytheoneofsensorystimulationforexample,asitis articulatedbyconsideringonlythereflexarc,whichisnotto bearticulatedeitherasarealisationofthesubject.

Thisistheconceptionofthepersonalistmythinsofar preciselyasiteludes,inthisfieldoftherealisationofthe

26.6.63

XXIV8

subject,chepriorityofowhichinauguratesandhenceforth preservesthisprivilegeinthefieldoftherealisationofthe subject,ofthesubjectassuchwhoisonlyrealisedinthe objectswhichbelongtothesameseries,whicharefromthesame place,letussay,inthismatrix,asthefunctiono,whichare alwayscedableobjects:andthesearewhatforalongtime havebeencalled"works"withallthemeaningthatthistermhas eveninthefieldofmoraltheology. SothenwhathappensintheactofthisotherfieldwhichIam speakingabout,andwhoseincidence,agency,insistenceinthe realiswhatconnotesanactionasact?Howarewegoingto defineit?Isitsimplythispolarrelationshipandinaway whathappensinitintermsofovercominganxiety,ifIcan expressmyselfinthisway?

Letussay,informulaewhichcanonlyapproachafterallwhatan actis,thatwespeakaboutactwhenanactionhasthecharacter, letussay,ofasignifyingmanifestationinwhichthereis inscribedwhatcanbecalledthethegap(l'ecart)ofdesire.An actisanaction,letussay,insofarasthereismanifestedin ittheverydesirewhichissupposedtohavebeendesignedto inhibitit.Itisinthisfoundationofthenotion,ofthe functionoftheactinitsrelationshiptoinhibition,andthere alone,thatonecanbejustifiedincalling"act"thingswhichin principleappeartobesolittlerelatedtowhatonecouldcall, inthefull,ethical,senseofthewordanact:asexualactoil onehandandontheotheratestamentaryact.

Wellthen,itishereinthisrelationshipofotothe constitutionofadesireandwhatitrevealstousaboutthe relationshipofdesiretothenaturalfunctionthatour (10)obsessionalhasforushismostexemplaryvalue.Inhis caseweputourfingerallthetimeonthischaracteristic,whose enigmaticaspectcanbeeffacedforusonlyoutofhabit,thatin hiscasedesiresmanifestthemselvesalwaysinthisdimension thatIwentsofarastocallearlier,anticipatingalittleno doubt,thefunctionofdefence.

Howcanthisbeconceivedofsimply,onwhatbasisdoesthis incidenceofdesireininhibitiondeservetobecalleddefence? Itisbecause,asItoldyou,thatitwasinananticipatory fashionthatIwasabletospeakaboutdefenceasanessential functionoftheincidenceofdesireitisuniquelyinsofaras thiseffectofdesire,signalledinthiswaybyinhibition,can beintroducedintoanactionalreadycaughtupintheinduction ofanotherdesirethisisalsoforusacommonfactof experienceandafterall,withoutmentioningthefactthatwe arealwaysdealingwithsomethingofthisorder,letusobserve that,nottoleaveourobsessional,thisisalreadytheposition ofanaldesire,definedinthisway,bythedesiretoretain centredonaprimordialobject,towhichitisgoingtogiveits value,itisalreadyherethatthereissituatedthedesirethat issituatedasanal.Ithasnomeaningforusexceptinthe economyofthelibido,namelyinitsliaisonswithsexualdesire.

26.6.63

XXIV9

Itisfittingtorecallherethatintheinterurinasetfaeces nascimurofSt.Augustine,theimportantthingisnotsomuch thatwearebornbetweenurineandfaeces,atleastforus analysts,itisthatwemakelovebetweenurineandfaeces.We pissbeforeandweshitafterwardsorinversely. Andthisisoneofthefurthercorrelationsandonetowhichwe givetoolittleattentionasregardsaphenomenologythatafter allweallowtocomeintoanalysis.Thatiswhyitisnecessary tohaveone'searpricked,andtopickoutinthecasesinwhich thisemerges,therelationshipwhichlinkstothesexualactthe fomenting,asImightsay,ofthatwhichwillappearofcourseas unnoticed,asperhapsunevoked,inthehistoryoftheWolfman, hisprimallittlepresent,thehabitualfomenting,inthesexual act,ofsomethingwhichofcoursedoesnotseemtobevery important,butwhichtakesimportancefrombeingindicativeof therelationshipIamspeakingabout,thefomentingofthelittle shit,whosesubsequentevacuationhasnodoubtnotthesame significationforeverysubject,dependingonwhetherforexample (11)theyareontheobsessionalslopeoronanotherone. SothenletustakeupourpathatthepointthatIleftyouon it,namely:whataboutthepointthatIamnowdirectingyou towards,asregardsthisunderlayofdesireindesire,andhowto conceiveherewhatinthispathleadsustowardstheelucidation ofitsmeaning,leadsustoitImeannotsimplyinfact,butof necessity?Arewegoingtobeabletoconceiveinthis interpretationofdesire/defenseandwhatitisdefending against,namelyanotherdesire,thatwearesimplyled,asI mightsay,quitenaturallybywhatleadstheobsessionalina movementofrecurrenceoftheprocessofdesiregeneratedbythis impliciteffortofsubjectivicationwhichisalreadyinhis symptomsinwhichhetendstolayholdofitsstagesagain,inso farashehassymptoms,andwhatismeantbythecorrelation inscribedhereinthematrix,withimpediment,withemotion? ThisiswhatthetitlesthatIputinitsreduplicationexplained hereunderneath,designateforyou.

Whatistheimpedimentthatisinvolved?Itisthatsomething intervenes,theimpediment:"impedicare",caughtinthetrap, whichisnotthereduplicationofinhibition.Atermhadtobe chosen.Thefactisthatthesubjectisquiteimpededin retaininghisdesiretoretain,andthat,inthecaseofthe obsessionalthisiswhatmanifestsitselfascompulsion.

The dimension of emotion here, borrowed from a psychology which is not our own, a psychology of adaptation, of the catastrophic reaction,alsointerveneshereinaquitedifferentsensetothis

26.6.63

XXIV10

classicandhabitualdefinition.Theemotioninvolvedistheone whichissupposedtohighlighttheexperiencesbasedonbeing confrontedwithatask,namelythatthefactthatthesubject doesnotknowhowtorespond,iswhereheconnectsupwithour "nottoknow,nepassavoir",:hedidnotknowthatitwasthat andthatiswhyatthelevelofthepointwherehecannotstop himself(s'empe~cher)thatheallowsthingstohappen,whichare thesecomingsandgoingsofthesignifier,thatalternatelyposit andefface,whichallgoalongthisequallyunknownpathof rediscoveringtheprimaltracewhattheobsessionalsubject seeksinwhatIcalledearlierandyouwillseewhythechoice ofthisworditsrecurrenceintheprocessofdesire,iswell andtrulytorediscovertheauthenticcauseofthiswhole process.Anditisbecausethiscauseisnothingotherthanthis final,abjectandderisoryobject,thatheremainsinsuspensein thissearch,thatthereisalwaysmanifestedthere,atthelevel ofactingout,somethingthatisgoingtogivetothissearchfor theobjectitsmomentsofsuspension,itswrongdirections,its mistakenpaths,itslateraldivergenceswhichwillmakethe searchturnindefinitely,andwhicharemanifestedinthis fundamentalsymptomofdoubtwhichforhimisgoingtoaffectthe valueofallhisobjectsofsubstitution.

Herenottobeableisnottobeabletowhat?tostop oneself(s'empecher).Thecompulsionhere,thedoubt,concerns preciselythesedoubtfulobjectsthankstowhichthereispushed backthemomentofaccesstothefinalobjectwhichwouldbethe end,inthefullsenseoftheterm,namelythelossofthe subjectonthepathwhereheisalwaysexposedtoenteringalong thepathofembarrassment,ofembarrassmentwherethereis introducedassuchthequestionofthecause,whichisthat throughwhichheentersintotransference.

Whatshouldretainushere?Haveweseen,circumscribed,even approached,thequestionIposedabouttheincidenceofanother desirewhichwithrespecttothisonewhosepathIhavetravelled along,mightplaytheroleofdefence?Manifestlynot.Itraced thepathofthereturntothefinalobjectwithitscorrelation ofanxietyforitisherethereliesthemotiveforthegrowing arousalofanxiety.Andinthemeasurethattheanalysisofan obsessionalispushedfurthertowardsitsterm,providedonlyit isguidedalongthispath,thequestionthenremainsopen,ifnot ofwhatImeantforIthinkthatyouhavealreadyglimpsedthat butaboutwhattheincidenceasdefenceis,adefencenodoubt workingandworkingveryhardtoputofftheexpirydate (echeance)thatIhavejustoutlined,asdefenceofanother desire.

Howisthispossible?Wecannotconceiveofitexceptbygiving itscentralposition,whichissomethingIalreadydidearlier, tosexualdesire,Imeantothedesirethatiscalledgenital,to naturaldesireinsofarasinthecaseofman,andpreciselyin functionofthisstructuringpropertodesirearoundthe mediationofanobject,itpositsitselfashavinganxietyatits heartandseparatingdesirefromjouissance.

297.6.63

XXIV11

This function of o which at this level of genital desire is symbolised analogically by the dominance, by the pregnance of o in the economy of desire, is symbolised at the level of genital desire by the (t>) which appears here as the subjective residue at the level of copulation, in other words, which shows us that the copula is everywhere, and that it only unites by being lackingtherewherepreciselyitwouldbeproperlycopulatory. (13) Itistothiscentralholewhichgivesitsprivilegedvalue tocastrationanxiety,namelytotheonlylevelatwhichanxiety isproducedattheverylocusofthelackoftheobject,itisto thisthat,specificallyintheobsessional,thecomingintoplay ofanotherdesireisdue.Thisotherdesire,asImightsay, givesitsfoundationtowhatcanbecalledtheeccentric position,theonethatIhavebeentryingtodescribeforyou,of thedesireoftheobsessionalwithrespecttogenitaldesire. Forthedesireoftheobsessionalisnotconceivableeitherin itsagencyorinitsmechanism,exceptinsofarasitis situatedasasubstituteforwhatitisimpossibletosupply elsewhere,namelyatitsplace.Inaword,theobsessional,like everyneurotic,hasalreadyaccededtothephallicstage,butit iswithrespecttotheimpossibilityofbeingsatisfiedatthe levelofthisstage,thathisownobject,theexcrementalo,the ocauseofdesiretoretain,andwhich,ifIreallywishedto conjoinhereitsfunctionwitheverythingthatIsaidaboutthe relationstoinhibition,Iwouldrathercallthecork,itiswith respecttoitthatthisobjectisgoingtotakeonwhatIcould calldevelopedvalues.Anditisherethatwecutthroughtothe originofwhatIcouldcalltheanalyticphantasyabout oblativity.Ialreadysaidandrepeated,thatitisan obsessionalphantasy.Forofcourseeveryonewouldlovetothink thatgenitalunionisagift:Igivemyself,yougiveyourself, wegiveourselves.Unfortunatelythereisnotraceofgiftina genitalcopulatoryact,howeversuccessfulyoumayimagineitto be.Thereisonlyagiftpreciselywhereithasalwaysbeenwell andtrulyandperfectlylocated:attheanallevel,inthe measurethatheresomethingisoutlined,emerges,ofwhatishere preciselyatthisleveldesignedtosatisfy,tobringthesubject toahaltwiththerealisationofthegap,ofthecentralhole, whichatthegenitallevelpreventsanythingwhatsoeverwhich mightfunctionasobjectofgiftfrombeinggrasped.

SinceIspokeaboutacork,bywhichyoucanrecognisethatitis themostprimitiveformofwhatIcalled,ofwhatIintroduced theotherdaytoyouastheexemplaryobjectthatIcalledthe tapthroughthediscussionofthefunctionofthecause,well thenhowcouldweillustrate,withrespecttowhatdeterminesthe functionoftheobjectstopperortapwithitsconsequence,the desiretoclose,howcouldtherebesituatedthedifferent elementsofourmatrix?

(14) Therelationshiptothecausewhatisthat?Whatcanone dowithatap?Itistheinitialpointatwhichtherecomesinto playfromobservation,intheexperienceofthechild,this attractionthatwesee,contrarytoanyotherlittleanimal

26.6.63

XXIV298

whatsoever,manifestingitselfforsomethingwhichannounces itselfasrepresentingthisfundamentaltypeofobject. The"nottobeable"tomakesomethingofit,aswellasthe"not toknow",andintheirdistinctionthereisindicatedhere sufficientlywhatthesymptomis:itisaleak(fuite)inthe tap.Thepassageal'acteistoopenit,butopeningitwithout knowingwhatoneisdoing.Thisiswhatischaracteristicofthe passageal'acte.Somethinghappensbywhichacauseis liberated,bymeanswhichhavenothingtodowiththiscause. For,asIpointedouttoyou,thetaponlyplaysitsfunctionof causeinsofaraseverythingthatcancomeoutofitcomesfrom elsewhere.Itisbecausethereistheappealofthegenital, withitsphallicholeatthecentre,thateverythingthatcan happenattheleveloftheanalcomesintoplaybecauseittakes onitsmeaning.

Asregardsactingout,ifwewishtosituateitwithrespectto themetaphorofthetap,itisnotthefactofopeningthetapas thechilddoes,withoutknowingwhatheisdoing,itissimply thepresenceornotofthejetofwater.Actingout,isthejet, namelywhatisalwaysproducedfromaneventwhichcomesfrom somewhereotherthanthecausethatonehasjustactedon.And thisissomethingthatourexperienceindicatestous.Itisnot thefactthatourintervention,letussay,forexampleonthe planeofananalinterpretationisfalsewhichprovokesthe actingout,itisthatwhereitisbroughttobear,itleaves roomforsomethingwhichcomesfromelsewhere.Inotherwords: onemustnotinconsideratelypesterthecauseofdesire. Herethereforethereisintroducedthepossibilityofthe functionwhichonthisterrainwherethereisplayedoutthe destinyofthedesireoftheobsessional,ofhissymptomsandof hissublimations,ofsomethingthatwilltakeonitsmeaningfrom beingthatwhichskirtsaround,asImightsay,thecentralgap ofphallicdesire,whatishappeningatthescopiclevel,inso farasthespecularimageentersintoan"analogous"function becauseitisinacorrelativepositionwithrespecttothe phallicstage.

Everythingthatwehavejustsaidaboutthefunctionofoas "analogous"objectofgift,designedtoholdbackthesubjecton theedgeofthecastratinghole,everythingthatwehavejust saidaboutit,wecantransposeontotheimage.Andherethere (15)intervenesthisambiguityintheobsessionalsubjectabout thefunctionoflovewhichisunderlinedinalltheobservations. WhatisthisidealisedlovethatwefindasmuchintheRatman andtheWolfmanasineveryobservationofanobsessionalthat hasbeentakenacertaindistance,whatistheenigmaofthis function,giventotheothertothewomaninthiscaseof thisexaltedobjectasregardswhichpeoplehavecertainlynot hadtowaitforeitheryouormeortheteachinggivenhere,to knowthatitrepresentssurreptitiouslythenegationofhis desire?Inanycasewomenfortheirpartarenotdeceivedbyit. Whatwoulddistinguishthistypeoflovefromanerotomaniacal

26.6.63

XXIV299

love,ifwedidnotseekoutwhattheobsessionalengagesof himselfinlove? Doyoubelievethatfortheobsessional,ifthisisindeedthe waythingsareasregardsthefinalobjectthatmayberevealed inhisanalysis,alongacertainrecurrentpathItoldyou whichoneexcrementisthedivinatorysourceforfinding oneselftobealoveableobject! Iwouldbegyoutotrytoilluminatewithyourpockettorchwhat thepositionoftheobsessionalisinthisregard.Itisnot doubtwhichprevailshere,itisthatheprefersnoteventolook atit.Thisprudenceissomethingyouwillalwaysfind.And neverthelessiflovetakesonforhimtheseformsofanexalted bond,itisbecausewhatheintendsshouldbeloved,isacertain imageofhimself,thatthisimagehegivestotheother,andto suchanextentthatheimaginesthatifthisimagewerefaultyin anyway,theotherwouldnolongerknowwhattoholdonto.Itis thefoundationofwhatIcalledelsewherethealtruistic dimensionofthismythicallovefoundedonamythicaloblativity. Butthemaintenanceofthisimageiswhatattacheshimtoawhole distancefromhimselfwhichispreciselywhatitismost difficulttoreduce,andwhichgavetheillusiontoaparticular person,(Bouvet),whohad,ofcourse,agooddealofexperience ofthesesubjects,butnottheapparatusandforreasonswhich remaintobeexploredtoformulateit,toputsuchanaccenton thisnotionofdistance:thedistanceinvolvedisthisdistance ofthesubjectfromhimselfwithrespecttowhicheverythingthat hedoesisneveranythingforhiminthefinaltermand, withoutanalysis,islefttoitssolitudebutsomethingthathe seesasagame,whenallissaidanddone,whichonlyprofited thisotherofwhomIamspeaking,thisimage. (16)Thisdimensionistheonethatisusuallyhighlighted,as regardsthenarcissisticdimensioninwhichtheredevelops everythingthatinthecaseoftheobsessionalisnotsomuch central,namelysymptomatic,butifyouwishbehaviouralor experiencedandwhichgivesitsveritablefoundation,that throughwhichwhatisinvolvedforhim,namelytorealiseat leastthefirstphaseofwhatisneverpermittedforhim,whatis neverpermittedtomanifestitselfinact,namelyhisdesire,how thisdesireissustained,asImightsay,bydoingtheroundof allthepossibilities,atthephallicandgenitallevel,which determinetheimpossible. WhenIsaythattheobsessionalsustainshisdesireas impossible,Imeanthathesustainshisdesireatthelevelof theimpossibilitiesofdesire.Theimageofthehole,ofthe holethatisinvolved,Iwouldaskyoutofindthereferenceto itItoldyouaboutitonceandthatiswhyIinsistedonitat suchlengththereferencetothetopologyofthetorus,the circleoftheobsessionalispreciselyoneofthesecircleswhich becauseofitstopologicalplacecanneverbereducedtoapoint. Itisbecausefromtheoraltotheanal,fromtheanaltothe phallic,fromthephallictothescopicandfromthescopicto

26.6.63 thevociferous,itneverturnsbackontoitselfexceptby passingagainthroughitspointofdeparture.

XXIV300

ItisaroundthesestructuresthatthenexttimeIwillgiveits conclusiveformulationtowhatthisexample,whichis sufficientlydemonstrativetobeelaboratedasanexample,andis transposablemoreoverfromthesedataintootherstructures,the hystericspecifically,thatstartingfromthisexample,weare ableinthefinaltermtosituateaboutthepositionandthe functionofanxiety.

3.7.63 Seminar25:

XXV301 Wednesday3July1963

IwillconcludetodaywhatIhadsetmyselftosaytoyouthis yearaboutanxiety.Iwillmarkoutitslimitanditsfunction, thusindicatingwhereIintendtheretocontinuethepositions whichaloneallowus,willallowussettle,ifitispossible, whatisinvolvedinourroleasanalysts.

Freuddesignatedanxietyattheendofhisworkasasignal.He designateditasasignaldistinctfromtheeffectofthe traumaticsituation,anarticulatedsignalofwhathecalled dangertheword"danger"forhimislinkedtothefunction,to thenotion,notelucidateditmustbesaid,of"vitaldanger". TheoriginalthingthatIhavearticulatedforyouthisyear, isthespecificationofwhatthisdangeris.Thisdangeris,in conformitywiththeFreudianindication,butmoreprecisely articulated,whatislinkedtothecedingcharacteristicofthe constitutivemomentoftheobjecto.

What,henceforth,forus,shouldanxietybeconsideredthesignal of,atthispointofourdevelopment?Hereagainwewill articulateitdifferentlytoFreud:thismoment,thismomentof thefunctionofanxietyispriortothiscedingoftheobject. Forexperienceprohibitsusfromnot,astheverynecessityof hisarticulationobligesFreud,situatingsomethingmore primalthanthearticulationofthesituationofdanger,oncewe defineitaswehavejustdone:atalevel,atamomentpriorto thiscedingoftheobject.

Anxiety,IannouncedtoyoufirstintheSeminaroftwoyears ago,anxietymanifestsitselftangiblyinafirstapproachas referringandinacomplexfashiontothedesireofthe Other.Fromthisfirstapproach,Iindicatedthattheanxiety provokingfunctionofthedesireoftheOtherwaslinkedtothe factthatIdonotknowwhatobjectoIamforthisdesire. Iwillemphasistodaythatthisisonlyfullyarticulated,only takesonanexemplaryformatwhatIcalled,designatedhere,in asignontheblackboard,thefourthleveldefinableas characteristicofthefunctionoftheconstitutionofthesubject inhisrelationtotheOther,insofaraswecanarticulateit ascenteredaroundthefunctionofanxiety.

3.7.63

XXV302

(2) Therealonethespecificplenitudebywhichhumandesireis functionofthedesireoftheOther,therealoneatthislevelis thisformfulfilled.Anxiety,asItoldyou,islinkedtothe factthatIdonotknowwhatobjectoIamforthedesireofthe Other.Butthiswhenallissaidanddoneisonlylinkedtothe levelatwhichIcangivethisexemplaryfableofit,inwhich theOtherwouldbearadicallyOther,wouldbethispraying mantiswithavoraciousdesire,towhichnocommonfactorlinks me.Onthecontrary,somethinglinksmetothehumanOtherwhich ismyqualityofbeinghisfellow.Whatremainsoftheanxiety provoking"Idonotknow"isfundamentallymiscognition, miscognitionatthisspeciallevelofwhatis,intheeconomyof mydesireasman,theo.

Thisiswhy,paradoxically,itisatwhatisdescribedasthe fourthlevel,atthelevelofscopicdesire,thatthestructure ofdesireisforusmostfullydevelopedinitsfundamental alienation,itistherealsothattheobjectoismostmasked, andwithitthesubjectis,asregardsanxiety,mostsecured. This is what makes it necessary for us to seek elsewhere than at this level the trace of o as regards the moment of its constitution. Since the Other, in effect, is in essence always there in its full reality, and therefore this reality, in so far as it takes on a subjective presence, can always manifest itself by one of its sharp edges, it is clear that development does not giveanequalaccesstothisrealityoftheOther.

Atthefirstlevel,thisrealityoftheOtherispresentified,as isquiteclearintheoriginalimpotenceofthenurseling, throughneed.Itisonlyinthesecondphasethatwiththe demandoftheOthersomethingproperlyspeakingdetachesitself andallowsustoarticulateinacompletewaytheconstitutionof littleowithrespecttothefunctionofthelocusofthe signifyingchain,afunctionwhichIhearfromtheOther. ButIcannottodayleavethisfirstlevelwithoutclearly highlightingthatanxietyappearsbeforeanyarticulationassuch ofthedemandoftheOther.But,singularly,Iwouldaskyoufor amomenttodwellontheparadoxwhichconnectsthestarting pointofthisfirsteffectofceding,whichisanxiety,withwhat willbeattheendsomethinglikeitspointofarrival:this manifestationofanxietycoincidingwiththeveryemergenceinto theworldoftheonewhowillbethesubject,isthescream,the screamwhosefunctionIhavesituatedforalongtimeasnotat (3) allanoriginalbutaterminalrelationshiptowhatweought toconsiderasbeingtheveryheartofthisother,insofaras hereachescompletionforusatamomentastheneighbour.

Thisscreamwhichescapesfromthenurseling,hecandonothing aboutit.Ifhehascededsomethinghere,nothingconnectshim toit.Butthisanxiety,thisoriginalanxiety,amIthefirst, havenotalltheauthorsemphasiseditscharacterinacertain traumaticrelationshiptotheemergenceoftheorganismhuman onthisoccasionintoacertainworldwhereitisgoingto live.

303.7.63

XXV3

Canwenotseecertaincontradictoryfeaturesinthesemultiple andconfusingindications?CanweretainasvalidFerenczi's indicationthatforontogenesisitself,thereistheemergence fromsomeprimitiveacqueousmilieuorotherwhichisthe homologueofthemarinemilieu,namelytherelationshipbetween theamnioticliquidandthiswaterinwhichtherecantakeplace thisexchangebetweentheinsideandtheoutside,whichtakes placeintheanimallivinginsuchamilieuatthelevelofthe brachiopoda,whichissomethingthatneverfunctionsatany momentofthehumanembryo.Iwouldaskyourathertoretain foreverythingthatisindicatedtousinthisoftenconfused speculationwhichispsychoanalyticspeculationoughttobe consideredbyusasnotwithoutmeaning,tobeonthepathof somethingindicative,thatitskipsover,delaysonandsometimes illuminates,becausephylogenesisismentionedonoccasionI wouldaskyoufromthepointofviewofaschematisedexchange intheformofanorganismwith,atitsborderandonthis border,acertainnumberofchosenpointsofexchange,tonotice thedegreetowhichineffectitissomethingunbelievable,ifit isthecasethatthemostbasicschemaofvitalexchangeis effectivelycreatedbythefunctionofthiswall,ofthisborder, ofthisosmosisbetweenanoutsidemilieuandaninsidemilieu, betweenwhichtherecanbeacommonfactortoconsiderthe strangenessoftheleapbywhichlivingbeingshaveemergedfrom theirprimitivemilieu,havepassedintotheairthereforewith anorganwhosearbitrarycharacterIwouldaskyoutoconsultin thebooksonembryology,onecannotfailtobestruckbywhatone mightcallthearbitrarycharacterofthedevelopmentofthe neoformation.Thereisjustasmuchstrangenessinthis intrusion,insidetheorganism,ofthissystem,inthewhole adaptationofthenervoussystemtobeaccommodatedforalong timebeforeitreallyfunctionsasagoodpump,thereisjustas muchstrangenessintheleapconstitutedbytheapparitionof (4)thisorgan,asonemightsaythereisinthefactthatata momentofhumanhistory,onesawhumanbeingsbreathinginan ironlung,oragaintakingoffintowhatiscalledinaccurately thecosmos,withsomethingaroundthemwhichforitsvital functionisnotessentiallydifferentfromwhatIamevokinghere asareserveofair.

Shouldwenotrecognisetheessentialfeatureofthefactthat anxietywasinawayitisFreudwhoindicatesittoushere chosenasasignalofsomething,thisradicalintrusionof somethingsoothertothelivinghumanbeingwhichpassinginto theatmospherealreadyisherewehavetheessentialfeature whichmeansthatthelivinghumanbeingwhoemergesintothis worldwherehehastobreathe,isfirstofallliterallystifled, suffocatedbywhathasbeencalledthetraumathereisnoother onethetraumaofbirth,whichisnottheseparationfromthe mother,buttheaspirationintooneselfofthisfundamentally differentmilieu.Ofcourse,thelinkbetweenthismomentand whatcanbecalledseparationandweaningisnotclearbutI questionyou, Iaskyoutogathertheelementsofyourown experience,yourexperienceasanalysts,asobserversof children,theexperiencealsoofeverythingthatmustbe reconstructed,ofeverythingthatprovesitselftobeforus

3.7.63

XXV304

necessaryifwewishtogiveasensetothetermofweaning,to seethattherelationshipofweaningtothisfirstmomentisnot asimplerelationship,arelationshipofphenomenawhichoverlap, butmuchmorerathersomerelationshipofcontemporaneity. Itisnotessentiallytruethatthechildisweaned:heweans himself,hedetacheshimselffromthebreast,heplays,in accordancewiththisfirstexperience,whosealready subjectivisedcharacterismanifestedjustastangiblybythe passageonhisface,simplyoutliningthefirstsignsofmimicry, ofsurprise,heplaysatdetachinghimselffromthisbreastand takingitupagainandiftherewerenotalreadysomething activeenoughforustoarticulateitinthedirectionofa desireforweaning,howcouldweevenconceiveofthevery primitive,theveryprimordialfactsintheirappearance,in theirdating,therefusalofthebreast,thefirstformsof anorexia,thecorrelationsofwhichourexperienceteachesusto seekimmediatelyatthelevelofthebigOther. Whatislackingtothisfirstobjectthatwecallthebreastfor ittofunctionauthenticallyaswhatitissupposedtobeinthe (5)classicaltheory,namelytheruptureofthelinkwiththe Other,whatislackingisitsfulllinktotheOther,andthisis whyIstronglyemphasisedthatitslinkisclosertothefirst littleneonatalsubject,itisnotoftheOther,itisnotthe linktotheOtherthathastobebroken,itisattheverymost thefirstsignofthislink.Thisiswhyithasarelationship withanxiety,butalsowhy,fromthefirst,itisinfactthe firstformof,andtheformwhichmakespossible,thefunctionof thetransitionalobject.

Moreover,itisnotatthisleveltheonlyobjectwhichoffers itselftofulfillthisfunction.Andiflateranotherobject, theoneonwhichthelasttimeonemoreagainIinsistedat length,theanalobject,comestofulfillthisfunctionina clearerfashionattheverymomentthattheOtherelaboratesher ownintheshapeofthedemandonecanseethewisdomofthe ageswhicnensuresthatthesewatchersoverthecomingintothe worldofthehumananimal,themidwives,havealwaysdwelton, havealwaysbeenbroughttoahaltbeforethissingularandso tinyobject,themeconium,whichcomeswiththeappearanceofthe childIwillnotreturntoday,sinceIhavealreadydoneit,to themuchmorecharacteristicarticulationthatthisobject,the analobject,allowsustogiveofthefunctionoftheobjecto, theobjectoinsofarasitisfoundtobethefirstsupportof subjectivationintherelationshiptotheOther,Imeantheway inwhich,orthatthroughwhich,thesubjectisfirstrequiredby theOthertomanifesthimselfassubject,asasubjectinthe fullsenseoftheterm,asasubjectwhoalreadyherehastogive whatheis,insofarasthispassage,thisentranceintothe worldofwhatheiscanonlybeasaremainder,asirreducible withrespecttowhatisimposedonhimintermsofasymbolic imprint.

Whatheisthere,iswhathehasfirstofalltogiveanditis tothisobjectthatthereisappended,astoacausalobject,

3.7.63

XXV305

whatisgoingtoidentifyhimprimordiallytothedesireto retain.Thefirstdevelopmentalformofdesireisthusandas suchakintotheorderofinhibition.Whendesireappearsfor thefirsttime,itopposesitselftotheveryactthroughwhich itsoriginalityasdesireisintroduced. Ifitwasalreadyclearattheprecedingstagethatitisindeed totheobjectthatthereisappendedthefirstformofdesire,in sofarasweelaborateitasdesireforseparation,forthe secondform,itisclearthatthefunctionofcausethatIgive (6)totheobjectismanifestedinthefactthattheformof desireisturnedagainstthefunctionwhichintroducestheobject oassuch.Forofcourseitmustbeseenthatthisobject,asI recalledearlier,isherealreadygiven,alreadyproduced,and primitivelyproduced,putatthedispositionofthisfunction thatisdeterminedbytheintroductionofthedemandthrough somethingwhichisprior,thatitwastherealreadyasaproduct ofanxiety. Herethenitisneithertheobjectinitself,northesubjectwho autonomiseshimself,asitisimagined,inavagueandconfused priorityoftotalitywhichisinvolvedhere,butfromthefirst initiallyanobjectchosenforitsqualityofbeingspecially negotiable,ofbeingoriginallyanobjectofpurchase(objet d'achat).

Youseewhatisinquestionhere:itistorealisethatinthis primalpointofinsertionofdesire,whichislinkedtothe conjunctionwithinthesamebracketsoftheoandoftheDof demand,thereisthisononesideandontheothersideanxiety, anditisintheinterchangingofthesepositionsofanxietyand ofwhathasforthesubjecttobeconstitutedinitsfunction whichwillremain,uptotheend,essentiallyrepresentedbyo, itisherethatthereisfoundthelevelatwhichwecan,at whichwemustmaintainourselves,tosustainourselves,ifwe wishtoconsiderwhatisinvolvedinourtechnicalfunction.

Thisanxietyhere,hereitisthenwehaveknownitforalong timeasitweresetaside,dissimulatedinthisrelationshipof theobsessionalthatwecall"ambivalent",thisrelationshipthat wesimplify,thatweabbreviate,thatweeveneludewhenwelimit ittobeingoneofaggressivity. Thisobjectthathecannotpreventhimselffromretainingasthe goodwhichmakeshimworthwhile,andwhichisalsoonlywhatis expelled,whatisevacuatedfromhimself,arethetwoaspectsby whichitdeterminesthesubjectevenascompulsionandasdoubt. Itisonthisveryoscillationbetweenthesetwoextremepoints thattheredependsthepassage,themomentary,possiblepassage ofthesubjectthroughthiszeropointwhereitis,whenallis saidanddone,entirelyatthemercyoftheotherhereinthe dualsenseofthesmallotherthatthesubjectfindshimself.

Andthatiswhy,frommysecondlectureon,Ipointedouttoyou, inopposingthestructureoftherelationshipofdesiretothe desireoftheOther,inthesensethatIteachyouit,tothe

3.7.63

XXV306

structureinwhichitisarticulated,defined,algebrisedinthe Hegeliandialectic,andthatItoldyouthatthepointatwhich theyoverlap,apartialpoint,theveryonewhichallowsusto (7) definethisrelationshipasarelationshipofaggressivity, istheonewhichtheformuladefinedatthepointthatwemake equaltozerothemomentImeanhereinthephysicalsenseof thisdesire,namelyofwhatIwrotehereasd(o):0>d(0),in otherwordsdesirequadeterminedbythefirstcharacteristically negotiableobject.Hereeffectivelyonecansaythatthesubject findshimselfconfrontedwithwhatisexpressedinHegelian phenomenology,bytheimpossibilityofthecoexistenceof selfconsciousnesses,andwhichisnothingbuttheimpossibility forthesubject,atthelevelofdesire,offindinginhimself, assubject,hiscause.

Hereyououghttoseealreadythebeginningoftheconsistency betweenthisfunctionofcauseandthisphantasy,thisphantasy characteristicofathinkingthatisinawayforced,forhuman speculation,aboutthisnotionofcausasuiinwhichthis thinkingtakescomfortfromtheexistencesomewhereofabeingto whomhiscausewouldnotbeforeign.

Compensation,phantasy,thearbitrarysurmountingofthisaspect ofourcondition,thatthehumanbeingisfirstofallsubjected tohavingproducedthecauseofhisdesireinadangerthathe doesnotknow.Tothisislinkedthissupremeandmagisterial tonewithwhichtherereverberates,andceaselesslyreverberates, attheheartofSacredScripture,despiteitsblasphematory aspect,thetextwhichhasremainedfromEcclesiastes,andwhat givesititstone,itsaccent,ifnotthefactthat"Allis vanity",vanity,whatwetranslateinthatway,isinHebrewthe following,,pronouncedruach,whosethreeradicallettersI amwritingforyouandwhichmeanswind,oragainbreath,amist, ifyouwish,somethingwhichiseffaced,whichleadsusbackto anambiguity,Ibelieve,morelegitimatetoevokehere,as regardsthemostabjectaspectofthisbreath,thananythingthat JoneselaboratedinconnectionwiththeconceptionoftheMadonna throughtheear.

Thistheme,thisthematicofvanity,isindeedwhatgivesits accent,itsresonance,itseverpresentimporttotheHegelian definitionofthis,oftheoriginalandfruitfulstrugglefrom whichtherebeginsthePhenomenologyofthespirit,hetellsus, ofthefighttothedeathforpureprestige,hetellsus,which hasindeedtheaccentofmeaningthefightfornothing. To make the treatment of obsession turn around aggressivity, is, in an obvious and I might say avowed fashion even if it is not deliberate to introduce at its principle the subduction of the desireofthesubjecttothedesireoftheanalyst,insofaras, (8) likeeverydesire,itisarticulatedelsewherethaninits internalreferencetoo,thisdesireisidentifiedtoanidealto which,inanecessaryway,thedesireofthepatientwillbe bent,insofarasthisidealisthepositionthattheanalyst hasobtainedorbelieveshehasobtainedwithrespecttoreality.

3.7.63

XXV307

Nowtheothatisinvolved,markedthusascauseofdesire,is notthisvanity,northistearingapart.Ifitisindeedinits functionwhatIamarticulating,namelythisobjectdefinedasa remainder,asthatwhichisirreducibletosymbolisationatthe locusoftheOtherwhichdependsonitcertainly,forotherwise howwouldthisremainderbeconstitutedifoistheuniqueof existenceinsofarasitputsitselfforward,notatall,ashas beensaid,initsfacticityforthisfacticityisonlysituated initsreferencetoasocalledmythicalnoeticnecessity,which itselfissupposedtobepositedastheprimaryreferencethere isnofacticityinthisremainderinwhichthereisrootedthe desirewhichwillmanage,moreorless,toculminatein existence. Themoreorlessextremeseverityofitsreduction,namelywhat makesitirreducible,andinwhicheveryonecanrecognisethe exactleveltowhichithasraiseditselfatthelocusofthe Other,hereiswhatisdefinedinthisdialoguewhichisplayed outonastage,fromwhichtheprincipleofthisdesire,after havingmountedit,hastofalloffitthroughthetestofwhatit willhaveleftthereinarelationshipoftragedy,ormoreoften ofcomedy.

Itisplayedoutthere,ofcourse,asarolebutitisnotthe rolethatcountsandthisweallknowfromexperienceandfrom previouscertaintybutwhatremainsbeyondthisrole.A remainderthatisprecariousanddeliveredupnodoubt,forIam alwaysacedableobject,aseveryoneknowsinourday:anobject ofexchange.Andthisobjectistheprinciplewhichmakesme desire,whichmakesmethedesirerofalackwhichisnotalack ofthesubject,butafailurebroughtaboutinthejouissance whichissituatedattheleveloftheOther.

Thisiswhyeveryfunctionoftheorefersonlytothiscentral gapwhichseparatesdesirefromthelocusofjouissanceatthe sexuallevel,whichcondemnsusfromthisnecessitywhichmeans thatjouissanceisnotnaturallypromisedtodesireforus,that desirecanonlygoouttomeetit,thatinordertomeetit desiremustnotonlyunderstand,butbreakthroughthevery phantasywhichsustainsitandconstructsit,theonethatwe havediscoveredasthisstoppingpointwhichiscalledcastration anxiety.Butwhynotcastrationdesire,sinceatthecentral lackwhichdisjoinsdesireandjouissance,thereisalso (9)suspendedadesirewhosethreattoeveryoneisonly constructedfromitsrecognitioninthedesireoftheOther.At thelimit,theother,whoeverhemaybe,appearsinthephantasy tobethecastrator,theagentofcastration. Undoubtedlyherethepositionsaredifferentandonecansaythat forthewomanthepositionismorecomfortable,thebusinessis alreadydoneandthisindeediswhatgivesheramuchmore speciallinkwiththedesireoftheOther.

ThisindeedisalsowhyKierkegaardcansaythissingularand,I believe,profoundlycorrectthingthatthewomanismoreanxiety riddenthantheman.Howwouldthisbepossible,ifpreciselyat

3.7.63

XXV308

thiscentrallevelanxietywasnotconstructedprecisely,andas such,fromtherelationshiptothedesireoftheOther. Desire, in so far as it is desire of desire, namely temptation, is what at its heart brings us back to this anxiety in its most originalfunction. Anxiety,atthelevelofcastration,representstheOther,since encounteringaweakeningoftheapparatusgivesustheobject hereintheformofalack(carence). DoIneedtorecallwhatintheanalytictradition,confirmshere whatIamintheprocessofarticulating?Whoistheonewho givesusthefirstexampleofacastration,attracted,assumed, desiredassuch,ifnotOedipus? Oedipusicnotfirstofallthefather.ThisiswhatIhave meantforalongtimeinpointingoutironicallythatOedipus couldnothavehadanOedipuscomplex. Oedipusistheonewhowishestopassauthenticallyand mythicallyalsotothefourthlevel,whichImustindeedtackle alonghisexemplarypath,theonewhowishestoviolatethe prohibitionconcerningtheconjunctionofohere(J>)with anxiety,theonewhowishestoseewhatisbeyondthemost completesatisfactionofhisdesire.ThesinofOedipus,isthe cupidosciendi,hewantstoknow.Andthisispaidforbythe horrorthatIdescribed,thatwhathefinallyseesarehisown eyes,o,thrownontheground.

Doesthismeanthatthisisthestructureofthefourthlevel, andthatthereisalwayspresentsomewherethisbloodyritualof blinding?No.Itisnotnecessaryandthisiswhythehuman dramaisnottragedy,butcomedy:theyhaveeyesinordernotto seeitisnotnecessaryforthemtotearthemout.(10) Anxietyissufficientlyrejected,miscognisedbythesimple captureofthespecularimage,i(o),forwhichthebestthatcan bewishedisthatitisreflectedintheeyesoftheOther.But thereisnoneedeven,becausethereisthemirror.

Andherethearticulationaccordingtothetableofreference thatIdescribedthelasttimeforyou:theinhibition,symptom, anxietyofthefourthlevel,hereismoreorlesshowIwould describeit: Atthelevelofinhibition,itisthedesirenottoseewhich, giventhearrangementofphenomena,scarcelyneedstobe sustained.Everythingissatisfactorythere.Miscognitionas structuralatthelevelofthe"nottosee"isthere. Onthesecondlineandonthethird,asdismay,asegoideal, namelythatwhichoftheOtheris,astheysay,istheeasiestto introject.Ofcourse,itisnotatallwithoutreasonthatthis termintrojectionisintroducedhereneverthelessIwouldask younottoacceptitwithoutreservation.Forintruththe ambiguitywhichremainsbetweenthisintrojectionandprojection,

3.7.63

XXV309

sufficientlyindicatestousthatitisnecessary,inorderto giveitsfullmeaningtothetermintrojection,tointroduce anotherlevelattheheartofthecentral"symptom"ofthislevel asitisspeciallyincarnatedattheleveloftheobsessional thatIalreadydesignated:itisthephantasyofomnipotence correlativetothefundamentalimpotencetosustainthisdesire nottosee. Herewhatwewillputatthelevelofactingout,isthe functionofmourning,insofarasIamgoingtoaskyouto recogniseinamomentwhatinthecourseoflastyearItaught youtoseoinit,afundamentalstructureintheconstitutionof desire.

Hereatthelevelofthepassageal'acte,aphantasyof suicidewhosecharacterandauthenticityaretobeputin questionessentiallywithinthisdialectic. Hereanxietyalwaysinsofarasitismasked. Hereatthelevelofembarrassmentwhatwewilllegitimately callforIdonotknowifenoughaccountistakenofthe audacityofwhatKierkegaardcontributesinspeakingaboutthe conceptofanxietywhatcanthatmean,ifnottheaffirmation that:eitherthereisthefunctionoftheconceptaccordingto Hegel,namelysomewheresymbolicallyaveritable(11)holdonthe real,ortheonlyholdthatwehaveandthisiswhereitis necessarytochooseistheonethatanxietygivesus,theonly finalapprehensionassuchofallreality.Theconceptof anxietyassuchonlyarisesthereforeatthelimitofa meditationwhichnothingindicatestousisnotgoingto encounteritsstoppingpointverysoon.

Butwhatmattersforus,istorediscoverheretheconfirmation oftruthsthatwehavealreadytackledfromotherangles.What doesFreudarticulateattheendofhisspeculationabout anxiety,ifnotthis:"Afterall",hesays,"Ihavejusttold you,putforward,abouttherelationshipsbetweenanxietyandthe lossoftheobject,whatisitthatcandistinguishitfrom mourning?"Andthiswholecodicil,thisappendixtohisarticle youcanconsultitonlymarksthemostextremeembarrassment indefiningthefashioninwhichonecanunderstandthatthese twofunctions,towhichhegivesthesamereference,havesuch diversemanifestations.

IwouldaskyouheretodwellwithmeforamomentonwhatI thinkIoughttoremindyouof,thatwhatourinterrogationhere

3.7.63

XXV310

ledustowhenwewerespeakingaboutHamletasaneminent dramaticpersonage,asemergenceatthedawnofmodernethicsof therelationshipofthesubjecttohisdesire,whatIhighlighted thatitisatoncetheabsenceofmourningandsimplyand properlyspeakingofmourningbyhismotherwhichmadethere vanish,dissipate,collapseinthemostradicalwayinhimthe possibleelanofadesireinthisbeingwhoispresentedtous moreoverwellenough,Ibelieve,foroneorotherpersontohave recognisedhim,evenidentifiedtotheverystyleoftheheroof theRenaissance,BaldassareCastiglione,forexample.DoIneed toremindyouofhim:heisthepersonageaboutwhomtheleast thatcanbesaidisthathedoesnotretreatbeforeverymuch, andthathedoesnotlackdaring!Theonlythingthathecannot do,ispreciselytheactthatheismadetodo,becausethe desireislacking,thedesireislackingbecausetheidealhas collapsed.WhatcanbemoredoubtfulinthewordsofHamletthan thissortofidolatrousrelationshipthatheoutlinesofthe reverenceofhisfather,ofhisfatherforthiscreaturewhomwe areastonishedthatthissupremeking,theoldHamlet,thedead Hamlet,literallybowsdownbeforetopayherhomage,ensconced inhislovingallegiance?Dowenothaveherethesignsevenof (12)somethingtooforced,somethingtooexalted,nottobeof theorderofanuniquelove,ofamythicallove,ofaloveakin tothisstyleofwhatIcalledcourtlylove,which,outsideits properlyculturalandritualreferences,throughwhichitis obviousthatitisaddressedtosomethingotherthanthewoman, isthesignonthecontraryofsomelackorother,ofsomealibi orother,beforethedifficultpathsthattheaccesstoatrue loverepresents.

Thecorrespondencebetweentheanimalevasionofthematernal Gertrudefromthiswholedialectic,andtheovervaluationwhich ispresentedtousinHamlet'smemoriesabouttheattitudeofhis fatherisobvioushereandtheresult,isthat,whenthisideal iscontradicted,whenitcollapsesletusnoticeitwhat disappearsinHamletisthepowerofdesirewhichwillnot,asI showedyou,berestoreduntilthevisionoutsideofamourning,a trueone,withwhichheentersintocompetition,thatofLaertes forhissister,fortheobjectlovedbyHamlet,andfromwhomhe hadfoundhimselfsuddenly,throughlackofdesire,separated.

Doesthisnotopenthedoorforus,doesitnotgiveusthekey whichallowsustoarticulatebetterthanFreuddoesandalong thelineofhisowninterrogationwhatismeantbymourning. Freudpointsouttousthatthesubjectofmourninghasto performataskwhichis,inaway,toconsummateasecondtime thelossprovokedbytheaccidentofthedestinyofthebeloved object.

Whatdoesthatmean?Doestheworkofmourningnotappeartous, inalightthatisatonceidenticalandcontrary,asthework whichisdonetomaintain,tosustainalltheselinksindetail. AndGodknowshowmuchFreudinsists,andquiterightly,onthe scrupulousanddetailedaspectoftherememberingofmourning concerningeverythingthatwasexperiencedintermsofalink withthebelovedobject.

3.7.63

XXV311

Itisthislinkthatmustberestoredwiththefundamental object,themaskedobject,theobjecto,theveritableobjectof therelationship,forwhichsubsequentlyasubstitutemaybe providedwhichwillnothave,whenallissaidanddone,anymore importancethantheonewhofirstoccupiedtheplace. Asoneofyou,ahumorist,saidtomeduringoneofourJournees Provinciales,thereisastorywelldesignedtoshowusinthe cinemathatany"irreplaceableGerman"whatsoeverhewas alludingtotheadventurethatisdescribedforusinthefilm HiroshimamonamourthisirreplaceableGermancanfindan (13)immediateandperfectlyvalidsubstituteinthefirst Japaneseencounteredatthestreetcorner.

Theproblemofmourningisthatofthepersistenceofwhat?The bondsthroughwhichdesireissuspended,notatallontheobject oatthefourthlevel,butoni(o)throughwhicheverylove,in sofarasthistermimpliestheidealiseddimensionthatIhave spokenof,isstructurednarcissistically. Andthisiswhatmakesthedifferencebetweenwhathappensin melancholyandmania.Ifwedonotdistinguishtheobjectofrom i(o),wecannotconceiveofwhatFreud,inthesamenote,recalls andpowerfullyarticulates,justasinthewellknownarticleon "Mourningandmelancholia",abouttheradicaldifferencethereis betweenmelancholiaandmourning. DoIneedtorefertomynotesandtoremindyouofthispass.: where,afterhavingbecomeengagedinthenotionofthereturn, ofthereversionofthesupposedly"objectal"libidoontothe subject'sownego,headmits:inmelancholia,itisobviousthat thisprocessheistheonewhosaysitdoesnotreacha conclusion,theobjectovercomesitsdirection,itistheobject thattriumphs.Andsincewhatisinvolvedasareturnofthe libidoinmourningissomethingdifferent,itisalsoforthat reasonthatthewholeprocess,thatthewholedialecticis constructeddifferently,namelythatthisobjecto,Freudtells usthatitisnecessarythen,andwhyinthiscase?Iam leavingittoonesidehereitisnecessarythenthatthe subjectexplainhimself,butthat,sincethisobjectoisusually maskedbehindthei(o)ofnarcissism,thatthei(o)ofnarcissism istheresothat,atthefourthlevel,theoshouldbemasked, miscognisedinitsessence,thisiswhatmakesitnecessaryfor themelancholictopass,asImightsay,throughhisownimage, andtoattackitfirstinordertoreachinthisobjecto,which transcendsit,thethingwhosecontrolescapeshim,thething whosecollapsewillleadhimintoprecipitation,suicide,with thisautomatism,thismechanism,thisnecessaryandfundamentally alienatedcharacterwithwhichasyouknowthesuicidesof melancholiesarecarriedout,andnotinanindifferentcontext: andifthishappenssooftenbyawindow,ifnotthrougha window,thisisnotbychance,itistherecoursetoastructure whichisnoneotherthantheonethatIemphasiseasbeingthat ofthephantasy. Wecanonlygraspthisrelationshiptoo,throughwhichthereis

3.7.63

XXV312

distinguishedeverythingthatbelongstothe"maniamelancholy" cycle,everythingthatbelongstothe"ideal",thereference "mourningordesire",intheaccentuationofthedifferenceof (14)thefunctionofoascomparedtoi(o),ascomparedto somethingwhichmakesthisreferencetoofundamental,radical, morerootingforthesubjectthananyotherrelationship whatsoever,butalsoasfundamentallymiscognised,alienated,in thenarcissisticrelationship. Letussayrightaway,inpassing,thatinmania,itisthe nonfunctionofo,andnotsimplyitsmiscognitionthatisat stake.Itisthesomethingthroughwhichthesubjectisno longerballastedbyanyo,whichdelivershim,sometimeswithout anypossibilityoffreedom,totheinfiniteandpurelyplayful metonymyofthesignifyingchain. ThisnodoubtIhavehereavoidedmanythingsthisisgoing toallowustoconclude,atthelevelwherethisyearIintendto leaveyou.Ifdesire,assuch,andinitsmostalienated,most fundamentallyphantasticalcharacter,iswhatcharacterisesthe fourthlevel,youcanremarkthatifIinitiatedthestructureof thefifth,thatifIindicatedthatatthisleveltheois resharpened,thistimeopenlyalienated,assupportofthedesire oftheOther,whothistimeisnamed,itisalsototellyouwhy Iwillstopthisyearatthisterm.

Thewholedialecticineffectofwhatishappeningatthelevel ofthisfifthlevelimpliesamoredetailedarticulationthanhas everbeencarriedoutwithwhatIdesignatedearlieras introjection,whichimpliesassuchIwascontenttoonly indicateittheauditorydimension,whichimpliesalsothe paternalfunction.

If,nextyear,thingsturnoutinawaythatallowsmeto continuemySeminaralongthepathIanticipate,itisaround, notsimplythename,butthenamesofthefatherthatIwillmake arendezvouswithyou. ItisnotfornothingthatintheFreudianmyththefather intervenesinthemostobviouslymythicalwayasbeingtheone whosedesiresubmerges,crushes,isimposedon,alltheothers. Istherenothereanobviouscontradictionwiththisfact obviouslygivenbyexperiencethatthroughhisvoiceitis preciselysomethingquitedifferentthattakesplace,namelythe normalisationofdesirealongthepathsofthelaw?

Butisthateverything?Necessityitself,alongsidewhatishere traced,represented,renderedtangiblebyexperience,andeven downtothefactsfrequentlyweighedbyusabouttheabsence (carence)ofthefunctionofthefather,doesthenecessityof maintainingthemythnotdrawourattentiontosomethingelse,to thenecessityforthearticulation,forthesupport,forthe maintainingofafunctionwhichisthefollowing,whichisthat thefather,inthemanifestationofhisdesire,knowsforhis parttowhatothisdesireisreferred.Thefatherisnotcausa sui,inaccordancewiththereligiousmyth,butasubjectwhohas

3.7.63

XXV313

gonefarenoughintherealisationofhisdesiretointegrateit toitscausewhateveritmaybe,towhatisirreducibleinthis functionofoquaIaskyoutograspwhatallowsusto articulate,attheoriginofourresearchitselfandwithout avoidingitinanyway,thatthereisnohumansubjectwhodoes nothavetoposithimselfasafiniteobjecttowhichare appendedfinitedesires,whichonlytakeontheappearanceof becominginfiniteinsofarasbyescapingfromoneanother alwaysfurtherfromtheircentre,theycarrythesubjectalways awayfurtherfromanyauthenticrealisation.

Nowthisrelationship,thismiscognitionofo,issomethingwhich leavesadooropen.Wehavealwaysknownit,therewasnoneed evenforanalysistoshowittous,sinceIbelieveIwasableto showittoyouinadialogueofPlato,TheSymposium.Theobject o,insofarasatthetermatermnodoubtneverachievedit isourmostradicalexistence,istheonlypathalongwhich desirecandeliverusthatinwhichwewillhavetorecognise ourselves,thisobjectoistobesituatedassuchinthefield oftheOther,andnotonlyisittobesituatedthere,butitis situatedtherebyeachandeveryone.Andthisiswhatiscalled thepossibilityoftransference.

Theinterpretationthatwegiveisalwaysbroughttobearonthe greaterorlesserdependenceofdesireswithrespecttoone another.Butitisnotaconfrontationofanxiety.Thereis onlyanovercomingofanxietywhentheOtherhasnamedhimself. Thereisnoloveexceptthatforaname,aseveryoneknowsfrom experience.Andthemomentthatthenameispronouncedofhimor ofhertowhomourloveisaddressed,weknowverywellthatit isathresholdwhichisofthegreatestimportance. Thisisonlyatrace,atraceofthissomethingwhichgoesfrom theexistenceofotoitspassageintohistory.Whatmakesofa psychoanalyisauniqueadventureisthissearchfortheagalmain thefieldoftheOther.Ihaveoftenquestionedyouaboutwhat thedesireoftheanalystshouldbeinorderthat,therewherewe aretryingtopushthingsbeyondthelimitofanxiety,workis possible.

Undoubtedlyitisfittingthattheanalystshouldbeonewhohas beenable,howeverlittleitmaybe,fromsomeangle,fromsome tack,tomakehisdesiresufficientlyenterintothisirreducible otooffertothequestionoftheconceptofanxietyareal guarantee.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi