rubrique a pour but de recueillir différents commentaires de collègues,
des réflexions, des questions qui pourraient surgir à partir de
citations choisies, ou des extraits de textes de S. Freud et de J.Lacan.
En recueillant des voix et des pensées différentes, « Réflexions » nous
amènera aussi à « Lire un symptôme » et finalement à notre Rencontre à Tel
Aviv. « Réflexions » vous invite à participer à ce projet.
aim of this rubric is to gather different commentaries, reflections or
questions that emerge from chosen quotes, or from extracts of Freud’s or
Lacan’s texts. By gathering different thoughts and voices,
‘Reflections’ will take us towards ‘Reading a Symptom’ and in the end to
our meeting in Tel Aviv. ‘Reflections’ invites you to participate in
this project.
the other from Lacan, one can follow two directions for the reading of the
symptom –
toward the real of the symptom, « based on writing as outside meaning »[1] – a reading which is
beyond meaning
know that in writing I have to blind myself artificially in order to focus all
the light on one dark spot, renouncing cohesion, harmony, rhetoric and
everything which you call symbolic, frightened as I am by the experience that
any such claim or expectation involves the danger of distorting the matter
under investigation, even though it may embellish it »[2]
letter to Lou Andreas-Salome, his way of writing. How he tries to go beyond any
claim or expectation, how he tries to go beyond anything which is symbolic. I
regard Freud’s idea about the writing as a lead in relation to the question –
how to read a symptom: In the dark, with no preconceived argument or
expectation, relinquishing any objective of cohesion, harmony or rhetoric.
Freud proposes to abandon the temptation to adorn the investigation with meaning.
Reading as a
dupe
its [the Borromoean knot] dupe »[3]
For Lacan, the Borromean knot,
whose fourth ring is the symptom, is a writing that supports the real. In
Seminar XX Lacan mentions his trip to the East over the plain of Siberia.
Following this trip he talked about the route of the river he saw from the
plane as the « metaphorical trace of writing »[4].
He linked our ability to read the written to the « idealism related to the
impossibility of inscribing the sexual relationship »[5].
Thus, in a Mobius manner, it is possible to read the written as a result of
that which is impossible to write. Precisely there Lacan places the symptom, as
a real thing, as a substitute (suppliant) for the sexual relation.
Consequently, the quotation above, concerning the recommended manner of
operating with the knot, can be regarded as prescribing a way of reading the
symptom – a reading that directs us to the meaningless – to use a bit of
stupidity, i.e. to be its dupe. The reading in the dark and the reading as a
dupe, share some similarities but, the direction that Lacan suggests is not in
the realm of dark and light, vision and blindness, but rather to be located
beyond appearance and being. To be a dupe in the right way is to be the dupe of
the real.
L’inscription au congrès en ligne:
Association Mondiale de Psychanalyse – World Association of Psychoanalysiswww.wapol.org http://www.wapol.org
