Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

eason is said to be purloined, while what I enunciate, in re-establishingPoe’s text, The purloined letter, namely, the letter that does not arrive, theletter whose circuit is extended. On this I made a certain number of remarksthat you will find in my text, a text which is at the start of what is called myEcrits. I show how striking it is to see that the fact of being in short in astate of dependency on this letter feminizes a personage who – one couldput this otherwise – is not precisely lacking in pluck, were it only from thefact of filching the letter which the Queen knows that he possesses and he isfeminised for all that, and not because of the trials he endures in hiding itfrom the Other, who is the King, this scandalous letter. He says to himself:the Other does not know. But this is simply equivalent to the fact that heholds the letter. He for his part knows, hence the extrapolation that AlainDidier Weill makes, an extrapolation which depends on the fact of holdingthe letter. That he hides it from the Other, does not ensure that the Kingknows anything at all about it.Alain Didier Weill pursues: the way in which the story of the Queen of thestory is different to Bozef depends on the fact that, if the Queen does indeedcarry out the trials opened with the Minister of these 4 moments ofknowledge that he himself has described and that he finds the trace of in Poeby the ascendency that the Minister has gained at the expense of theknowledge that the abductor has, of the knowledge that the victim has of itsabductor and of which the four moments are according to him: the Ministerknows that the Queen knows that the Minister knows that she knows. It istrue that this can be picked out, and that following on this, Alain DidierWeill, in his letter, points out to me that the Queen does not for all thatexperience this objective dispossession by the Minister as the subjectivedispossession at which Bozef arrives at the level that he enunciated for you,the last time, as B3-R3. It is true that here there is a deficiency in theenunciation that gave us at the last session. But, in this regard. I disagree.Bozef, even though he has had a name bestowed on him – and this indeed isthe flaw in which I surprise– Bozef even though he has been given a name,is not something which deserves to be named, I mean that it is notsomething which is like something which, let us say, is seen. It is not84