not p<strong>in</strong>po<strong>in</strong>ted it? He calls this a serpig<strong>in</strong>eu (billhook-like?) process. It is not evensure that it is a serpig<strong>in</strong>eux process there where it is judged to be the centre oflanguage. I for my part, I said all the same that this Japanese who had a very livelytaste for the metatongue, namely, that he took great enjoyment <strong>in</strong> hav<strong>in</strong>g learnedEnglish, and then French afterwards. Is this not where the slippage was? Heslipped <strong>in</strong>to mental trauma from this fact that, <strong>in</strong> all these metatongues that hemanaged to handle rather easily, well then, he could not f<strong>in</strong>d himself <strong>in</strong> them. Ifor my part advised that he should be given some room and that one should notstop at the fact that Clérambault had <strong>in</strong>vented, one f<strong>in</strong>e day, a th<strong>in</strong>g called mentalautomatism. Mental automatism is normal. If as it happens I do not have it, formy part, that is by chance. There are all the same, all the same someth<strong>in</strong>gs thatcan be called bad habits. If one starts say<strong>in</strong>g th<strong>in</strong>gs to oneself, as the aforesaidJapanese expressed himself textually, if one starts to say th<strong>in</strong>gs to oneself, whywould that not slide towards mental automatism because it is all the same quitecerta<strong>in</strong> that, accord<strong>in</strong>g to what Edgar Mor<strong>in</strong> says <strong>in</strong> a book which was recentlypublished and <strong>in</strong> which he questioned himself about the nature of nature, it isquite clear that nature is not as natural as all that, it is even <strong>in</strong> this that thereconsists this rottenness which is what is generally called culture. Culture seethes,as I po<strong>in</strong>ted out to you <strong>in</strong> pass<strong>in</strong>g. Yes.The types modelled by social relations consist <strong>in</strong> word play. Aristotle imputes, wedo not know why, be<strong>in</strong>g hysterical to the woman; it is a play on the wordhysteron. I po<strong>in</strong>ted out someth<strong>in</strong>g to you about k<strong>in</strong>ship. La parenté en question,is a book tackled by Needham, Rodney Needham who is not the good one. Whydoes everyone get engulfed <strong>in</strong> the most banal type of k<strong>in</strong>ship? Why do people,who come to speak to us <strong>in</strong> psychoanalysis, talk to us only about that? Whywould we not say that we are entirely ak<strong>in</strong> to a pouâte for example, <strong>in</strong> the sensethat I articulated just now, the pas pouâteassez? A pouâate, one has just as muchk<strong>in</strong>ship with him, why does psychoanalysis orient, orient people who openthemselves to it, orient people, <strong>in</strong> the name of what, towards their childhoodmemories? Why does it not orientate them towards a k<strong>in</strong>ship with a pouâte, apouâte among others, any one at all? Even a pouâte, is very commonly what iscalled a mental defective. It’s hard to see why a pouâte would be an exception.126
A new signifier, one that would have no k<strong>in</strong>d of sense, that would perhaps bewhat would open us up to what, <strong>in</strong> my lumpish way, I call the Real. Why wouldone not attempt to formulate a signifier which would, contrary to the use that ishabitually made of it, which would have an effect? Yes. It is certa<strong>in</strong> that all thishas an extreme character. If I am <strong>in</strong>troduced to it by psychoanalysis, this is all thesame not without an import (portée). Portée means sense, it has exactly no other<strong>in</strong>cidence. Portée means sense and we always rema<strong>in</strong> stuck to sense. Why is itthat we have not yet forced th<strong>in</strong>gs sufficiently, <strong>in</strong> order, <strong>in</strong> order to test what thatwould produce, to forge a signifier which would be other.Good, I will stick with that for today.If ever I summon you <strong>in</strong> connection with this signifier, you will see it advertisedand this will all the same be a good sign, s<strong>in</strong>ce I am only relatively mentallydefective, I mean that I am like everyone else, s<strong>in</strong>ce I am only relatively mentallydefective, who knows, a little light may come to me.127
- 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 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