IRISH SCHOOL FOR LACANIAN PSYCHOANALYSIS
INTERCARTEL STUDY DAY – SATURDAY, 13 June 2015, 10.00-16.00
Miltown Park Conference Centre: Room X (first floor)
TOPIC: Final reports on work in 2014-2015
PROGRAMME- see abstracts for titles.
10.00 Chair: Karina Melvin
Mary Cheyrou–Lagreze, Mary Cullen, Patricia McCarthy, James O’Connor
11.45 Chair: Tom Dalzell
Terry Ball, Colm Cunneen, Monika Kobylarska, Audrey McAleese
14.00 Chair: Barry O’Donnell
Marion Deane, Monica Errity,Tony Hughes
15.00 Chair: Cormac Gallagher
Reflections on the study-day, AOB
Title: The cut which turns the Symbolic inside out
There are two quotations from the second week of Lacan’s seminar, L’insu que sait de l’une bévue s’aile à mourre (Lacan 1976-77) which specifically refer to the practice of psychoanalysis: “That psychoanalysis is attached to putting outside what is inside, namely, the unconscious… – [though] this is not without posing some questions” (p.22) and “…what do we see if we proceed as we usually do by a cut, by a split, to turn the Symbolic inside out?” (p.23). In addition to talking about the practice of psychoanalysis, what these quotations have in common is that, in one way or another, they speak of an inside and an outside and of the unconscious which, though inside, is outside. This paradox, with reference to the practice of psychoanalysis, is the focus of this paper.
Title: Wrestling with the Void.
My contribution will first of all focus on several aspects of Jean Allouch’s comment that “pyschoanalysis is a spiritual exercise”, reflecting on common denominators/contradictions in an effort to decipher where and if psychoanalysis and spirituality meet and part. In continuation of last February’s effort, I will then bring in the mystical dimension, endeavouring to see if the ‘thing’ of the mystics can throw light on Lacan’s void, and/or his sporadic wrestlings with some of the theologians of the soul. Finally, I will investigate whether or not a fourth discourse could be or needs to be, incorporated into the Four Fundamental Discourses, i.e. The Spiritual Discourse.
Title: Struggling with L’Etourdit (with help from Christian Fierens’ Second Reading)
This short paper outlines my finding a way in to begin to ‘read’ Dr. Fierens’ paper and the beginning of a work in progress towards taking on board the possibility of leaving room, “…..for a disconcerting Real, for a pure saying” .(Fierens, Ch. The Real of Lacan in the Treatment of Psychosis. The Letter. Irish Journal for Lacanian Psychoanalysis, Issue 65, 2014.)
Title: From Mathematical Functions to Fregean Functions in L’etourdit
Continuing on from my research into mathematical functions arising from cartel work on L’etourdit, this presentation will investigate Lacan’s use of the ‘function as proposition’ with regards to the phallic function in the Square of sexuation. I will trace the references to mathematical functions in L’etourdit and highlight why this form of function is not carried over into the square of sexuation. From there I will be able to illustrate Frege’s work on the function as proposition which will highlight why Lacan takes up this form of function for the phallic function. This seems to be a world away from Freud’s work on the ‘sexual function’ however there are many areas of confluence with his understanding of sexuality as it pertains to the neuroses which I will draw out.
Title: In Other Words
“This mythological story, in particular, its semantic and syntactic features, provides a basis from which Lacan’s opposing theories on ‘truth’ and ‘being’ can be considered.”
Title: Revising repetition
This paper presents Freud’s theory of repetition as it is articulated in Beyond the Pleasure Principle in order to understand better Lacan’s concept of the ‘missed encounter’ which he elaborates in The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. It also attempts to understand what lies behind the difference between repetition and reproduction which Lacan emphasises are not the same thing.
Title: Introduction to Topology
Lacan’s formal introduction to topology occurs in his seminar on Identification 1961-62. This presentation will take a step by step approach to his introduction of the torus in particular. The first half of his seminars in Identification serve as a way-in to his discussion of the structure of the subject as symbolised in topology.
We will see the link between the three lacks of privation, frustration and castration. We will also see the connection between some aspects of Freud’s Project for a Scientific Psychology and topology.
Title: How significant is the concept of inexact interpretation? Discussion on Edward Glover’s article “The Therapeutic Effect of Inexact Interpretation: A Contribution to the Theory of Suggestion.”
The main purpose of this paper is to analyse Glover’s article on “The Therapeutic Effect of Inexact Interpretation: A Contribution to the Theory of Suggestion” and to explore its significance for psychoanalytic practice. Lacan addresses the problem of the therapeutic effects of inexact interpretation in “The Function and Field of Speech and Language in Psychoanalysis”. He refers to it again in “The Direction of the Treatment and the Principles of its Power” where he raises a crucial question: What is the place of interpretation? In answering this question this paper unveils the relevance of the concept of inexact interpretation.
Title: An Incorrect Interpretation
The function of the analyst is interpretation. What is interpretation and how is it possible to speak about it? In The Direction of the Treatment and the Principles of its Power and Seminar IV, Lacan critiques Ruth Lebovici’s paper, Transitory Sexual Perversion in the Course of a Psychoanalytic Treatment (1956), as an illustration of an incorrect interpretation. Lacan’s critique is in the context of his polemic against ego psychology and object relations. Is Lacan’s warning about the danger of incorrect interpretation and countertransference as relevant today when so many ego psychology- type therapies reign supreme and psychoanalysis is nowhere to be found in any State or institutional setting? Ruth’s case study – the effect of an incorrect interpretation and the part the analyst plays in provoking the patient’s transitory perversion – shows her dedication to the work but is ultimatley wild analysis. By looking at Ruth Lebovici’s case study,what can be learnt about interpretation?
Title: Myth and Its Logics
In L’Etourdit, Lacan introduced a new incest, namely the incest between the real (saying) and the truth (said). Incest is what must be guarded against. This is attempted by means of the psychoanalytic discourse, where the logics of sexuation are put to work. Comprising four formulae ie the universal, the existence of the exception (nia), the absence of rapport (‘nya’ or there is no sexual relationship) and the notall, these logics deal with the phallus.
‘If the phallus is what is at stake in the Oedipus Complex, it is not to produce saids that are true and applicable to all, men and women, it is in the experience of the relaunching of saying of the treatment for the analyser and the analyst’ (Fierens)
To understand them allows us to better appreciate Freud’s discovery of the hole at the heart of knowledge – Freud puts us on the track of the fact that lack-of-sense (ab-sens) designates sex (Lacan) – and to better justify psychoanalytic practice to ourselves and others.
Title: No words to say it? : Exploratory thoughts on Fierens’ ‘equanimity’ of speaking and ‘autistic’ positions in psychoanalytic discourse.
In his second reading of Lacan’s L’etourdit (C.Gallagher trans. Aug. 2014), Christian Fierens introduces the autistic discourse – equating it to that of the speaker. ‘…what the speaker says or what the autistic does… ’. Speech presents itself in the form of statements (enonces), but also silences: ‘… Look! I am silent. Look! he is silent… ’. Silence being a potential statement. Yet, Lacan speaks of Anxiety as that which remains unspoken and Freud introduced the return of the repressed: the very eruption of the soma – an encounter with the Real? – as a consequence of repression. The psychoanalytic act (out), which Fierens insists the analyst ’…must be doing…’ . ‘…Abstinence has nothing to do with doing nothing…’ .