The Analyst's New Clothes: Lacan, Derrida and the Pursuit of Truth in Le Facteur de la Vrit I still aintain that

Derrida's criticis $la%o& 'i(e)# of Lacan is a case of !rodi"ious isreadin"#

Few tas)s are as a!!ealin" as en*uiry into the laws that "o%ern the !syche of e+ce!tionally endowed indi%iduals# $i" und Freud# In the !enulti ate section of The Post Card: Fro $ocrates to Freud and ,eyond, entitled Le Facteur de la Vrit, -ac*ues Derrida turns his attention fro $i" und Freud .the su/&ect of the /oo)'s second section, 0To $!eculate 1 on 'Freud'02 to the French !sychoanalyst -ac*ues Lacan and Lacan's se inar on 3d"ar Allan Poe's short story 0The Purloined Letter#0 For Lacan# Poe's story illustrates a 0!sychoanalytic truth0 essential to his 0return to Freud#0 0The Purloined Letter0 0illustrate4s5 the truth which ay /e drawn fro that o ent in Freud's thou"ht under study 4,eyond the Pleasure Princi!le5 1 na ely, that it is the sy /olic order which is constituti%e for the su/&ect # # #0.672# As such, Poe's tale co es to Lacan as an already a%aila/le illustration of the itinerary of the sy /olic order and its relation to the re!etition co !ulsion# Derrida insists that Lacan's readin" of 0The Purloined Letter0 li its the !lay of the written word on the reader8analyst's res!onse to the te+t# Derrida atte !ts to return the dou/le trian"les Lacan has re o%ed fro the o%er all fra e of the story to the te+t itself and to show how Lacan's fra in" destroys the !ossi/ility of 0te+tual drift0 in writin"# ,y i"norin" the o%er all fra ewor) of the te+t 1 /y e+cludin" literature fro literature 1 Lacan does away with the !ossi/ility for literature to act itself out# 9e li its the !lay of the uncanny within Poe's te+t /y e+tractin" the story's dou/led scenes fro the narrati%e te+tual whole# For, as we shall soon see, Derrida ar"ues that the story's narrator and the narrati%e fra ewor) within which he o!erates allow for a nu /er of dou/lin"s ./etween the narrator and Du!in or Du!in and the :inister D111, for e+a !le2 which /oth !re%ent analysis of the story and allow Poe's tale to !ro%ide its own analytic inter!retation# 3d"ar Allan Poe's 0The Purloined Letter0 is the third and final of a trio of detecti%e stories# Followin" /oth 0The :urders in the ;ue :or"ue0 and 0The :ystery of :arie ;o"et,0 0The Purloined Letter0 is already !art of its own trian"ular relationshi!# Narrated /y a friend of Poe's detecti%e C# Au"uste Du!in, the tale docu ents the theft of a letter fro the <ueen of France and the letter's e%entual return to its ori"inal reci!ient# The story itself is di%isi/le into three sections# Durin" the o!enin" o ents of the tale the unna ed narrator !ro%ides a /rief o%er%iew of the e%enin" he has /een s!endin" in the co !any of Du!in# As it ha!!ens, uch of that e%enin"s discussion has focused on the e%ents of the two stories !recedin" 0The Purloined Letter0 in Poe's detecti%e trilo"y# Their con%ersation has "i%en way to silent ru ination on the !art of /oth !artici!ants, a state of affairs that will soon /e interru!ted /y the entrance of the Prefect of the Parisian Police which /e"ins the second scene of the tale# The Prefect i ediately enters into a con%ersation with Du!in and the narrator concernin" the theft of the !urloined letter# Throu"h the narrator's retellin" of this con%ersation the reader disco%ers that, while entertainin" the =in" and a certain :inister D111 in her /oudoir, the <ueen of France witnesses the theft, /y the :inister, of a letter she had /een forced to lea%e o!en with address u!!er ost u!on a ta/le# The contents of this letter, which re ain un)nown to the reader throu"hout the tale, would /e 1 as the :inister reali(es 1 e+tre ely co !ro isin" to the <ueen should they /e disco%ered to the =in" .who is unaware of what is ta)in" !lace under his nose2# After conductin" his official /usiness and a)in" s all tal) for a while, the :inister !laces a letter of his own on the ta/le ne+t to the <ueen's letter and, witnessed /y the <ueen, !ic)s u! her letter, lea%in" his own in its !lace# Des!ite the inutest of searches of the :inister's ho e /y the Parisian !olice, the letter re ains in the hands of the :inister# The :inister, eanwhile, has /een usin" the letter .or, ore !recisely, the threat of its !resentation to the =in"2 to i !ro%e his !olitical !osition at court# After descri/in" /oth the scene of the letter's theft and the conse*uent atte !ts to reco%er it, the

Prefect of Police concludes .under the !ro !tin" of Du!in2 /y 0read4in"5 aloud a inute account of the internal, and es!ecially of the e+ternal, a!!earance of the issin" docu ent0.>?2# This elli!sis ends the second di%ision of the tale and the first of the story's two dialo"ues# The narrator then "oes on to descri/e another eetin" /etween hi self, Du!in, and the Prefect that ta)es !lace a onth after this first con%ersation# Durin" this second con%ersation Du!in, u!on the recei!t of fifty thousand francs fro the Prefect .a fraction of the reward the !refect will recei%e if he reco%ers the letter2, !roduces the issin" letter# After another narrati%e interlude in which Du!in and the Prefect e+chan"e letter for chec) and the Prefect lea%es, Du!in e /ar)s on an e+!lanation of his reco%ery of the letter# Du!in, ha%in" seen the inade*uacies of the !olice's search ethods, !ays a %isit to the :inister# @earin" "reen tinted "lasses to co%er his wanderin" eyes, Du!in sets a/out the tas) of locatin" the letter# After ascertainin" the wherea/outs of the letter which, as he disco%ers is as o!en in the :inister's roo as it had /een in the <ueen's, Du!in ta)es his lea%e of the :inister ha%in" 0for"otten0 a snuff1/o+ which he lea%es on the :inister's ta/le# ;eturnin" the ne+t ornin" to retrie%e his snuff1/o+, Du!in has arran"ed for a co otion to ta)e !lace in the street /eneath the :inister's window while he is inside# @hile the :inister is occu!ied with the distur/ance in the street Du!in retrie%es the <ueen's letter fro its hidin" !lace in a 0tru !ery fili"ree card1rac) of !aste/oard, that hun" dan"lin" /y a dirty /lue ri//on, fro a little /rass no/ &ust /eneath the iddle of the antel!iece0.6>2 and su/stitutes a facsi ile of his own a)in" in its !lace# Thus, Du!in "ains !ossession of the letter and returns it, %ia the Prefect of Police, to the <ueen# The letter Du!in lea%es for the :inister .and it is certainly for the :inister2 in !lace of the ori"inal letter is ore than &ust a facsi ile of the ori"inal# Du!in has ta)en the o!!ortunity afforded hi /y this occasion to !ay the :inister /ac) for an 0e%il turn0.6?2 done to hi !re%iously and to lea%e the :inister in no dou/t as to who has succeeded in outwittin" hi : 9e 4the :inister5 is well ac*uainted with y :$#, and I &ust co!ied into the iddle of the /lan) sheet the words 11 0'1111111An dessein si funeste, $'il n'est di"ne d'Atree, est di"ne de Thyeste#' They are to /e found in Cr/illon's 'Atre#'0 .6?2 It is with these words that Poe's story concludes# Derrida's analysis of Lacan's readin" of 0The Purloined Letter0 /e"ins with an e+tended first section, translated as 0Di%ested Prete+ts,0 on which the whole of his su/se*uent readin" is hi"hly contin"ent# 9is analysis /e"ins with the state ent, re!eated throu"hout, that 0!sychoanalysis, su!!osedly, is found# # # # @hen one /elie%es one finds it, it is !sychoanalysis itself, su!!osedly, that finds itself0.B>?2# The resonance of this state ent is re!eated throu"hout Derrida's readin" of Lacan# Psychoanalysis finds itself8is found in the %ery literature it atte !ts to analy(e# The !lay of diffrance, the whis!er of the trace, and the !lay of the uncanny ust /e allowed to surface if literature is to co unicate fully# For Lacan, fiction .and Poe's tale in !articular2 0e%en has the ad%anta"e of anifestin" sy /olic necessity ore !urely to the e+tent that we ay /elie%e its conce!tion ar/itrary0.672# Thus, as Derrida ar"ues, Lacan .li)e Freud, as we shall see !resently2 co es to his fictional e+a !le e+!ectin" to find a certain truth already in !lace# The notion of !sychoanalysis and its always already !resent nature is central to Derrida's readin" of Lacan and his own, intertwined, readin" of 0The Purloined Letter#0 Derrida continues: For e+a !le: what ha!!ens in the !sychoanalytic deci!herin" of a te+t when the latter, the deci!hered itself, already e+!licates itselfC @hen it says ore a/out itself than does the deci!herin" .a de/t ac)nowled"ed /y Freud ore than once2C And es!ecially when the deci!hered te+t inscri/es in itself additionally the scene of the deci!herin"C @hen the deci!hered te+t de!loys ore force in !lacin" onsta"e and settin" adrift the analytic !rocess itself, u! to its %ery last word, for e+a !le, the truthC .B>B2 9ow to tal) a/out a te+t that already says ore than you e%er could, a te+t that /rea)s o!en its own analysis8deci!herin", /efore the act of !sychoanalysis /e"ins to ta)e !lace# @hat is there to analy(e in an always8already %eiled and un%eiled te+tC For Derrida what 0The Purloined Letter0 shows us is that .in li"ht of and des!ite Lacan's analysis2 any atte !t to fra e a te+t will always result in a li itin" of what that te+t has to

offer# As Da%id Carroll !oints out in his essay 0Institutional Authority %s# Critical Power, or the Aneasy ;elations of Psychoanalysis and Literature:0 Lacan's neutrali(ation of the narrator is directly lin)ed to his !ositin" of a transcendent !osition of !sychoanalysis # # # this is the !osition fro which Lacan s!ea)s when he distin"uishes /etween truth and falsity # # # neutrali(ation is the only way to achie%e astery, and all institutions and schools wor) this way: /y neutrali(in" o!!ositional forces they !retend to s!ea) with a unified %oice fro a !osition of authority that is as sus!ect as it is !owerful and lethal when allowed to function uno!!osed# .>6B2 Indeed, this 0transcendent !osition of !sychoanalysis0 is e+actly what Derrida shows 0The Purloined Letter0 to /e desta/ali(in" in Lacan's analysis# @hat Derrida /elie%es Lacan finds, ins!ite of hi self, is a te+t that refuses to /e tied down to any definition of the truth# @hile he entions neither analyst nor story /y na e in these 0di%ested !rete+ts,0 Derrida is clearly referrin" to Lacan and his readin" of Poe fro the outset# Indeed, Derrida is ar"ua/ly returnin" to a criticis of Lacan he first %oiced in 0Freud and the $cene of @ritin"0 in which he stated that 0des!ite se%eral atte !ts ade /y Freud and certain of his successors, a !sychoanalysis of literature res!ectful of the ori"inality of the literary si"nifier has not yet /e"un, and this is surely not an accident# Antil now, only the analysis of literary si"nifieds, that is nonliterary si"nified eanin"s, has /een underta)en0.6?D, first italics ine2# Throu"hout this first section, he will set u! the analytic scene of his own deci!herin" of Lacan throu"h a ore "eneral readin" of the !osition of !sychoanalysis in8and literature .and that of literature in !sychoanalysis2# Always, howe%er, with his ulti ate "oal in ind: 0The $e inar on 'The Purloined Letter#'0 @hat ha!!ens when a te+t .and we will ris) ta)in" it as read that Derrida is already referrin" here, al/eit i !licitly, to Lacan and 0The Purloined Letter0 2 0!uts truth onsta"e0.B>B2C Indeed, what is this truthC It is not, for Derrida, the 0 astery of the author0 or the 0 eanin" of fiction:0 This sur!lus does not con%ey the astery of the author, and e%en less the eanin" of fiction# ;ather, it would /e the re"ular effect of an ener"etic s*uarin"1off# @ithin which truth would !lay a !iece: lifted, /y the !hiloso!her or the analyst, fro within a ore !owerful functionin"# .B>B2 This 0s*uarin"1off0 is Derrida's res!onse to Lacan's trian"ular fra in" of Poe's te+t# $een as /oth the "eo etric creation of a fourth side which turns the trian"le into a s*uare .what will later /e called the 0dou/le s*uare of )in"s04BE?52 and as a !ositionin" in !re!aration for a fi"ht or an ar"u ent, Derrida is !re!arin", as he does throu"hout this !reli inary discussion, for his tac)lin" of Lacan# @e are still left, howe%er, with the o!en1ended 0sur!lus0 of the 0settin" adrift0 this uncanny te+t is a/le to o/ili(e# Derrida will turn, for a o ent, /ac) to Freud in his atte !t to unco%er the 0truth of the te+t0.B>B2 ;eadin" Die Trau deutun", Derrida turns to Freud's notion of the !ri ary and secondary as!ects of a literary te+t: # # # Freud esta/lishes a rule: e%erythin" in a te+t that does not constitute the se antic core of the two 0ty!ical drea s0 he has &ust defined .incest with other and urder of father2, e%erythin" that is forei"n to the a/solute nudity of this oneiric content, /elon"s to the 0secondary re%ision of the aterial0 .se)undaren ,ear/eitun" des $toffes2# The for al .te+tual, in the usual sense2 differences that co e, as if fro the outside, to affect the se antic structure, here the 0Fedi!us co !le+,0 thus constitute secondary re%isions# For e+a !le, when one %iews Fedi!us ;e+ as a tra"edy of destiny, as a conflict /etween en and the "ods, a theolo"ical dra a, etc#, one has ta)en as essential what actually re ains an after1the1fact construction, a "ar ent, a dis"uise, a aterial added to the literal $toff !recisely in order to as) its nudity# .B>B1>G2 $toff, the dictionary tells us, has a %ariety of eanin"s, each of which resonates in Derrida's readin" of Freud's te+t: atter, su/stance, aterial, fa/ric, cloth, a"ent, su/&ect1 atter# The cloth of the literary te+t, its 0secondary re%isions,0 ser%e to %eil the na)ed truth of the te+t# The aterial of the 0secondary re%isions0 is the a"ent of its own co%erin"# In the o!erational !ara eters of Die Trau deutun", it would /e the role of the analyst to unco%er what Derrida calls, after Freud, the 0!ri ary content /eneath the secondary re%isions0.B>G2# As Derrida's readin" of 0The Purloined Letter0 will soon a)e ore than a!!arent, howe%er, this unco%erin" is not as easy .nor as !ossi/le2 as it i"ht see # Derrida "oes on to raise a *uestion that is central to his readin" of 0The Purloined Letter:0 0is the nudity of the eanin" hidden /eneath the %eilin" for s of the secondary re%ision a eta!hor0.B>G2C In other words, is the truth of the te+t a eta!horC If so, for whatC

3+hi/itin", denudin", undressin", un%eilin": the fa iliar acro/atics of the eta!hor of the truth# And one &ust as well could say the eta!hor of eta!hor, the truth of truth, the truth of eta!hor# @hen Freud intends to denude the ori"inal $toff /eneath the dis"uises of secondary fa/rication, he is antici!atin" the truth of the te+t# The latter, startin" fro its ori"inal content, is to /e coordinated with its na)ed truth, /ut also with truth as na)edness# .B>G2 As such, the eta!hor as 0trans!arent %eil0.B>G2 /oth %eils and un%eils that for which it is a eta!hor# In such a fashion, the truth of the te+t is that the truth always contains another truth# As Derrida atte !ts to show, howe%er, the 0truth0 Freud .and after hi Lacan2 finds turns out to /e a lac)# The te+t, whether 0The Purloined Letter0 or, as we shall see !resently in the case of Freud, 0The 3 !eror's New Clothes,0 re%eals its own truth 1 a truth that /oth Freud and Lacan in turn ta)e to /e the truth# Freud finds the 0truth of the te+t0 /ecause that is what he is e+!ectin" to find# @hat he has actually found, howe%er, is a eta!hor of the truth .or the truth of eta!hor2# 3ach and e%ery un%eilin" see s to !roduce another %eilin"# 3*ually, as Derrida continues, 0na)edness "i%es rise to su/stitutes0.B>G2# The un%eiled te+t dis"uises itself /ehind other eta!hors, the 0lac) of clothin" # # # is dis!laced onto other attri/utes0.B>G1>H2# The stoff of the te+t, its 0se antic structure,0 continually dis!laces truth with eta!hor# Thus, 0na)edness does not e+hi/it the !enis or the a/sence of the !enis, /ut the a/sence of the !hallus as an attri/ute su!!le entin" a !ossi/le fault, the a/sence of the colossal dou/le0.B>H2# The un%eilin" of the truth of the te+t re%eals nothin" /ut a lac), a lac) that the eta!hor of the truth /oth %eils and un%eils# The truth found /y !sychoanalysis .of either a Freudian or a Lacanian nature2 in literature always, for Derrida, re%ol%es around the notion of the 0lac) of a !hallic attri/ute0.B>H2# The readin" of this lac), in /oth Freud and Lacan, lea%es the clin"in" to or clai in" a truth that, as Derrida will ar"ue, /oth contains and %eils its own lac): ,ut with this threat 4that 0a letter can always not arri%e at its destination05, the circuit 4of the letter5 can always not finish# 9ere disse ination threatens the law of the si"nifier and of castration as the contract of truth# It /roaches, /reaches # # # the unity of the si"nifier, that is, of the !hallus# .BBB2 The clai to truth of the 0law of the si"nifier0 dis"uises its own e+tre ely !recarious !osition# ,ut, as Derrida would say, we are not there yet# For the !resent, suffice it to say that these notions of a/sence, su!!le ent, and the re%ealin" of a lac) are central to Derrida's readin" /oth of 0The Purloined Letter0 itself and his readin" of Lacan's readin" of Poe's te+t# ,efore he "ets to Lacan's analysis !ro!er, Derrida ust still e+!licate this notion of the %eilin"8un%eilin" of truth in fiction and the li itin"8deli itin" nature of the !sychoanalytic readin"# 9e will answer, in short, the *uestion of why !sychoanalysis is always8already !resent in the literary te+t 1 of e+actly how !sychoanalysis is found8finds itself# To do this, Derrida returns, once a"ain, to Freud# To /e !recise, he turns to Freud's readin" of the fairy tale 0The 3 !eror's New Clothes#0 @ithin Freud's readin" of this te+t Derrida will find a /lindness that s ar)ed si ilarity to the shortco in"s he finds in Lacan's se inar# Ff Freud's readin" Derrida states that 0Freud !ays no attention to a fold in the te+t, to a structural co !lication which en%elo!s his discourse# @hich is inelucta/ly to /e found there 4s'y trou%er50.B>I2# This 0fold in the te+t0 is the %ery nature of the te+t itself# 0The 3 !eror's New Clothes0 1 as te+t 1 is, for Derrida, a dis"uise# 0Li)e all narrati%es, li)e all secondary ela/orations, the tale %eils a nudity0.B>E2# The fairy tale is itself e+!licitly concerned with the readin" of its own te+tuality# 0If one ta)es into account the ore than eta!horic e*uation /etween %eil, te+t, and te+tile, Andersen's te+t has the te+t as its the e0.B>E2# The su/&ect atter of the fairy tale, in%isi/le clothin" and those that can and cannot see it, !resents 0onsta"e0 the %ery the e of the hidden within the te+t# Andersen's fairy tale !resents Freud, as it were, with his own scene of writin"# Thus, 0!sychoanalysis is found8finds itself#0 Derrida /elie%es that Freud has /een /lind to this te+tual !lay and has /een una/le to see the te+t's un%eilin" of his own !ro&ect fro within itself# The Analytic $cene of Deci!herin" If !sychoanalysis is found8finds itself within literature .s!ecifically here, 0The 3 !eror's New Clothes02, then what difference is there, if any /etween the literary and the !sychoanalytic te+tC Indeed, for Derrida, the %ery nature of the !sychoanalytic te+t calls into *uestion its !osition as an

e+!lication of the truth of fiction# It is not, as he notes, 0a literary fiction0.B>E2# Des!ite this, howe%er, its nature as a scientific te+t is also *uestiona/le# Freud's te+t 0deri%es no ore fro traditional scientific discourse than fro any classified fictional "enre0.B>E2# Derrida e+!licitly returns to the nature and the 0criterion0 of truth: 0In atte !tin" to distin"uish science fro fiction, one finally will resort to the criterion of truth0.B>E2# @hat this *uestionin" turns u!, howe%er, is the already stated hy!othesis that !sychoanalysis will always find its own analytic scene in the literary te+ts it atte !ts to e+!licate# The a/ility of literature to !lace this truth onsta"e *uestions the a/ility of the !sychoanalytic ethod of analysis, which atte !ts to unco%er its eanin", to do such a thin": The analytic scene, the denudin", and the deconstitution of the 3in)leidun" are all !roduced /y The 3 !eror's New Clothes in a scene of writin" that unclothes, without see in" to, the aster eanin", the aster of eanin", the )in" of the truth and the truth of the )in"# Psychoanalysis finds itself8is found 4se trou%e 5 1 e%erythin" that it finds 1 in the te+t that it deci!hers# :ore than itself# .B>72 @hat does it ean for the literary te+t to already contain ore eanin" than the !sychoanalytic inter!retation of that te+tC @hat !ur!ose, if any, does the !sychoanalytic analysis of literature ser%e if its analysis is already !resentC Can the literary te+t /e analy(ed or decoded usin" the 0!sychoanalytic sche as # # # this literature itself !roduces0.B>72C These are the %ery *uestions Derrida will atte !t to answer throu"h his readin" of Lacan's 0$e inar on 'The Purloined Letter#'0 Indeed, it is Lacan's se inar that we are 0led to0 in the closin" !ara"ra!hs of 0Di%ested Prete+ts#0 Derrida's analysis of Lacan's se inar /e"ins with the assertion that, while Lacan has 0ne%er directly and syste atically /een interested in the so1called 'literary' te+t # # # the "eneral *uestion of the te+t is at wor) unceasin"ly in his writin"s, where the lo"ic of the si"nifier disru!ts nai%e se anticis 0.B6D2# Therefore, Lacan's wor) is already in%ested in the relationshi! /etween lan"ua"e8te+t and truth# Lacan's se inar .a!!arently2 is concerned, not with the !sycho/io"ra!hical readin" of Poe's te+t, /ut with the !ursuit of the 0*uestion of the te+t0.B6D2# Indeed, 0ri"ht fro the o!enin" 4Lacan's5 analysis of The Purloined Letter is antici!ated /y a hori(on: the *uestion of the truth in its relation to fiction0.B6>2# Thus far, all would see to /e well# Indeed, this *uestion is concerned with the whole !ro/le atic of literature and its relation to the truth and to !sychoanalysis that Derrida has already a!!ed out# ;eadin" Lacan, ;eadin" Lacan's analysis of 0The Purloined Letter0 /e"ins fro the !re ise that the 0re!etition auto atis .@iederholun"s(wan" 2 finds its /asis in what we ha%e called the insistence of the si"nifyin" chain0.6E2# Further: The lesson of this se inar is intended to aintain that these i a"inary incidences, far fro re!resentin" the essence of our e+!erience, re%eal only what in it re ains inconsistent unless they are related to the sy /olic chain which /inds and orients the # # # # @e ha%e decided to illustrate for you today # # # that it is the sy /olic order which is constituti%e for the su/&ect 1 /y de onstratin" in a story the decisi%e orientation which the su/&ect recei%es fro the itinerary of a si"nifier# .6E172 This story is, of course, 0The Purloined Letter#0 Lacan uses Poe's story to show the functionin" of the sy /olic order in its relationshi! to the hu an su/&ect# The sy /olic order will /e a!!ed onto the dyna ics of the !urloined letter in its transitory !aths throu"hout the story# Lacan di%ides the story into two co !li entary scenes# The first, 0which we shall strai"htway desi"nate the !ri al scene0.?D2 and a second scene, the action of which /oth irrors and ad%ances that of the first, !ri al, scene# The !lay of the si"nifier .the letter2 on the story's characters is a!!ed /y Lacan as a series of "lances that alternately see all and see nothin"# These "lances are dou/led and shifted fro the first scene to the second: # # # three o ents, structurin" three "lances, /orne /y three su/&ects, incarnated each ti e /y different characters# The first is a "lance that sees nothin": the =in" and the !olice# The second, a "lance which sees that the first sees nothin" and deludes itself as to the secrecy of what it hides: the <ueen, then the :inister# The third sees that the first two "lances lea%e what should /e hidden e+!osed to whoe%er would

sei(e it: the :inister, and finally Du!in# # # # Ji%en the intersu/&ecti%e odulus of the re!etiti%e action, it re ains to reco"ni(e in it a re!etition auto atis in the sense that interests us in Freud's te+t# .?62 The tra%el of the letter and its si"nificance on those who /oth see and do not see it is of the ut ost i !ortance for Lacan# The !ositions of the story's characters in relationshi! to the letter and the tri!led "lance, denote and are 0deter ined /y the !lace which a !ure si"nifier 1 the !urloined letter 1 co es to occu!y in their trio0.?62# In short, the !ositions of the characters and their relationshi!s to /oth one another and the letter are deter ined /y the !osition of the letter within the "rou!# It is the letter, and not the characters the sel%es, that is of the "reatest i !ortance# Lacan's fra in" of the story into two scenes contains the shiftin" !ositions of the three "lances and the characters they constitute as its central the e# In each scene, as we ha%e seen, the !ositions of the characters chan"e in relation to the letter# It is these chan"in" !ositions that constitute the 0decisi%e orientation which the su/&ect recei%es fro the itinerary of the si"nifier0.672# Ff ost !articular interest for Lacan is the !osition of the detecti%e, Du!in, in relation to the letter and the su/&ecti%e triad# Du!in, at one !oint or another holds the !osition of /oth the third "lance, which 0sees that the first two "lances lea%e what should /e hidden e+!osed0.?62, and 1 !erha!s ore tellin"ly 1 the second "lance, which 0sees that the first sees nothin" and deludes itself as to the secrecy of what it hides0.?62# @hen Du!in o%es into the !osition of the second "lance it is the reader of the tale, in this case the analyst, who sees what has /een left e+!osed# Thus, the third "lance is contained /oth within and without the story itself# The third "lance is, in effect, the "lance of the analyst# As one who can see what the other /elie%es hidden, the analyst occu!ies the !osition of the third "lance for, as Lacan notes, 0we # # # /eco e the e issaries of all the !urloined letters which at least for a ti e re ain in sufferance with us in the transference0.B72# ,ecause of the nature of the letter as si"nifier, its contents, for Lacan, are rarely of i !ortance .althou"h this will not /e the case when Du!in inscri/es his facsi ile letter to the :inister2, it is the eanin" of the letter in its relation to its holders that is of i !ortance# Indeed, the !olice cannot find the letter /ecause they are loo)in" too literally: 0# # # the detecti%es ha%e so i uta/le a notion of the real that they fail to notice that their search tends to transfor it into its o/&ect0.?72# It is only throu"h the analytical "lance that the !osition of the letter can /e witnessed# This is, in !art, /ecause the letter itself, as si"nifier, is desi"nated not so uch /y its !resence than /y its a/sence: For the si"nifier is a unit in its %ery uni*ueness, /ein" /y nature sy /ol only of an a/sence# # # # @hat is hidden is ne%er /ut what is issin" fro its !lace # # # for it can literally /e said that so ethin" is issin" fro its !lace only of what can chan"e it: the sy /olic# For the real, whate%er u!hea%al we su/&ect it to, is always in its !laceK it carries it "lued to its heel, i"norant of what i"ht e+ile it fro it# .?71BD2 Thus, the letter carries i !ortance in as uch as it is 1 and hence Lacan's final assertion 1 always already in its !lace# @here%er it is is where it should /e# The letter's uni*ue !osition is a%aila/le to it throu"h its functionin" as a sy /olic chain# The roles of the story's characters alter in reference to their !osition with re"ards the letter, not the other way around# Indeed, the letters tra&ectory throu"hout the story is already inscri/ed in its /e"innin"# The 0!urloined0 nature of the letter is that it has /een, not stolen, /ut detoured# The !ossi/ility of the letter's return to its ri"htful !osition has /een a%aila/le fro the start: Thus we are confir ed in our detour /y the %ery o/&ect which draws us on into it: for we are *uite si !ly dealin" with a letter which has /een di%erted fro its !athK one whose course has /een !rolon"ed .ety olo"ically, the word of the title2, or, to re%ert to the lan"ua"e of the !ost office, a letter in sufferance# .B?2 ,y returnin" the letter to 0its !ro!er course,0 /y returnin" it .%ia the Prefect of Police2 to the <ueen, Du!in /eco es, as it were, the !ost an of the sy /olic order# In returnin" the letter, howe%er, Du!in is una/le to !re%ent hi self fro co in" under the sway of the intersu/&ecti%e triad# Cau"ht u! in his "a e of re%en"e with the :inister, Du!in falls into the 0 edian !osition !re%iously held /y the <ueen and the :inister0.GD2# 9e has !ositioned hi self within the second "lance fro which the analyst, in the !osition of the third "lance, will /e a/le to see what he .Du!in2 /elie%es to /e hidden# As Lacan a)es clear, 0what is !erha!s at sta)e is 4Du!in's5 withdrawal fro the sy /olic circuit of the letter0.B72# Indeed, ha%in" see in"ly

withdrawn fro the "a e . uch li)e the analyst2 /y recei%in" financial re uneration for his ser%ices, Du!in reinserts hi self throu"h his essa"e to the :inister .0An dessein si funeste, 8 $'il n'est di"ne d'Atre, est di"ne de Thyeste#02# @hyC The answer of course is that he cannot hel! hi self# Du!in, li)e anyone else, is held under the sway of the sy /olic order# In the final analysis nothin" has chan"ed# Du!in, is !erha!s a little richer, the :inister a little less !owerful, and the <ueen .!ossi/ly2 a little ore cautious# All in all, howe%er, and des!ite an o%er a/undance of !ositionin" and re!ositionin", the su/&ect is still /ound /y the sy /olic chain# Thus, 0the sender # # # recei%es fro the recei%er his own essa"e in re%erse for # # # # @hat the '!urloined letter,' nay, the 'letter in sufferance,' eans is that a letter always arri%es at its destination0.G61?2# 3%erythin" returns to, and is held under the sway of, the 0order of the Law0.GD2# @e are left, as in Freud, with /ut one esca!e fro this law: death# Truth as8in Death, or the Function of the Law Lacan entions death e+!licitly in his se inar only twice, /ut each of these occasions /are close attention# The first instance directly lin)s death to the functionin" of the si"nifier: Lou reali(e, of course, that our intention is not to turn the 4the relations /etween letter and !lace5 into 0su/tle0 relations, nor is our ai to confuse letter with s!irit, e%en if we recei%e the for er /y !neu atic dis!atch, and that we readily ad it that one )ills whereas the other *uic)ens, insofar as the si"nifier 1 you !erha!s /e"in to understand 1 ateriali(es the a"ency of death# .?E, y italics2 Therefore the letter, as si"nifier, 0 ateriali(es the a"ency of death#0 It functions within the real of a re!etition co !ulsion, as an au+iliary to the death dri%e# ,indin" the su/&ect to the 0decisi%e orientation which the su/&ect recei%es fro the itinerary of a si"nifier0.672, the letter )ee!s e%eryone on trac), as it were# The letter's function as transcendental si"nifier .the !osition of the !hallus2 forces each su/&ect, in each of Lacan's three !ositions, to fall /ac) into and re!eat the actions of those who ha%e occu!ied their !ositions /efore the # As re!etition auto atis , this constant re!ositionin" of the su/&ect within the orientation of the si"nifier /inds the to the death dri%e# The a"ency of the letter forces the su/&ect, as it does the :inister, to confront death# Death is the answer to the *uestion of 0what re ains of a si"nifier when it has no ore si"nification0.G>2# The answer, of course, is that the si"nifier will always ha%e the ulti ate si"nification 1 the ine%ita/ility of death: 0@hat are you, fi"ure of the die I turn o%er in your encounter .tyche2 with y fortuneC Nothin", if not that !resence of death which a)es of hu an life a re!rie%e o/tained fro ornin" to ornin" in the na e of eanin"s whose si"n is your croo)# Thus did $chehera(ade for a thousand and one ni"hts, and thus ha%e I done for ei"hteen onths, sufferin" the ascendancy of this si"n at the cost of a di((yin" series of fraudulent turns at the "a e of e%en or odd#0 .G>2 Lacan, here is %entrilo*ui(in" the *uestion which has led the :inister to the 0s!ot ar)ed /y /lindness0.G>2# Indeed, it is the %ery s!ot Du!in now inha/its# Du!in, li)e the :inister /efore hi , faces the ine%ita/ility of his return to the structure of the re!etition auto atis # 9e, li)e the :inister, can only stand outside of the "a e for so lon" 1 there is no esca!e fro the "a e /esides death# For the insistence of the "a e is that death is the ulti ate si"nified to which we are drawn /y e%ery si"nifier# The order of the Law, the law of the father, the !hallus as transcendental si"nifier, etc#, all lead us to the sa e !lace# Thus it is that Lacan will su""est that the :inister 0will lea%e the ta/le in ti e to a%oid dis"race0.G62# Ta)in" the lead of -ose!h 9# $ ith and @illia =erri"an in the introduction to Ta)in" Chances: Derrida, Psychoanalysis, and Literature, all that is left is for us to notice that the author of Poe's e!i"ra!h is $eneca, whose na e eans suicide# A letter always arri%es at its destination /ecause there is, ulti ately, only one destination# ;eadin" Derrida, ;eadin" In his readin" of Lacan's se inar, Derrida is concerned with one central !oint: that Lacan is a!!ro!riatin" Poe's story as an e+a !le, 0an e+a !le destined to 'illustrate,' in a didactic !rocedure, a law and a truth for in" the !ro!er o/&ect of a se inar0.B6H2# :any of Derrida's criticis s of Lacan in Le Facteur de la Vrit ste fro this sin"le !oint# Indeed, as with his readin" of Freud's analysis of 0The 3 !eror's New Clothes,0 Derrida is concerned here with what

this a!!ro!riation does to truth: 0the te+t is in the ser%ice of the truth, and of a truth that is tau"ht0.B6H2# For Derrida, 0The $e inar on 'The Purloined Letter'0 illustrates ore clearly than any of his other writin"s Lacan's !osition in re"ard to the nature of truth and fiction: The 0truth which ay /e drawn fro that o ent in Freud's thou"ht under study04,eyond the Pleasure Princi!le5, the truth with which the ost decorati%e and !eda"o"ical literary illustration is coordinated, is not, as we will see, this or that truth, /ut is the truth itself, the truth of the truth# It !ro%ides the 0$e inar0 with its ri"orously !hiloso!hical i !ort# # # # :oreo%er, if Lacan's state ents on the relation /etween fiction and truth are less clear and less une*ui%ocal elsewhere, here there is no dou/t a/out the order# .B6H2 This 0truth of the truth0 is, for Derrida, a fallacy# Lacan's !ursuit of this truth ne%er *uestions that within which it is searchin" .0The Purloined Letter02 and 0this first li it contains the entire '$e inar'0.B6I2# As such, Lacan's whole analysis falls under the sway of what Derrida ter s 0!hallo"ocentris #0 Indeed, Lacan's whole se inar, for Derrida, is !redicated on the %alori(in" of s!eech o%er writin", 0on the authentic e+cellence of the s!o)en, of s!eech, and of the word: of lo"os as !hone0.BH?2, a criticis which 1 as we shall see 1 Derrida has le%elled at !sychoanalysis /efore# As Derrida will ar"ue, the truth Lacan finds in Poe's te+t i !oses a li it on the functionin" of the te+t itself, outside of any ar/itrarily i !osed order# Lacan uses Poe's te+t to: # # # "round fiction in truth, to "uarantee fiction its conditions of !ossi/ility in truth, and to do so without e%en indicatin", as does Das Anhei liche, literary fiction's eternally renewed resistance to the "eneral law of !sychoanalytic )nowled"e# .B6H1I2 This "roundin" of 0fiction in truth0 ta)es !lace to the detri ent of the story's !ossi/ilities for eanin"# Lacan's use of the tra&ectory of the letter as an illustration of the truth in Freud's wor) li its the !lay of the te+t# As Derrida ar"ues: This story is certainly that of a letter, of the theft and dis!lace ent of a si"nifier# ,ut what the 0$e inar0 treats is only the content of this story, what is &ustifia/ly called its history, what is recounted in the account, the internal and narrated face of the narration# Not the narration itself# The 0$e inar's0 interest in the a"ency of the si"nifier in its letter sei(es u!on this a"ency to the e+tent that it constitutes, !recisely, on the first a!!roach, the e+e !lary content, the eanin", the written of Poe's fiction, as o!!osed to its writin", its si"nifier, and its narratin" for # The dis!lace ent of the si"nifier, therefore, is analy(ed as a si"nified, as the recounted o/&ect of a short story# .B6I1E2 Thus, the li it of the se inar is that it finds only what it e+!ects to find, its !sychoanalytic truth# Therefore, this truth 1 whate%er it ay /e 1 forces the ost !rofound of li its on the te+t in which it is found# As !sychoanalysis is found8finds itself, this findin" confers a %iolent /indin" on to that in which it is disco%ered# As Da%id Carroll !oints out: There see s to /e no inter!retati%e situation in which !ower is not in !lay, in which so e force or other is not called u!on to confront, neutrali(e, o%erco e other forces in order to !rotect the inte"rity and authority of the institutions a)in" use of the so1called do inant forces# .>6?2 $uch is the case with Lacan's use of Poe's tale# Psychoanalysis, in the act of findin" itself, li its that in which it is found# Thus, Lacan's i !osition of the trian"ular fra ewor) on Poe's te+t and the related reduction of the role of the narrator ensures that he finds what he wants .)nowsC2 to /e there /y li itin" other inter!retations, e%en 1 as Derrida ar"ues 1 those offered /y the te+t itself# Lacan's fra in" of the circuit of the !urloined letter within the sy /olic order and the 0decisi%e orientation which the su/&ect recei%es fro the itinerary of a si"nifier0.672 can only o!erate as a syste ic whole if the letter, as si"nifier and si"nified, can /e returned to its 0!ro!er !lace#0 This definiti%e orientation of the tra&ectory of the letter only functions /ecause Lacan 0ceaselessly su/ordinates the letter, writin", and the te+t0.BH?2# Thus, Derrida's !ro&ect is to re o%e the letter .and 0The Purloined Letter02 fro within the li its of this su/ordination# Indeed, Derrida is in fact returnin" to a criti*ue he /e"an in 0Freud and the $cene of @ritin",0 in which he cautioned a"ainst: The sy !to atic for of the return of the re!ressed: the eta!hor of writin" which haunts 3uro!ean discourse, and the syste atic contradictions of the onto1theolo"ical e+clusion of the trace# The re!ression of writin" as the re!ression of that which threatens !resence and the asterin" of a/sence# .>7I2 This 0re!ression of that which threatens0 clearly correlates to Derrida's criticis s of Lacan's 0trian"ular lo"ic0.B7>2 in Le Facteur de la Vrit# Lacan's ain failin", for Derrida, is that he re o%es the su/&ect of 0The Purloined Letter0 .the

letter itself and its trian"ular tra&ectories2 fro the tale's o%erall literary fra ewor)# First, /oth the author of the te+t and the author of the letter itself are re o%ed fro the scene of writin"# Thus: This letter, a!!arently, has no !ro!rietor# It is a!!arently the !ro!erty of no one# It has no !ro!er eanin", no !ro!er content, a!!arently, that /ears on its itinerary# $tructurally, then, it is %olante and %ole# And this theft8fli"ht would not occur if the letter had a eanin", or at least if it were constituted /y the content of its eanin", if it li ited itself to /ein" eanin"ful and to /ein" deter ined /y the le"i/ility of this eanin": 0And the o/ili(ation of the ele"ant society whose frolics we are followin" would as well ha%e no eanin" if the letter itself were content with ha%in" one0 .$#, !# GH2# .B6616?2 $econd, the narrator of the tale, he who Lacan refers to as the 0"eneral narrator0.?B2, is denied any role in the action of the tale# Lacan concludes that 0the e+tre ity to which the ori"inal narrator is reduced !recludes her alterin" any of the e%ents0.?B2# In o!!osition to Lacan's %iew, Derrida ar"ues that the narrator is a central fi"ure in the te+t and should not /e left out of an analysis of 0The Purloined Letter0 if the full richness of the te+t is to /e unco%ered# For Derrida the narrator's function is central to 0The Purloined Letter#0 3ach of Lacan's li its o!erates to ensure the 0truth0 of his own readin"# The e+clusion of the narrator in Lacan's se inar !re%ents the !lay of the uncanny Derrida sees as a central facet of Poe's story# An inclusion of the narrati%e !ers!ecti%e while studyin" Poe's te+t 0o!ens u! structures that re ain closed to Lacan0.BG72# The narrator's insistence on the dou/led nature of Du!in .e+cluded fro Lacan2 structurally effects the tale /y ru!turin" Lacan's trian"ular !artitions: Du!in is dou/le, dou/les hi self, and s!lits hi self in two /y hi self# If Du!in is a dou/le /y hi self alone, and if he is the dou/le of a dou/le .the narrator2, etc#, this ris)s creatin" so e distur/ance in the deli itation of trian"les in the 0dra a0 called 0real,0 as well as in the identification of !ositions and "lances within the 0dra a#0 All the ore so in that, as we ha%e seen, in the 0real dra a0 itself, Du!in successi%ely identifies with all the characters, as do all those who find the letter in its !ro!er !lace and e%ident eanin"# # # # All the 0unhei lich0 relations of du!licity, which unfold without li it in a dual structure, find the sel%es o itted or ar"inali(ed in the $e inar# .BHD2 This li itin" of the !lay of the uncanny throu"h the dou/led nature of Du!in .and the narrator2 allows Lacan to aintain his distinctions /etween the sy /olic and the i a"inary# Therefore the o ent in Poe's te+t which ost desta/ali(es the !ursuit of !sychoanalytic truth .or any truth for that atter2 is neutrali(ed at the outset# This neutrali(ation, for Derrida, is !art of Lacan's su/ordination of writin" to s!eech# @hat Lacan is ista)in" for the letter in *uestion, the !urloined letter, is the 0ideality of a letter0 which could 0resist destructi%e di%ision0.BHB2# As such: 9e considers the letter only at the !oint at which it is deter ined .no atter what he says2 /y its content of eanin", /y the ideality of the essa"e that it 0%ehiculates,0 /y the s!eech whose eanin" re ains out of the reach of !artition, so that it can circulate, intact, fro its !lace of detach ent, that is, to the sa e !lace# In fact, this letter does not only esca!e !artition, it esca!es o%e ent, it does not chan"e its !lace# .BHBK y italics2 The notion of the ideal letter, "rafted onto the letter in Poe's te+t, is what allows Lacan to find his truth# The 0decisi%e orientation0 illustrated /y Poe's te+t is itself a %eilin" and a lac)# 9owe%er, it is a lac) that is dis"uised /y the distin"uished and do inatin" !osition "i%en to the !hallus, as si"nifier, which .for Derrida2 %eils the !ossi/ility of its own !artition: This transcendental si"nifier 4the !hallus5 is therefore also the si"nified of all si"nifieds, and this is what finds itself sheltered within the indi%isi/ility of the ."ra!hic or oral2 letter# $heltered fro this threat, /ut also fro the disse inatin" !ower that in Ff Jra atolo"y I !ro!osed to call @ritin" ,efore the Letter .title of the first !art2: the !ri%ile"e of 0full s!eech0 is e+a ined there# The a"ency of the Lacanian letter is the rele%e of writin" in the syste of s!eech# .BHG2 Thus, as Irene 9ar%ey !oints out in her essay 0$tructures of 3+e !larity in Poe, Freud, Lacan, and Derrida,0 Derrida finds Lacan "uilty of holdin" 0an array of traditional @estern eta!hysical assu !tions that 4his5 te+t thus e+e !lifies concernin" the nature of the si"n, the !ri%ile"e of the !hone or %oice o%er writin", and the eanin" of ,ein" as !resence0.6G62# As such, the whole of Lacan's readin" of Poe's story is !redicated on a host of !hiloso!hical !ositions that Derrida has ade it his !ro&ect to refute# For Derrida, Lacan's !ositionin" of the transcendental !osition of the !hallus ensures an illusion of sta/ility:

The transcendental !osition of the !hallus .in the chain of si"nifiers to which it /elon"s, while si ultaneously a)in" it !ossi/le2 thus would ha%e its !ro!er !lace 1 in Lacanian ter s, its letter e+e !t fro all !artition 1 in the !hone atic structure of lan"ua"e# No !rotest a"ainst etalan"ua"e is o!!osed to this !hallo"ocentric transcendentalis # 3s!ecially if within etalan"ua"e, lan"ua"e is centered on the %oice, that is, on the ideal site of the !hallus# If /y so e isfortune the !hallus were di%isi/le or reduced to the status of a !art o/&ect, the entire edifice would colla!se, and this ust /e a%oided at all cost# .BIH1E2 Indeed, as Derrida clai s, this always does ha!!en# The edifice always colla!ses, /ut s!eech reassures us that its structure is intact# 0The Purloined Letter0 howe%er, a story which is 0already an affair of writin"0.BEB2, refuses to /e held within such fra es# In Derrida analysis, Lacan falls into the %ery tra!s he sees ca!turin" Du!in# Ana/le to aintain his do inant !osition, he too falls into the second !osition, that of the =in" and the law, /lind to the structure that /inds hi : ;e!etition of Du!in then# In that he ay 0now easily read its solution in /road dayli"ht,0 the author of the $e inar, let us not for"et, is a)in" a scene for his confreres, the /ad, and unfaithful, "uardians of the le"acy of Freud# @ith the 0e+!losion of feelin",0 whose si"ns we ha%e !ointed out, he is see)in", at least, to "et /ac) on course: to rectify, to redress, to !ut /ac) onto the ri"ht !ath that which is not deli%ered 4en souffrance5, and 0ar ed0 with the 0return to freud,0 0to correct a de%iation too anifest not to ha%e /een a%owed as such at e%ery turn#0# # # 9e rea!!ro!riates his ter s for hi self, then, /ut he too does so in order to "i%e the /ac), to return the to Freud, for the issue here is to restore the true instruction, the true doctrine# -ust as Du!in, /y callin" hi self a 0!artisan of the lady,0 /oth o/li"es the <ueen and i es the contract which lin)s her to the =in", so there would /e so ethin" li)e a !act /etween Freud # # # and the author .the !lace of the author2 of the se inar# .BGG1GH2 Lacan, in essence, /eco es another dou/le of8with Du!in, una/le to )ee! hi self 1 as an analyst should 1 fro re&oinin" the "a e, the sy /olic circuit whose !ath is decided /y the letter# As such, the ulti ate destination of Lacan's se inar is the return to Freud# $uch is the i !ortance of the title of this section of Derrida's analysis: 0First $econd 8 The Truth of the Letter fro Freud's 9and#0 This title indicates the three !ositions a!!ed out /y Lacan as e /odyin" the su/&ect's 0decisi%e orientation:0 0># a "lance that sees nothin" # # # 6# a "lance which sees that the first "lance sees nothin" and deludes itself as to the secrecy of what it hides # # # ?# 4a "lance that sees5 that the first two "lances lea%e what should /e hidden e+!osed to whoe%er would sei(e it0.?62# As such the third !osition, e /odyin" the 0truth of the letter0 as Lacan recei%es it fro Freud hi self, co es to occu!y the !osition !re%iously occu!ied /y /oth the :inister and then Du!in# This !osition is one fro which, as we ha%e seen, the su/&ect cannot fail /ut fall /ac) into the second !osition .that which is ar)ed /y /lindness2# This fallin" /ac) is the true nature of the third !osition and is the one in which Derrida !laces Lacan# Li)e the scene of writin" fro which Lacan !ulls his trian"les, this !osition is unsta/le# 3ach and e%ery one of its occu!iers ust e%entually return to the !osition of /lindness, allowin" the sel%es in turn to /e !luc)ed fro /ehind li)e Lacan's !olitical ostrich .?62# Dare one as) what !osition Derrida /elie%es hi self to occu!yC Lacan's atte !ted return to Freud is, for Derrida, hi"hly sus!ect and only !ossi/le throu"h the ulti!le su/ordinations Derrida shows Lacan enforcin"# Lacan's 0se antico1/io"ra!hical0 0triado1 for alist0 0!sychoanalytic inter!retations0.BE?2 !re%ent 0The Purloined Letter0 fro e+ecutin" its own scene of writin"# Lacan's fra in" of the te+t !re%ents it fro 0tell4in"5 itself0.BE?2# ,y e+cludin" the narrator Lacan 0o its e%erythin" in the scene of writin" that o%erflows the two trian"les0.BE?2# Thus, he is in uch the sa e !osition as the one in which Derrida finds Freud readin" 0The 3 !eror's New Clothes:0 /lind to that which the te+t itself can show hi # ,y ta)in" a tale which 0one could already read # # # was an affair of writin", and of writin" adrift0.BEB2 and e+tractin" the trian"ular fra es that constitute /ut a !art of its whole, Lacan li its the !lay of the te+t# As such, he can for ulate a stance fro which 0a letter always arri%es at its destination0.G?2# For Derrida, howe%er, a letter can always not arri%e: As soon as the narrator a)es Du!in return his letters 4and thus uch of the i !ortance of the narrator in Derrida's for ulation5 # # # the letter di%ides itself, is no lon"er ato istic # # # and therefore loses any certain destination# The di%isi/ility of the letter 1 this is why we ha%e insisted on this )ey or theoretical safety loc) of the se inar 1 is what chances and sets off course# @ithout "uarantee of return, the re ainin" 4restance5 of anythin" whatsoe%er: a letter does not always

arri%e at its destination, and fro the o ent that this !ossi/ility /elon"s to its structure one can say that it ne%er truly arri%es, that when it does arri%e its ca!acity not to arri%e tor ents it with an internal driftin"# The di%isi/ility of the letter is also the di%isi/ility of the si"nifier to which it "i%es rise # # # .BEE1E72 The eanin" of this di%isi/ility, this driftin", is that 1 in the case of 0The Purloined Letter0 1 there is no 0real true su/&ect of the tale0.BE?2# Ta)in" into account this drift the di%isi/ility of the letter and all its !ossi/ilities for loss, theft, and fli"ht, does not "i%e us the truth# Indeed, it eans that there is no a/solute truth# The !sychoanalytic truth Lacan searches for and finds in Poe's tale is not an a/solute# As Derrida has atte !ted to show, it only /eco es a truth at the e+!ense of e+cludin" other as!ects of that fro which it is drawn# Truth therefore, e+ists only within a !ers!ecti%e .which, in this case, ha!!ens to /e !sychoanalytic2# As Da%id Carroll re ar)s: 0Derrida's insistence on the "eneral narrator # # # 4is5 not to 0sa%e the te+t,0 then, /ut rather to e !hasi(e the !sychoanalytical, !olitical, and !hiloso!hical, as well as literary, effects of the narrator, the effects of his !osition on the e%ents narrated and how they are narrated# Derrida's !ur!ose is to show how Lacan's un%eilin" of Freudian truth !roceeds /y eans of a neutrali(ation of the narrati%e effect of fiction and a refusal to ta)e into account the effects of the conte+ts of the truth on the truth found there 1 a neutrali(ation that Derrida clai s is not neutral, not only as concerns Poe's te+t /ut ore i !ortantly as concerns the relation of !sychoanalysis to truth# .>6?16B2 For Derrida truth co es, if at all, at a !rice# In the case of Lacan's 0$e inar on 'The Purloined Letter,'0 this !rice is the e+clusion of the narrati%e scene of writin" and all that e+clusion entails: the uncanny dou/lin" of the narrator, Du!in, the :inister, etc#K the te+tual drift that /oth analy(es and denies analysis# The !ursuit of truth carries with it the i !ossi/ility of its own reali(ation# The findin" of truth ta)es !lace only within a %iolently /indin" and li itin" analysis that is /lind to its own failin"s# Therefore, !sychoanalysis finds itself8is found only within a li ited site of analysis# The disse inatin" !ower of the letter, /oth as si"nifier and word, forestalls and !re%ents a/solute inter!retation#