Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

look of the Real, there is not, for the subject, at B3-R3 any recourse to any cornerwhatsoever, that the recourse summoned by the signifier of the Name of theFather is going to be to create a little nook, namely, a nook that is going towithdraw him from the Other, but which is also going to withdraw him fromhimself by constituting him as not knowing, since it is precisely this corner itself,the corner in which he has the most of himself, the most symbolic of himself thatis going to be evaporated. I would say that at that moment – scripture says to us‘let there be light’ – what is at stake at that moment is ‘let there be a hole’, this isan expression of Lacan’s. And this is perhaps what happened in the syntacticalformula that I evoked earlier. Having said this, how is it that the subject – I amturning all the time around that as you can see – who has lost speech, is going torediscover it and is going to be able to say ‘It’s you’? Well then I would say due tothe intervention of the signifier of the Name of the Father, which recreated theprimal repression, which made S 2 disappear and restored the o-object in its place,because of the operation of this signifier of the Name of the Father, the subjectreaches a different point of view, a point of view where he does not know theequivalence between the knowledge of the Other and the key which is lacking inhim. He discovers that it is not because the Other recognises that he is lacking,that there is not in him the key, that he lacks the essential key of his being, it isnot because the Other recognises that that he knows it. I would even say thatwhen he discovers that the Other can recognise the existence of this key while notknowing it, namely, not being able to restore it to him, if, in a first moment hemay fall into despair, in truth this is going to reintroduce him to hope, because ifthe Other is in the position of recognising what he does not know, that introducesthe dimension of the fact that the Other himself has lost this same key, that heknows well what lack is involved, and the hope that is opened up then, is to makepresent the absence of this lost uninscribable thing, and the hope, is precisely thatthe uninscribable can cease not to be written. And that is what is delivered atS(Ø).The unlikely paradox on which one ends up, as one might say, is how a signifier,this signifier of S(Ø), can assume this unthinkable contradiction of being at oncewhat maintains open the gap of what does not cease to be written – when youread, when you hear music that overwhelms you or a poem that overwhelms you,75