I rem<strong>in</strong>d you that the place of semblance where I put the object...that theplace of semblance is not where I articulated that of the Truth.How can a subject, s<strong>in</strong>ce that is how I designated the S with the bar, $, howcan a subject, a subject with all its weakness, its debility, hold the place ofthe Truth and even ensure that this has results? He places himself <strong>in</strong> it <strong>in</strong>this way, namely, a Knowledge. [To be corrected, <strong>in</strong>sert arrows andbars]o > S 2 (hesitation) o > S 1$ S i $ S 2Is it not like that that I wrote it at the time?- J-A Miller: $ at the place of S 1 , S 1 at the place of S 2 and S 2 at the placeof $o > $S 2 S 1- <strong>Lacan</strong>: - You see that it is easy to get confused with this!Yes. Undoubtedly it is better like that. It is undoubtedly better like that, butit is still more troubl<strong>in</strong>g like that, I mean that the gap between S 1 and S 2 ismore strik<strong>in</strong>g because there is someth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terrupted and that <strong>in</strong> short S 1 , isonly the beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of knowledge; but a knowledge which is content toalways commence, as they say, ends up at noth<strong>in</strong>g. This <strong>in</strong>deed is why,when I went to Brussels, I did not speak about psychoanalysis <strong>in</strong> the best ofterms. There are some that I recognise who were there.Good. To commence to know <strong>in</strong> order not to arrive, is someth<strong>in</strong>g whichgoes when all is said and done, rather well with what I call my lack of hope,but f<strong>in</strong>ally that implies a name, a term it rema<strong>in</strong>s for me to allow you toguess – the Belgian people who heard me speak <strong>in</strong> Brussels be<strong>in</strong>g free toshare it with you or not.100
<strong>Sem<strong>in</strong>ar</strong> 9: Wednesday 15 March 1977There are people well <strong>in</strong>tentioned towards me – and already that raises amounta<strong>in</strong> of problems: how account for the fact that people are well<strong>in</strong>tentioned towards me? It is because they do not know me; for, as regardsmyself, I am not full of good <strong>in</strong>tentions – <strong>in</strong> any case these well <strong>in</strong>tentionedpeople have sometimes written letters tend<strong>in</strong>g... – <strong>in</strong> any case, it waswritten..., it was written that my stammer<strong>in</strong>gs the last time about thediscourse that I call analytic, was a slip. They wrote that textually. Whatdist<strong>in</strong>guishes a slip from gross error? I have all the more tendency, for mypart, to classify as error, what is qualified as a slip, <strong>in</strong> that all the same Ihave spoken a little bit about this analytic discourse; when I speak, Iimag<strong>in</strong>e I am say<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g. The annoy<strong>in</strong>g th<strong>in</strong>g is that where I make aslip, or I am supposed to have made a slip, it was <strong>in</strong> material, as I might say,<strong>in</strong> written material that I made the slip. That takes on a particularimportance when it is a matter of someth<strong>in</strong>g written by someone - , me onthis particular occasion - by someone who has been found out. Formerly Idid happen to say, <strong>in</strong> imitation moreover of someone who was a celebratedpa<strong>in</strong>ter: ‘I do not seek, I f<strong>in</strong>d.’ At the po<strong>in</strong>t that I am at, I do not so muchf<strong>in</strong>d as search, <strong>in</strong> other words I go around <strong>in</strong> circles. This <strong>in</strong>deed is whathappened <strong>in</strong> connection with this slip, the fact is that the letters written werenot <strong>in</strong> the right direction (sens), <strong>in</strong> the direction that they turn, but weremixed up. It should all the same be clearly said that I did not make this slipaltogether without reason, I mean that I certa<strong>in</strong>ly imag<strong>in</strong>ed the order <strong>in</strong>which the letters turned, but I th<strong>in</strong>k I know at least what I wanted to say.I am go<strong>in</strong>g to try today to expla<strong>in</strong> what. I am encouraged to do so by thehear<strong>in</strong>g that I received last even<strong>in</strong>g at the Ecole Freudienne from a MadameKress-Rosen. I am not go<strong>in</strong>g to ask her to stand up, even though I canclearly see her. I even became quite concerned to know if she were amongwhat are called the listeners (auditrices) and I do not see why I should put101
- Page 1:
Seminar 1: Wednesday 16 November 19
- Page 5 and 6:
after all noticed that to consist m
- Page 7 and 8:
It would be enough for you to take
- Page 9 and 10:
There had therefore been a turning
- Page 11:
Supposing that we have a torus in a
- Page 15 and 16:
topology encourages us to do so. Th
- Page 17 and 18:
and me, and I who, in short, by din
- Page 19 and 20:
we cut it in two, the front and the
- Page 21 and 22:
is itself a hole and in a certain w
- Page 23 and 24:
Everyone knows that this is how thi
- Page 25 and 26:
Seminar 3: Wednesday 21 December 19
- Page 27 and 28:
proceed to this double cut, a doubl
- Page 29 and 30:
The inside and the outside in this
- Page 31 and 32:
egards the structure of the body, o
- Page 33 and 34:
inspired by it and its inspiration,
- Page 35 and 36:
music on you, is that it has this p
- Page 37 and 38:
from the beloved to the lover. What
- Page 39 and 40:
that the little o-object is not uni
- Page 41 and 42:
Seminar 4: Wednesday 11 January 197
- Page 43 and 44:
short I called the discourses; the
- Page 45 and 46:
It is flattened out, and in a way t
- Page 47 and 48:
astonishes me still more, is not th
- Page 49 and 50: Seminar 5: Wednesday 18 January 197
- Page 51 and 52: see it here, namely, something that
- Page 53 and 54: namely, that everything that concer
- Page 55 and 56: Let’s see. Let us try to see here
- Page 57 and 58: - X: You can’t hear me because pr
- Page 59 and 60: Seminar 6: Wednesday 8 February 197
- Page 61 and 62: its relationship to the body that w
- Page 63 and 64: that in the position B1, would be t
- Page 65 and 66: is in the position of maintaining t
- Page 67 and 68: Effectively the problem of primary
- Page 69 and 70: which I will return later, what is
- Page 71 and 72: the object of desire is not unknown
- Page 73 and 74: that he tells the truth. You see th
- Page 75 and 76: look of the Real, there is not, for
- Page 77 and 78: accentuated by him is the search fo
- Page 79 and 80: What is happening, is it not, the d
- Page 81: grounded and articulatable way, and
- Page 84 and 85: eason is said to be purloined, whil
- Page 86 and 87: Borromean knot with that of the Ima
- Page 88 and 89: Alain Didier Weill, for his part, i
- Page 90 and 91: Seminar 8: Wednesday 8 March 1977Wh
- Page 92 and 93: shouldn’t tell you, at 7.15 at Ju
- Page 94 and 95: means that the tongue fails, that,
- Page 96 and 97: of his time as a formidable cleric
- Page 98 and 99: It is very difficult not to waver o
- Page 102 and 103: this term in the feminine, since th
- Page 104 and 105: which coincides with my experience,
- Page 106 and 107: and to put that for you in black an
- Page 108 and 109: see, does not see too great an inco
- Page 110 and 111: that exists, he says what he believ
- Page 112 and 113: In short, one must all the same rai
- Page 114 and 115: particular besides, neurotic, a sex
- Page 116 and 117: functioning as something else. And
- Page 118 and 119: mean to deny? What can one deny? Th
- Page 120 and 121: slipping from word to word, and thi
- Page 122 and 123: Seminar 12: 17 May 1977People in th
- Page 124 and 125: y writing. And writing only produce
- Page 126 and 127: not pinpointed it? He calls this a