Perversion the Social Relation

Perversion the Social Relation Perversion the Social Relation

ideiaeideologia.com
from ideiaeideologia.com More from this publisher
10.07.2015 Views

6oBruce Finkthe child will set about trying to understand what the mother says inthe context of the construction: "She won't let go of me because shemisses my father"; "She complains of his abandoning us because she islonely." The contradictions do not uproot the construction or anchor thetherapist has provided, but rather serve as the point from which everythingelse is interpreted. So although the mother's behavior and presencehave not necessarily changed a whit, the therapist has enabled the childto read them differently. The child's experience of his mother has beenradically transformed by the construction.Later in life, the child may come to reject virtually all facets of thetherapist's construction, coming to believe instead that the mother'smotives were mostly malicious and self-serving, but he will reject theconstruction from the standpoint of the construction. In other words, hewill have a point on which to stand that remains unshakable, a vantagepoint from which to cast doubt upon the accuracy of the construction.Prior to the construction, there was no place to stand, no ground, andthus no possibility of questioning or wondering. After the construction,the child can call everything into question without ever cutting out theground from beneath his feet. He may, at the extreme, come to wish hehad never been born, but at least there will be a place from which hecan formulate that wish! That place is the subject, the Lacanian subject.NotesThis essay originally appeared in A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis byBruce Fink (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press), 165-202, copyright 1997by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. It is reprinted here in abridged formwith the permission of Harvard University Press.1 Sigmund Freud, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works ofSigmundFreud, ed. and trans. James Strachey et al. (London: The Hogarth Press and The Instituteof Psycho-Analysis, 1961). Subsequent references to The Standard Edition bothin the text and in the notes will use the abbreviation SE followed by volume numberand page number or lecture number.2 These "fine" diagnostic distinctions are included under the general category of the"paraphilias" in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM-III-R] (Washington: American Psychiatric Association, 1987). The psychiatric authorsof this all-too-widely used manual seem to adopt the more scientific sounding term"paraphilias** in order to avoid the seemingly less politically correct term "perversions.**However, they go on to use the most crassly political and moralistic language

Perversion 61in their detailed discussions of the paraphilias—for example, "The imagery in a Paraphilia...may be relatively harmless** (279); "Normal sexual activity includes sexualexcitement from touching or fondling one's sexual partner** (283, emphasis added);and so on.3 See Écrits, 610; 248, where Lacan speaks of the "fundamental fetish of every perversionqua object glimpsed in the signifier's cut,** implying thereby that the object asfetish is crucial in every perversion. The object as isolated by the signifier (as "cut out**of an undifferentiated ground, simultaneously creating both foreground and background)will be discussed later in this chapter.4 See the fine discussion of Verleugnung in J. Laplanche and J.-B. Pontalis, The Languageof Psychoanalysis, trans. D. Nicholson-Smith (New York: Norton, 1973),indispensable book that provides encyclopedic analysis of Freud's most central andcomplex concepts. Note that, in translating Verleugnung, the French also sometimesuse the term démenti—from démentir, meaning "to belie** or "to give the lie (to something).**5 SE X, 11; see also SE XXIII, 27*.6 See Freud*s reference to this term in SE XXI, 153.7 See the discussions of this tcnn in Bruce Fink, The Lacanian Subject: Between Languageand Jouissance (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995). It should be understoodin relation to Freud's related term, Triebreprasentanz—the representative, atthe level of thought, of a drive (for example, the thought "I want to sleep with mysister-in-law**).8 Or "representative of the drive** (Triebreprasentanz)—that is, the drive's representativeat the level of thought. Strachey translates Triebreprasentanz as "instinctual representative.**9 Freud sometimes seems to suggest that it is castration itself that is repudiated—inother words, the idea that the mother's penis was cut off and that one's own peniscould thus be cut off. In this case it would seem that one idea remains in consciousness—"Everyhuman being has a penis**—while a diametrically opposed idea is putout of mind, and this is tantamount to Freud's own definition of repression.10 As Lacan says, "By definition, the Real is full** (Seminar IV, La relation d'objet, 1956-I9S7, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller, Paris: Seuil, 1994, 218)—that is; nothing is lackingin the Real. See also Seminar VI, April 29,1959 {Le désir et son interprétation, 1958-1959, privately published by and for the members of L'Association freudienne internationale,Paris: I.S.I., 1994, 364), where Lacan says "The Real as such is defined asalways full.** The same general idea is repeated again and again in Lacan's work. InSeminar X (L'Angoisse, 1962-196$, unpublished) Lacan suggests that what he meansby this is not so much that there are no holes or rips in the Real, but rather that thereis nothing missing in the Real, nothing absent or lacking.Subsequent references to each seminar in the text and notes will appear as Seminarfollowed by volume number and page number.11 Indeed, as the hysteric teaches us, perception itself is not an "innocent" or scientificallyobjective process, giving us a "true view** of the "real external world.** Each3n

6oBruce Fink<strong>the</strong> child will set about trying to understand what <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r says in<strong>the</strong> context of <strong>the</strong> construction: "She won't let go of me because shemisses my fa<strong>the</strong>r"; "She complains of his abandoning us because she islonely." The contradictions do not uproot <strong>the</strong> construction or anchor <strong>the</strong><strong>the</strong>rapist has provided, but ra<strong>the</strong>r serve as <strong>the</strong> point from which everythingelse is interpreted. So although <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r's behavior and presencehave not necessarily changed a whit, <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>rapist has enabled <strong>the</strong> childto read <strong>the</strong>m differently. The child's experience of his mo<strong>the</strong>r has beenradically transformed by <strong>the</strong> construction.Later in life, <strong>the</strong> child may come to reject virtually all facets of <strong>the</strong><strong>the</strong>rapist's construction, coming to believe instead that <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r'smotives were mostly malicious and self-serving, but he will reject <strong>the</strong>construction from <strong>the</strong> standpoint of <strong>the</strong> construction. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, hewill have a point on which to stand that remains unshakable, a vantagepoint from which to cast doubt upon <strong>the</strong> accuracy of <strong>the</strong> construction.Prior to <strong>the</strong> construction, <strong>the</strong>re was no place to stand, no ground, andthus no possibility of questioning or wondering. After <strong>the</strong> construction,<strong>the</strong> child can call everything into question without ever cutting out <strong>the</strong>ground from beneath his feet. He may, at <strong>the</strong> extreme, come to wish hehad never been born, but at least <strong>the</strong>re will be a place from which hecan formulate that wish! That place is <strong>the</strong> subject, <strong>the</strong> Lacanian subject.NotesThis essay originally appeared in A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis byBruce Fink (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press), 165-202, copyright 1997by <strong>the</strong> President and Fellows of Harvard College. It is reprinted here in abridged formwith <strong>the</strong> permission of Harvard University Press.1 Sigmund Freud, The Standard Edition of <strong>the</strong> Complete Psychological Works ofSigmundFreud, ed. and trans. James Strachey et al. (London: The Hogarth Press and The Instituteof Psycho-Analysis, 1961). Subsequent references to The Standard Edition bothin <strong>the</strong> text and in <strong>the</strong> notes will use <strong>the</strong> abbreviation SE followed by volume numberand page number or lecture number.2 These "fine" diagnostic distinctions are included under <strong>the</strong> general category of <strong>the</strong>"paraphilias" in <strong>the</strong> Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM-III-R] (Washington: American Psychiatric Association, 1987). The psychiatric authorsof this all-too-widely used manual seem to adopt <strong>the</strong> more scientific sounding term"paraphilias** in order to avoid <strong>the</strong> seemingly less politically correct term "perversions.**However, <strong>the</strong>y go on to use <strong>the</strong> most crassly political and moralistic language

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!