518-519 / 536
THE SPEAKING BODY
Xth Congress of the WAP,
Rio de Janeiro 2016
519
518
Guéguen, Pierre-Gilles.
Transference: A Paradoxical Concept
[LCE
2(12), 2013]
“With regard to Freud, it would certainly be a mistake to consider that love
resolved his question of feminine jouissance—and yet, his initial awareness of
not-knowing allowed for a usage of the concept of the unconscious, starting
from transference phenomena and their handling within analytic treatment.”
p. 2
“Lacan adds a further step a few years later in
Seminar XI
. It concerns a
redefinition of transference and a precision brought to the relationship between
transference and repetition. Here, transference is introduced as leading to
the closure of the unconscious. It is necessary to take into consideration the
new paradox that Lacan introduces at this moment. When he affirms that
transference is the closure of the unconscious he is saying much more than
merely introducing transference as being purely illusory. He constitutes it
as paradoxical because in this Seminar he offers another perspective to it:
Transference is the enactment of the reality of the unconscious, insofar as reality is
sexuality
. This is to say that transference closes upon the supposed satisfaction
of an unconscious desire. In other words, a “missed” encounter with the object,
but one that is mediated by an impulsive substitutive satisfaction that is internal
to analysis. Simultaneously, in Seminar XI, while Lacan announces that while,
transference closes up the unconscious, repetition—somewhat surprisingly—
allows for its opening.”
p. 4
“This, once again, may appear paradoxical since repetition unceasingly
reproduces the primordial tie of the subject to what has been traumatic for
him/her and does not offer itself to the interpretation as a formation of the
unconscious. Still, Lacan is very clear: in the analytical session, he discards the
use of repetition inasmuch as it would be referring to the replay, in the here and
now of the session, of the childhood relations towards the parents. Instead, he
focuses the attention on the type of repetition that opens up to the unconscious
as trauma because it unceasingly indicates how the subject defends himself from
the real, how he avoids it.”
p. 4-5
“I would say that it is important for the analyst to allow transference to install
itself whilst giving the patient, at the same time, an indication that he/she and
the analyst ar on the same side of the “wall of language”, or rather, that they
are together in the process of deciphering the meaning of symptoms and that
the analyst doesn’t have the final word. Analysis then begins and transference
effectively becomes the motor of analysis as well as the instrument of the closure
of the unconscious.”
p. 7
Hafner, David.
Lacan’s Perspective on the Drei Schwere Kränkungen
and Copernicus’ Circle
[RT 7, 2014]
“The Freudian hypothesis of the unconscious manifests itself in the impossible,
through the symptom that does not cease to bumble the ideal. But as we
discussed above, the Copernican revolution did not take into consideration the
real. It operated, instead, at the level of the symbolic reversal. Copernicus’world
is of a complete symbolic lacking the hole of incoherence or impossibility
characteristic of the Lacanian real.
For Lacan, it was not until the subversion of the circle due to Kepler that
one could make a comparison worthy of the subversion of the subject by the
unconscious.”
p. 149
Krips, Henry.
What is a Picture: Lacan and the Vicissitudes of
Trompe l’Oeil?
[RT 7, 2014]
“The ‘God’ that Lacan has in mind here is definitely not the God of theology
(whose death Lacan joins Nietzsche in proclaiming). Rather it is what Lacan
calls ‘the Other’: “the perfect God, whose truth is the nub of the matter”—a
truth that, for God’s subjects, belongs to the realm of their unconscious.” As
Lacan puts it succinctly: “the true formula of atheism is not
God is dead
…
the true formula of atheism is
God is unconscious
.” Or, as he makes the point
elsewhere: “the gods may still speak through dreams. Personally I don’t mind
either way. (Rather) what concerns us (here) is the tissue that envelops these
messages, the network in which, on occasions, something is caught….This is the
locus where … the unconscious is played out… Situated between perception
and consciousness … in which the place of the Other is situated.”
p. 122-123
Laurent, Éric.
Uses of the Neurosciences for Psychoanalysis
. Trans.: J.
Stone [RT 5, 2010]
“As soon as man speaks, he is submitted to the question of his truth and his
most intimate identifications come to respond to the paradoxes of his link
to what he says and to what has been said to him. The materiality of the
unconscious is made, not of learning, but of things said to the subject, that have
hurt him, and of things, impossible to say, that make him suffer. The opposition
between the principles of the nervous system’s functioning, arising directly
from the laws of biology and physics, and the register of another causality for
founding psychology, is thus posed. Unconscious memory parasites the living
[being] and alters its potency.”
p. 46
Authors of the Freudian Field