Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

More documents

Recommendations

Info

which coincides with my experience, namely, that I do not recognise allwomen. There is no such thing, but is all the same necessary to say that thisis not self-evident; There is no such thing, unless it is incestuous – this isvery exactly what Freud put forward – there is none such except incestuous,I mean that, - what Freud said -, the fact is that the Oedipus myth designatesthe following, that the only person that one wants to sleep with, is one’smother, and as regards the father, one kills him. It is even all the moreprobable that one knows neither who is your father and your mother, it isexactly why the myth of Oedipus has a sense; he killed someone that he didnot know and he slept with someone that he had not the slightest idea washis mother, it is nevertheless like that that things happened according to themyth, and what that means, is that the only true thing is castration. In anycase with castration, one is quite sure of escaping it, as all this so-calledGreek mythology designates clearly for us, namely, that the father, it is notso much his murder which is at stake as his castration, that castration passesby way of murder and that, as regards the mother, the best thing that one cando with her, is to cut it off to be quite sure of not committing incest.What I would like, is to give you the refraction of these truths in sense. Onewould have to manage to give an idea of a structure, which is such that itwould incarnate sense in a correct way. Contrary to what is said, there is notruth about the Real, since the Real is sketched out as excluding sense. Itwould be still too much to say, that there is something of the Real, because,to say that, is already to suppose a sense. The word Real has itself a sense, Ieven at one time, played a little bit on it, I mean to invoke the things, Ievoked as an echo the word reus which, as you know, in Latin means guilty;one is more or less guilty of the Real. This indeed is why moreoverpsychoanalysis is a serious thing, I mean that it is not absurd to say that itcan slide into fraudulence.There is something that must be noted in passing, which is that, as I pointedout the last time to Pierre Soury – the last time, I mean in his own place, atJussieu, the one of which I spoke to you the last time – I pointed out to himthat the reversible torus from which he approaches the Borromean knot is104
something which, for the knot in question, presupposes that one single torusis reversed. Not at all, of course, that one cannot reverse others, but then itis no longer a Borromean knot. I gave you an idea of that by a little drawingthe last time.It is therefore not surprising to enunciate in connection with this torus, withthis torus which starts from a triple Borromean knot, with this torus if youreverse it, to qualify what is in the torus, in the torus of the Symbolic, assymbolically real. The symbolically real is not the really symbolic, for thereally symbolic is the Symbolic included in the Real. The Symbolicincluded in the Real has well and truly a name, it is called the lie, whereasthe symbolically real – I mean that which of the Real is connoted inside theSymbolic – this is what is called anxiety. The symptom is real; it is even theonly real thing, namely, which has a sense, which preserves a sense in theReal. It is indeed for that reason that the psychoanalyst can, if he is lucky,intervene symbolically to dissolve it in the Real.So then I am going to all the same note for you in passing what issymbolically imaginary. Well then, it is geometry; the famous mosgeometricus, that so much has been made of, is the geometry of angels,namely, something which despite writing does not exist. I formerly teasedthe Reverend Father Teilhard de Chardin, a good deal by pointing out tohim that if he was so keen on writing, he should recognise that angelsexisted. Paradoxically Reverend Father Teilhard de Chardin did not believein them, he believed in man, hence his business about the hominisation ofthe planet. I do not see why one would believe more in the hominisation ofanything whatsoever than in geometry. Geometry explicitly concerns theangels and for the rest, namely, as regards structure, there reigns only onething, which is what I call inhibition. It is an inhibition that I attack, I meanthat I worry about, I concern myself about everything that I bring you hereas structure, a concern which is simply linked to the fact that a genuinegeometry is not what one thinks, one that depends on pure spirits, as muchas one that has a body, that is what we mean when we speak about structure,105
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 100 and 101: I remind you that the place of semb
Page 102 and 103: this term in the feminine, since th
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
show all

Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?