44 Slices
Medium 9781855755093

6 The Question of Time: Phases of Analysis and Oedipus in Analytic Treatments

Raul Moncayo Karnac Books ePub

Lacan developed what I call a multiform criterion for the practice of analysis. This does not mean that the Lacanian field has no practice standards but that psychoanalysis cannot be practiced according to the “one size fits all” criteria. Lacan's clinical practice was consistent with his early theoretical cry for a return to Freud. Post-Freudian classical psychoanalysis attempts to be more Freudian than Freud and follows him in his sayings but not in his practices with patients. Typically, Freud's unconventional or nonstandard frame is attributed to him being the first analyst and not having been analysed himself. It is said that Freud was overly active and educative with patients, that he spoke too much, fed them, lent them money, did couple sessions, and conducted analytical sessions in people's houses, walking, on horseback, and in cafés. Freud also advocated having sessions almost every day, or more often than not. His analyses lasted up to one year but certainly not the ten and twenty years that became the norm in the psychoanalysis practiced under the standard frame.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782204244

Commentary on Session 11 of Lacan's Seminar XXIII

Raul Moncayo Karnac Books ePub

Wednesday 11 May 1976

Two types of writing and ego function The knot of four in neurosis and psychosis

The Borromean knot must be written. Why? Because the knot as well as the signifier is a support for thought or for non-thinking or appensee (the a as a privative a). Writing is a doing which gives support for and precipitates thinking.

The Bo (Borromean) knot must be written in order to get something from it.

Lacan describes two types of writing:

Writing with the signifier and writing degree zero or in a state of erasure. It does not cease from being written and does not cease from not being written.

This is the characteristic of the NoF emerging from the Real as a unary trace. On the one hand a trace is written, on the other hand, the trace is a unary form of negation because it negates and erases what it negates. It is an affirmation that negates the unmarked or the Real by marking it with a trace or mark. The unmarked refers to the outside meaning, but also to the generation of pure desire and the object cause of desire that is both signified and negated at the same time. The NoF as Signifier, the phallus/objet a, and the desire of the mother as signified are written but they also wind back to something Real beyond signification. This Real does not cease from not being written and yet the signifier never stops writing it. What I am calling writing degree zero (following Barthes’ (1953) title), is the writing of the Borromean knot, that incorporates the unsayable into its structure.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782204244

Commentary on Sessions 7 and 8 of Lacan's Seminar XXIII

Raul Moncayo Karnac Books ePub

Wednesday 17 February 1976 and Wednesday 9 March 1976

The proper name and nomination Topology and the sexual relation

Joyce attributes significance to the proper name (last name) and its transformations. Lacan states that for Joyce a name “can only take place as a nickname”, referring to the name “Dedalus” in Joyce's work. Going beyond the S1 requires the S2, the nickname or the pen name.

Lacan uses the terms signifier and subject interchangeably. “The signifier is what represents a subject for another signifier” (Lacan, 1961–1962, Seminar IX). Mark Twain the writer, for example, is what represents a subject for another signifier (Samuel Clemens). The pen name Mark Twain for Samuel Clemens occupies the place of the Other (S2) for the subject (S1). But since Samuel Clemens is representing a subject and is not the subject “itself”, the actual subject falls to a Real place “ex-sisting”, or non-existing between signifiers.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782204244

Introduction: The Relationship between Lacan's Seminar III on Psychosis and his Seminar XXIII on the Sinthome

Raul Moncayo Karnac Books ePub

The relationship between Lacan's Seminar III on psychosis and his Seminar XXIII on the sinthome

The unconscious, foreclosure, the question of Being, the signifier in the Real, are all terms that in one way or another are present in both seminars although they are twenty years apart.

In Seminar III (1955–1956), according to Lacan, the psychotic subject does have an unconscious. This contrasts sharply with the usual psychoanalytic notion that for the psychotic subject there is no repression and the unconscious is all manifest or predominates. In this formulation, repression and the reality ego that make the secondary process and cohesive speech possible, are both missing in psychosis. In the neurotic the unconscious is created through repression, but in psychosis repression fails. But for Lacan although there is no primary repression, in psychosis there is still another defence at play. In psychosis the unconscious is created through foreclosure.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782204244

The Definition of Jouissance and the Different Types of Jouissance

Raul Moncayo Karnac Books ePub

Wednesday 16 December 1975 and Wednesday 13 January 1976

The untying and tying functions of the Real The definition of jouissance and the different types of jouissance

Lacan starts out by talking about the seriousness needed for analytic experience whether in sessions or in his seminar. He refers to this seriousness as something “senti-mental” by which he means the feeling or sentiment of an absolute risk, which is one of the ways he will refer to the Real as an experience.

In RSI (1976–1977b) Lacan argues that the Real appears in traces, strokes, or pieces that threaten our imaginary or symbolic sensibilities, the sense or senses through which we understand the world. At the same time those Real points or tips of the Real present the possibility of an absolute consistency rather than the relative consistency represented by the Imaginary.

The consistency of the Real and the Imaginary are homogenous to one another except that ordinarily we only know the consistency of the Imaginary. In visual perception the world appears as a saturated consistent whole. Nevertheless, the consistency of the Real “ex-sists” outside meaning while that of the Imaginary only exists. This “ex-sistence” of the Real with respect to the Imaginary is what lends the Real appearing within the Imaginary the connotation of the uncanny that manifests as a shock, an impact, a knock, or a stroke.

See All Chapters

See All Slices