You are on page 1of 814

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN

Edited by Jacques-Alain Miller BOOK IV The Object Relation 1956-1957
TRANSLATED WITH NOTES BY

L. V. A ROCHE

a \

-i

re \\g_

CONTENTS

A THEORY OF OBJECT LACK

I I III IV V 78

Introduction The three forms of object lack The signifier and the Holy Spirit The The dialectic of frustration On bundling as analysis, and its consequences

PERVERSE PATHS OF DESIRE

VI 100The

primacy of the phallus and the young homosexual girl VII 1.:, A Child is Being Beaten and the young homosexual girl VIII WS Dora and the young homosexual girl

THE FETISH OBJECT

D C The function of the veil X Identification with the phallus XI 620* The phallus and the unsatiated mother

A THEORY OF OBJECT LACK

I INTRODUCTION

The Z-shaped schema. The object, lost and refound. Pearls. The object, anxiety, the hole. The fetish and the phobic object.

This year we shall speak on a topic to which the historical evolution of psychoanalysis, or what is thus named, might give a central position in theory and in practice, whether in a way that is explicit or not. This topic is the object relation. Why did I not choose that when we began these seminars, since it was already current, primary, critical? Precisely for the reason which motivates the second part of my title -- and Freudian structures. This topic could be treated, in effect, only after a certain distance had been taken on the question. We had first to consider the structures in which Freud has shown us that analysis takes place and operates, especially the .complex structure of the relation between the two subjects present in analysis, the analysand, and the analyst. It is to this that our three years of commentary and criticism of Freud's texts have been dedicated, as I shall recall for you briefly. The first year dealt with the very elements of the technical management of the cure, that is, with the ideas of transference and resistance. The second year was concerned with the foundation of the Freudian experience and discovery, namely, the idea of the unconscious, which I believe I have sufficiently shown to be what obliged Freud to introduce the principles,

literally paradoxical on the dialectical plane, which figure in Beyond the

Pleasure Principle. Finally, during the course of the third year, I gave you a
clear example of the absolute necessity of isolating that essential articulation of symbolism which is called the signifier, in order to understand anything at all, analytically speaking, of the strictly paranoiac field of the psychoses. At the end of these three years of criticism, we are thus armed with a certain number of terms and schemas. The spatiality of the latter is not to be taken in the intuitive sense of the term schema, but in another perfectly legitimate, sense, which is topological -- it is not a matter of localizations, but of the relations between places, interposition, for example, or succession, sequence. Our elaboration culminates in a schema that we can call the schema, which is the following -[Diagram, p. 12.]

(Es) S .

. o' other

(Ego) o .

. 0 Other
THE SCHEMA

This schema initially provides a notation of the relation of the subject to the Other. As it is constituted at the beginning of analysis, it is a relation, of virtual speech b which he subect receives his own message
j

from the Other, in the form of speechehich is unconscious. This message is, forbidden him, it is profoundly misconstrued [
meconnu] it is deformed, arrested, intercepted, because of the
interception of the imaginary relation 2

between o and o', between the ego and the other, which is its typical object. The imaginary relation, which is essentially an alienated relation, interrupts, slows down, inhibits, usually inverts, and profoundly misconstrues the speech relation between the subject and the Other, the great Other, in so far as this is another subject, a subject par excellence capable of deceiving. It is not vain to have introduced this schema into analytic experience, seeing how that is formulated today by an ever increasing number of analysts, who give prevalence in analytic theory to the object without, however, sufficiently commenting on it. They recenter the dialectic of the pleasure principle and the reality principle upon it, and they found analytic progress upon a rectification of the subject's relation to the object, considered as a dual relation, which is, they then say, in speaking of the analytic situation, extremely simple. This relation of subject to object, which tends more and more to occupy the center of analytic theor , is precisely what we shall p_ at to test.
y

Once the object relation considered as dual is ken tQ correspond precisely to line o-o' of our schema, can one thus construct a satisfactory whole from the phenomena offered to observation in analytic experience? Does this instrument all by itself allow us to reply to the facts? Can the more complex schema that we have suggested be put aside, indeed, must it be discarded? That the object relation has become, at least in appearance, the principal theoretical element in analytical explanation, is something that I can demonstrate to you from a recently published Collective work, to which, in

3

fact, the term collective applies particularly well.' I cannot say that I am inviting you to delve into it. You will see object relations overvalued and promoted from one end to the other in a way that is not always very satisfying in its articulation, but whose monotony and uniformity are surely striking. You will see the object relation promoted in art article entitled Evolution de la psychanalyse, and, as the final term in this evolution, you will see in the article, La Clinique psychanalytique, a presentation of clinical work which centers it entirely upon the object relation. Perhaps I might give you some idea of where such a presentation can lead. Taken as a whole, the collection is quite striking. One sees analytic practitioners try to organize their thinking and the understanding they might have of their own experience around the object relation, without its seeming to give them full and complete satisfaction, but, on the other hand, not without its orienting their practice and penetrating it most profoundly. One cannot say that the fact that they conceive their experience in these terms is without consequence in their modes of intervention, in the orientation given to the analysis, and also its results. That is what one cannot possibly fail to recognize [mêconnaitre], in simply reading them. Analytic theory and practice, it has always been said, cannot be dissociated, and from the moment that one conceptualizes the experience in a particular way, it is inevitable that it will also be directed in that way. Certainly, the practical results can only be partially glimpsed. To introduce the question of the object relation, and more precisely the question whether or not it is legitimate and sound to give it a central place in analytic theory, I shall remind you at least briefly of what this concept owes, or does not owe, to Freud himself. I shall do so because for us starting with a commentary on Freud is a sort of guide, and almost a technical limitation that we have imposed upon ourselves. Moreover, this year I have sensed in you some questions, if not disquiet, as to whether I would or would not start off with Freudian texts. And no doubt it is very difficult, with regard to the object relation, to start
For the identification of this volume, see i n f r a , A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s . 4

from Freud's texts themselves, because the object relation is not in them. I am of course speaking of what is here very strictly taken to be a deviation in analytic theory. I must therefore start with recent texts and at the same time, with a critique of their positions. On the other hand, there is no doubt that we must ultimately refer to the Freudian position, and, at the same time, we cannot avoid dealing, even if very rapidly, with what revolves around the very notion of the object in the fundamental themes that are strictly Freudian. We cannot do that at the beginning in a way that is fully spelled out. It is precisely at the end that we shall come back to it, and that we shall be able to articulate it. I want, therefore, simply to make a brief reminder that this would not even be conceivable if there were not behind us three years of collaboration in textual analysis, and if we had not already encountered the theme of the object in its various forms.

1 Freud, of course, speaks of the object. The final part of Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality is called precisely "The Finding of an Object", "Die
Objektfindung". One is implicitly speaking of the object each time that the notion of reality comes into play. One speaks of it in yet a third way

5

whenever the ambivalence of certain fundamental relations is brought into play -- namely, the fact that the subject makes himself an object for the other, the fact that there is a particular type of relation in which reciprocity with regard to an object is patent, and is even a constituent fact.

I would like to put the strongest emphasis on the three modes in which notions relative to the object before us appear. If you look at Chapter Three of the Three Essays, you will see something which was already there at the time that Freud wrote the Entwurf, a text which, I remind you, was only published by a sort of historical accident, for not only did Freud prefer not to publish it, but one might say that it was published against his will. Still, in looking at this first sketch of his psychology, we find the same formula with regard to the object. Freud insists that for man, every means 91 finding the object is, and is ever, only the pursuit of a drive [tendance] in which what is at stake is a lost object, an object to be refound.
It is not at all a matter of the object considered in modern theory as being the fully satisfying object, the typical object, the object par excellence, the harmonious object, the object that founds man in an adequate reality, in the reality which gives proof of maturity -- the famous genital object. It is striking to see that at the moment when he fabricates the theory of instinctual development as it was revealed in the earliest analytic experiences, Freud indicates that the object is grasped by means of a search for the lost object. The object that corresponds to an advanced state of instinctual maturation is an object found again, the refound object of early weaning, the object that first formed the point of attachment in the child's earliest satisfactions. It is clear that a discordance is established by the mere fact of this repetition. A nostalgia binds the subject to a lost object, and directs the entire effort of the search. It marks the newly found object with the sign of an impossible repitition since this is precisely not the same object -- it could never be. The primacy of this dialectic puts a fundamental tension at the center of the subject-object relation, which means that what is sought is not sought in the same way as what will be found. It is the search for a satisfaction past and outgrown that the new object is 6

sought and it is founds and embraced else where thail where it was sought. There is a fundamental distance introduced by the essentially conflictual element which all search for the object entails. This is the first form in which the relation to the object appears in Freud. To give full weight to what I would underline here, we must resolve to articulate it in terms that are philosophically elaborated. If I intentionally do not do so here, it is because I reserve that for the moment when we shall return to this theme. But those for whom these terms already have some meaning because of their knowledge of philosophy can already perceive all the distance that separates the Freudian relation of the subject to the object from earlier conceptions, founded on the notion of an adequate object, an object anticipated in advance, adapted to the subject's maturation. The Platonic perspective founds all apprehension of the object upon recognition, reminiscence of a type that is in s o m e w a y preformed. This is separated, by all the distance that there is between modern experience and ancient experience, from the notion offered by Kierk ard under the term repetition, repetition that is ever sought but never satisfyed. By its nature, repetition is opposed to reminiscence. It is always as impossible to satisfy . It is in this register that the Freudian notion of the refinding of the lost object is situated. We shall retain this text, which clearly shows that Freud from the beinning notion of the object within the framework of a profoundly confliclual relation between the subject and his world. How could it be otherwise since already, at that epoch, there is essentially question of the opposition between the reality principle and the pleasure principle? The pleasure principle and the reality principle cannot be separated from each other. I would further say that they are implied and included in each other in a relation which is dialectical. The reality principle is constituted only by what is necessary for the satisfaction of the pleasure principle. It is no more than its extension, and inversely, both in its dynamic and in its fundamental search, it implies the fundamental tension of the pleasure principle. Nonetheless -- and this is
ega

the essential element in what Freudian theory contributes -- between the two there remains a gap, which we would not be able to distinguish if one were simply the continuation of the other. The. pleasure principle in effect tends principle implies the existence of an organization or a structure that is different and autonomous, from which it follows that what it grasp can be fundamentally different from what is desired. This relation itself introduces into the dialectic of the subject and the object another term, which is here possed as irreducible. Just as the subject , we saw is always vowed in his primordial demands to a return, a return which is impossible because it is a return, so reality is in fundamental opposition to what is sought by the drive, as the relation between the reality principle and the pleasure principle shows. In other terms, the satisfaction of the plea ure principle, always latent, underlying any exercise of in the world tends more or less_ to be realized in a form that is somewhat hallucinatory. The underlying organization of the e • a that of the drive of the subject a s s u c h a l w a y s h a s the fundamental possibility of satisfaction by means that are unreal hallucinatory This is the other position that Freud strongly accentuates, as early as The Interpretation of Dreams, that is, beginning with his first fully developed formulation of the opposition between the eality rinciple and the pleasure principle. These two positions are not, as such, articulated with each other. The fact that they appear in Freud as distinct indicates very well that it is not around the subject's relation to the object that development is centered. If each of the two terms finds its place at different points in the Freudian dialectic, it is for the simple reason that in no case is the subject-object relation central. If this relation appears to be sustained in a way that is direct and without gap, this is only when what are at stake are relations that have since been called pregenital - to see - to be seen, to attack-to be attacked, passive-active. The subject lives these relations in a way that always implies, more or less tacitly, more or less openly, his identification with
s r

8

the partner. These relations are lived in a reciprocity -- the term is valuable here -- of ambivalence between the subject's position and that of the partner. At this level, in effect, a relation is introduced between the subject and the object which is not only direct and without gap, but which is literally an equivalence between one and the other. It is this relation that has become the pretext for putting the object relation as such into the foreground. This relation of reciprocity between subject and object, which might well be called a mirror relation, in itself already poses so many questions that I have introduced the concept of the mirror stage into analytic theory in an effort to resolve them. What is the mirror stage? It is the moment when the child recognizes his own image. But the mirror stage does far more than simply denote a phenomenon that occurs in the development of the child. It illustrates the conflictual character of the dual relation. All that the infant learns in the captivation by his own image is precisely the distance that exists between his internal tensions, the very tensions raised by this relation, and his identification, with his image. That, however, is what has served as a theme, a pivot, for putting the subject-object relation into the foreground, and making it the phenomenal scale to which one might usefully refer what up until then had been presented in terms that were not only pluralistic but truly conflictual, introducing an essentially dialectical relation between the different terms.
`

One of the first to have sounded this new accent, though not so early as one believes, .vas Karl Abraham. Up until then, the evolution of the subject had always been seen through a reconstruction, retroactively, with respect to a central experience, that of the conflictual tension between conscious and _unconscious, conflictual tension created by the fundamental fact that what is sought by the drive is obscure, usness so much so that what conscio
can recognize of it is first and before all a misrecognition [méconnaissance]. It is not on the path of consciousness that the subject finds himself, there is something else and a beyond. As this beyond is fundamentally

9

misconstrued meconnu] by the subject, beyond the reach of his knowledge, a question immediately arises as to its structure, its origin and its meaning. But this perspective was abandoned, on the initiative of a certain number of noteworthies, followed by significant currents within psychoanalysis. Everything was recentered with respect to the function of an object, and more precisely, its final state. Whereas we go backwards in order to understand how the terminal point is attained -- which is moreovernever observed because the ideal object is literally unthinkable,- in the new perspective, this ideal object is on the contrary conceived as a aim an endpoint, towards which a whole series of experiences, elements, partial notions of the object contribute. This perspective has progressively gained ground from the moment that Abraham formulated it in 1924 in his theory of the development of the libido. His conception founds for many the very law of analysis, frames everything that occurs there, forms the system of coordinates within which the whole analytic experience is situated, and determines its point of achievement, that famous ideal object -- final, perfect, adequate -- which is presented as in itself marking a goal attained, namely, the normalization of the subject. 2 On the avowal of those who are engaged on this path, the very progress of analytic experience is to have put the subject's relations to his environment into the foreground. The accent on the environment constitutes a reduction of everything that the analytic experience offers. It is a return to a completely objectifying position which puts the existence of a particular individual into the foreground, together with his more or less adequate, more or less adapted relation to his environment. To illustrate that, I think that I can do no better than to refer you to the formulations to be found on pages 761 to 773 of the collective work that we are discussing.

I0

After it has been underlined that the progress of an analysis is a matter of the relations of the subject to his environment, we incidentally learn that this is particularly revealing in the case of little Hans,2 where the parents appear, we are told, to be without a personality of their own. We are not obliged to subscribe to this opinion. The important thing is what follows -- This was before the war of 1914, at a time when western society,
sure of itself, asked no questions as to its own perenniality. Since 1926, however, the accent has been on anxiety, and the interaction of the organism and the environment. There is also the fact that the foundations of society have been shaken, anxiety before a changing world is a daily experience, individuals see themselves as different. It is an epoch in which physics questions itself, and relativism, incertitude, and probability seem to strip objective thought of its confidence in itself

This reference to modern physics as the basis of a new rationalism should, it seems to me, go without comment. What is important is what is curiously admitted in an indirect fashion, which is that psychoanalysis is a sort of social remedy. That is what is put into the foreground, and presented as the characteristic motor element of its progress. It matters little whether that has a basis or not, since these things frankly seem to us of scant weight -- what is instructive is the very great lightness with which they are accepted. This example is not unique, for the specific nature of this work is the collectivity operating within it, so much does it seem made by a curious homogenization, rather than by an articulation properly speaking. The first article, to which I referred just before, states expressly that when all has been said, the general concept needed in our current understanding of the structure of the personality is to be obtained through the perspective which they say is the most practical and the most prosaic there could be, that of the social relations of the patient -- this last expression is underlined by the author. I shall pass on other terms which have the character of a confession -we understand that one might be troubled by all that is so unstable,
2

Sigmund Freud, Analysis of a Phobia in a Five Year Old Boy.

11

ungraspable, and artificial in such a conception of analysis, but this is not due to the object itself of that discipline, which is an activity whose variations over time no one would dream of contesting. That in effect, is
an explanation ever so lightly dusted with the different modes of approach which derive from that line. That is not to say that it must satisfy us completely, for I do not see that the objects of other disciplines are not equally subject to variations over time. Concerning the subject's relation to the world, we see the affirmation of

a parallelism at all times between the more or less advanced state of the maturation of instinctual activities, and the structure of the Ego in a given subject. In other words, after a certain point, the structure of the ego is
considered as the stand-in, and ultimately as the representation of the state of maturation of instinctual activities at their different stages. These are terms which, to some of you may not seem in themselves to require much criticism. It matters little, for the question does not lie there, and we shall see to what extent these terms can be retained. But their
consequence is the installation at the center of analysis of what appears

precisely like a typology in which there are pregenital and genital types. We find this, for example -- The pregenital type are individuals having

a weak Ego -- and in them the coherence of the Ego depends strictly upon the continuation of object relations with a significant object. Here we can
begin to ask some questions. We shall perhaps see shortly, in passing, in the same text, where the notion of this unexplained significant object can

lead. The technical notion that it implies is the importance of pregenital relations within the analytic relation. The loss of these relations, or of
their object, which is synonymous here, since in this instance the object exists only as a function of its relations with the subject, causes serious disorders in the activity of the Ego, such as depersonalization phenomena, and psychotic troubles. We find here a point where a test is sought which
would give proof of the profound fragility of the ego relations maintained by the pregenital type towards his object. The subject tries to maintain his

object relations at all cost, using all sorts of arrangements to that end, including a change of object through displacement, or symbolization, in

12

which the choice of a symbolic object arbitrarily charged with the same affective value as the initial object allows the subject not to find himself deprived of object relations. For him the term "auxiliary Ego" is fully justified. The genital type, on the contrary, possess an Ego which does not see its strength and the exercise of its functions as depending upon the possession of a significant object. Whereas for the former, the loss of a person who is subjectively felt to be important -- to take the simplest example -- calls their individuality into question, for the latter such a loss, painful though it may be, in no way disturbs the soundness of the personality. They are
not dependent upon a relation to an object. That does not mean that they

can easily do without any relation to an object, which in any case is unfeasible practically, since object relations are so multiple and varied. It simply means that their unity is not at the mercy of the loss of contact with a significant object. When the rapport between the Ego and its object relation is taken into consideration, that is what differentiates them radically from the former.

Further on -- in all neurosis, normal development seems to have
been stopped by the impossibility for the subject of resolving the last of the structuring conflicts of childhood, whose perfect liquidation, if one may express it that way, would end in that fortunate adaptation to the world which is called the genital object relation, which gives every observer the impression of a harmonious personality, and in analysis gives he immediate perception of a sort of crystalline limpidity of spirit, which is, I repeat, more a frontier than a reality 1...].
Crystalline limpidity. We see just how far the notion of the perfection

of the object relation can lead this author. Whereas the drives in their pregenital form present the character of an
untamable need for possession that is unlimited and unconditional, and include a destructive aspect, in their genital form they are truly tender and loving, and if the subject is not quite oblative, that is to say, disinterested, and if his objects are still fundamentally as narcissistic as in the preceding case, he is here is capable of understanding, of adaptation to the situation

13

Moreover. in so far as he is a subject. and an adolescence. the establishment of the relation to the other on the affective. indeed feeling plane. the desires. is complex with the notion more or less implicitly designated in these texts under the terms "objectivity" and "plenitude of the object". or to formulate the humorous remarks which they sufficiently suggest by themselves. will certainly take us much further. including consideration of the needs. refuses. which both the notion of objectivity and the most elementary experience indicate. On the contrary. which are named and 14 . that is to say in so far as he speaks. would bring you back to a very different idea and exploration of object relations. the happiness.with all the problems of adaptation which it implies by the fact that it resists. the intimate structure of his object relations shows that the participation of the object in pleasure of his own is indispensable to the subject's happiness. and on the other hand. We can in no way confound the establishment of reality. This confusion is articulated in such a way that objectivity is presented in one text as characteristic of the relation to the other in its highest form. for example. One must still make the progress that is required. the needs of the object are taken into the highest consideration. 3 This extraordinarily simple conception of the analytic notion of instinctual evolution is far from being universally accepted. That is sufficient to raise a very serious problem which we cannot if fact avoid asking -.of the other. the pleasure of the other. -. Texts like those of Glover. there is surely a distance between what on one hand is implied by a certain construction of the world considered as more or less satisfy at agixeri epoch. We shall have occasion to come back to these texts. But it is not enough to cite them. The preferences. The constitution of the other as such. and a maturity that are normal? There is an essential distinction to bemade.what is meant by an issue from childhood. which are the work of those who truly know how to shit pearls.

if one may put it so. however. which is not. end without putting what I am saying into relief by illustrating it with an example. It will suffice for me to emphasize the classical fundamental Freudian conception of abia. i or evolutive. It is above all an outpost against an established fear. You will see. 15 . The object has a completely different role here. object with regard to a particular demand of the subject's. and the object which is very essentially constituted in order to keep this fear at a distance. is conceived in a completely different manner. p h o Freud and all those who have studied phobia with him and after him could not help noting that there is no direct relation between the object and the alleged fear which colors it with its fundamental mark in constituting it as such.. On the contrary. as a primitive object. The fear gives the object its role at a determined moment in a particular criss of thesubject. legitimately affirmed? We shall criticize it as well. The object to the issue of a signal of alarm. typical. That is how at each stage the subject must be characterized. a rampart within whi h he is sheltered from his fears. The object encloses the subject within a certain circle. by showing that it is at the origin of the idea of the object as it is promoted in the works of a Glover. It is.defined as such. one might say aced p l against the background of anxiety. It is not a matter of a pure and simle a p p tness of the. and in the way conducting analysis that is characteristic of his thinking and his technique. The object is an instrument for masking and guarding against thendamenal ground of anxiety which u f t characterizes. at the clse of our meeting today. which can very well a certain cases be a primitive fear and not be one in other cases. At different stages of his development. there is a considerable distnce between the fear in question. I cannot. the subject's relation to his world. that the function of the object whose stages characterize the different periods of individual development. Is this modern notion of phobia. when you look at these texts. Analysis requires that one introduce a functional notion of the object that is of a very different nature from that of a pure and simple correspondent to the subject.

which is taken to be its consequence and outcome. and to the denial of this absence. indeed as an abyss in reality. in so far as 16 . I introduce this topic today in order to show you that if we take things from the perspective of the object relation. It is nevertheless remarkable that the desire of reconstruction in the genetic sense should have come to the point of trying to deduce from the flourishing of primitive phobic objectal constructions the very construction of the paternal object. know whether there is something in common. You cannot help but see that here too the object has a certain complementary function with regard to something which appears as a hole.That it is a question of an anxiety which is castration anxiety. It does not seem that the fetish should be expressly linked to castration anxiety by the same slope. and let us thus in effect approach the question in that light -. and all the forms of the object that you can think of for man. But putting the questions in these terms. the ideal object. in the collective work that I have cited. perhaps one must find the occasion and starting point for a critique in the phenomena themselves. and anxiety _castration anxiety. it is no less remarkable to see what the concepts of the fetish and of fetishism become. difference between the function of a phobia and that of a fetish. the functional object. and without ourselves refusing to tackle the problems stemming from the object relation. much as the latter is linked to the perception of the absence of the phallic organ in the feminine subject. It matters little. for example.but then. let us not content ourselves with uniform explanations for different phenomena. goes exactly in this direction. and to establish the function of protection played by the object of phobia with regard to this anxiety. - between the phobic object and the fetish. Let us agree to accept the question that is put to us concerning the typical object. we are told. Let us center our opening question. has been little contested until recently. the fetish is found in analytic theory to fill a function of protection against anxiety. In another register. A report by Mallet on phobia. on what constitutes the. by a curious reversal of the path which had allowed us to go from phobia back to the idea of a certain relation with anxiety.

Can one deny that the latter also raises in itself the question of its objectival value? The fact that. but direct. That is exactly where I have resolved to take my starting point. and about which we might wonder why it is no longer given its due value -- the notion of the screen memory as being especially constituent of each subject's past_-. in a certain register. namely. is at least very close to that which we have just mentioned. does not seem to me necessarily less enigmatic than one of the objects of daily human experience. if not synonymous. the property of regularizing relations with all other objects. for example. a piece of money. which is put into the foreground here. It is not enough to speak of the object in general. the notion of a fetish-object. and also the very singular function of that constitution of rem on which Freud from the beginning shed truly striking light.these are so many questions which deserve to be treated by themselves and for themselves.they are one and the other centered upon the same ground of a fundamental anxiety against which one and the other may be invoked as a measure of protection or as a guarantee for the subject. 17 . as if the fact of having succeeded in becoming a genital type were enough to resolve every question. or of an object which would have. They must also be analyzed in their reciprocal relations. or abstract. or lose any other species taken into consideration for the exchange of any element whatever in human life transposed into its market value -.does that not in a thousand ways introduce a question that has been effectively resolved in Marxist theory by a term that. We shall set off from our experience in order to end at the same problems. for it is from these relations that the needed distinctions of field might arise which would allow us to define in detail why a phobia and a fetish are two different things. by I do not know what virtue of magical communication. that of the screen-object. the fetish? In short. since we start with the objects that are offered us. we lose it in so far as it is a means of exchange. What an object for a genital type might be from an essentially biological point of view. thus proceeding in a way that is no longer mythic.

is woman. I have done some reading on your behalf.What relation is there between the general usage of the word fetish and the precise employ of the term to designate a sexual perversion? That is how we shall introduce the topic of our next meeting. It is by way of a return to experience that we shall be able to re-situate the term "object relation" and restore its true value. and more particularly. the object. I have read what psychoanalysts have written on the subject that will be our own this year. 21 November 1956 I I THE THREE FORMS OF LACK OF THE OBJECT What is an obsessional? The imaginary triad. Mr. Phallicism and the imaginary. why not call it by its name? 18 . which will deal with phobia and the fetish. Reality and Wirklichkeit. The genital object. to call it by its name. This week. that is. the genital object. Then. Winnicott's transitional object.

said Renan. Well. you will find it in Civilization and its Discontents. The idea of a harmonious object.and the theoretical divigations of psychoanalysts. somethdoes not work.there_is. It would seem more important that it be you who should do this reading than I. What did Freud. 1 I remind you that the common forgetting of the notion of the object is not at all so accentuated in outline if one follows the way that Freudian experience and doctrine situate and define this object. 19 .I do not even say by the analytic experience. Human stupidity gives an idea of the infinite.there would be no analysis at all. which does not mean that this suffices to define it. That brings us back to our questions about the object. Nothing is more precise than Freud's formulations on this point -. a gap..register. And then. -. Do not suppose that I am assimilating them to stupidity. but they are of an order capable of giving an idea of the infinite. always all alone. If harmony in this matter were not something prolnatic. is perfectly contradicted by the experience -. these readings are very instructive from still other points of view.irt_this. as well as in New Lectures on Psychoanalysis. bring to this subject? -. if he had lived in our time..what I shall say today will probably not go beyond that. It is in fact striking to see to what extraordinary difficulties the minds of different analysts have been submitted in the aftermath of Freud's so abrupt and astonishing statements. It is this. he would have added -..So it was by a certain number of readings on female sexuality that I was gratified. principally this one. That would make it easier for you to understand what I shall be led to say on the subject. by its nature completing the subject-object relation. lesson 31. No. but just by the common experience of the relations between man and woman. The positive statement that it does not work is in Freud.

but against the background of common reality.j. This obj. theoltectitself caught in a quest.the object. It is a living game 20 .. namely. .Such a partiality in the management of the object .tary_object ends. What is an obsessional? In sum...against . which is _opposed in the most categorical way to the idea of an autonomous subject. relation can condition an ex reme deviatim.on_tole_afraid_ ofit.. illustrated in_practice_with obsessional neurosis. on an ideal planeahgprogress of an analysis comes dowatoidentification_with the.ect with the object.. that in every__ relation of the_sub. The object is always an object found again. s. . the place of the related term is simultaneously 9scppiesayjhe subj even relation to it. a structuring notion which can be expressed somewhat like this. is that of an imaginaryrecian2sity. is the object as it arises from the exercise of what Freud calls theprimary system of. The play to which he delivers himself is a way of sheltering himself from death. egootJLr 2 r_lalyit. In the same way. an anxiety-provolingreali. I already underlined the last time the idea of the bject hallucinated . since I can identify with you. ThathAs_b_e_erurLog especially. Completely_opposedto that in analytic practice.the background of.. if one may say so. the third theme in which the object appears if we follow it in Freud.. is the basis of It is evidently to this last point that the practice of object relations in modern analytic experience is most attached. Obsessional neurosis is. This . with as a result what I shall call an imperialism of identification. Thus identification kb. Since you can identify with me..covering the real. In the final count.The object_appears at first in a quest for the lost object. pleasure. he is an actor who plays his role and guaranties a certain number of acts as if he were dead. background of anxiety. it is surely of us two the one whose ego is best adapted to reality who is the better model. in which the idea of asomplemen.lear from that of anxiety. as most of those who are here believe. It is a jeation_DEredL.. whichmust be distinguished Finally. thereis_ the idea of the object reduced in the final account to the real.ty. and the term of the analytic_questis to perceive_thatthere 1sxjoLea.e_ct_appears„no lout el against a .

and deserves to be accentuated at every moment if we want at least to know of what object we are speaking. tience the notion of the object. who is only his alter ego.He himself is only there as a spectator. with the aid of the notion of the object relation as it is elaborated by the author in question. To this end. say. which will allow us to find our bearings in our vocabulary.which consists in showing that he is invulnerable. which consists in going as close as possible to death while being out of range of all the blows. ble_undex_gmasit that the game is not being_played at the place_where beds. the small other. killed his desire in advance. One sees him in a sort of exhibition in which he tries to show just how far he can go in the exercise. a game of game. because the subject has.b. It is a notion which I shall not say is fleeting. but we can make a thousand errors if we do not know where this game is played.that is to say just how far the other can go.t6ckery. He has. and. mortified it. in some way. in the end? We know that it is he himself. She significant object for _ : this subject. the double of himself. It is clear that.niq has_ veritable does not mean that he knows the place from which he sets it all Who is it who leads the game. Itwould_b_tyrongtp believe_thatthis object could be sketched in term of the dual relation. let us 21 . The game unfolds before an Other who watches the_play. thaLis_wily dmost_nothing_that. a game of. the very possibility of the game and the pleasure that he takes residing in that. he exercises a domination which conditions all of his approaches to others. but which appears as extremely difficult to close in upon. he does as an alibi. in this very complex situation. and thatis yvhat is unconscious in_hinlWhat he does. one might . On the other hand he does not know what place he occupies. You will see where that leads. To reinforce our comparison.ap_Re. One must catch a glimpse of that. the notion of the object is not immediately given. since itarticiateLin an illusory game. including its illusory characteristics -. The notion of the object here is infinitely complex. We shall try to give this notion of the object a uniform usage. which has all the characteristics of a game.

in alternation. What appeared in outline. Monsieur Loyal arrives and says -. of ritual. elraion. by a certain N* who was a sort of genius. 22 . this sort of office. In taking_ the dual relation as_real. a series of slaps. I ask you to take the case of the obsessional in the author to whom I am referring.ancittautcome of this iAgion_to the_objectis. perhaps one cannot understand what the object strictly speaking means. or in the background. Why? Not only does experience not follow the ideal notion that we might have of its accomplishment. you will have interiorized it. Those who did not know him at the time when he played in a Paris cabaret can have no idea of the unholy character that he could give to the exhibition of a clown with a simple hat. represents the progress of the analysis. At that. That is the step that I am trying to have you take today. and that way you will have it in the right place. one way of resolving the situation and giving it an outcome.the fantasy of phallic incorporation.. in which Auguste and Chocolat are administering each other. practice. the subject gives them because of his aggressivity. in effect._makes_that privileged imaginaryobject which is called the_ phallus_surge up into the foreground. whereas.. then. You will see that the management of the object relation consists in this case in doing something which would be the analog of what would happen if you were watching a circus act. One can accompany it with a little song that is truly imperishable. -. of mass. to the extent that one approaches it. on the contrary.if one has not seen it.say that it is a matter of demonstrating-what-the_subjedhas articulated for tbisOther_spectator that he is without knowing it_and at whose _place he puts us to the extent that the transference advances. As black as it seemed. is the1 s2foundly oral character of thejmaginary .Let's see. and to read what. each of you eat your baton. but this notion only puts its paradoxes that much more into relief.cannot escape the laws of the imaginary. in such a way that the whole accomplishment of the dual relation. according to him. That is. all of this is unreasonable.. at which one could assist. You have left the arena for fear of receiving these blows.

in the course - 23 . That is what is put into the foreground by the schema which I gave you at the end of last year._a_thirct. what we can call th. but 4§ .the mother child relation. with all that it has of the problematic. even for those authors who make it the foundation of the whole analytic genesis. in concluding the analysis of the signifier to which the exploration of psychosis led us.. in effect. the point towards which the whole theory of the analytic situation is currently directed. traces and reflections of the initial position. and this is. is modeled upon a certain relation that is effectively fundamental -. That is demonstrated as much by experience as by the evolution of analytic theory. This relation surely is well designed to give the idea that it is a matter of a real relation.. p. I do not say as a mediating element. at the center of the concept of object relations. it is impossible. and I shall try to make you see. But.phallicism of the analytic experience. to bring in this imaginary element without there appearing as a key point. One tries. if one does not introduce the phallus as an element. because that would be to take a step that we have not yet taken together. and even to exercise. 29] Mother Child THE IMAGINARY TRIAD The imaginary relation. to reduce it in the end to being only the development of the mother-child relation.The notion of the objectselatioras impossible to understand. It is our inaugural schema. whatever it may be.e. . [ Diagram. but also as an introduction to what I intended to propose to you this year concerning the object relation. and one discovers in everything that follows this genesis.

Is it evident that annoyance is characteristic of the aggressive relation? One knows very well that aggression can be provoked by every other sentiment. namely. imaginary. him Xeccignix ejtis aggressivity. _ists on.. that the sentiment of love might be at the source of an aggressive reaction. 24 . entering_ into the imaginary . and putting a final touch on my description of the manner in which the dual relation is handled in a certain orientation and theorization of analytic experience. making. by its nature. that is to says in making him situate the analysis.es as evidence of the subject's misconstruction (miconnaissancel of the situation the fact_that he never wants to express his aggressivity. in thp dual relation.giv. When the analyst. By way of giving you a last detail. as if it were the central theme. for example. If there is an aggressive element. and that it is not at all to be excluded. j. that far from being an aggressive reaction. in a way that is significant. a form of question. when one seeks the origin of the whole analytic dialectic in the absence of the trinity of the terms symbolic.of this lecture.iro_n_y_is_aboYe_alLa way of questioning. that in the end everyone knows that annoyance and irony belong to the class of aggressive manifestations. The author adds. one can in the end only refer to the real. As for saying that a reaction like that of irony is. and expressesit only by showing a slight annoyance provoked by the technical rigidity. I shall again refer to the first article in the collective work of which I have spoken. it is structurally secondary with regard to the element of the question. the tgxt. real.game of the obsessional. That shows you in what a reduction of the field such a conception of the object relation ends. in what I just called a reciprocal relation. The author thus admits that he insists on perpetually leading the subject back to the theme of aggressivity. and I resolve never to speak of it again starting from this moment. the impasses that result from every attempt to reduce this imaginary phallicism to any real given whatsoever. In effect. aggressive. that does not seem to me compatible with what the whole world knows.

and it is the question with which we shall end. Freud wrote at a certain date and in what one or another author replied -. because it is a truly salient point of analytic experience. imaginary.theleas_what you see coming up in every line of what.object? That is worth the trouble of asking.symbolic.ne..leaLthe. turns around a major object. what does that represent for you straight off? Is the object real or not? Is what is towld in_the. what was at stake was in fact a matter of distinguishing the penis as a real organ with functions definable by certain real coordinates.... 25 . Without even going to the heart of the problematic of phallicism which I am introducing today. We shall see in greater detail that one must not confound the phallus with the penis. which is the phallus.that remainsnone. as well as the whole dialectic of an analysis.. One cannot saLthat the phallus is not a prevailing object in the mioanalytc dialectic. around the years 1920-1930.. it would be worth the trouble of our asking ourselves what the notion of the object means. an immense debate which occupied the whole analytic community was ordained around the notion of phallicism and the question of the phallic phase. that the whole dialectic of individual development. When someone speaks to you of the object relation in terms of access to _the-reaLas_the access that mustbe_obt4ined At_the_encLoLanalysis. .Helene Deutsch. Were it only for that. one can see. When. The whole ambiguily of the question comerning„the_object and its management in analysis comes down to_thiazz jp_the.objectyeal or not? 2 We reach this question both by way of the vocabulary elaborated for our use here -.and also by the most immediate intuition.. Though it was neverjormulated that the isolation_of this object was only_conceiyab Le_onthe _imaginary pla.We are thus led to the fundamental question with which we must begin because to it we must return. an object of which the individual has an idea as such. from * phallus in its imaginary function. and real -. Melanie Klein.

we can only refer to the real in theorizing.itself implies the _distinction ofthe. whose conditions are highly artificial. we need not be astonished at that. That is the concept implied by the German term Wirklichkeit. which goes back to the 18th century. It is the whole of the meslaanism. of Wirkung. It is what implies in and of itself every possibility' of effect. In fact. But even before going into that. we see very well that alt _real has more than one meaning Some of you. he is going to talk about that famous real. It is a question first of the whole of what effectively happens. . it seems to me. as to the very notion of reality. in particular. There is more than one way of tackling the question. with ease. will not hesitate to breathe a little sigh of relief -. for the real is at the boundary of our experience. When one speaks o one may intend several things. This position with regard to the real is very well explained by thessregn of ouLemerience. as soon as we tackle it. Still. let us ask what is_meant by the reciprocal position of the object and the real. but it is possible that we can all arrive at certain distinctions or dissociations essential to the management of the term real.Finally. for. if we look closely at how it is used. I would say. to the attempt by La Mettrie and by Holbach to develop the man-machine. or reality. which has the advantage of distinguishing in reality a function which the French language does not easily allow us to isolate. The concept of phallicism in . I think. how can this perspective have the least interest for an analyst?-.when the very 26 . I shall only make some reflections in passing here. which has until now remained in the shadows. that everything occurring in mental life must be referred to something which is proposed as material. But what do we mean when we invoke the real? It is scarcely probable that we should all have the same notion at the outset. contrary to what we are told when the situation is presented as being absolutely simple.Ernest Jones. If it is conceivable for a mind in the mechanico-dynamic tradition. to show how much psychoanalysts remain prisoners of categories that are really foreign to everything to which their practice should. have introduced them.categor_y_oLthelmaginary.

But. place an organic reality at the source of everything that works in analysis. Let me make a simple comparison in order to demonstrate it. Everything must be referred. in this instance electric power. Matter.In the end. only one must go to the place where he said it. a principal matter that is at the origin of all that occurs. in a way that is completely gratuitous. To say that the energy was already there in a virtual state in the current of the river does not advance us at all. It means. strictly speaking. that they have their own order. only begins to interest us from the moment that it is accumulated. and see what function it has. Freud said that as well. spoke of what happened in this machine in terms of the moment when the land was still virgin and when the waters of the Rhine flowed in abundance. which can later be distributed and put at the service of consumers. which pushes them endlessly to take up this refrain in their texts the way one knocks on wood -. and it is only accumulated at the moment when machines come into action. nothing. like other physicians. that primitive Staff. in this instance. that we too. in as much as he accepts the order of efficacy in which he functions. if he is analyst. in the end. we are only dealing with superficial mechanisms.principle of the exercise of his function plays in a succession of effects for which it is accepted by hypothesis. What is accumulated in the machine has above all the strictest ratio with the machine. the Rhine for example. It is a little as if someone in charge of a hydro-electric factory in the middle of the current of a large river. to things we shall perhaps one day know. if he understands what directs the whole spirit of the system. There is a sort of absurdity in that for an analyst. it is the machine that is at cause in the accumulation of any energy whatever. He gave this reality a completely different weight The reference by analysts to an organic basis corresponds to nothing other than a sort of need for reassurance. If he follows Freud. because the energy. exercises such a fascination on the medical mind that one imagines one has said something when one says. the perspective that he must take of it is an energetic perspective. No doubt they are animated by a propulsion which 27 .

it—were elsewhere than in this exercise itsglf. but in a way that is very fugitive. There is another use made of the notion_oireality in analysis. more problematic. The need that we have to confound the Stoff.comes from the current of the river.lhat are gQInposed and built. the dialectic..that could only come to the mind of someone completely mad. which allowed the introduction of the terms primary system and secondary system into the order of the psychic mechanism. This usage that was shown to be so fruitful at the beginning..e a completelLdifferent energetic weight. appears. I shall show you that there is no longer any meaning of this sort where Freud apparently made much of it. also brought_into_playin_thesluaLpsinciple. or tbe_grimitive matter. theiNganization„the_structuration of elements. I even think that analysis is made in order to demonstrate it. which is much more important. or the flux.up4i. I can truly qualify such a reference in this instance as superstitious. To see the distance between 28 .JArhatis. It is a misconstruction of the vetyre s tityjn_which we move. It is a sort of sequel to the postulate known as organicist. or the drive.ve.4stA. as the progress of analysis advances.if. There is a contrast that is rather striking. The use of the term reality here is completely other. The conflict. because the pleasure principle does not exercise itself in a way that is less real than the reality principle. This is a matter of something completely different. but to think that the current of the river is the primitive order of the energy. to preserve the tleed-Otspgaking of an ultiragtsgAlity as. to want with all one's might to find in something which was there from all eternity the permanence of what is accumulated at the end as the element of Wirkung. and which has nothing to do with the preceding notion. orthe impulse. with what is really at plate en the exercise of analytic realitytrepresents nothingother than a misconstruction ofilieymbolic Wirklichkeit. to confuse with a notion of mana something belonging to a very different order that we call energy. Realityisfin fact. which can have literally no meaning in the analytic perspective. the eleasure principle and the realimplinciple. of a possible Wirklichkeit -..

a term which becomes a key in our dialectic. that. that happens from time to time. There is thus at the beginning. the relation to the maternal breaste_while we haveidentified the reality principle with the fact that the child must learn to do withoxtit. One sees analysts come back to a sort of primitive intuition. and realize that everything that they had said up until then explained nothing. ■ 2 9 . Winnicott in a little article in which he speaks of what he calls the transitional object' -. precisely by coming at the moment of the child's delirious hallucination and providing the real object which satisfies him.der for the child not to_be_tzaurnalized. 36/. or an imaginary puppet show. Winnicott has us note that in sum. and we make all that goes badly derive from a primordial anomaly. for. WinnicQtt simply notes that we are always highly interested in the function of the mother. Mr. that is. pleasure prizgiple_with-a-certairt_objectselation. no doubt this is rather a sort of figuration. . but that is what we have come to.e_ha_vP identified-the. no jart 1 2 E n g l i s h in the original.. . we have substituted actors. the mother must operate so as always to be there at the moment when she 'is needed. Winnicott very rightly notes under what conditions everything goes well -.let us think of it as transitionofobject or transitional phenomenon.a certain sliding.for it is important that everything go well.. . namely. t r a n s i t i o n d ' o b j e t on p h i n o m e n e t r a n s i t i o n n e l . No doubt these subjects are very ideal. frustration. that is. Is this child blessed? Is he a genius? Is he a jolly fellow? Is he a savage? No one will ever know. which happens from time to time.the first use made of the opposition between the two principles. one must almost refer. That is what happened to Mr.the pleasure principle. iiam. He is surely someone who was rather a liberator. Well.. 2 Mr. in the ideaLmotherfinfantralAtion.. to the child who says that the king is totally nude. thedialecticaL and impersonal opposition of the two principles the reAlity_principle_and. and the point at which we have now arrived bly. and that we consider it absolutely decisive in the child's apptelleasion of reall% Thatis _to say. for things to go well.

. .an_object which corresponds strictly to the primordial desire. anct_tb.the ap2rehensiort_of the real which fills him and satisfies him. The child has no need for one to give him toys in the strict sense of the word. itis„inconceivabkillat anything at all should be elaborated that „.of distinctioaketween_the .. This difference can be installed only through a disillusionment. All of the child's objects of play are transitional objects.b. through a certain inaugural tension. wilenaiLe_incarnatesji. even in the very young child... We cannot ask whether they more subjective than objective. we see the appearance of objects that Winnicott calls transitional objects because we cannot tell on what side they bgloRgin the teduggcl. rwith the real object thgtis in question. and at the same time to perceive. the child has thus no way of . from time to time.andin..hallucination-of. which intervene in the development of the field of human desire.the r2a121)jest..carnate_dialectic_oLhaucination atict. These are transitional objects. is unthinkable in such a dialectic. Although Mr. . If everything goes well... Secondly. coutd. it is a fact of experience that. instrumental as well as fantasmatic. when. the difference that there is between reality and illusion.ro_f_satithstiOn—bunda_On—the. In their work.go further than the notion of.i0 two_reaLactors the mother and the chgcl. . r . The extreme diversity of objects. completely.-the-maternal_ breast. which arises in principle from the_prirriary_ustem according to the notion that we have of it. . we see that it is nevertheless to these objects that authors are 30 .allgcirtation linked in principle to the functioning of_the. which is certainly very hesitant. Thus the mother must progressively make the child learn to suffer frustrations. Winnicott does not take the step of naming them thus.e_encounte. the reality does not coincide with the hallucination rising from desire. since he makes them with everything that falls into his hands.and.. Winnicott simply has us note in the first place that within such a dialectic.the_Disie. we shall quite simply call them . .primary_system . full of detours and confusions. for they are of another nature.distinguishing what heiongstQ.

that will occupy the foreground of objectal demands with the major satisfaction that it can have for a subject. and we are wrong. They see in the child the ever so slightly privileged handling of some slender object._in our concrete-experience_salytic theory„atalLw_e_bea_ble to_do. some part of reality accidentally placed within his reach. began with the notion of castration. a handkerchief stolen from the mother.led when they try to explain the origin of a fact like the existence of the sexual fetish. which appears during a period that. the corner of a sheet. but the very spring of the subject's relation tafilewodd. but rather a permanent periodin_the_child. And that has been so since the beginning. From its origin. We think that we are still speaking about it as they spoke of it in Freud's time. We speak of it less and less. : 3 NeRer.a forgetting which necessitates those forms of substitutlion which I emphasize with regard to Winnicott's article —.of object.trAght_be_hetweerroti?ation 9ftheletish-object and the first_apparition of the object_ as imaginary What is forgotten in such a dialectic -. 31 . we shall . is that one of the most essential springs of the_analytic experience is the notion of lack of the object. a notion so paradoxical that one can say that it has still not been completely worked out.withaut_a_notion of object lack as being central. does not.fetish. without asking themselves_ about the distance that there. That is totally erroneous. however. constitute an intermediate period. There is still a third term of which we are beginning to speak. his sexual satisfaction.l_s_ development. the analysis of neurosis. They are thence led almost to confound these two types. They are led to seek as well as they can the common points between the child's object and the. analysis. This is not a negative. although it is called transitional here. namely. or more precisely. What we speak about much more is frustration.

nce_to_any._bessence. ssence Ithe domain of a clam] It concerns something that is desired but not owned.see how necessary it was to introduce this notion.. possibility of satisfaction oracsuisition. 4 The idea that we have o frustration if we simply refer to the use of the word when we speak. and that is the notion of _privation. isg)r. by what route and by what imperative. What difference is there between a frustration and a privation? Let us _ start with that. but that is desired without refere.. one can only speak • only of privation with respect to the real. It is clear that_if we must refer to privation. frustration is the domain of exigencies that are unleashed_andthout law. The center of the notion of frustration. and says that the two are experienced in the same way in the psychic system. 32 Wesen. They have to be distinguished. whose essential nature.nt. has been much more . After these two remarks. it will perhaps be easier for us to perceive what goes on in castration. It appears extremely problematic. operates.■ 1■•■•••'. in fact. the major_point of the whole imaginary play in the conflictual _ 1.-•■•••■•• f progress that the analysis of the subject describes. Itisa hole. is that of azinL. It is a_lesion. since Jones introduces the notion of privation with it. a_real lack. It is situated on the imaginary plane. he does not have. as. __Freud says.. abandoned than it has been developed..••. that a being defined as a totality should sense himself deprived of something that by. Let us start with the term whose usage is most familiar. is an imaginary wrong. definition. in so far as it is something completely different from theimaginarat.As._ Those three things_ar_e_nat_at_alLequivale. in so far as it is one of the categories of lack._a damage whith.17. it is in as much as phallicism. namely_ the.is-not-where-the phallic„ demand. imaginary injury. .er_arlythirtg_but_an. Now. FrustrationdLby. as we are used to seeing it at work when we follow the way that we make it come into play in our dialectic. That is something very risky. We shall thuprivationdr_Litsm_ture as a_lack is essentially. I shall point some things out simply to try to make you first understand what there is here. demand forhe_phallus. the notion of rustration.

What is lacking. I say lack of the object and not object. and real hole. castration irt_sol is as.cteht„ that something g which the law sanctions and which gives it its support and its inverse. The castration in_ question is always that of an imaginary object...that is what allows us to situate those three elements thatikeshallsalLthe. Symbolic debt. which have nothing to do with our experience.the.There is_a point in common between the imaginary_ 33 .k.. .. major crisis which is the Oedipus complex. We can only marvel at it after the fact. until the new order. we shall have to ask the question -- what is the object that is lacking in these three cases? It is at the level of castratica_that_thisja_most clear.. which is punishment. law. It is by a sort of mortal leap into experience that Freud placed so paradoxical a notion as that of castration at the center of the decisive. because to situate ourselves with regard to the object. in our analytic elpetlence. There. for this to i be valuable. or absence -.o1.aimordia)..a_questan_of. and holding them in his hand.three terms of reference for the lack of the object. Castration can only be classed in the category of the symbolic debt. De object is imaginary.itis_co_asithltedtatie_syrnholic. go straight towards the west until death overtake him. — it is completely clear that this is not. and which seem to merit explanations that remain elsewhere in a very different order than that of the structuring and normalizing mechanisms ordinarily put into play in our experience. observed such things only in excessively rare cases.rea. with what there is of a fundamental law in the prohibition of incest and in the structure of the Oedipus complex.L&stration vas introduced by Freud in a way that was absolutely l coordinatedvdth the_notion..Lobject. It is only in the law of Manou that it is said that he who has slept with his mother must cut off his genitals. They are right in so far as one must hold strictly to the central notion that it _is. is the meaning of what was first stated by Freud. We have.categories of the lack of the obisst. No doubt that will appear to certain people as not going without some reserve. formative.g. imaginary harm. if we think about it now. for it is certainly marvelous that we dream only of not speaking about it.

That means that the librarian lives entirely in a symbolic world. You can convulse the real as much as you want. in its nature. however imagLnarythe frustration_may bedt_is always a real object which is troubling the clad..object of castration is an imaginary okiegt. and even a third term_that we shall call the agent.the fact that castration is an imaginary lack of the object. The real has for its characteristic the fact that it sticks to the soles of one's shoes. this phallus which one haLtaken so long toidentify as. not be in a place where precisely it is not? From the point of view of the real. but you will see how useful it will be to us later in detecting the sleight of hand thanks to which one gives solutions 34 . Everything that is real is always and obligatorily in its place. There is no better reference than this -. even when one disturbs it. what. which hasiacilitated_our belief that frustration can take us more simply to thellearioLthe. that an object is lacking from its place. in their places as morsels. on the other hand.how can something not be in its place.. to be on the same pla_neof these_categories.. for example. it can be just beside it. that means absolutely nothing. other than a gynitglicobject.tion. That is completely clear -.the object of privation is never anything.think of what happens when you ask for a book in the library. DajACt..character_otthelukin_frustrAtion ancl_the irnaginary_character of the ohject_in_castra. a real object. They tell you that it is missing from its place. When we speak ofrivatp jorItitisa matter of a symbolic_fahject. That will help us ourselves to understand this evidence whose terms demand a bit more metaphysical management than we are used to when we speak of those criteria of reality of which we were speaking just before -. It is in as much as we defi at it must be there. and it is in principle invisible. That may seem a bit abstract.ancLnothing_else.probleillautAls.notat all necessaryforthe lack and the object. the. it nevertheless remains that our bodies will still be in their places after the explosion of an atomic bomb.. it still remains that in principle it is missing from its place.Auch. is very much._and_thaLls_what_rnust_make4z$ ask.. The absence of something in the real is purely symbolic. the subject elect in our dialectic of frustration. The object of frustration.

But. I simply want to complete the chart. 28 November 1956 35 . but I do not have the time to do that. that of the first question concerning the relation between the object and the real. or even be unequivocally deduced. as I pointed out just before? These are questions that at least deserve to be asked. at the end of this session. If the answer could perhaps be sketched here. or real? And what is the agent in castration? Is it symbolic. we have the pre-eminent notion that it is the mother who lays the role of the agent.which are not solutions to problems which are false. But is this agent symbolic. you will see. the child. leave them open. imaginary. I simply want to add a notion that will also have its bearing later. whereas the went is the manifestation of_another-order here. We have remained in the categories of the imaginary and the real. and the phallus. it would still not be satisfying at this point. imaginary. desperate efforts to break with what seems intolerable. or real? What is the agent in privation? Does it truly have any sort of real existence. You nevertheless see that the qualification of the agent on these three planes is a question that is manifestly suggested to us by the beginning of the construction of the phallus. I am making a jump here which requires that I come back to the imaginary triad of the mother. The agent also plays its role in the lack of the object. that of the agent. With regard to frustration. there is perhaps from the beginning something which allows us to conceive in a way that is very simple and clear why the evolution in the two sexes is very different.and that in order to bring the two terms back to a single principle. One makes. because the notion of the agent goes beyond the framework to which we are limited today. I shall. which is the completely different evolution of what one calls sexuality in man and in woman -.

and that is something I am reluctant to do in a context of scientific work. If we spoke last night of the object.. The factory of the id. So I am not displeased not to have had to do so:. Last night you heard a lecture by Mme Dolto on the image of the body. This very simple 36 . which is. If we begin now with the image of the body as it was presented to us last night. which is of a completely different nature..thenageof the body is not an obitgl. so as to situate it with regard to this seminar. It remains nevertheless only is the image of the rd_leyes even become an object. it would have been to situate that work with regard to what we are doing here. Circumstances had it that I could say nothing other than all the good that I thought of it. Its imaginary discordance. If I had had to speak of it. it was so as to try to define the stages of development. the notion of the object is important in that respect. teaching. I would say -something that you know sufficiently well and which is eminently evident -. and in fact. in sum. the signified and death. The transmission of the object by signifier.III THE SIGNIFIER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT The image of the body and its signifier. The signifier.

or fantasmatic genesis one attempts. One can try. contortion. it still remains quite mysterious that at certain epochs of their lives. This possibly imaginary object as it is given to us in actual fact in analytic experience is already known to you. You would be wrong to think that these objects have already revealed their secrets. That does not mean that we should hold to the hypothesis of the imaginary object. and in any case. brassieres. which I said I would take as a center -. Why? Apart from shoes.phobia and the fetish. opposition to other imaginary forrnatiansWe have to deal in effect in analytic experience with objects about which we can raise the question of their imaginary nature. How was it possible to be a fetishist in the time of Catullus? There too. but that this is the central question that we ask. I have already taken two examples. as one can try anything.ctLy_in. Now. it is surely not by making them vanish that one progresses. but there still remains some residue. or that we should start off with it -.can ask how it is that we do not give that more attention. as an introduction to the clinical level which is of interest now in the notion of the object. acrobatics. Similarly. you have been able to observe that the number of sexual fetishes is extremely limited. the residues in scientific explanations are always what it is most fruitful to consider. 37 .we start off with it so little that it is precisely what we are questioning. there is a residue. Far from it. To fix an idea of it. It is difficult to conjure up from that the form of a primitive given which would be for example inscribed in the image of the body. The principal one is the shoe. children. and other things -all worn close to the skin. believe they need to be afraid of lions. which have so astonishing a role there that one.remark. which was made by no one except in an indirect fashion. male or female. I do not say that they are of an imaginary nature. the lion not being an object encountered in their experience with excessive frequency. socks. will allow you to situate the status of the image of the body_exa. No matter what exercise. we barely rind gaiters.

At first sight it concerns. if they are objects. articulate. constructions which order. This hindrance is to go seekingregity in somethingore 38 . and which can be understood only after that. I said that psychoanalysts had a concept of reality so mythical that it is close to what has hindered the progress of psychiatry for decades. There is certainly a fact there that can only be situated by starting with the notions of signified and signifier. We are thus led back once a ain to the notion of the signifier. Mme Dolto uses this object. How to conceive their kinetic value in the economy of the libido? Does it belong to the order of what emerges from a. Insasd_signifier-that t h e i m a g L s a i l i 2 d i a l o g u e . I shall begin by underlining that I have been able to verify. are highly embarrassing to us.These are the_objects about which we shall ask. or supposed object.\ that . from an ectopia with regard to a certain typical relation? Do these objects simply arise from the typical succession of what one calls stages? - Whatever the case.that is. 411 . is. a certain lived experience. This is particularly evident from the fact that no --Itis_always in rel a ti nn-to-another-a-these • . r 1 Since it is a question here of teaching. • images_that_each_takes_on_a_crystallizing. Mme Dolto. the theme is fascinating. as a signifier. this image. with which you had to deal last night. and from which one might have thought that psychoanalysis had been delivered. organize.whetheiyiear imaginary objects. To see the interest aroused in the audience. these objects. i t i s a s a s i g n i f i e r t h a t it represents something.and whose efficacy one does not for an instant doubt -.by the operator.arieraing-valua -that4t-penetrates the subiectin_question. genesis. in this instance. But what is most striking is the use that is made -. and since nothing is more important than our misunderstandings. that some of the things which I said the last time when I spoke of the concept of reality were not understood. the young child. and the length of the discussion. directly and indirectly. as was said.

And you think of 39 . I never said anything else. It is simply a matter of knowing what this id is. the waterfall. I am not at all denying that there may be something that was there before. before the different accidents that could arise. there is a whole world. system. On the other.material character_ To make myself understood.hand. You speak of the energy accumulated in the factory. before I comes to be. its enlargement or its repair.What are you looking for there? Remember that for the engineer. It is certainly a legitimate way to consider reality. there was something. But between the energy and the natural reality. which is precisely the emphasis placed on_w_hat_i_s_there_hefore. the waterfall is everything.third perspective under which _the_theme of the real can appear. The power of the factory is already determined by anterior conditions. This objection calls for several remarks. I began by defining it as Wirkiichkeit • hy_the_effidency_aLthe. For example. it is enough for the engineer to measure the height of the sheet of water with regard to the level to which it will fall. one thought that one could reason valuably by referring to the primitive matter that comes into play to make it work. The energy bezina_to_corne_ into account only at the moment when you measure it. and that is even what is most solid in the mirage which supports the objection that was made to me. First. in thi_Linata uce_the_psychic_system. I gave the example of the hydroelectric factory. in the case of the factory. We are constantly dealing with it. I did not have the time to introduce the . Someone said to me that. in speaking to you of reality. and I situated it for you with the example of the factory. Everything is already given in the potential energy. On this point someone came and said to me -. but this energy is nothing other than the transformation of the potential energy which is given in advance by the site where we have installed the factory. in this instance. and I said that it was as if. to latch onto what is there before the exercise of a symbolic functioning. there was the id. what was there before was the energy. including the suspension of the factory's activity. I wanted to s make the mythic character of a certain conception of reality precise. To calculate it.

can still potentially carry a certain value of reserve energy. One must alread.it is in relation to the lower level of water that the energy can be calculated. and to put it plainly. Any difference of level that is there in the flow of the water. an equivalence. on the track of a system taken to be signi in That is not at all to be contested.CA 1einstallsa_factary_only where certain privileged thingLareprestatiamature_as_usable.Freud was brought by the energetic concept to forge a notion that we must use in analysis in a way that is comparable to that of energy. Let us see now how that is sketched. between manifestation - 40 . as measurable._ans:Lstia way that is virtual.what work is it necessary to expend to obtain an available recompense of efficiency? This energy. is always measured between two established points. whether it be in streams or in droplets.measuring it only at the moment when factories function. It sitn21y3. It is a notion which. the concept of energy is effectively constructed upon the need of a productive civilization wanting to take its bearings in its accounts -. it is of interest to no one. an outlet is not enough to allow you to calculate the energy -. and which consists in a simple question of principle. the existence of a common measure. designed to allow a certain play of thought. But that is not the question. and inthisjnatance. In other terms. There is no absolute energy in a natural reservoir. simply. It is still necessary for the materials which will come into play in the use of the machine to be already present in nature. But in itself alone. is entirely abstract. among which in effect there enters that of the energy which you will have at your disposal.--as goiNign . It is because of them that you are obliged to make numerous calculations. in a certain privileged fashion. . The important thing is the comparison that I made with the psychic system. for example.11ows onetop_Qsit. like that of energy. The question is that certain natural conditions must be realized in order for there to be the least interest in calculating the energy. in a way that is s nifying. There is energy in the reservoir in relation to a lower level into which the liquid will flow when you add an outlet to the reservoir.

s. .instance. for an activity is necessary in ordeslo_adoake. whether there is one for femininity and one for masculinity. The reference to a chemical support is. strictly speaking. which in effect is one of the essential springs of Freudian thought for organizing what is at stake in all sexual behavior.Thus Freud immediately situates the_ libicALorLLEINIe which is..ale-and_unique_libido.e_yestio the passive position. without any importance regarding the libido. or whether there is one and only one.... which is properly speaking the imaginary level. The libido is what links the behavior of beings amongst themselves. How paradoxical all that would be were it simply a question of a concept there only to allow us to incarnate a liaison of a certain type. in the Three Essays. where the behavior of one living being in the presence of another living being attaches itself to him by links of desire. which will give them for example a ms111. There is no marvel in it. should have spoken for the first time.a. which is produced at a particular level. There_ is nothing that is less tied to a material support than the concept of libido_i_n_analysis._analytic experience makes it necessary_for us to beliey_e_thaLtheteis_ on. passive position.lyme_s. as may in fact very possibly be the case. or two or three for each.21 islieor_passime_-- but Freud tells us. whether there are many. 41 .. does not have any sort of importance. y. whether they are interchangeable..parasiw_dcal as the term may seem. for. It is a question of the notion of libido. if I mai say s2. Thus Freud comes to indicate that the libido is thus. this libid.which qualitatively appear to be extrernelyslifferent.. always present in a form that is efficacious and active as aspect which rather relates it to the masculineositiorp_oes a_s_far_as_p_ositingtha _ortly-the-masculine_forra_oLthelibidais_within-our-reach. in any case. in 1905. longing.neutiralized. Freud says as much-whether there is one. One marvels that Freud. of the psychic support of the libido in terms such that the later diffusion of the concept of a sexual hormone scarcely require a modification of this passage.

by the intermediary of the message of the Other. no one can deny that there is a sensible difference. the als.. not simply in the landscape. that of ther.We are accustomed to considerin. That is still the best definition. what is the Es? To what does the introduction of the concept of the factory allow us to compare it? Well. Though all this energy was there before. opposed? If one stays solely with what defines them from the outside.naLa_brute_reality.it-is_this.lity_principle and the pleasure princi le. The Es is what in the subject is capable. that I am developing this theory of the signifier and the signified for you.. notLsirnhinm g that was there before. but can also be accumulated. once the factory has been constructed. of becoming I. The Es is_a_l_r_eac4Lorganizecl. the instincts the libido. It is precisely in order to remind you of the presence of the Holy Spirit. An untutored person who knows nothing about it. By what right are the systems. That is equally true for what the machine produces. one can say this 42 . Now. More precisely.g_theEs as an agency which has the greatest relation to the drives. you are wrong. that it is not only transformed. it is constructed by the operation of the Holy Spirit. articulated. and if you doubt it. still. That is even the main interest in the fact that it is a question of a hydroelectric factory. All the force already there can be transformed. thinks that perhaps the genie of the current plays games inside and transforms the water into light or force. If analy_sis_has_gi-ven_us_a_nything. which is absolutely essential to the progress of our understanding of analysis. as the sipifiesda_agartizesluktfi.. as it would appear to someone who knew absolutely nothing of how it worked. for example. 2 Let us take that up on another level. seeing it. but in the real. primary and secondary. The factory is not constructed by the operation of the Holy Spirit. precisely to the factory. and not simply a hydromechanical factory. with this difference.

e law of the return to. but never forgotten in practice.uxsin the reality system is defined by_what forces the subject to conduct a detour in. These two terms. which is in some way.what occursin.much -.against which one is bruised.system is governed by the pleasure principle. but also gating_araun. 47] signifier signified 43 . for example.the detour from reality. p. in which and as which the continuity of lived experience is presented.. in its concrete use. Just as in the Rleasure principle_ there_ is-on-one side a-return_to-rest-r-but-on_the_ather. and between subjects. to which you are given daily.namely thetwo__levets-of-speech-expressedin the notions_of_the_signifier_andL_the_aignified.. though they Appear contradictory. nothing in these definitions gives the sense of what emerges of a conflictual and dialectical character in the use of these two terms in practice.it is both pleasure and desire.. You never use either one of these systems without providing it with a particular index. desire. I No_ie. I have already situated the course of the signifier or of concrete 4 -1f:liscourse. and he said it formally. [ Schema. The para_ o)ctLoahe_pleasure_griacipis is this. while_ what_oc. tied10_1h.rest to the tendency to a return to repose.u. that is. are none the less effectively tied in experience. that is to ssaby the drive to return to rest. in a sort of parallel superposition with the course irbf the signified. What occur appears without a doubt as it is shown to yo. the gateofreposelDut also the erection of desire. if Freud introduced the concept of the libido..so-there_is_nat_onLy_reality. as one says.c.. often neatly avoided. Now. the flux of drives in a subject.. its own paradox.d_it. That appears much more clearly i_Lwednirisinto correlgion with the_ existence of the two_ptincipies. has an ambiguous sense in German.the_prirnary. two terms hich link_theaLancLallow them to function-dialectically -. external reality. Nevertheless. for each. which he underlines -. it is really becausepleasure in the concrete sense. Lust.sa a paradox is to be found with regard to reality.

and of the signifier _te_siO_.sm.LsUerratowhich the English lan jagtresorts as to a primitive expr e ssionsfte.That isierycerlain13LwhatEreuklnouglat_us under the_term_oLthe deatainsti_nct.fied. Thus ori m en_a_a_y that desikesorcieng to the signified.althalagiLappetitea_ssuch is not marked with the laws. _permits him to glimpse death as the_absolute.rsaper-to thegpifier. byan livin being.always marked by the imprint of_a_signifigr --_which-doeslude_thatinaomething else in tj-1941i.Kwnasiced by the impj_int of the signifier-The-signifier-isintroduced-MIQmatural .into_the_demanst. This schema implies that what is a signifier of one thing can become at any ingant the signifier of something else. probably mythic. or even.e_nrindesirersornething-whighniAmg in any_. The HolESpirit is the entry of the signifier inyjihe-world. unless one admits the essential possibility of a perpetual goL. or of language.y. movementinto_desim. It is nevertheless something which is virtually . the libido of the subject. The intervention of the signifier poses a problem which led me to remind you just before of the existence of the Holy Spirit.. inias:)Leflection on his lid which_ .SCHEMA OF PARALLELS This representation is all the more valuable in that nothing can be conceived. since we encounter it only in the late texts of a certain philosophical experience. Nothing in analytic experience can be explained except by this fundamental schema. but of the phenomena present in analysis. which is never attained at all... We saw last year what it was for us. and that all that is present in desire. It is a matter of that_liznitoLthe signified whid___Lis_nescer attained.. existen. the putting into parenthesis of all that is lived. except in exceptional cases. the drive. impassables_ondition_of his . 1 English in the original. 44 . and what it is in the thought and the teaching of Freud.p.. is . The relations of man with the signifier as a whole are very precisely tied to this possili of suppression. 1010.cele per exprsssit.thesignified under the signifier. not only of speech. qualifying it with exiErlsy.

whether or not thev_are _recognizable in a given phenomenon... base. •• • • II • r•al . This is death in so far as it is the su_ppoitthe..yes... the libidinal flux. some purely 45 ... p...and we shall resolve it... such that if some difficulty shows up..... It is already there.. that is of life..... and I shall tell you later how he approaches the early development of woman and her famous castration complex. iI The Es at stake in arAlysis is a si 1..signifier . The_ertoratt-with4he-idea-that llierea-re-thread _ancLneedle.. the operation of the Holy Spiri... of what is lived of the flux of L emotions. Is this sipitkiLlyhich_hasits_ommlaws.the__ - girl and the bound between one and the other a pre-established_ primitive harmony. we must reply -.. it is not I do not know what primitive and confused property coming from I do not now what pre-established harmony. into our schema.. what is designated by the Es? We ask the question -. it can only be because of some secondary disorder. of its presence in the world... some process of defense... 48] death .. as the efficacious surface of the signifier in which the latter in some waLreflects what one could call the last word of the signified. In order to understand anything at all of what we are doing in analysis..s i g n i f i ed SCHEMA OF PARALLELS (2) r i$ts. r that is not understoo....... an byQathesis to_vsthicl:Lthos_e__ whom I shall not hesitate on this occasion to call weak minds always return. which has posed an insoluble problem for all analysts since they first came into the light of day.We shall put what is at the basis of the existence of the signifier.a. In the first row among them is a Mr. Jones.tlyD [Schema....

One can go looking for natural references to this idea discovered in analysis. I am indicating that this is his point of departure when he reconstructs development. the phallic phase. It is in no way a matter of a meeting to which the only obstacles are accidents that can arise along the route. namely. But analysis underlines precisely that experience makes us discover a host of accidents which are far from being so natural as all that. it is the male genital apparatus. and on all that the relation between the sexes will be for him. The phallus is not the male genital apparatus as a whole. When one imagines that the unconscious means that what is in one subject is made to divine what should respond to him in another. for instance. on all his history. If this phase is called phallic. The erected image of the phallus is what is funclamental_here_ rLonye„11 h e '. namely. What I am putting at the principle of analytic experience here is the concept that there is a signifier already installed and structured. I am not validating what Freud said.. What Freud says is precisely the contrary. which will make their imprint on the development of a subject. there is only_one_primitive representation of Ihe_state.accidental and contingent event. re is no choice apart from a virile image or castration.of the genital stage — the h %JR as such. but because_on_the imaginary plane. and particularly in his relation to sexual images. one is aoin. To this conception. the sacks. and that is what everything that precedes the Three Essays on Sexuality did. which occurs before the complete development of the Oedipus. it is not because there is only one libido. exception made of its complement. it is not this time in the name of a fundamental energetic equality which is only there for the convenience of thought. which is that it is a real pity that nothing in the development of the child. shows that the rails of a free access of man to woman and vice versa have already been constructed. Freud's very simple remark in the Three Essays stands opposed. that the child's sexual theories. There is a 46 . are tied to the first maturity of the genital stage.g notning outer than to suppose a primitive harmony.

by_the very_play_of these signifiers. The death instinct is nothing else. It is not you who have made it. we know that there is already in nature something that is his Es. I have placed on the schema this reality behind it.factory ready made. and that it is introduced into the world against a background which is more or less known or misconstrued. and it is even less natural than images.2112fit something so natural as all that. a_s there have been stoifiers that function. Literally. This factory is language. When we approach a subject._that_you lookinfor igritIeclepth2. Because of this. The scandal of this fact — that is where the analytic position rests. for the living exercise consists precisely in making one's own way in existence exactly like all those who have preceded us in the same true to type lineage. For asiong. and also to the use of the signifier -. In fact. If our commentary on Beyond the Pleasure Principle two years 47 .the possibility that nothing of what is in the signified exists. which has been. The existence of the signifier_is not linked to_anytl Ang_other than the fact for it is a fact that _discourse exists. Behind the signifier. than there to make us perceive that life is improbable 4nd completely caducous. you cannot remember beyond it -. the E. I thought it necessary to recall these positions which seem to me fundamental. its contradictions.Concepts of this sort have nothing to do with any sort of living exercise.s. and which is structured according to the mode of a signifying articulation marking all that acts upon this subject with its imprints.I am speaking of the histor_y_of_humanity_as_a_whole. the psychic system of subjects has been orgarlio. and it is all the same curious that Freud should have been led by analytic experience to be able to do nothing other than to characterize it by saying that thesipitier functions on the ground of a certain experience of death.functioningior as long as you can remember. The experience in question has nothing to do with any sort of lived - experience. and its profound difference from natural coaptations. which is completely veiled to the signified. the existence in nature of the hydroelectric factory made by the operation of the Holy Spirit is the very contrary of the concept of nature. in fact. and it functions.

...ain in the signifier. strictly speaking. than a reconstruction.which is characterized by being-articulated accarg ithgtologicaLlaw§. If I made you play the game of odds and evens recently when we spoke of the death instinct. constitute the first elements. but whichatetaken.. the notion of the human body in so far as it is erect is another.g.b_gt cot_liplgely transformed by the fact that they are neans that they have intraducecLintrt-the-plaee-Gf-the-signifier-as-such. its first_arma. mortal. :: - Let us return now to the point where we left things the last time. It is a matter of things which are un•ras abl.11ic term.. It is thus that a certain number of elements all linked to corporal stature..exp_eriPnrP. and not simply to the lived experience of the body.signifiethorrows a whole seriEsoielemerdsl aterm thatisTrofoundly engaged in the signified Hamel . tpLesent_from-every-beginnibut impossible not to ..which_are_given in experience as accidents of the body. it was to remind you that there are laws behind which stand the laws of the signifier. the body Just as there are already in nature certain reservoirs. 3 48 .12er of eleraents. it was that what is at stake is nothing other.• II • • I L n• whic 1 • • h.up. if I have taught you to write series of plus and minus signs grouped in twos or threes in a temporal sequence. the pure and simple erection. Inyersely_dn_theraythat death is reflected in the background of the 'ecLsathe.certairi nunJ. if one may say so. A stone elevated to a vertical position is one of its examples.doxes of the experience. precisely by that of this inexplicable phenomenon _that the subject is led to behave in a way that is essentially signifying.ag.houcamed_from. which give it.ago could show anything. and. in repeating indefinitely something that is for_laix_n. which is on the plane of analytic experience. n in the_siolfied there Ara. motivated by certairupara.

In sum. you will not come back to it -.for you will recognize none of the themes that are familiar to you in the book that you usually read. once we have a concept of an Ich-libido as a reservoir of the libido which constitutes objects. On the other hand. the one which is dynamically creative. it is without any of its original equilibrium being changed. there is no work of Freud's that has not been subject to revision. Freud tells us. nor of generation. Everything that concerns the pregerd_tal_d_eyelop_ment_ofiheitbido is conceivable only after the appearance of the theory_ of rtarsissism . That goes for the theory of the libido itself.The central relation to the object. But if these do not entirely reach a conclusion. which consist. their progress in the research on the pregenital relation as such is still only explained by the importance of the sexual theories. But if the Traumdeutung. which introduced the idea of a libidinal common measure. of man's relation to the image. with regard to this reservoir -. All have notes added later. This crucial moment of genitality in development remains outside the limits of the Three Essays. Certainly. if you read the first edition of the Three Essays. We can account for the origin of the very idea of the theory of the libido. several years after the Einfiihrung des Narzissmus. with their major misunderstandings. is that of lack. The promotion of the notion of the phallic phase will come to an end only after the last edition of the Three Essays. i 49 . and modifications of the text are extremely frequent. in the article of 1923 on Infantile Genital Organization. is a Wiederfindung. in the fact that the child has no notion either of the vagina nor of sperm. and he adds.and once the sexual theories of the child have been isolated.we can only get a little glimpse of it over the walls. for example. That is the first of the important things for you to keep in mind in studying this text. is enriched by this. That is their essential defect. Freud says explicitly. One must not read the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality as if it were a work written in one spurt. Freud tells us. In analytic experience. all Findung of the object. The chapter entitled The Theory of the Libido concerns the concept of narcissism as such. with the additions made principally in 1915. this is the notion of narcissistic tension. and .

zviedergefunden. in so far as being fundamentally imaginary. This fundamental experience _supposes that there is. only an image that he bears within himself. Thus there is always an essential division. which is precisely the mother. a conservation of the object in memory. essentially. It is in this framework. since become so prevalent. is articulated with the theory of sexuality only in 1915. in a particular analytic orientation. a natural accord between object and subject. Because of the latency period. that the strictly imaginary functions are revealed. That is the notion with which the first Freudian dialectic of the theory of sexuality is introduced. only occurs beginning with the article on narcissism. the first object. is only formulated with respect to the 50 . the imaginary layer is then introduced. the development of infantile sexuality is characterized by being staged over two periods. which is always. the latency period. that is to say. As the Three Essays in their first and original version show. which is. If we have since.at the same time. been able to recognize an organizing value in fantasies. a signifying transmission. in the course of. The introduction of the imaginary. Everything arising from the pregenital relation is taken into this parenthesis. and by the very fact of its refinding there is always a lack of accord in the object that is refound with regard to the object that is sought. that of a central reserve from which every relation to objects is established. _ remembered ina way. is . so that the object will always be only an object found again. in the refound object. a dialectic of the symbolic and the real. it is in as much as we have not supposed a pre-established harmony. This object then enters into discord and plays a disturbing role in every later object relation of the subject. irreversible. In other words. in our vocabulary. of the latent memory traversing this period. that is. says Freud. finally. That is the final word in the theory of narcissism. at certain selected junctures and at certain times of this evolution. and will remain marked by the first aspect of the object. fundamentally conflictual. Into a dialectic which is first. unbeknownst to the subject. one of the essential articulations is the subject's fascination by the image. that has not been susceptible to change.

e sexuality. effectively exercised or lived. and plunges the entire analytic audience into perplexity. oral and anal.ater. In 1920. and permit their articulation. On the contrary. an encounter. when we encounter it. That is precisely what we designate by the various concepts of incorporation. the pregenital relation was used to designate the memory of experiences which are preparatory to the Oedipal experience.. but which are only articulated in the latter. in which.. which appears above all. The signifier takes its material somewhere in the signified. which is always in itself a critical . pre-Oedipal. How is one to organize this experience? As I told you the last time. which organize them. dominate them. 51 . and that the imaginary organization is structured. from the origin. in a certain number of vital relations. I have you note. I have shown you the three levels of this lack that it is essential to situate each time that there is a crisis. and which appear submitted to operations from which it is impossible to extract the signifying structure.. the objects.phallic phase in 1920. of different periods. with the character of being paradoxical. with regard to the search for the object. but is then affirmed in a way that is so categorical that from then on. are already taken for something other than what they are. as one calls them. The term pre-Oedipal was introduced_with_regarcLto. The pregenital relation can only be understood by starting with the signifying articulation of the Oedipus... and not. and thaLleh_yeat :11. an effective action.fekninin. it appears disturbing. It is more opposed to than in accord with the idea of a regular harmonious development. it is a matter of a critical development. at that time. The images and the fantasies that form the signifying material of the pregenital relation themselves come from an experience made of the contact between signifier and signified. These are objects that have already been worked over by the signifier. It is only later that this past is grasped. so much so that it is in relation to the Oedipus that there was situated a dialectic called. it is around the notion of the lack of the object. pregenital.

in the symbolic chain. frustration. as related to the privation of a privileged object.search. who records with all the appearance of an exemplary fidelity. which prevails for a certain time. Analysts today in fact reorganize analytic experience by beginning with the level of frustration. These levels are the following -.castration. and we shall see what we can understand in it. 52 . privation. We shall read this observation. which can even be progressive in certain cases. a privileged imaginary creation. the central structure of each. published in 1949. which does not exclude the use of pre-established categories. why not? — but can a phenomenon like that of phobia be understood by its sole situation in a certain chronological order? Are things not better explained if one refers to the three terms that I have enumerated? That is what we shall see. Effect more or less regressive. namely. We shall be able to appreciate whether it is truly possible for the author to articulate what is essential in this observation by starting with the concept of frustration as it is currently conceived. In castration. We shall also try to see what is understood by its reporter. is essentially different for the three. as a debt. What she collects is sufficient to give us an idea of a temporal succession during the course of which a phobia appears. that of the stage which the subject has reached at the moment of the appearance of the said privation. Annaliese Schnurmann. and neglect the concept of castration. I shall simply underline what these three terms mean. we shall place ourselves at the exact point where modern theory and current practice are installed. In the lessons that will follow. then disappears. Thus I shall start the next time with an example that I took at random from volume 3-4 of The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. The latter saw a phobia develop during a short period of time in one of the children confided to the care of Anna Freud's Hampstead Nursery. which contains a lecture by a student of Anna Freud. which was nevertheless Freud's original discovery. there is a fundamental lack that is situated. and which has a whole series of effects on the behavior of the subject. along with the Oedipus. one among a thousand others. What they are as lack.

113. This framework.--For thesubjestto accede to privation. We cannot pose the problem of the object relation correctly unless we begin with a certain framework that must be considered as fundamental to understanding. the beginning of objectal organization. while each time that one gets enmeshed. he must conceive the real as bein: other than it t at is he mus already have syml_zolized_it. But that is because. shows this very well. for 53 . the lac the. One gives oneself up to such an exercise because there is in fact every appearance that psychoanalysis makes it possible. the thread of his web. one thinks one is dealing only with a difficulty in language. or the first of these frameworks. a real limit or gap.in_factinstallecl-in-a-tived experience that is unthinkable for him -.at the lexelof frustration_ where 's_. One thus sees the subject secrete from himself successive relations in the name of I do not know what preestablished maturation. with objects which will end by being the objects of the human world that is our own. This lack of the object must be the human conceived at its different stages in the subject -. everything happens as in an idealistic dream -._thelack is purely and simply in the real.Irt frustration. whereas it is a manifestation of the error into which one has wandered.. He is there to envelop himself in the silk of his cocoon. the image of the body as a signifier. In the psychogenesis currently given to us in analysis. and his whole conception of the world must be drawn from himself and from his images. is that in world.. Iha imprivation.with regard to the symbolic chain. which escapes him in its beginning as in its end -.each subject is like a spider and must draw from himself. the lack is in the real. that does not mean that it iLitthe_sulaject. in this experience.42rimatim. The reference to privation as it is put forth here consists in olic before -. Somatognosia.before we can say things that are reasonable.but we must also consider this lack in the real. the lack of the sibiesttwaric thestructure as well_ aa_.imaginaryplaneLas an imaginar_y iniury-. It is thus opposed to the genesis of the psychic system which is usually_givert posing to us. one wants to retain only the aspects that tend in this direction.

it is not a matter of a privation that is fully conscious.trodurpc t h e symbolic order.and_tletho-in.endent. which is that.. entirely outside the sub. the demand for the ph. what saturates and satisfies her in him. Similarly.ailu.2 Privation is the center of reference that we need.a ----. the trick being simply at a certain moment.. There is always in the mother.. ittule_or_less. thus that the mother sees her chilci?_Thatis. is his phallic image for her.ressentie. apart from the child. and that is why I have posited the trio of_th_e mother. there was one thing that must have been apparent to you -. by a projection? Is that not to suppose that every relation 2 . who has his relation with the mother. he must first symbolize the real.wherLwespealc here of privation. When We spoke yesterday evening of the image of the body with regard to the ( child. knows nothing about this. or indeed. _the mother? What possibility does the child have of assfclingto this relationaLelement? Is it on the order of a direct effusion. at what moment is the child capable of perceiving that what his mother desires in him. is it. p&hencl. the only children of eitherseeggme_phobic_are_thoseiezhasemoth some trouble in the ob'ect relation t ins her to her • r own the mother's -. These days everyone uses it. according to her._110w is he subject - led 19 symbolize it? How is frustration introduced iatiLthe symbolic order? That is the question we are asking and we shall see that the subject is neither isolated nor indep._ t he child.• --question that was not asked at all. 54 .oflheLmposite sex. That an idea which surely makes something other than the relation of the child and the mother intervene. if it is effectively the child. p_rivation.s. It is striking that no one spoke last night of a major passage in what Mme Dolto brought us.__which ate child symbolizes or realizes.. and that is how Mr.this 'image of the body. the child and the phallus. if it is_even_accessible_to_the child. for all that.For the stiiegLiQap. Jones roceecalcep_givationthe_equiAtalent-of-f-r-ustra-tion— Erivation is in the real.

where anomalies may present themselves 55 . however. and the phallus. in certain very particular forms of dependence. [Schema. that the child onl edes ■ it aft ymbolizatombuttlig_iiicertain cases. there were anyone else who could see them too? That. male or female. Certain elements which can be disengaged show. male as well as female. I shall tell you again that we must question fetishism with the triple schema of the mother.Qr on the contrary. since he is also the phallu_i'rmagliscordance l which raises the question of knowing how the child. apart from herself. and it will surely take us far. he arrives at the irriazimary_iniurydrisome_way_that is direct not irfu I • I f the mother with r jap-i-auphallus. is the point that is important. of her school. for example. the child. It is another question than that of phobia. and one or another analyst. is induced. who sees all these images of the body. 57] Phallus fetishism lJ Child SCHEMA OF FETISHISM Mother Why does the child come more or less to occupy the position of the mother with remAJELthephallus?. The_factthaLfar_the_m_o_thetilae_claild is far from being only the child. That is within the reach of experience. or introduced into it.between subjects is of the same order as the relation of Mme Dolto with her subject? I am astonished that no one asked her if. Is this an imaginary element which is reflected in the symbolic? Or is it on t h e mbolicalement which appears in the itmginaryl These arethe crucial v is around methe_q_uestion that is so essential i _tilae_Aesrelopmear_of4hojaia. and as a way of already lighting my lantern. So as not to leave you completely famished. p.

Well. Phobia when it develo s is nolgAll_oft does not t:gatup_on__ the link cited above. the position of the phalluswith regard to the mothet? Why is he led there? What L5 at play is the link_ib.e)(trernel distant from the e 5 December 19bh 5b . phobia belongs rather to that order. We shall come back to that.for there to be three terms iri_this_tr these must be an enclosed s • ace all • • f-t _ which is - called the father.with all the appearance of the normal. It concerns this encircling_tie. It constitutes another mode of solution to the difficult problem introduced by the relations of the child and the mother. tIL. imaginary. phobia constitutes a call to_ses_cue._ Starting from a particular critical moment. when no path of another nature is open for the solution of the problem. the motherlaahatextent does he put something_of himself there? Is the relation mother-phallus given to the child in a way that is spontaneous and direct? Does ev_erything_happen simply because he looks at his mother and perceives that it is a phallus that_sl Le_siesireaLltaoes not seem_aa. to maintain the essential solidarity menaced by the gap_ introduced by the apparition _o_f_th phallus between the mother and child. the element wh i c h i n t p hobia has a character that is veritably mXthical._an_ p ReaLtcLa_aing ul syrnb_Qn __ In what does its singularity consist? Let us say that it is in always r appearing s e:gAremel. At the moment when it is called to rescue.sym12cLgiIgis.at the child establishes between the phalluLand. I already showed you last year -.

57 .

real Privation Real Hole symbolic 58 . from the symbolic to the real. [Format chart. p. The child and the phallic image.Iv THE DIALECTIC OF FRUSTRATION Frustration is the true center of the mother-child relation. A return to the Fort-Da. The phobia of the little English girl. The mother. 59] AGENT LACK OF OBJECT OBJECT Castration Symbolic Debt imaginary Frustration Imaginary Injury.

nobody dreams of taking offense at that any longer. It is what is most variable in the instinct. Analysis began with a notion which I shall call scandalous. or cultivated. or placed in the foreground of the question. but that the notion itself of the object relation is in no way underlined. but something which is subordinated to it solely by its aptness for atmeasznK it. namely. It - 59 .The object of the drive is that through which the instinct can attain its goal. its paradoxes. I believe I have already several times underlined what in analysis provoked so much scandal at the outset. The notion that there is no pre established harmony between the objet_ct_ and the drive is thus articulated. regarding the affective relations of man. The object is literally tied to it only_by conditions that are particular to it. the confusion that analysts have experienced.in both cases. that the approach to the sexual object presents an essential difficulty which is of an internal order. we have glided towards a harmonious notion of the object. which allows us to articulate with precision the problem of the object as it is posed in analysis.the choice of the object. It is singular that since then. Even those who are most ill-informed note that Freud's work contains many things concerning the object -. for example --. one gets out of it as one can. and much more than it. The lack of rigor in this matter. Here. the aim of the drive is to arrive at i tS_ QWEI appeasement. I have chosen one of the most significant citations concerning the object. It is not so much that it gave a value to the role of sexuality and that it played a part in the fact that this has become a common topos -. is Freud's sentence -. not the object objection. In short. To let you measure the distance between this notion and what Freud himself articulated with the greatest rigor. asgordingtothe pleasure principle. It is a question of satisfaction in so far as.Here is the chart at which we have arrived. One could also say the possibility of appeasing it. have resulted in a curious sliding. extracted from his article on The Instincts and their Vicissitudes. But it is precisely that it'introduced along with this notion. not at all something that was attached to it at the origin.

and towards that end.oleevoiutiQn_of sexuality.is not a doctrine. with what is still fundamentally F_o_u_ststhought. the notion of frustration is marginal. it even partially gyades a conceptual _grasp. and compatible with the basis of analytic doctrine. thanks to several points. in highlighting the notion that the object is_always. But it is one citation among others that go in the same direction. and that on the other. inadequate. from which. to see by what detours Freud leads us to make us understand its effective agency. namely. What isfaii•afai about? Castration is essentially tied to the s mlkordmIsfituted. castration was linked to the central position_given to the Oedipus complex as the articulatingelement _essential _to_thewh.in_Er-etd. We are now led to examine the fundamental notions more closely. frustration. which are themselves further developed in Freud. The connection between castration and the symbolic order is given evidence by all our earlier reflections. as well as by this simple remark -. and in particular to scrutinize the one that is placed at the center of current analytic theory. To what extent has this notion become necessary? To what extent does it need to be rectified? It is our task to do a critique which will make it usable. as I have underlined many times. where. The question now is to articulate the conception of the object which is at play here. We have already succeeded. and privation. the notion of frustration. If I have written symbolic debt on the table. Those are three terms whose differences it is fruitful to note. Besides. it is a citation.iierrt a_primal--F-indan4ansi - tlaustheffiederfinchalgthe_refindingjs_never satisfying. the subject can in no case be isolated. from the outset. 1 I have reminded you of what is present from the outset in the givens -castration. itjs because the Oedipus complex already implies in 60 .only-art_objestiostad agairt. we have seen from other characteristics that the object is on one hand. which implies a long coherence.

and whose more or 6I . which all of our earlier reflections support. That does not imply that it is external to the Oedipus complex in a sense it provides a prepared turf._=i. What.. the development of the subject. at each stage of the development of the young subject.t occupies the central position on this chart. which . fixations. which is the notion of desire.n4. At leastthat is what Freud states here and I will set off from that today. The notion of frustration. in effect. deriving from prez9edipa1 experience.itself from the beginning. adequate.is_the-object at cause. impressions. in a direction that can be atypical or heterotypical. By pi. by this considered remark. a whole cortege of notions which one translates into a language of quantitative metaphors -.. What is the mode of relation to the obj_ct at play in frustration? It clearly introduces the question of the real.one speaks of satisfaction. that Freud puts at_the_ceat_es01 analytic conflict. and a foundation. and even demonstrated. Thus. when it is placed in the foreground of analytic theory. refers to the first age of life. and prepares certain inflections in him. which has nothing in itself to introduce either a misalignment or a disorder into your understanding. in order to try to push the dialectic of frustration a bit further... It models_the expel jgrice of the subject. with the notion of frustration. or that is put_into play_ thsylrtholic debt instituted by castration? As I indicated the last time. of a certain sum of good deeds which are adapted. Frustration. a base.. The important thing is to understand what frustration means. I think.. The fact that castration is at the level of the symbolic debt is sufficiently justified. Here. and fundamentally.-will give the slope along which the Oedipal conflict will come to be inflected in a way that is more or less decided. how it was introduced.the_a_ccentianthe_maticlia are not departin ig_michfrom the_notion. the notion of the law which absolutely cannot be eliminated from it. and what it concerns. it is an imaginary Al jjec__the phallus. I will continue. It is tied to the investigation of traumas. of gratification. there is introduced into the conditioning.

The proofs to which this remark awakens us are not lacking.Jt is a matter of real conditions which we are supposed to have to detect in the subject's past. Starting there. or on the contrary. That will be easy for you to measure. in relation to which will be formed what I just a while ago called its first slope. whose absence. with their phallic and sadistic subdivisions. and always participates in a dual situation without an Qeneral assumption of his position being possible. analytic theorists have found themselves in a discussion which teems with misunderstandings. etc. we have here the imaginary anatomy of the development of the subject. so th two. lived by the stili)"ectataperiodof development t which his relation to a real je c t is centered usually on the so-called primitive imago of the maternal ast.less complete saturation. Freud having spoken of l 62 .whatis_the nature of this relation. those that allow the description of the different instinctual stages. on the whole. Frustration is thus considered as an ensemble of real impressions. inscribing the first fixations. is then considered as an essential element. There we are taken to the heart of the question -. absent from the first analytic observations. -. by means of the analytic experience. one has been able to articulate the relations of the oral stage and the anal stage. In short. whichinakes_the-very-pesition-oi the sub'ect • arti • ••• • • • f the other. This interest in real conditions which bursts out in a given piece of current analytic literature is. Simply limiting ourselves to that.and to show that they are all marked by an elertoLambivalence. the earliest that the subject has with the real object? On this matter. It is enough to refer to the texts to see the threshold that has been crossed in the analytic investigation of the child by the sole fact of this displacement of interest in the analytic literature. We are thus in the presence of a subject who is in a ppsi tion of desire with regard to the breast in so far as it is a real object. at least for those of you who are familiar enough with the three notions on the chart to be able to recognize them easily. or at least it is articulated differently on the conceptual level. let us see where it leads.

and ended in formulations so diverse that I cannot enumerate them before having gone further in the conceptualization of what is at stake. which has confounded the discussion. that is to say. the child is always kept in contact with the mother. This theory would reconcile the notion of auto-eroticism as it is given in Freud with what seems to be imposed by the reality of the object with which the child is confronted at a very primitive stage of his development. This conception is perfectly contraryioille of clinical ex p. Balint call Primary Love. I will simply remind you of the theory of Alice Balint.b. I am thinking of the remark of Alice Balint. he has the most urgent need? There is a misunderstanding born of a confusion here. We are perpetually dealing with the evocation in the subject of the mark of all that could arise of truly fundamental discordances. the mother always has the infant on her 63 . The theory of this socalled perfect and complementary primitive love moreover carries the signature of this discordance in its very wording. Elsewhere. in the land of dreams in the Garden of the Hesperides.a lived stage of auto-eroticism. some have maintained the notion by interpreting this auto-eroticism as the primitive relation of the infant with the primordial maternal object.i the two poles of need. and Mrs. amongst savages. in as much as a perfect Jeciprocity_is. which we have already discussed. in Mother Love and the Love of the Mother. that where relations are natural. for these seem to contradict the statement that there are no effective relations of the subject with an object. Others have objected that it was difficult to relate many details of direct observation of mother-child relations to a notion that seemed founded on the fact that the subject knows only himself. It ends with an articulate and striking conception that Mr._establishest120ween what the child demands of the mother - ■ " se • I I t tar and what the mother demands ofthex. in fact. What could be more manifestly external to the subject than that object which is the first nourishment par excellence. According to them of love in which egoism and the gift are perfectly reconcilable. of which.

already potentially articulated. would have nothing more to do than to emerge. and the different elements. things are attacked with more nuances._throu h their intermediary.back. the progressive We retain the French. 1 I have taken this example only to introduce what will be the motor element of our critique of frustration. in the theory of biological development. For such a subjec_t. it would only appear the more meritorious. and one let it show only in distant places where surely. They reproach Melanie Klein with having a theory of development which. Thus one finds in this bulletin an article by MM. The authors ask for a comparison of that with the way that. namely from the inaterArtd." "ideal. if not idgactive.taLtepiesentation-given-by-Kleinian_thectry_is-not-at-a11. if anyone learned of it. In its table of contents one finds authors who figured in the volume to which I alluded in my first lecture. From the beginning there would be primitive aggressive drives --." and "active. which reproduces tlaegl. felt by the subject as coming from the outside. would locate everything within the subject in a preformed manner. It is clear that thefundamen. for its condensation of the words "idea.shameless and completely uncritical -. In this more confidential bulletin.of the object relation. There fell into my hands a certain bulletin. elnThole oak must already be contained in the acorn. nothing would come from the _outside. as if it were from lack of assurance that one showed a bit of shame. 'clue that they macte_oLthe_Kl. Pasche and Renard. that the authors end by admitting that this position is ideal. the notion of a love so strictly complementary and seemingly destined of itself to find its reciprocal constitutes an evasion so little compatible with a correct theorization.einian_positions_at the Congress of Geneva. The whole Oedipus complex with its possible development would be already included in the instinctual givens. that of the Belgian Association of Psychoanalysts. that of the theoro.namely. for some.va r and that is why it is amusing to see by what bias the theoretical reconstruction that she proposes is attacked. In fact. then the return shocks from these aggressive drives. they say.. which is • centered on an optimist view -." 1 64 .

and predominant.12ut_also_ if h the authors AN not r_eally_much closer_ than_ they believe to the position for which they reproach Melanie Klein. they say. and most of • you will recognize it.._whictl. They thus arrive at the conclusion which they believe can be drawn from the_Kleinian contribution -. y of the mother. I would simply like to underline the formulation in which the whole paradoxically ends. They believe that they find in Melanie Klein that it is already given in a constellation that is internal at the beginning. starting withhimself ox-with anything_ else.the child ishornwith-inheritetLinstincta. can only be which the so-called depressive Without taking these criticisms one after another as we would need to in order to appreciate them at their just value. which forms the heart of the article. to which the subject is now and henceforth adequate.linderlinejSY.rept. nor to_discover through a series of strange and lucky finds.that it is about a notion of a schema. But we will have to see in the proof not only if this critique does notgo against all that FreucLitten . and even of opposition. preformed by_hered_i_ty.evsa_y„.11 to . conceived as a preformed schema. all_the elements which will permit the subject to adapt himself to a series of stages which are not called ideal only because theyage_precisely_raemories for the 65 . in his heredityjn_the state of preformed schemata. ready to appear at a specified point. but to recognize. The Platonic character of this formulation cannot escape us. in such a way that it would not be astonishing later to see the notion of the internal object prevalent in the foreground. but which he remembers. and which he will then have -not to form. The authors seem fascinated by the question of how what is contributed from the outside is inscribed in development.construction of thetotalfi.u. For it is really they who indicate that there already exist in the subject. psitionis_iraugurated- i. in the face of a world which he does not perceive. This world which one has onl t IIl NO is established with the aid of a certain imaginary preparation._eLy_diffic.._they. This is formulated in the name of criticism.

i All of that. But that this articulation should be revealed in a certain relation with the child. which will provide IIirriatype and a norm.subjga.that_we see them rep_LiVectedonto tie ast starting with points that may be verprecocious. it seems to me. and there is no question of following her when she says that the Oedipus complex was already there in theAtorms. It is in the cont tioticLotthe.. ti. These fantasies. tp_Arelyhypothetical articulation.troactively read in his pastrio irhiglessthanthell for that. begins to indicate the 4 which we can introduce something new into the confusion regarding the primordial mother-child relation. •— _ of the penis moving amongst the brothers and sisters in that sort of field defined by the interior of the maternal body. That there is something the Kleinian conception is not to be doubted. and it is viesisely a matter of knowing how something like an order can be established starting from there.t is characteristic at the origin is the sound and fury_af_the. have only a retroactive character. and very precisely phylogenetic memories.A. But why can these points be so precocious? How_canialaise a subject attte2eldrern y_ad_vanced--age-of-two-and-a_half_years„and like the pythoness before a mantic or divinatory mirror. and that it should be articulable very precociously. while it may better satisfy our idea of natural harmonies. Is that what Melanie Klein wanted to_say?It is strictly unthinkable to maintain that it is. there is some sort of mirage here.subject. If there is precisely one thing of which Melanie Klein gives us the idea -.itatusake_unclerstood.and is this not just what is criticized by the authors? -it is that the earliest situation iscilaaic„is_s_eritaialy-artarchic.Lizes. is surely something that poses a fertile question. puts at the outset a tr 7 There has to be some reason is given which. This theoretical. is still not consonant with what experience shows. Without doubt. 66 .

It is certaM__that an object can begin to exercise its influence in the relations of the subject well_b_efoxt it hasbeen_pgrseivLtL: asan object. the agent isthfinother. as Freud has underlined. but. it will suffice for me to remind you of what we have already studied during these last years. A great deal becomes clearer if we approach it in the following way -._thereds_theagent effect_the_objea-only_has_ an agency._which is the truesenter when it is a question of situatingthefarly relations of the child. that the subjarticular mode of relation will be established. It is only as a function of a periodicity in which holes and deficiencies can appear. only begins to functiondaielatiorao_a_laac. The object is_real. but it could also be anything at 67 . And in this_ fundamental relation which is the relation to the lack of the object. which allows us to give an essential formulation to the general position of the problem. and without any sort of biological value. the relation direct. which in no way requires the admission that there is even for him a distinction_between_a_me_and_a_notme. althesttheslaancl. in the auto-erotic position in Freud's sense of the term„Ln_whickthgreis ns4 Minn of the them speaking. there is room to introduce the notion of the agent. Still. It is a ball in this instance. for example. ther is something other than thesrimitive object. namely what Freud has articulated concerning the original position of the child with regard to games of repetition. which he grasped so brilliantly in the child's behavior.. Ihereds_on. and we shall find them bracketed until the end. It is the same. only . nor any conceivable approach to a relation. startin ent_oLthe_first.tr One is wrong_ notto_hegin-with_frustration._the i_gaLobject. In this instance.there arejwo sides to frustration at_thel _beginning. To demonstrate it.gamesr-gameLaLthe_seizure-oLan_ object which is perfectly indifferent in itself. She does not appear as such from the beginning. one must have a just notion of this central concept...oae_hand.

Before showing that in a way that is more clear. Certainly.It thusalay_xs . there is already 68 . but in the opposition plus and m.'nuspresence and absence. that of the depressive position. 1 - articulated extremely precociously by the child. in order to get it back it again later.us the_beginning. The latter is not simply posed as such objectively. thisscansion_af_the calls_far from giving us the whole . symbolic order straight away. she introduces a new element of totality. since there must next be a sequence.for the subject.and the_pair of opposites presenceabsence. which already participates in the order orsy:raptialieity. we are told that at a certain stage of development. The child is thus placed between the notion of an agent. which is opposed to the chaos of part objects which characterized the preceding stage. which at the origin is the mother. is what the possibility of linking the real relation to a yjubglic relation. I simply want to indicate what is implied by the sole fact that the pair of opposites presence- absence is introduced into the child's experience. which givesus the first. with its scansion and the marks or traces that remain of it. it is t e'ectecl itis_calkdayaysicaiizatism. What is introduced here is what naturally tends to disappear at the moment of frustration. the connotatio_a_plus-minus.._s_ymb_a_Qf frustration./ - Concerning the mother.all that a small child of six months can throw beyond the pale of his crib..and when it is resent. arranged as such. elementof a symbolic order. We already said that in our studies last year -. This(ouplig_ofpxesence-absence._ connotes the first constitution of the agent of frustration.ga * distinct vegmamkati the real object relation. us_to_disen. butworiist Jay the subject. No doubt this element is not sufficient by itself alone to constitute one. this new element is yerypredsely presence-absence._liut it shaws. which later will offer the subject precisely_the_pos5ibility_sa_establishing a relation _with a real object. Well. We can writskM) as the.. presence-absence is articulated in the_register_of_thesalt_The maternal object is called precisely when it is absent -.

neither more nor less than the mother up until the present. objects in the sense that we intend here. as to whether the notion of the not69 .r4tion_of_the_whole_oLreality for what follows.. from_themoment_thatthe mother helaines_p_O.u_. That. the mother as such. th__d_is_tcLsay. possessed -. does not respond? If to the call of the subject. the fundamental condition.access to._.I leave aside the question.. is also the beginning of_the struct. objects that can be grasped._a_seversal of the object's position is produced. she no longer responds except when it pleases her. the breast -. in some way. are susceptible of entering into thesonnotation presence-. absence. in the same way. a question of observation.virtually the origin. And now they too..let us take it as an example —. and that it is upon_her_thatthe chilciLs.. andhe becomes real. On the other hand. the essential term in the relation of the child to theaeal object. the birth. as dependentonithis_reaLohjeA*Ichishenceforth the maternal p_ower_. when. When she no longer responds. she no longer responds? 1" Let us give the answer ourselves.Phe becomes real.fallsfxorrLher __ Whereas she had been inscribed in the symbolic structuration that made of her an object present-absent in response to the call -. please note.Wei.the moment of veering when he primordial relation to the real object opens into a relation that is more complex? What is the turning point at which the_ mother-child relation opens towards elements that will introduge_whatyve_ have called_a dialectic? I think that we can formulate it in a way that is schematic by asking the following question -. what happens? These objects which upunfijlthenhaclbeenpluely92jects_ of satisfaction.Q1zjecis_clearlydepends. In short. The question now is the following -. become objects_af.. which is not metaphorical. gift deriving from this Towex. As long as it is a question of a real relation.what happens if the mnbolic agent. Correlatively.how to conceive . distinct from the real object which is_ the object of satisfactionfor the child. She_. the possibility.) Why? Until then.Wd as such real. of a symb_alic_order. she existed in the structuration as an agent..she J_Decornes a power. she exits from the_ structure. can be made to be as enveloping as one wants.

In other terms. and which is the mother's power. it satisfies a need. according to one formulation. the disappointments. It is easy to impute it to all that is farthest from us. if one recalls that one of the most cumbersome notions of theory since it has become. doubled by the French. it is twice Qui_a_gossiblesabje_ct Of_atjafActipti. That would be absurd. At the moment that I am describing. And at that moment. a genetic psychoanalysis. The object is valued as evidence of the gift deriving from the maternal power. of omnipotence. count for naught in the question. The object thence has two orders_of satisfying properties. But is it conceivable that the child has a notion of omnipotence? Perhaps in effect. The omnipotence in question is that of the mother. but are rather the mark of_the value of that power which can not-respond. "non-moi. It is erroneous and completely unthinkable that the child could have a notion of his omnipotence. it is she who is omniRotenticl Itis_a_clecisive moment. This investigation may seem a bit theoretical." 70 . and the object symbolic. but it also symbolizes a favoral:21Lpower. but that does not mean that the omnipotence in question is his. and the checks that it encounters. theposition. What caunts. which touch upon the mother's omnipotence. )ten the mother becomes real. That is extremely importante to retain. the mother can give anything at all. Not only does nothing in his development indicate that he has. 2 English in the original. but almost everything that interests us in this development and in the accidents that embellish it is there to show us that his so-called omnipotence. To think it is to end in impasses. It at least has the advantage of introducing some essential distinctions.is_iezerse_d_= has real. in_ which the mother passes into reality from a symbolization that is completely archaic. he has the essential of it._-_:_as before. and of preparing the way for openings which are not those that one currently takes.2 initially enters through the image of the other or through what is the objets that the child wants to keep around him are no longer so much objects of satisfaction. are the deficiencies. You will see now where they have already led us. is that of the omnipotence of thought._you will see.

the_child. I will keep them on the blackboard as two circles exterior to one another. For us that is a given. suddenly passes to another register.Here. frorri_the moment that it depends upon this power. This object is defineci_as_imaginary—lt is_ in_ no way possible to confound it with the penis in its reality. namely. it seems.her„need-for the phallus. as permitted -. like_its_pr_esence. we misconstrue [rneconnaitrej 71 . its erected image.. Freud tells us that in the world of objects. let us consider our mother and child who. is the child. - phallus has so decisive a role thatanostalgiaior it. form only a single totality of needs.. women. her essential object lacks.among. and which has in its jsession all that _the_smtiect might need. men. they assume it as licit. than for those who can assure themselves of having it in reality. says that the. for his part. namely. there is one_whose function is paradoxically decisive.a ppwer. that in the end. more important even for the members of humanity who lack the real correlate.if the_w_ornan satisfaction in the child it is precisely in_as_much as she finds in him / something_that calms. then. For a simple reason -. are. And even if he has no need. It is properlyspeakini(its form. more or less well. Nevertheless. and whose whole sexual life is yet subordinated to the fact that they really assume its use imaginarily. 3 Let us now pose the question by starting from a completely different point. Starting there. woman-counts the phallus_. and b_e_comes something that can refuse itself. it becomes symbolic i. just as the Mortimer couple in Jean Cocteau have only a single heart. Freud. By not taking that into account. and that this has the strictest rapport with her relatlaraa. according to Michael and Alice Balint.that is to say. What had been situated up until then on the plane of the first connotation presence-absence.oxitaAg_enc_y in the imaginary. the phallus. in the presence of _something that_he has realized as . and aiu_zatait.

irtary. In the end.an object which as such is intermediary.d.and assumein a way. at a primordial.not only Freud's teaching. and on.o_rshal desired object? Far harmonious. but the phenomena that are manifest at every moment in experience. by what_there might be of _effective_real. . and he also receives something from her._real. The question is to know at what moment. to some extentle_d_himself dispossessed_of.eta ina~eed — the three terms are there.s to the extente of the phallasis notcompletely_absorbed_for_the_mather_by theigigmoLthe child? Where there is a diplopie. and how. in perceiving that it is not he_slome..that he demands from the mother. We cannot not introduce that here. of_themother and child is doubled on one side by the need for a certain imaginary saturation.. All sorts of situations that are already structured exist between the mother and the child. as we will see. if we follow Qp-pu(i.on-for-the-mather-the_syzibolic function of hez. Thereis_always for the mothersomelbing that reinainsirred_u_c_ible in what is at stake.b_ut_a-cestaizipaage. Let us say. in a way that is approximate. something. - -- 72 .the other.ci jaken_as_reaL spitholizes thejrnale More precisely the-chackas_real takes.th_e_relation. relations with the child. definitivelyrnythical. The child expects something from the mother. From the moment when the mother is introduced_into_the real as a pawerJor the child there opens thsp_osibility_of. in the style of the Balints.the imag. that is more or less symbolized -. a _division_oLthe socallecLptim.. atwhat mornents_m_thechgclenter into -. the objectof_the-gift. that the child can believe that he is loved for himself. . The question is then — what_happen. Every sort of variant can be introduced here. . we will say that teslail. So we have the mother and the child in a certain dialectical relation.at—th_e_p_hallus is for the mother? At what moment can the child. situation of the relation to wb. the child can be introduced directly into the structure of the symbolic-imaginary-real.instinctuallevd_which remains. as it is produced for the mother. In other words. .

as Little Hans exa.Thislittle_girLha... and by a good observer. mother had lost tLer_husband at the beginning of the war. but that sheiss_imyly_desiripg. The child realize this phallic image on himself.. one sees her function as symb_otic mother. perceived thatbays have apee-pee maker. She comes to see her daughter... she plays little games of approach -.1errt Rower -.she comes on tiptoe.everything is noted day by day --.other.ind it is there that the rwciss..herself_desirousitcd_o_nLy_cd something. tha_s_he.Ahatis to_say...when_the_rhather. and when she comes.latter _plays her role as symbolic_rnother. and distills her arrival.than. In short.. who is two yeasa_aacUlve raorahLalst hak1g. As a consequence.. whickikthe. - 73 . She understands nothing because the theory of Anna Freud is false.L1 4.made_the discoiery that boys have a pee-peeinak w ants-to imita... islimjte443. begins to function in a position of rivalry..teAtit.At_ the__moment when the child learns the difference between the sexes._ himself.phallus_ ipr'41.n.ginary term..this will be for the subject more decisjve„tban everything_else.. In fact.b_ut_begause the. and because it is one of Anna Freud's students who made the observation.. and its fecundity.ving. the notion that the mother lacks the_phalius. A drama is produced around this issue.anii. Because it was during the war. she understands nothing. and I shall indicate its interest right away. is_there.is_ticselatigi► propeaspeakinginterveries. all sorts of fortunate conditions were present. but does not_ entaiLany_consequen.ces. The last time I introduced the observation of a phobia talittlezirl. to what degree does this experience fit in with what is given him in the presence of his mother and in her actions? How is the recognition_oLthis_third..the. So all goes very well. The child is observed from one end to the other.d alsa to manipulate theirs.wants when the mother is not thete. the facts put her into a state of astonishment which produces all the precision of the observation -.essesit. the presencec_ejs regular. This child was separated_froilkheunothey_notonly because of theavar.There is something here that goes much further. The littlegirl.is. She does everything to do as the little boys do. the child jlasigalszbiecshe.ematlierjascribed? Even more. Irna.......

The observation is given as being that of a phobia. one fine night the little girl_wakes up. and which bites thesex.That we know to the degree that we analyze the child. anclit wants to bite her. She wants to get out of her bed.she is a bit 74 . Is the phobia a consequence of the discovery of the absence of the penis? Why do we ask the question? Because the dog is clearly a dog_which bites. and in fact. The first really long and articulate sentence that she pronounces -. A dog is there. she has to be put into another. and the phobia evolves over a certain time. seized_by a holy terror. in so far as we follow and understand what she says. that is.

which would then be only a sort of apparel and_pfetextcovering somethi ngmatet. In other words. with all of the prohibitions that it implies. as such.theAahobials_there as the aientthairipAyeswhghaLiritlegarnm9sles%acepted_asabsent. But what I want you to note is that the objgc41.after all. the_supexegodsp_erhap&fot. or again that the images of the dream are only a way for the subject to garb his anxieties.t13. One clears this obstacle at every moment.of_a_paslaggi9„.theirionth_that.is to say that the dog bites the leg of the naughty boy. Mrgorte's) for example.. But the mechanism of phobia is the mechanism of phobia. mother's absences over ithe_course. Pasche at the end of the article of which I have spoken.ndamental. Certainly. in the original. the intervention of an element which is. taken away? The schema that I have tried to articulate today certainly goes in that_ direction. There is something justin_tonception--_thatis_ really the mechanism of phobia.. to the point of saying that it fundamentally explains the death instinct. says very clearly -.thw? -.pxecedeLthe_ _blossoming of the phobia. are primordial. is something in decline. when I bring in this observation Ql_a_phobiaLL\to.thesilikl only an imaginary_alibi. the time needed for the phobia to - 4 3 English. namely the misrecognition [meconnaissance I ofthssp_ribolic order. that is to come back again to the same idea. Why the dog? We will talk about that later..provided der in ord ro j_ustify_what is absent as beingabserit. because it was bitten off._.of.E l f behind in her development -. Is that what Iwaritto_tell you. primitive. whereas anxieties. Are we going to make a short-circuit in things and say that in 1921aiLissimply-a. TheinteTftst of the observation is that itjadkateamith_precision the.. and this is a plain acting 3 o f You also see te_relation-that-is-there_betweealtg symbolization and the object of_the.matter.. .. for example.that is to say.. 75 . on the other hand. to personalize them as one might say._ culture. and to understand it as does M.. . in whose shelter there will come to repose what is fundamental.as I toldyou _just before. narnFly. the anxieties in their unconstituted state..phobia..

the mother ceased corning to visit. unless it is one other point. and an operation was necessary.but something had to happen during._thus_at_a_third.back.= an_d_the_next_ day the dream of the dog breaks forth.the child is very sad. First. begins to play all sorts of games with her that are both 76 . tired.m. which I am going to tell you.ther. This brother that she acquires all of a sudden and who is about five years older than she.yllarn_of_the mother's corning=coming. We will thus discover thanks to the observation that the aphallicism was-not enough. The child then sees _her_ mother in a weakened form. but nothing glaperhe comes back. The mother is no longer the . The little girl finds that she has a new father and a new brother. she plays again with_the_child„and still nothing happeiliecomesback leaning_on a_cane. she must be encouraged. that there had to_be this secongthipture in the alternatingrb. Nothing is more significant and paradoxical in the observation. the Blitz ends. From what moment does the phobia become necessary? From the moment when the_mather_lacks_thephallus What thus determines the phobia? What finds an equilibrium in it? Ilr_h_y isit-sufficient? We shall tackle that the next time._ver_y_ distantdiat the pholliaarises. and of the way that therapists have attacked it.12. sick. yet there is no phobia. she has been missing. I simply want to point out the question that arises concerning the antecedents of the phobia. and this -laelt is inscribed in the child's reaction and behavior -.break out is much longer. because she had fallen ill. that interval. and she remarries. leaning on a cane.sarne-weekly elation of approach and going away thatmake_her_a_sufficient point of nchora•e f• e child And it is at this rnoment._or_the.y. We shall speak again of this phobia. The mother ctb - at first appeared as someone who could be .. After the phobia._weakened. There is another point that is no less striking. fourmonths roll by between the child's discovery of her aphallicism and the blossoming of the phobia. and have thought that it could be understood. the mother takes the child back.olic_rno. the son of the stepfather.flo on er either the same presence or the sarne_gaiety. and the phobia installs itself. she_has.

She will surely become that_ lirt-phalius5 about which so much is said. which is worth more than the brother.of power as such. but which isessgatially_liracesi_to_theltmetion_of_phgbia.A. The child now finds her needrated_by the maternal presence.ormethin.. the fear of the castratin animal as such. by that of the father. she has never been better. thefath. situated beyord_the relations with the mother.g. we are told why -. a personage who is not only phallic but who also bears a penis. English in the original.adoring and violent. But does the therapist see as clearly as that? This relation in which she is alreadyth . and clearly gives himself up to an activity which is entirely linked to th. there is not a trace of mental disturbance..that would have been a fine occasion for the phobia to break out again. which is said to have been the essential element of articulation allowing the brother. the fundamental theory on which the whole therapeutics of Anna Freud is founded indicates that it is to the extent that the ego is more or less well informed of reality that discordances are established. and by implication . He asks her to show herself nude. 77 . In effect.. the child to pass through the grave crisis she entered when faced with the maternal impotence. In short„AU a substitulejoywhat appears to us to have been saturated by the phobia. of which we have not yet spoken. and in addition by her relation with the brother. who presentifies her lack to her.disengaging from the mother th_eidea.erdamfficiently present to aducepacisely_kne.s. It is a matter of knowing to what degree she will not later be 4 5 English in the original. We can perceive in another respect that at this momentshedias_becoalrne_tgatire. The presence of the man-brother. bexpmc. is pregnant with all sorts of pathological possibilities.e_interg_silhAtile takes in her as being without aS And the psychotherapist is astonished -. Nevertheless.power o_r_imppleir.11 .pLeleramt.e. should this not be the occasion for the little girl to fall ill again? Far from it. In addition.s.vmbolig element.it is that she is clearly preferred to this boy by her mother. narnely.

there is no essential need to be filled by_theile_veloprnent of theThallic fantasy. How is this separation maintained. 12 December 1956 V ON ANALYSIS AS BUNDLING AND ITS CONSEQUENCES The drive under the naked eye. by what identification. But for the moment. the birth of the object as fetish. 1 English in the original. by what way.Implicated in this imaginary function. He is sufficierdlor gvaintainingasufficieka distance between the three terms of the relation mother-child-pkallus. namely. because the father is_there-an. by_putting_ there something_of herself. 78 . by what artifice? That is what we shall begin to attack the next time in taking up this observation again.d_heis_s_ufficient._so that the subject does not have to maintain it by giving of herself. We shall thus be introduced to what is most characteristic in the pre-Oedipal object relation.

The transitory perversion of a phobic patient.but the sole fact that it is inserted here in a different constellation gives it in every respect a signification that is different. At the point at which we have arrived. My wish has been amply fulfilled by more than one. Pierre Marty and Michael Fain on L'Importance de la motricitê dans la relation d'objet (The Importance of Motricity in Object Relations). Bouvet. The fetishist solution. truly present the concept of the object relation as it is conceptualized in a certain orientation. and partly remains the same -. So I am going to summarize this work. Not long ago. than in the few words that I can pronounce here. is now gathering pace. which has been affirmed over the course of years.The true nature of the anaclitic relation. What I am trying to demonstrate takes it in a direction that partly differs. in some text. I wished ironically that someone. others have made an effort at precision. gives you a living example of the dominant conception. and ends in a conception that is very firmly articulated. 1 The article of MM. I could see that this formulation. and if the formulation was rather an enfeebling of it by the one who had introduced this concept with regard to obsessional neurosis. In recently rereading certain of their articles. published in the January-June 1955 number of the Revue francaise de psychanalyse. 79 . The paroxysm of perversion. while warning you that things will certainly appear to go much further when you read the article itself. it would be well to punctuate the signification that the object relation takes when it is put at the center of their conception of analysis by the group of those who make more and more of it. The analytic conception of the object relation has already known a certain historical realization.

the only thing in principle that can be established and manifested is what is called the primitive relationship of the drive.between a subject. it is precisely here that there is localized in the mind of the analyst what must become manifest. within the analytic convention. which is the person who is present. and an external object. the sitgation as it is basically conceived can only be exteriorized in an erotic aggression. that is to say. at every instant. the motor manifestation of the drive cannot occur. The couple is supposed in itself alone to be the animating element of the analytic development. in some way. and experienced as living by the analyst. that we shall be allowed to perceive what interferes with the constituent situation. with regard to which. and the external object that is the analyst. it is because it is agreed that it will not become manifest. if one can say that. the subject in fact has a relation with an internal object. because of the rule. in the subject's different sketches at motor reaction. the patient.The relation between the analysand and the analyst is conceived from the outset as being established between a subject. the drive as it is emerging. It is precisely to the degree that. and become the object of a fantasmatic relation. The subject being forced to contain his movements by the relation as established in the analytic convention. This is normally manifested by motor activity -. lying on the couch or not. there exists a certain discordance. If the latter does not manifest itself.that is the presupposition for the development of the analytic relation. but caught in the imaginary mechanisms already instituted within the subject. It is there that the drive. Between this imaginary object and the real object. the analyst will be 80 . is localized. and that we shall see superimposed on the relation with the external object a relation with an internal object. In the end. at every moment. the analyst. To express it in our vocabulary. the analyst is conceived as being real. The tension of the analytic situation is conceived on the following basis -. It follows that we shall find the final word of what happens at the level of the drive in small traces carefully observed. According to the article in question. but it is to be hoped that its erection will surge up.

object will have to be. let us now see its practical consequences. apart from those who are there. if what I am teaching 81 .ages.judged. has been led to give a certain value to the notion of the neurotic distance that the subject imposes on the object._malized. according to this conception. It really seems that one is tending more and more in this milieu to give a pivotal importance to such modes of apprehension. within which little by little a distamuathe.is. Know that I have not taken an exceptional example here. is how one arrives at conceptualizing the anal when one believes_that Wis. no one else to enter into play in the analytic situation.5imply restrained. inscribed in the situation of a real relation between pessart. The fantasma tic. one of these authors. it was not a matter of his being able to smell him psychologically. I have already several times alhided to the fact that one of these authors. This was not a metaphor. then. As there is. its position in the foreground. at least in this suspended position it is in. It is thus that the subject will realize his analyst as a real presence. had given as the crucial turning of an analysis the moment when his analysand could smell him. It is clear from the beginning that so exorbitant a conception cannot be pushed to its final consequences.. That. and in a way that is lived by the subject. or internal. On the other hand.. and that something must be realized there. reduced to a real distance. is a mathematical consequence of such a conception of the_analytic relation. followed by all the others. Having seen the theoretical formulation. the active and actual distancemith. The authors are going very far here. Frorn_theinoment_that-the-latte_r_is conceived as a realposition. that they are separated in this enclosure by a conventional barrier. gauged. it was the moment when the patient had perceived the odor of the analyst. but that this has been repeated several times. it is true during the postulancy of his career. and will have to model his interventions.regard_tctilv_analyst it is certain that one of the most direct modes of the relation to the other will be that apprehension from a distance provided by scent. The appearance of this relation of scent. which is that between the subject and the analyst._wilich.

One will draw it askew because of the way in which one conceives it. 82 . Within the framework of this operation there unfold a certain number of phenomena which will allow us to situate the different stages in which the subject remained more or less stuck. A verbalization has importance for them only in so far as it is impulsive.you is true.Why don't you answer me? You will find it in these authors. In what does_this operation of regulating the distance to the internal object. It is thus that the analytic situation comes to be conceived as a real situation. to which all of technique is submitted. and it is not negligible since everything is there. can be expressed thus -. It is not enough to conceive it as such for it to be as one conceives. We shall also see the special value that is given to a single impulsive verbalization. but that does not. mean that one can do without it. even if the practitioner shares such a conception. or fixed. to cries towards the analyst of the sort -.one does not know why one is there talking. however. But inversely. end? Our schema allows us to conceiveJt. in which an operation of oduction oltheimaginary to the real is accomplished. is a motor manifestation. that is to say. one serving as the NW of the other. in the imaginary relation. and the pregenital relation becomes more and more the essential of what is explored in analysis. punctuated in the most precise way. but wh4tiLieall_y_Ls remainsALthe somewhat I am trying to express for you by the schema_ which_shows She intervention and_crossing of the symbolic relation and the imaginary relation. Nothing is said about the function of language and speech in this position. One thus accomplishes what one calls the exhaustion of his various essentially imaginary positions. The situation is not annulled however much one misconstrues it. the situation in which he operates still does not really become what the said conception stipulates. The only thing that is in no way clarified by such a conception of the analytic situation. One does not know it. and that shows the insufficiency of this conception very well. this insufficiency can be of some consequence in the manner of bringing the whole situation to a good term.

concerning the unconscious symbolic relation -.thiuk of e. if we neglect the link between the imaginary relation and the symbolic. The order with regard to the image in effect serves him in both understanding.ne. in every neurosis. If our effort.—hutcan_alsoresp_ont_is_on this line that_ ty_erything_tlaatis of the tr4nafereatiasuskr is qgablisheckthe imaginary gluing there precisely the role of filter. There is already_structuredihLhespfalcing_ relation.asis. not ceaselessly. since it. to realize himself both as history and as intention.. to the narcissistic ___is_thatathe small other. this beyond. What is absolutely certain in a certain number of cases. his own ruling order. if everything is misconstrued in the relation between the imaginary_ten§ion and what must be realized...ur. which is_ not yet one. bears uniquely on the imaginary relation which is there in a transverse position with regard to the advent of speech. if we do i ( .andinordertoannihilatei dorNccoate_ j that we already have the results. percei. On the line S-A. subjects have already come to us who have passed by this style of understanding and proof. must be established. which links the_subject as more or Lessdiscordant„dividecl cven to fragmentation.impossilDility of thesymbolic which c21Witutes. one might say. if we only interest ourselves in what those who hold this conception call the distance from 64‘e-utter. the subject-in_whizm yaunspeechls_constituted because he can not only receive it. indeekofokatack Of course. i r v v i o n e s 'ci -arttheobject. and the . our interest.Y_e_it. [entendre] and not understanding what there is to understand in the place of speech. Let us not say any more than that. the subject has already.ickwith regard to the other.) d S ! . if we forget that there __is_something which must allow the subject to achieve himself. 83 kavr-6. the relation of the subjectio the_ Other is produced.aginary relation. brought to light. this great Other beyond the other whom you ipLeh_fnciiLmaginarily. this supposed Other who is the subject as such.not _smply the other who is there but is the place of speech. and precisely in cases of obsessional neurosis.The line a-a' conerns_th_e_im._The Otheris.and yet it is the whole analytic doctrine that is there in its potential state --.1 . Yes.

we have left open the question of how -.Startiug with thia recognition. a sort of glaze or crystallizahonstfanimage_araund_the_olilectamhirh were _lezithin_thesubjeds reach..1. NAI that 4%a* is +red-astonishing if we refer to the imaginary triad. -2 At the point to which I had pushed things the last time. that of the father. The_trianglejs in itself preAedig4.asao the coming_iritoplaymholic---Felation. for example.This_is_prad.the sole object for his mother. I am thinking. but that what interests the motterb_an_interest more or less strongly 7 ascentuatecLaccording_to_the case. 84 .that she herself lacks this_ohject. and interests us only in as much as it is then taken up again in the quartet which is constituted by the eiIty_oplay of the paternal function. by the dimension of the Oedipus. It is only isolated by abstraction. he must perceive in secpaLl place that the mother is truly lit_vAysit.. which scarcely existed in analytic literature before this technical mode was put into the foreground. the_precipitationof a homosexual attachment for ark_ohject which was in some way paradoxical. which remained there like an asti_lact. beginning with what we could call the fundamental disappointment of the slikl. you saw the beginning of a linof_research that concerned the imaginary triad mothercl.not only that he isnot..lili:J m phallus. we shall obtain what one could call paradoxical reactions of perversion.. That is the point at which we had arrived the last time. We have already observed phenomena that are completely out of the ordinary. .is thatla_making..u.the_entire demelopment of the_analytic_situation_a pursuitof the reduction of this famous distance which i5 said to be characteristic of_the_object relation in_obsessional neurosis. of the explosion. which occurs only with the fourth luaction.cgd_whealg recognizes -. Lthe phallus . introduced. The phenomenon can show a quite durable persistence.

he must firsthave been menaced by the agency of castration. What happens in the normal Oedipal_situation? It is by the intermediary_of_a certain rivalry between the subject and the father.relaton. The normal issue of this situation is that the child symbolically that he needs.. There follows an appeal made by the chilito_a_term_which_coldd sustain _this unsustainabLe.that the ii. which is originally the paternal agencyJtis on the symbolic plane. For tElcir it is completely clear.child__Qf the_p_hallus that she • lacks. I will introduce a lateral remark here. girl or boy. It is a highly favorable case for studying phobia. because the events occur at the border of the Oedipal relation. Thus the blossoming of the phobia. then. later perception the mother this Inother_who_is at_the_ .lutiorilim_ to need it. precisely those which introduce him to AlLayLnko. ilyentifiggtioniyhich is at the_b_asisaLtlae_normative Oectipalyelation is established.I showed it to you by alluding to the case of a transitory phobia in a very young child. When the hamessing_oLtb. I told you the other day that the child 44s real is tak. Licselation.taphallk potencyThat occurs differently according to the position.x.boundary of the symbolic and the real.. the dog.symbol other_lack of th_eol_2jeclof her imaginaryappetitee_phallus. within certain limits. with the surging up of that fantasmatic being. This solution is always invoked. concerning the formulations that one finds written by Freud to introduce the distinction between the . • who castrates. - 85 .by_the. symbolically limable. There is at first a double imgiaTxclisappoliataLent discovery. whether the situation be normal or abnormal. which intervenes here as properly speaking responsible for the whole_situation. at least for a provisional period.e-threeimaginary_obje_ctsis_b. .mbythernother as thy. of right to thg_phallus. thanks towilich_the whole situation is thinkable.okel there is one solution_possible.also_lacks the phallus. the one who bites. punctuated by an alternating identification in the relations that somethin is established whiclumilLallaw_the subject to sepower conferred. that is to saylteleonthe_p_larke_afa sort of pact.

he always misconstrues the other. Inversely. If one pushes further. the object of anaclitic love. and very paradoxically. It is. in another vocabulary. in the formulation of opposition that Freud gives for these two modes of relation. He is very curiously led to speak of the anaclitic relation as a need to be loved which is much greater than the need to love. which we have tried to elaborate here by showing its roots in the specular relation to the other. and some have gone so far as to make a defensive reaction of this leaning against. one will see that there are singular coat:aglictions. In the types of Libidinal relation in_the adolescent. an element of activity_seems inherent in the very particular behavior aLthe_marcissist. and which he gives him as an attribute. which bears the mark of an eagly_depend. it is always conceived as a pure and simple survival.ence on the fnother„and the object of narcissistic love. for it does not truly have in Greek the meaning that Freud gives it. which is modeled on the narcissistic image of the subject. 8b .it is a relation of leaning against. The latter appears active in as much as. and also their justification. That is 'ust the contrary of the need to love in which Freud garbs him._ Freud distinguishes two types of love object. which is indicated by the German word Anlehnung -.anaclitic relation and the narcissistic relation. which asks only an opening on the side of a relation of dependence. that is when it persists in the adult. indeed. we call the oblative. the narcissist suddenly appears in a light that is surprising. once again in a misconstruction of the position of intersubjective elements that the paradoxical perspectives have their origin. anaclitic ancLnarcissistic. making of him in some way the natural locus for what. though we owe it to Freud. which can only be disconcerting. one sees perfectly well that it is a matter of_a_ne_ect for support. That also lends itself to all sorts of misunderstandings. In effect. In fact. is really poorly made. or . The word anaclitic. paradoxical. They are extremely singular. up until a certain point. if one reads Freud. Where the anaclitic relation is interesting.

the depository„that_the position becomes anaclitic. That is what makes the essence_of the anaclitic relation. which shows very well that it is the most open position. him and as being a legitimate exercise for him.. which he becornea„ himself.0. of what one calls an infantile position.prolongation..ject_with. calls this neither more nor less than the erotic position.. that he becomes the bearer of the object of desire for the object which succeeds the maternal object.s much. as optimal with regard to the object that is refound. from a certain perspective. once experienced and assumed. because in rinciplele is the sole deplasitoryofthis object which is the object of the mother's desire.•scencting_ the relation of frustration or of object lack in the relation of castration. with the fourth term. namely the father.. the maternal woman.s. It is as a function of such an achievement of the Oedipal position that the subject is in a position which we can qualify. _•..__the representation. object that is refound.4egard to. in his article on libidinal types. in contrast to the narcissistic relation.and knows himself to_ be_ indispensable 12rieEstof_theer_o_ticlife-af. This terimintroduces the symbolic relation. One misconstrues its essence in not perceiving this -. This parenthesis is intended to show you the usefulness of putting the dialectic of the three first objects into play. womanJt is in so far as the woman depends on him. the indispensable_oblect.. on the phallus of which he is thenceforth the master.. The relation of de endence is established 41_4. successor of the early maternatob. sibility of tran.. which embraces them all and links them in the symbolic relation. that it is he and he alone who satisfies her._ identifying with thg_. as belonging to .namely. is invested with the phallus as such.0.it is in so far as the male subject inthe symbolic relation.which is the phallic object.thgr. of the Other. in so far_as she needs to find in him her object... and with it the pos. the .and this since the origin of Freud's communication -. Freud.ulajects who participate in this libidinal version is entirely conditioned byllieneAd.the_obje_ctal partner. which is _something completely different„for it 87 . and marked by the relation to the early mother who is in principle his object in_the normal Oedipal position -. the subject knows_thathel indispensable to her.

.rnaternal_p. 11 ` [ Schema.gime_S.ith_regardio_a third objectabsphallic 22jegtj_n_rhich is boikwhat the woman lacks and what_the child _has 41s:covered as lacking in the rn911: '. a_ dialectic which_confers_on_this lack_the dimg.-becomes the rule and the measure in.msdhAr.the child will make theatalEc choice in_her place .. and will realize for her the assumption of her longing? towards the.nsiQD Of pact. Dis-accord. .modes. 88 . in fact..with_ gatd_ his..the_anaclitic relation It can happen. or destruction of links.adner. a. or non-link..v. 85] SCHEMA OF FETISHISM (2) 2 English in the original. that an accident of development or a historic incident damages the linksailiemother-child_relatism_v.. Let us come back to our subject.prohibition and particularly. one institutes and one invests... in short. a coherence is lacking. To re-establish it. L s s ..than_thewsymbolic_There areirnaginary.. a law.cernent. phallic object..the child's identificationiarith. Starting a. that of_ incest.. and ask ourselves what happens if because of a default in the symbolic relation the imaginary relation .the.. there are other modes... There is lor_example. p..introduces this object lack in a dialectic in which one takes_and_ime. which are not typical.

the lack of the object properly _constitutes the human _path. assured of not having any 3 We are retaining the French expression passage a l'acte as a formal t e rm wi t h n o t e ch n i ca l E n g l i s h eq u i v a l en t .. in so far as it can be put into question. It o c c u r s i n F r en c h t ex t s frequently coupled with the English term acting out.cific_of_per-versionis_p.reciselythat this unity can only be realized in moments th_at are pot syn1. which is fusion. During this passage a l'acte. Perversion in effect has the property of realizing a mo_cle_ofaccessio_that beyond of the image of the other which characterizes_ the human dimension. his exclusive object. that of the realization of man's relation to his existence. The Freudian anaclitic theory formulates this transincliviclualidirnensim as such. That is already enough to make of him something different from the animal. That way at least. There is a way that is more direct.a beyond. But it realizes it only in moments like those that are always produced in paroxysms of perversion.This schema is nothing other than that of the fetishist perversion..12plically ordained. he can be at peace. which French authors give in E n g l i s h. and calls Eros the union of two indi3Liduals. extrahistorical conditions. all the more satisfying because it is inanimate. but the sp.ta. moments of syncope within the history_ofthesubject. Already on the imaginary plane. It is. Such a unit_yjs_realizegl at certain_moments in perversion. the subject himself says that in the end he finds his object.e. This imaginary access to the lack of the object is accomplished within certain specific.3 a shift into action. a s b e i ng w i t h o u t a t ec h n i c a l eq u i v a l en t i n F r en c h . 89 . and from all of the animal relations that are possible on the imaginary plane. indeed even virtual. if you will. which is how the paroxysm of perversion always presents itself. and access. is a constituent part of this unity.is realized. something. in which each is torn from himself and for an instant that is more or less fragile and transitory. one example of a solution. Other solutions exist for access to the lack of the object.• In fetishism. One observes a convergence or a rise towards the moment which can be very significantly qualified as a passage & l'acte.

is always what is ew. indeed trans-subjective property is more secure. . the fetishist solution is ' incontestably one of the most conceivable. and will_consicterhimself„to_b_e_a destructive object for her. That is effectively what we shall see occur during the course of an analysis of a fetishist. and one finds it realized effectively.s satisfyla . namely the mother. his primitive object.. the_ph414. he will then lose..butof identification with the oject. intersubjective. An object deprived of every subjective. with extreme rapidity. if it is with the object that he momentarily identifies._. for this p_osition_as_s_uch. marks the entire fetishist manifestation._ . offers the formula that it seems that one is in the presence of a subject who would like. but she suddenly had the feeling that that was it -.that they are always perfectly_ recipkocal. without her knowing at the moment very well why. this profound double vision. for it was like a fly in the soup. The specific of imaginary relations being. and he is_ alternatively at one and __. This perpetual play. privileged. 90 .. That tor i s. As for realizing the condition of lack as such. And in fact. the something_which_ symbolizes. since they are mirror relations. not of identification with themother. to show you his own image in two opposing mirrors This formula came out of her just like that.thesubject. he has passed into the_ specular l ( relation of the mother with the phallus.disappointments. That is so evident that one phyllisGretaasse who seriously tried to go deeply into the foundation of the fetishist relation. To love a slipper is really to have the object of one's desires within reach.is neverthere„where jw is for Au ood reason that he has left his place.. namely.S. a brief instant the fascinating illumination of the object which was the maternal object should satisfy the subject does not suffice to establish the erotic balance of the whole. one could perhaps say. we_mustalso expect to see from -time to time in the fetishist the appearance of a position. and at the same time impermanentaymboi wbichis the_precise object of fetishism. There is stabilization only in so far as one grasps this unique..e&.theotheilposition.

What could pass for a happy fantasy of 4 4 Fonction et champ de la parole et du langage en psychanalyse (1953). when one centers it entirely on the object relation by bringing in only the imaginary and the real. at least transitory. a technique. Hence. someone of the household. and it is also encountered in the south of Germany. except the last. • pp.Thus it is on an analogous. plane of relations that we can conceive as by nature essentially perverse what the results. which consists in this -. That is what we are going to see now. having to do with a partner who approaches the group in a way that is privileged. show. in a certain management of the analytic relation. This little passage may have passed unnoticed. Published in Ecrits. 237-322. Translated as The Function and Field of Speech and Language in Psychoanalysis.lcullig is a conception of amorous relations. on condition that no contact take place. which still exists in the sort of cultural islands where old customs persist. and when one rules the whole accommodation of the imaginary relation on a pretended real of the analyst's presence. generally the daughter. so that all the conditions for approach are there. if not identical. in Ecrits: A Selection. a geography which is not indifferent. but I enlighten the reader by a note which specifies that bundling is a very precise practice. as a manifestation of hospitality. one allows that. I made an allusion to the use of this type of object relation in analysis I compared it then to a sort of bundling pushed to its supreme limit as a psychological trial. may offer that he share her bed. a patterns of relations between male and female. 30-113. But.in certain conditions. the word bundling the girl is frequently enveloped in a sheet. . Stendhal talks of it as a particularity of Swiss fantasies. pp. 3 In my Rome Report. 5 English in the original.

apprgiaCh. for this sort of research into the.. which included long restrained stays in the presence_ottheioxed_objectalmingattlat realization of tha_t_beyonci_which is_sought properly_erolic.o. No doubt all of that springs today from remains that are not understood.L.with.. What is aimed for and_effectiyely attaid15. In the article of Fain and Marty.ut any doubt a beyond of the physiological short-circuit.merits a certain attention.. These practices 92 . one finds points of emergence of these techniques and these traditions explicitly formulated in other cultural climates. impulse [élan] towards the one who is behind her back.4_ deliberate use of the imaginary relation as such is made. and as it has appeared since I wrote my report.. if one may put it so.g.a. To. the Amish sect.k.. Everything that we know of the_pacticg_of courtly love and of the sphere in which it was localized in the Middle Ages... it proves that I have forced nothing in saying that it is to this end.ttain_. the analytic situation has paradoxically come to be conceived and formalized this way. butwe cardincl asoordinated„ancLdeliberate_formulationaLit... that the practice of analysis has been reduced in a certain conception of it.mores in which we may perhaps regret not participating -. We frequently find these paradoxes in the uses and customs of certain cultural islands. Once one has the key.forcecL that seventeen or eighteen years after the death of Freud. for there is nothin. in a whole_traditiort that one could call teligious_or_even symbolic. there is a report of a session in which all of the movements of the patient are noted to the extent that she manifests something which might be oriented towards the analyst. implies a_very_rigculaks tectukcal elaboratim_of the—amcgous. and its psychological consequences. and which has very precisely preserved the local customs related to a religious group. on which someone has done some rather advanced studies. The text is quite striking. more or less distant..realizati oof been propounded several times in the history of humanity in a way that is completely conscious..it might be amusing -. as for example in that Protestant sect of Dutch origin. a sort of more or less restrained.

but is not without _a_mistress. We have here. they are noinare perverse than any other regulation of_arnorous_ approach in a_definite sphere of mores. He is in this constellation when the analyst takes him on. Almost everything in his relations with a professional milieu has become impossible for him. This phobic subject. prow icied with a particularly aggressive instrument which is nothing other than a tube of fly tox. Let us now take the case which is described in the little bulletin cited the . insects. older than he by fifteen years. The diagnosis is finely made. and that of phobia does not pose any difficulty. He leads a reduced life in the shelter of the family milieu. or.phobogenic ob*tcloes Dot seem to be externalat first sightals. It is a perfectlyro nizab obic object a marvelously illustrated substitute for an entirely deficient paternal image -.may seem perverse in the eyes of the naive. one obtains the emergence of the image of a man in armor. 93 . and this fear is not for naught in the general equilibrium of this phobic structure. the observation of what she justly calls a pholaisaLib'est. as one puts it. from the pen of someone who has taken a rank in the analytic community.6 which will destroy all those tiny phobic objects i . patterns. That is worth signaling out as a point of reference. - eing_tracked and suffocated in the d a r i s _ b _ y man_in armor.self in a posture that is extremely bent over. in that we see the appearance at one moment of a repetitive drearxx whiclijs the model of an exteriosyd _In this particular case. last time. in order to know where we stand. and begins to tackle the question with him. In reality. the object is only discovered at a second try. however.after a certain time. The subjectis_remeal . whose activity had been rather reduced. Ruth Lebovici. has arrived at an almost completeinactivity. ti 6 English in the original. which reports the sincere questions of the members of a certain group concerning object relations. despite the paradoxical fact that the. who was provided him b_y his mother. and he always_ p_resentshim. His mostmanifest_sympILLm is the fear of being too tall.

next door while he himself wasi his own cell.has appeared in very precise circumstances in which she has her part."to rejoice my soul " 94 . It is little to say that the author is not at peace.7 or masturbating. the man in armor.the_effectiye realization of this position -. and in every case. What has happened?_ Having finall gotten aslimpse of the phobic object.the subject discovered in a cinema a little_ space providentially provided with windows thanks to which_he could effectively observe women in the w. Why the_phAllie mnther_when it is trulLa man in armor with_aLl_of_his heraldic character? During this whole observation. The fact that she raises the question about this moment proves that she is conscious that the question is there. rejoicing.se reactionapp. immediately aterwar2:ks agery . the questions that the author raises are reported with a fidelity that I believe is incontestable. It is thus not a forcing on my part to introduce the question of the perverse reaction. 7 S'esbaudissant._seen hy_a_aKomaniabs. s'ebaudir. she interpreted it as being the phallic mother. highly excited comes to solicit him to have amorous relations with • her There was then a _ reversal-of . She has perfectly perceived that the reaction which she calls perverse -. Lacan uses the archaic spelling of a word that is already in archaic or literary use. they are well underlined. with_the_subject. to rejoice." as in.-c. The author wonders in particular about the following point -- Have I made an interpretation that was not right? That proves already that she is conscious the question is there.it is a label -. according to the author herself..this position. and they j then engaged in nothing less than a period of three years__ iructhich_the subject first developed stages of a perverse fantasy which_consisted of imagining himself urMating. masturbating_ or not_watchirig a woman urinatingjinallyjn_athircistage.The analyst who has charge of the subject published the observation under the title Perversion sexuelle transitoire au cours d'un traitement psychanalytique (A Transitory Sexual Perversion during Psychoanalytic Treatment).eared. since. In fact. the interest of the observation lies in that.

much more prohibiting than the mother had ever been. let us see what is there on the analyst's side. he says he is hindered by the presence of another feminine subject who also played a role in his history. for the masculine personage is only indicated by associations. I mean the Oedipus complex. and whom he had seen urinate in front of him at a much later period of his childhood. . - First. position.The author herself wonders about the determining value of her mode of interpretation in the precipitation of what at first had the air of_a fantasmatic crystallization of an element _that was_eyidentlya component part of the subject_and. In following the analysis closely. in the end.which is not the phallic mother. Since the . finding himself with a person of his past towards whom he declares he has amorous impulses. when she asks about the general conduct of the treatment. past the age of thirteen. The interpretation is without a doubt a bit forced. in which. Everything makes it appear that the entity of the phallicmother_is produced here because of what the author calls. The analyst intervenes in the following way -. but the analyst thinks of thus reintroducing the truth.No doubt you prefer to interest yourself in watching a woman urinate than to make the effort to go after another woman who might please you. above all if one knows that it is the husband of the analyst who sent the patient to her. that is. Ititalsrecisely_this_moment-that-the-turnis_proge_ 95 . and observes that she herself has been. imaginary relation develops not without the aid of the analytic false move. But the author gives us the key to this idea that the phallic mother is also there. one absolutely cannot doubt it. but who is married.. One must admit that to have the alleged husband of the mother intervene in order to reintroduce the Oedipus complex has all the character of a provocation.her_own_counterztransferentigt. but the mother in her relation with 11 ie_pballus. the subject reports a_thearn.

which is. as if we were witnessing the constitution_of . . he says. 9b . What in fact is at the source of the institution of the fetishist position. Later. scaring yourself with something that you know very well will never happen.. ends by developing his fantasies within the treatment itself. This somewhat brutal reminder of the conventions of the situation_is entirely in accord with_the idea of the analytic position a. th. He begins to have those reactions that indicate a certain narrowing of the distance to the real object. He says it. which proves that there is something more. then makes this remark -. not the non-yhallic mother. with regard to whether she has_or does not have the organ in question. because you know very well that you will in no way obtain that._ohserving. This position little by little leads the subject to say to himself -. but the aphallic. who begins to find that this is getting a bit on her nerves.al it is just after this intervention which brings things to a head. the fantasy crystallizes completely. by the way.My God. she asks herself anxiously -.You are manifesting your passive positions now. and speaks for example of his fear of urinating on the couch.You are amusing yourself now. with a certain satisfaction. anyone might wonder about the degree of mastery in an intervention like that one.ri the sense of beim. the set up of _. this can only be resolved if I go to bed with my analyst. such as spying the legs of the analyst. is very precisely that the subject stops at a certain level of his investigation and his observation of the woman. the analyst replies -. The subject. ro. - 8 Italics in the original. who understands a certain number of things in his relation of impossibility with regard to attaining the feminine object. as if that were not enough.Have I done well in saying that? In fact. in response to a demand by the subject to slow down the rhythm of the sessions. and finds in the real the perfect place. There is in fact something that is at the boundary of the real situation. At that moment. The analyst. observeLto that_altim_self . which the latter notes.s Secondly.progressive turtling in the fantasy of_observationiror.it the subject passes definitively to the act. the chosen place. etc.

and he loses his balance. he no longer thinks of anything other than the size of his shoes. why not consider that as the end of the analytic work? From the experimental point of view. the same that he had at the beginning.the little urinal in the_Chatups Elysees. he had lived like an automaton. who is fifteen years older than he. but now everything is changed.is 97 ..so great a satisfaction that he declares that up until the moment of this discovery. the subject returns to his mistress. but as a mother who ikaphallic: He suspends his erotic activity at that for a certain time. taken as a real object. theiransformation of . and whom he can very well observe not as a phallic mother. and a certain liberty that can derive from it. from whom he is separated by a wall. I am not telling you how the treatment ends. it is considered that the phobia has been cured. One would need to examine it carefully. considTh hat_thisis_the moment when the distance from_the ie_41. and that they are L perhaps not in the end the most desirable effects. this notion taken as a reference cannot be without effects. it is surely not without interest.all throughout the observation it is indicated that this is the point in which every neurotic relation errs -. the timiLLattemptatan_access to castration. or they are too small and they squeeze his feet. After that it is judged that this is sufficient. That is what things came to. They are much too large.is given as acquired. and reaches its height at the moment when the subject in the presence of his analyst perceives the smell of urine. for each detail is rich in what it teaches. the phobia is complptp After all. This time he is truly at the right real distance from the object.it is like a sign of recognition among initiates -. I wanted simply to put you within an ace of the fact that _the concept of the distance from the object-analyst. In giving you a resume of this observation. the subject also makes some varicosity operate. Unfortunately. and as he no longer speaks of his great height.gbject -. The last session is avoided. having found here. Everything is there. Ti_le_schcalled right distance from the real object -. so that the turning.

This is not. sometimes quite abruptly. are still susceptible to rupture or to dissolution.this fact coincicieth the apogee of the perversion. much phenomena. ayerversion-. the real always offers all that one needs at the right moment. in this case. be permanent or extremely durable. While they may . it is rather an artifact. strictly speaking.finally accommodated to its just extent. when orie has finally been regulated to the right distance by the right paths. 19 December 1956 re: 98 . Yes. which occurs on the day after he visits the particularly propitious place that the real had offered him at the right moment. Thus. after a certain time the subject gets himself caught by a female usher. Ofsourse.and the author does not dissimulate it --.

PERVERSE PATHS OF DESIRE 99 .

- . and the phallus. The problem is that of the perversion. the girl. But it is certain that we could not possibly examine object relations this year without encountering the feminine object. namely that of feminine_ homosexuality. in the first part of this seminar. The beyond of the object. when I reminded you that 100 .VI THE PRIMACY OF THE PHALLUS AND THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL Freud. The service of The Lady._the_ most problematic that there is from the perspective aipsycl Loahalysis. by contingency. I demonstrated that sufficiently last trimester. That gives us matter enough for edification -the subject of this encounter is not natural. The signifier Niederkommt. Why have I proceeded thus? Partly. The lies of the unconscious. The problem is not so much one of knowing how we encounter the feminine object in analysis. in quotation marks. Today we are going to take a leap into a problem that normally we should have encountered much further on in our discussion if we had been proceeding step by step.

We must on this point make an exhaustive study of a certain number of texts. reference_on the symb. it will be a compromise between what there is_to.a. as._where_it is a matter of subjective assumplion. This ambiguity is precisely where. tlow does the ferninine_object enw_intp_thi she must make a choice. The problem now is what the feminine object thinks about it.What_a_t_the_autset_i&natural_or. attain and what cannot be attained. namely. This_path is_even less natural than for_ the masculine dialectic? It is not for nothing that today I am calling the woman object. with 1923. the analytic dimension resides. . second remove. about which analytic experience teaches us that no matter where it falls. . -. starting. in as much as . which places her from the start in a position characterized by the ambiguity between natural relations and symbolic relations. the maternal breast.Abis. Only.from the moment of her encounter by man. because she must at some moment of this dialectic enter into the function of the object.olic_plane.Larri trying to demonstrate.in_that_the_stibject hersel_f_issaught iniliesymbolic_chain. for what is by Freud..biological does not cease to find. what her path is from her first approaches to the natural and primordial object of desire. at. Feminine homosexuality is encountered each time that the discussion bears upon the stages that the woman must traverse in order to accomplish her symbolic completion. 1 Feminine homosexuality has been given a particularly exemplary value in psychoanalysis for what it has been able to reveal of the stages of the woman's path and of the arrests that can mark her destiny. the feminine subject is always called upon to inscribe herself in a sort of refinding. It is really there that there is question of the woman as subject.position-is-highly_unnaturaLsince it is a position. the date of his article on Infantile Genital Organization. which has no interest in being qualified as such other than because it is a subject who takes it.

The word literally means "badly given.let us make this termsynommoo_foralLeLogenous_ experience. that there are emotions.if not of the real role of the male in the act of procreation. 102 . concentx4ted_Qn the clitoris. whether the libido-. A very great number of facts lead us to admit that at least in the girl. but of(reat ignorance) 0n one hand. by authors who entered the action later. That there is in the early experience of the little girl something that corresponds to a localization of the vagina. These absolutely enormous statements demand some exegesis to be understood. An objection has often been raised.lefOre a.for one and the other sex. the terminal stage of the first epoch of infantile sexuality. is a typical phase for the boy as for the girl. ignorance of the fecundating role of the male's semen -. ignorance of the very existence of the feminine organ. Genital organization gives the formula for it. L 1 M a l d o n n e . There is not at this point any realization of male and female. card games to mean a bad deal or a false hand. That is at least found in a certain number of cases. moreover with the greatest confusion.d_e_scription to be taken at the level of real experience. We hardly_fincLourselves_here. which is accomplished with the entry into the latency period. indeed even a precocious vaginal masturbation. The phallic phase.. The possession or the non_p_ossession of the phallus is the principal differential element." The term is used in . and not being provided with it is considered as equivalent to being castrated. can scarcely be contested.=_itisnot a matter of misconstruction [mecontpTissance].Q. there is awareness of that which is provided with the phallic attribute and that which is not provided with it. 'I will be precise .= is_ at the_beginning exclusively.on the other hand.In this text Freud poses the primacy of phallic assumption as a principle. a lived presence is effectively revealed -. "Error" is the accepted figurative sense. at least of the existence of the feminine organ. Hence the debate as to whether the predominance of the phallic phase in the_girl must be attributed to existence of the clitoris._ancLthis_error_is_ltself_founded_orLarkignotalic. It is attained by both sexes. that is founded upon an error i Miulirige_n.

Though it is advanced with prudence by him. From these hypotheses it is accepted a priori that one will try to retrace the genesis of the term phallic with regard to the girl. Freud's affirmation is founded on his experience. an extremely active discussion had arisen among his students. and in others. in Jones. confused allow us to raise all sorts of objections. moreover. The paradoxical affirmation of phallicism is the very pivot on which theoretical interpretation must be developed. for which one would then have to account. in so far as it is distinguished by 103 . and which constitutes a veritable jungle growth of approximations. too many facts which are. which takes his statement of 1923 further. In the interval. which contains a harvest of speculations. the primordial experience of the vaginal organ. After having had to devote myself to that during this vacation. It is what we shall try to do. is marked with uncertainty. If we go into the details. there could not be a prevalence in the girl of the organ which does not properly belong to her. we shall see that it is only a reconstruction. Freud writes something even more astounding about feminine sexuality. has done. which tend towards a misunderstanding of Freud's affirmation. in 1931. as Kateraissrney. indeed with that portion of uncertainty which is so characteristic in his presentation of this discovery. it is still affirmed as primordial. and the reference that is made to it remains very prudent. Her objections are determined by realist premises. The last fact to which the author refers. It is a fixed point. Eight years later. except on the ground of a denial of the existence of the vagina. It is surely not in these terms that Freud's affirmation must be understood. for example. which imply that all meconriaissance supposes in the unconscious a certain knowledge of the coaptation of the two sexes and that in consequence. it seemed to me extremely difficult to give an account of it without falsifying it. in part expressed by the author herself. whose trace one finds in Karen Homey. which requires a whole long detour. If one situates it thus. even reserved.. whose necessity derives from a certain number of theoretical premises.and is only diffused at the end of a long and painful displacement.

All of the writers admit that at the turning_pointin. the littlegirileginsto_. To give an account of this debate and be understood. more light than another might on what was happening in her unconscious. in parallel with the theoretical examination of object relations. could be retained from the mass of facts. To show in this regard that the privation of the chili desired from the father can come into play with a pressing incidence.tered the Oedipus complex.. which is given as being always essentially unconscious.. how analytic practice itself is inflexibly engaged in a deviation that cannot be mastered. was found according to him to have..the profoundly unmastered character of the categories that are put into play. not to give a truly just perspective of what is at stake. who. it seemed to me this morning that one exemplary image. and can precipitate the movement of the Oedipus. To return to the precise instance that concerns us today. and if it would come today or tomorrow. which is to show. being in analysis. desire a child from_the_father_a. she got up every morning and asked if the little child from her father had arrived. We can put a hand on the way in which a certain mode of understanding and attacking frustrations leads the analyst. to a certain degree.. This detail seems to me exemplary of what is at stake in this deviation in analytic practice. identification with_theiatberdio_take up the feminine position again. and mastering it is already to change its axis and nature completely. And it was with rage and tears that she asked this every morning. Following some enlightenment that had been given to her. and thus. in realitylto a style of intervention whose effects are not i 104 . by that fact..in making beer turn back_from the paradoxical path bywhighffilgest.at the morunt. her. This problem is really correlative with the second aim of our work this year. gleaned from one of these articles. one cannot proceed otherwise than by mastering it. one of the authors cites as an example the case of a little girl.of entering the Oedipus complex. a reference which is always there to accompany our theoretical exploration of the object relation.s a substitute for the missin_phallus and that the disappointment of not receiving it plays an essential role . eKoiution. namely.

It can onl_y_be_brought in_later. enters into the play of a series of symbolic resonances_ concerning_what the subject has experienced in the past -.inary_substitution for what is at that moment lived by the subject in a totally different way. . as it is lived at the outset. because it is. ) a substitute for _that_missing_phallus which plays an essential role in the evolution of the littlegirl cannot be legitimately brought into play just at any time and anyhow._and tointroduce a sort of legitimacy. but are manifestly opposed to what is at stake in the process of analytic interpretation. with what that carries of the . At_thebeginning. or_exen. The notion we might have that a child given by the father appears at a given moment of evolution'as an imaginary objeci. ___?___consecrate frustration_aS___Rtcl 11and to install it_at_the_center_of_.possessive or destructive reactions at the moment of the phallic crisis. is of importance or interest only in so far as it opens into one or the other of the -- 105 .on_the_rondition that the child.. as the correct theory tells us. eNpgrigna_ Frustration can only be legitimately introduce_d_as_ such in interpretation if it has effectively_passed to theleveLof_the-unconscious. _in_so_far as thesubject has to deal with it. by speech.only1:ioubtful. everything that relates to the prevalence_or_predominance_of the phallus at a particular stage in the child's evolution only has its _incide_nce after the fact The phallus can only be brought into play in so far as it is necessary. to precipitate. It is literally .ata contemporary_stage. as an atticulatio_n_of what has happened. extraordinarily unstable._analysts.ewhoisinacloserelationwiththechild.is alread_y_to sanction an organization.excluded. Frustration. when for the subjectherself the question of_her_own_motherhood_ and possession of a child is raised. whether it be the late arrival of a child_forsomeon. To bring in an element that is not inscribed in the symbolic structuration of the subject._frustration_is_only_an evanescent moment. a certain relation of imag. on the symbolic plane. and_on a purely theoretical plane.for us. Its realization byth u ect ie_sAsl2yclefin4tiprl. the_ stage to which it corresponds.truly problematic g. In short. It only has a ftmction.orevenmore.at a given_naoment_tcumbolize somee_v_ent.

This little girl. a male who enters into the play of the family whereas ua until then the mother had been a widow.since now she is confronted with a step-father.and she is right -. Why? In principle. because the idea of privation is in no way conceivable on the plane--of _the real.that all girls are like that._That is what the therapist teaches her—Thelatter_thu lack pass onto the symbolic plane of the law. The child knows very well that she does not have the phallus. The_phobia begins again. I showed you in what sense the phobia was a necessaryli placement. alsAnses_the.. A privation can only be effectively conceived for a being who articulates something on the symbolic plane. She is also confronted with an 106 ..111. presented the beginning of a phobia. you recall. In fact. castration is nothing other than what installs the_necessitv of frustration in itsinasader. which is only momentary.athe_t_value. psychotherapeutic interventions. that _is to say. and is stronger and will only be reduced_when the child has been reintegrated into a complete family. We can understand all that very well in those interventions that are supportive in character. that she could not giyeitbecauseshe did not have it herself.—which transcends taa installs it in z thatgi 0. her frustration should on the contrary seem to her even greater than before._ This intervention nevertheless remains debatable.castration or privation. like for example the one that I alluded to rapidly the other day in speaking of the little girl in the care of a student of Anna Freud. but she does not know that this is the_rule. and the psychotherapis_t_cpaestionsits efficacy. - The psychotherapist's intervention consists in saying to the child -. which surged up in connection with the experience_that_she had had of being„ effectively deprived of somethingonditions different from the_ situation in which the child in this morning's exampkwas caug. and where its spring la_rio_t_in the fact that she did not have the phallusit in thelict_thather mother could not giv!ittaher anvfrirnore. It is also what consecrates the existence of privation. but it is not._two_plane3 that I have distinguished -. That might make you think that it is a matter of a reduction to the real.

What is thus at play is less the_object than the_love _of the one who can give this gift_The4biesLof_frustrationis less the object than test. If the phobia happens finally to be reduced. If the demand is_satis_fiesl.Lun. of the subject's belongings. air of a certain gratuiejTC'omes from_the other.ngfsitLita_signification._rather than the object itself.the_abiectpasses_intQ the backgrauncLIL the demand is not satisfied.t.the object sh.what is at_ stake is the instability of the very dialectic_of_frustration. namely the whole chain because ofiwhich gift comes. there is a difference—If theilerna. in as only appears at the beginning. Frustration is not pxiiation_. At this_moment.older_broth_e. literally. the subject no longer needs it as a.derling. moment. if it is given as such.ift. In effect. thatis to say. in every case makes the objectir) ish as object.Yft? Frustratiorubears_upon_something of which _you Aredepri_vtd by_someonefrom_whom_youjustly_expectwhat you have asked. that it concerns the whole human symbolic chain.ncLismot satisfiesi. Frustration thus replies very well in appearancelo_a conceptual notion_lita. We find ourselves here at the origin of the dialectic of frustration. it is because. there is only the confrontation with the other art&the_gift_NALhich_surges_up. These critical remarks above all bear on the use of the term frustration. What there is behind_the other. the much as it is still at a distance from the symbolic. At the beginning.r. Only. This use is legitimized in a certain way by the fact that the essential in this dialectic_is the lack of the_object. and it is only later that the subject will be able to perceive that the gift is much more complete that it had at first seemed.substitute_for_the_absence in the _symbolic circuit of every halloform element.an_e In both cases. It opens into something which projects us onto snot te___1_21. What in effect justifies the word frustration? There is frustration — the word implies this --no subject enters a in as much as the object is considered to be demanded by_xigh. the Abject vanishes with equal certainty.jsstillmot perceived. This initial moment is always evanescent. the object enters inia_what_one_cauld_call the_narcissistic__air . the moment of frustration is an evanescent . The_g.

satisfactions.prior_to everything that happens to him.namely. The error is to want. disappointments. it is annihilated. various reconstructions of the experience and of the effects linked to the fundamental lack of the object become manifest.is ordered.desire. with everything that it entails as repercussions. and can be analyzed._a. 108 . takes on meaning. thanks to which the object is for the subject both something that ishir_uelf a_nd is ncrthirnselLantilly_which he can never be satistieckpreciselyiTithe__ sense that it is himself and not himself at the same time. an order of symbolic_debt. ksymbolic chain. events.which means that it c_an never_really be fulfilled as such. and having you encounter them in all naïveté. nothing is installed as a properly analyzable conflict. nowhere better than by taking some of Freud's texts. unless it is from the moment when the subject enters _ into an order which is the order_of symbots.a_legal order. for example. and disappointments. that everything through which he approaches his experience -.it should be only a reminder--.. and is_soon_protected_pnto_something else either onto the articulation of the symbolic chain of gifts. But the whole chain of experience can literally be conceived only by first positing the principle that nothing is articulated and built up in experience. I can make you appreciate the soundness of this reminder -. If one misconstrues this condition.symbolic_order. or onto the closed and absolutely inextinguishable register which is called narcis_sism. satisfactions.. It is solely starting with the entry of the subject into an order which exists. articulated. .to_deduce_ev_erything from_ desire considered as a pure element of the individual -. Satisfied_ or not. The entry_ of frustration into a dialectic which situates it by legplizing_it and which also gives__it a dimension ofrattg necessary to the _ _ establishment of the symbolized order of the real in which the subject will. install certain permanent privations as existing and accepted. recluced to nothing_a_thelctlioNnrkigstagg. and introduce a whole series of impasses. what one calls his lived experience. that confused thing that is there before -.than thepigneof pumAnd sin Jp_k_de ir and iaeffect implies something that human experience knows well -..

What follows lets us learn that these relations are not external to the inauguration of the situation. it is enough so that her parents. the fact that it absolutely enrages a motive for the young girl. All sorts of details given by the family indicate that this world could perhaps be qualified as demi-monde according to the classification reigning then in Vienna. and I would almost say one of the most troubling. or at least so serious. That led me to choose for my part to bring you one of Freud's most brilliant texts. To put it plainly.2 Several people spoke last night of a dubious. Theetkchmentof_the_ynting girl. or of diplomacy — though one does not see why. puts her in a rather painful relation to her family. but in conducting it as she does. For a good Viennese family in 1920. which everything reveals as events proceed to be trtATassionate. the way in which she partially publicizes her affair. beautiful. I am thinking of that tranquil piece of defiance with which she pursues her assiduity towards the woman in question. paradoxically wild side in certain texts of Freud. A very singular event has occurred she is running after someone older than she by ten years. of a very high social class -. They even alluded to elements of adventure.has become an object of concern to her parents. are ignorant of nothing. and especially her father. and considered respectable. not sustaining this passion. which may conceivably appear archaic to you. and that she does not really consider this so bad. a woman of the world. _ 109 . Without her making a demonstration of it. that she has been neurotic. indeed out of style. I would like to recall the essential articulations for you. to send someone to Freud was to take a very great step. intelligent. We are also told that the mother is not absolutely someone of whom one can be sure. awaiting her in the street. If they resolved to do it. It concerns the daughter of a good Viennese family. it is because the daughter of the house — eighteen years old. It is theIlsychogenesis of a Case of Female Homosexuality.

he has the sentiment that effectively. he introduces an idea which is not without foundation. and then one must embark and follow one's way. allic obit.. the way one constructs a villa. no hysterical symptom was brought into the analysis. To explain. He very pertinently signals the difficulties presented by a treatment when it is a question of satisfying the demands of the entourage. and that is why he is communicating it. nothing in the childhood history is remarkable with regard to pathological consequences. when she was able to learn from te_elder of her two brothers the difference whiftEacile o . Nevertheless.her.someone.the first. On the other hand.before a voyage one assembles the luggage. it did not allow him to change much in the destiny of this young girl. There_was in the childhood of the subject a moment which seems not to have occurred when she was all alone. The comparison that he then introduces is not one of the least stupefying -. Certainly. although it may appear out of use. This idea is that there aretwL)2tajes in an analysis -. who-did not haveilae__essentially desirable object. the young girl had never been neurotic. in which it is a matter of bending the resistances which still hold perfectly even though the subject already knows azood deal.the second. he points out. a schematic idea that must incite us to come back to certain early givens rather than to find ourselves more manageable ones. This reference from someone who had a phobia of railway trains and of voyages is rather piquant. Freud indicates precisely that this analysis did not reach its term. nothing is working. That is why it is clinically striking to see such a late flowering of an 110 - . and highlights a certain number of stages. he says. and which will not fail to appear outmoded to some. and very justly remarks that one does not do an analysis on command. What is more enormous still is that during all of this time. he sees very well what has happened. which is always complicated enough.They come to Freud and ask him to put things in order. He then introduces reflections on analysis that are still more extraordinary.. which consists in assembling everything that it is possible know. but that it allowed him to see very much further.

They are not very far from one of the little bridges that cross them. Freud tells us. which leads her to the consultation with Freud. indeed was more than cold. However.Under these circumstances. behave in such a way as to raise hopes of the most favorable development in the orientation of the feminine vocation. and who are. There are in Vienna some little railways that run in a belt. it appears.to freauent women whom FreucLdescribes as already mature. but gets out of it. The lady demands to know who this person is — It is papa. he doesn't seem happy. the father comes out and sees them. The lady then takes the thing very badly. One day. So she tells her -. the singular position that she occupies with regard to this ever so slightly denigrated woman. used to go walking with the lady almost under the windows of her own house. niederkommt. The young girl. Thus.attitude which appears frankly abnormal to all. this sort of maternal love which seemed in advance to make of her a model mother. She had had until then a very reserved attitude with the young girl. he throws them a blazing glance. 111 . She breaks a few bones. and goes off. If it has come to the point of confiding her to him. Did she not. at thirteen or fourteen. The passionate attachment that she shows to the latter ends in an explosion. had not especially desired to have complications. And so the girl throws herself down. in her attitude of gently flirting with danger. we will no longer see each other. had not at all encouraged her assiduity. but one which made everyone think that it was oriented very well. namely. that of motherhood? She took care of a little boy belonging to friends of her parents so tenderly that the two families became close. She falls. up until the moment when this attachment appeared. a sort of maternal substitute. it was in effect because a marked event had occurred. the young girl had had a development that was not only normal. is suddenly arrested __ansLit is_then that she begins for the adventure in question was not the first -. As he finds himself before other people as well. all at once.

until the moment that the conflict bursts out. The first seem very pertinent. There was in . and gives them the value of an explanatory sanction. have to do with what was at stake in the suicide attempt.effect_a_ieritable_reversaLof_the_subj. but it is much more instructive because much more_pxofaunck. which are none the less interesting. the significative act by which the crisis is crowned. It is under this headingzassording_tohira.dive position. The subject in effect declares to Freud that for her there is no question of abandoning anything whatever in her pretensions. even on points which have in some way escaped him. but perhaps not entirely as he understands them himself. The subject is intimately tied to the rise of the tension.Still. How does Freud explain it? By starting with the_normal orientation of the_s_u_l2ject towards the desire_to_hame_ashilci from the_father. The second also. and also the problematic of a declared homosexuality. where Freud saw clearly later -. Here one findsa_misconstruction that islo w gous. and the catastrophe occurs.. the orientation of her question_ towards her own sex. She will do all that is necessary in order to deceive her family.. I am alluding here to the observation of Dora.namely.e.he intervened with Dora_at the very time when he misconstruedherhornosexuality. and who was moved enough by this extraordinary mark of devotion so as to become much more accommodating.. for example the suicide attempt. both for what occurred before the treatment. Other remarks that Freud makes without completely exploiting them. the one who really incarnated the dramatic adventure in the course of which the analysis began. and for his own defeat.thAtime_mustsonCeiRe—the_original crisis which madeihe_subject engage precisely the opposite direction. which Freud tries to spell out. It is a question of one of those cases in which the disappointment due to the object of desire is translated by a complete 112 . but she will continue to maintain her ties with the person for whom she is far from having lost her taste. this_scheinasloes_not_really bold fo_r_the last person. or in her object choice. It is the particularity of Freud's observations always to leave us extraordinary clarification. Freud makes some very striking remarks with regard to this relation declared and maintained by the subject.

ksemadvx. which symbolically satisfies what is at stake by a precipitation. The patient makes the acquisition of a third_b_rolheL_Thatis _the_key_ point. When I essentially make the dialectic of narcissism_the-relation_ego-littieother.. since he supposes that the resentment towards the father continues to play. when theoily Jjggillfalls to the bottom of the little bridge.4.reversal of position -. It is thus at this moment that the girl changes position. she accoLyn lishea_as_ymbolic_act. really__ has another child from the father. It is now a question of seeing where that is best interpreted. according to Freud."2 being born. We must. her mother. but it is implied.and she was sufficiently occupied with that for it to mark a date with regard to her past --._which. as Freud_spells out in a note. It is also the detail that appears exceptional in this observation. role. This link in the situation explains the whole way that the adventure is handled. The term is not in the text. a leveling of the objects that are truly at play. I am doing nothing other than making evident what is implicit in all the ways in which Freud expresses himself..the subject identifies with this objgct. towards her fifteenth year._This_fact has themajor . The girl is clearly agrg essiye towards her father.." in the sense that one says that an animal "dropped its young.is equivalent to a regression to narcissism. It is not banal that the intervention of a little brother brought into the world like that should have as a result so profound a reversal of a subject's sexual orientation. combined with a sort of crumt ling of the e ie whole situation on its primitive givens. The suicide attempt_ follows the disappointment produced by the fact eothatti the:biect of her attachment Ziii4fiz tt iii some way that is homologous. It is Tat matter of a counter-aggressive phenomenon of a return onto the subject of aggression towards the father.whnic_h-is-nothing-other than the niederkommen that one is "dropped. In short. It is the term used in German to say 2 "Dropped." . consider the phenomenon as reatlierer_. What then is the disappointment which operates the reversal? At the moment. when the subject was engaged on the way to taking possession of the imaginary child -.

It was only a matter of showing him that she f . He metaphorically compares the reactions of the young girl with that of a lady to whom one shows various objects. on the plane of intellectual interest. her dreams announce an astonishing reflowerirjg_of the finest orientation.Jn effect. the cruel game thAt. -. he says.she played with her father.How nice! Freud nevertheless signals that one cannot speak of the absence of all transference. _she has not been only provocative and aggressive with him. It is _the double of_that_ kinclofgame of counter-lure that. Freud recognizes that there is something analogous in these dreams. f 1 was deceiving_him.kl_m_eaning of the situation. from behind her lorgnette. all that one could say to the patient never went further than interesting her enormously. She maintained it all. and who says. He sees alransference in it. He denotes with very great perspicacity the presence of transference in the patients dreams. no less than that of the advent of an object. 114 . it is a matter of _ explaining jn_what_way_the-situation_w_as_without_iss. the idyllic. she has made concessions to him.rr4. the fruit of this love. one would say today. almost forced character of the spouse announced by the dream appears so consonant to their common enterprise. and that their transferential significance is there -. In as much. Freud is not deceived._as the resistance was not_conquered. In parallel with the unambiguous declarations that the patient makes of her determination to change nothing in her behavior towards the lady.. without her abandoning her most recent positions.Thus we are led to the lastalriiga. the anticipation of the arrival of some handsome and satisfying spouse. 3 In the second category of the remarks that Freud makes.she seproduces_huittndamentalposition with him.ue in_theireatment.she played in response to the disappointment by the father. that anyone who was not Freud would have taken the greatest hope from it. she has_not vaunted herself shamelessly. In short.

I believe that the intention of leading me into error was one of the formative elements of this dream. we are in the order of lies and of__ truth_ Freud sees that very well. The dim is deceptive. The explanation is ever so slightly tendacious. This young girl must be ravishing. and this relation basically implies the_possibility_of_b_eing_ accomplished through a lie. in as much as it is the fundamental line of what constitutes the field of the unconscious for us. That is what Freud expresses in a way that is extremely just. he takes the thing_a. so that I will find her very pretty. It was also an attempt to gain my interest and my good disposition. which is that_there is a Tal transferencg therg. In analysis. The point that is apparent here is that of the intention imputed to the subject. But sorxlething it seems._and that the path isoperk. of captiyating_him. This additional sentence is sufficient for our instruction. when he says -. to captivate me. If the unconscious also lies to us. Freud retains only-. It is also. Freud._ To hear the emphasis of this sentence. L A what can we trust? his disciples will say.We cannot avoid here coming back to the basic relativity of the _symbolic formation. escapes him. he says. and from which he concludes that it in no way contradicts the theory. an attempt to wind me around her finger. and immediately enters into a discussion which it is fascinating to find in his pen. If the typical manifestation of the unconscious can be deceitful. and which errs only in being a bit too emphatic. he can hear in advance the objections that will be made to him.for him to interpret the desire of _Instead of takirigthis path let us L put it a bit grossly. there is no doubt that there was what we call a counter-transferential action. in order to make him fall from that much higher since he is taken captive in the situation. as with 115 .s_directecLagainst him. but it still remains that what is put into the foreground by Freud in 1920 is exactly this essential of what is in the unconscious is the relation of the subject to the Other as such. in order to make him fall from his heights.hat. probably in order to disillusion me that much more profoundly. He gives them a long explanation in which he shows how that can occur. if.

FretIcas_notapletely free in the affair.ng_giris_passion for the erson in question. In putting himself onsuard_ against these illusions. and is interrupted.. whereas itimas_precisely.of revealing the discourse of lies that was in the :runc cious_Freud tells her that all of it is designed against him.to_decelYe him. and in 'aPt. That comes_ down to cutting short immediately t. : . and gives it body. a matter_obomething. He makes it become real because he is within it. desire. and notaniatention.i rpretation. he has already entered the game. In affirming that the worst is promised him. which he wishes to avoid.n way -. He operates with the patient exactly as the therapist intervened with the little girl in giving the thing a symbolic stature. Something much more interesting still is emphasized by Freud without is interpreting it -. the treatment does not go much further. reCH___. a plague.enter into the real.A. within: to unite. .lt_was_only. He gives body to this desire. To the extent that is and that he interprets too precociously. How does he interpret? He says to_the. :ghat is what is at the heart of this-slide of analysis into the imaginary.'Dora. batlhis -. from the moment that it was installed as doctrine.hgrgas.but on condition that it wasmotasounter-transference that is_to_say. In . It has not escaped him. and perhaps 116 . Freud makes the conflict break out. Freud has sepAted. We see a transparent extreme example here. And that does not fail. in fact. that he not be in it._as_he senses himself. although in truth. he makes the desire of the young_gid. Hetlealizathe irnagineLy_play. thaletely different -.it is the_nature of the you. which has become more than a snare. that this is not a homosexual others. on_thesonditiort_thathe_not_believe y. what he has realized as the imaginary relation. His counter-transference could have served him in a rta.which we cannot misconstrue because it is in the text. That is_ to_sa_y_thelLeds_e_litiryto =:e himself illusions. young girl that she intends to deceive him as she is accustomed to deceiving her father. he senses himself disillusioned. the specific of homosexual relations is to present all of the variety of common heterosexual relations.

At first we have a reference_ta_theimaginary object. It is not_s_implytion_that is suffered.if you are willing to take _the word __syui tom as the equivalent of the word enigma. in itself. female oituals. p re c i se l y _t o so me o n e o t h e r . one could say. but as analysis makes clear. not only does without satisfactions. and by explaining what he means by that. which has a very particular meaning in the cultural history of Germany -. A child f a t h e r . or a need. As has already been said. since we are in the course of interrogating it. It is truly a sacred love. Do you not then see joined_here_in a sort olknot the three stages of a process which goes ■ from frustration to the symptom? -. but it is of interest only when it is taken on its own terms.It_is_the very order in_ bloom -opstitution of lack in the relation to the object. and to the person who is closest. That is to say that it is clarified when the categories of the lack of the object are appropriately brought into function. It is exceptional because it is particular. In short. posited as service. Freud adds some words like Schwiimerei. are subjects who_b. it is a love which. I17 . but verypreciselyaims at_nonsatisfactipa. .some additional variations. as institution. as reference.. By saying that this type of object choice belongs to the type that is manntiche. in fact. It is the child that interpretation allows us to conceive of as a child received from_thelather. lived in a way that is innocent. . contrary to what one might believe. .it is exaltation that is at the basis of the relation. It is a love that does not demand any other satisfaction_tham_t_lie_sake of_ the lady. or couttly_Joye in its most devoted form. Freud underlines admirably and articulates with an extraordinary relief that it is a question here of a platonic love at its most exalted. Why does a true crisis ensue? It is because _a real object then intervenes. he situates the relation of the young girl to the lady at the highest degree of the Ltrilzolized love relation. No doubt the situation that the case presents is exceptional.ave_alsorne moment made_a_very strong paternal fixation. i t i s t rue .

what is most important is this -._I_Usthen_tbat_averitable_reversaLaccur5.w. and it is not for nothing... as for Dora. And what she lacks in this instance.ketke everyman:who willgive her achad..real„. the issue that the subject finds in this form of love. is precisely precisely _that_p _ the child.1zy_achild._and that it ismaterialized.for_an insiant.fact_thatitis. the imaginary substitute. know after how many months that occurred if we had the dates. to resery_e_for njAiculine experience this love which lives purely and simplyirLthe order 1:?f devotion._ Jf that sustained tisriadhe_r_elation among women. the fast that the_objea..s.hey_by the father. normally blossoms in a cultural relation that is highly disappointment at this level.. in effect.... .mother. desired in the woman who is loved is precisely what slle_la.on.will_al.a. What is the most important thing that then occurs? Is it the turn that leads her to identify with the fatter? It is understood that this plays its role. Freud seems. and no longer in the imaginary. Is it the fact that she becomes herself that latent child which can in effect niederkommen when the crisis reaches its term? Perhaps we could . which brings into question what is tri_Ily±.giverk. its passage_onto the plane of courtly love.. But that is not what is most important..plane oi_flustraLan.. The mechanism of it is explained.... pose the question of_ what in the_ woman_ is loved beyond herself. her side who has it.properly speaking.ys_for.the fundamental fath.. : . What_is. But I think it is highly important to perceive that whatisin.. it is that the paternal presence as such was_aireacly installed for her.the..at child...... The.bythe.. Such a The love that the young girl love... 118 ..at.that what is desired is beyond the wunan whois loved. and which carries the attachment of the subject to the supreme degree of his annihilation in the Sexualaberschatzung.the symbolic plane.thefatherwho. to which she_return.. that the subject was satisfiecLby_th. devotes to the lady aims at_something other than her. It was.cks.._the. leads her back_to.presence child..there...indamentaLin everything that has to do with love in its perfection..is...as. Lg 1gition—was_alreadyinstttutedon—the_symholic_piane. the father_par excellence.

.whatis..• fi ._soughtin thE woman is what she lacks .1n_the most idealized love.. What is sought beyond her_ is_the_centraLobiggt_ of_thwhole libidirlatgcononly tjw phallus.At the extreme-of_love. 9 January 1957 jI .

Frustration. that there can be interest in 0§ °c:hoanalysis in engaging in it. it will not be ill to remind •ou. We ended our meeting the last time by trying to summarize a case ir female homosexuality presented by Freud. In fact. A permutative schema of the case. and jouissance. It is to reply to this lack. I dealt with its peripeties. at every moment. That there is a lack in psychoanalytic theory is what I seem to see rising 4. 120 . T h e F r e n c h t r a n s l a t i o n o f F r e u d ' s t i t l e . hit also. and as far as possible. Ein Kind wird en. sketched what one could call its structure. in passing. It is only by king it further. that we pursue our efforts here. The symbolic of the gift.VII SOMEONE IS_ BEATING A CHILD' AND THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL Intersubjectivity and desubjectivization. t un enfant. love. It will be useful to return to this structural analysis. mill of perversion. The image. Someone is Beating a Child i s t h e re nde ring of t he F re nc h t i t l e . the : ase would not have much importance beyond the picturesque if we were iair pursuing it on the grounds of a _s_tructuraLanaLysis. ( A Child is Being Beaten) m a k e s o f t h e i m p e r s o n a l " o n e " t h e c a l s u b j e c t o f t h e s e n t e n c e .

a subject raised as an only child by an elderly aunt who lives far away from the parents. The child surely. Mrs.This lack is sensible everywhere. and a dramatization that is profoundly foreign to the child's actual current family relation develops. according to her. I would say then that the engagement of the analyst in another relation than the relation of speech. Already between the ages of two and a half years and three. The situation does not allow the analyst to offer himself to the child in a position of neutrality or receptivity. as though by presentiment. Here Miss Anna Freud pays homage. As children are still within the creative situation of neurotic tension. there cannot. nor even really conceived. to the essential function of language in the analytic relation. though it is not developed. to give it echo.there cannot be a transference in the child. Another remark of the same nature — as children still have a relation with the objects of their inaugural attachment. and that even at a very early age. be a transference properly speaking. the situation is completely modified with regard to what one can verify in the real relation. to allow it to flourish. Melanie Klein. and must be taken [into analysis] with the help of means of play. for example. Thus. in which he would seek above all to welcome speech. contrary to what Miss Anna Freud declares. in the primary relation with the parents. there cannot be a transference neurosis. has a relation to language different from that of the adult. with things still in course of being played out. I sensed it again recently reactivated in my thought upon seeing the proposals of Miss Anna Freud confronted with those of Mrs. what is going on in the child's unconscious has nothing to do with the real parents. is still indicated. but she founded the principles of her analysis of children on remarks like this -. No doubt Miss Anna Freud has since then watered down her wine. since he must intervene entirely on the current plane. and profoundly modify his technique. Melanie Klein argues to the contrary that nothing is more similar to the analysis of an adult than the analysis of a child. . and on occasion. the analyst must change his position. at least. which provide the technique that is appropriate. she says.

in an imaginary global world which gives the idea of the maternal body as container. which seems to be ever more complete the further one goes back in time. to be found in a pure and simple immediate relation with the real. You see the cauldron of a sorceress or divine.which puts the child into an isolated and dual relation with a single person. Must we accept the affirmations of Mrs. we cannot at the same time not wonder what we have before us. Melanie Klein? These affirmations rest on her experience. 122 .-one_q. the whole machine at every moment demanding the surge of the most aggressive instincts for its movement. the closer we come to the origin. This question. but has already been inscribed in a symbolization. and this experience is communicated to us in observations which sometimes push things to the point of the strange. If we cannot fail to be struck by the evidence that this entire phantasmagoria is adequate to the unique givens that Mrs. the more certainly the Oedipus complex was there. all the primordial fantasies present from the origin. and we are going to find it again on the precise path down which I shall lead you for the moment. once asked. and even with rival brothers and sisters -. Everything is as though.I cite. and tending to be structured in a drama which seems preformed.uestion. What one must reveal in psychoanalysis is not. nevertheless reconstituted a whole family drama with a father. and what this dramatic symbolism can really mean. That merits at least thatirge—aslc. in the depths of which mell. mother. developed and ready to come into actin. which is that of perversion. springs up everywhere. Melanie Klein deals with. basically..

the thing is not unthinkable. Others. But in fact. inspired by the whole play through which an analysis of the reduction of defenses is pursued -. who are not for all that either the most perspicacious or the best. the same stages. and that it too is part of what is realized through all the dramatic crises. It does not suffer the fates which tend to reduce the other partial drives. but who have been instructed by experience. which is the ideal unifying drive. say that we must come back purely and simply to the idea of the persistence of a fixation on a partial drive. one hears the most discordant replies to that. however. That makes quite a picture. 123 .what is at stake in perversion is the eroticizing of the defense. This is thought. Whence comes this eroticizing? Where is the invisible power situated which could project what seems to arrive here as a sort of superfluity.1 What is perversion? Even within a psychoanalytic group. the same abundance. but the least one could say is that it is not thought through. try to show that perversion is very far from beingapure element that persists. these analysts want purely and simply to make of perversion an entity in which the drive is not elaborated. somehow unscathed. unifying them in a way that makes them end at last in the genital drive. v_ty should if 12eerciticizecl? That is the whole question. Perversion is thus a matter of an accident in the evolution of the drives. a libidinal satisfaction? In fact. I wouldn't mind. a coloration. In a classical translation of Freud's notion that perversion is the negative of neurosis. to cross the whole dialectic which tends to be established by the Oedipus complex. fusions and defusions that a neurosis traverses. presenting the same dimensional richness as the latter. a change of quality. believing that they follow Freud. They try thus to explain that perversion is the negative of neurosis by pushing into the foreground a formulation like this. and by the evidence that is truly imposed in analytic practice. the same rhythms. Some..

by taking a study that should be famous. four of women. is not to be taken as one has taken it for a long. in perversiort. and two of men. It is really-something else that Freud is suggestiag with the concise formula that we find in him. time. I would even further say -. It is characteristic that Freud's attention bears upon a sentence which he takes as his title rather than merely being content with a clinical label. and an attempt to organize it. we shall attempt to see how he conceives the mechanism of a phenomenon that one can qualify as perverse. and our analysis must find its true meaning. In addition. the Contribution Lo the Study_of the_Origin of Sexual Perversions.we have in Freud himself an example which proves that his formula.In_plain_ view. then we shall finally be able to see what he means when he affirms that perversion is the negative of neurosis. as if it were enough simply to hear that what is_ hidden in the unconscious when we are with a neurotic is. and somehow in a free state. which are all of obsessional neurosis. Freud tells us that he is centering his study on six cases. a resume of a considerable mass of experience. So there is.One must not suppose that Freud had never considered giving us an idea of that to elaborate. there is his experience of all the other cases of which he has not himself as great an understanding. for he can scarcely say anything further to characterize his fantasy. indeed that of a categorical perversion. Ein Kind wird gesehlagen. In truth. It is a sentence taken directly from the statements of patients when they address the theme of those fantasies that one could generally qualify as sado-masochistic. he 124 . whatever role and function they may take on in a particular case. Let us look at things a little more closely. he expresses it in a way that is remarkable in its imprecision. leaving open questions to which he can only reply with great difficulty. In addition. When the subject declares that he is bringing what his fantasy is into the treatment. We shall first try to follow Freud. he cannot at first give a satisfactory response. it seems. according to which perversionis__the negative of neurosis.

in approaching the problem tnrougn me case or me young nomosexuai girl. at least to this dimension in which we are trying to advance. for other fantasies. It is the structure of these states that I would suggest to you. We shall not get to the end of this article today. Freud tells us. The distance between the fantasmatic or imaginary use of these images and theirspoken formulation is really of a nature to make us prick up our ears. The progress of analysis shows. and which can be summed up under the heading — subjective structure.. but it_provolces in them_a great sense of aversion„repugnance. when. on the contrary.si nify for subjects? Freud tells us what his experience has shown him. indeed a sort of shame or sense of indecency. guilt.1 :4 does not do it without showing a sort of aversion. There is a rather remarkable fact to emphasize here. to give its true power to what often appears in theory as an ambiguity. . which have had an entirely understandable role at one moment in the subject's evolution. In other words. I shall simply bring out certain elements that directly concern the path on which we had started the last time. that this fantasy is substituted.. which f can be scanned to the extent that this history opens under analytic pressure and allows one to rediscover the origin of the fantasy. in the history of the subject. according to Freud. in order to let you recognize elements which are absolutely manifest on the sole condition that one has one's eyes open.. not only is there very. we shall try to determine at what level of subjective structure — the phenomenon occurs. which in its typical formulation is expressed -Someone is beating a child -. by a series of transformations.often great difficulty. indeed as an impasse or an antimony. Whereas the_ masturbatory practices that are more or less associated_ with these fantasies entail no weight of guilt for subjects. it is a question of formulating_these fantasies. This behavior on the part of the subject is already a gnn l that marks_a limit — it is_nat_the_same_thing to play mentally with the fantasy_ancLto _speak of. What does this fantasy. There are three stages.

whom the subject hates. as the most profound primordial organization. The preeminence of the figure of the father in a fantasy thatis completely. we shall not omit noting that it is a matter of a girl seen at a certain moment when the Oedipus complex has already been consitutecl. and which we ourselves shall leave aside for today. for reasons that he will explain later.. The subject formulates and organizes a primitive dramatic situation starting from the point we are at in the analysis. as much by his presence as by the care that is given him. The first fantasy that one can find.. takes the following form -. which we shall not bring into the foreground this time. that he will limit himself to what happens in women. a rival who appears at some moment.is retroactive. The important thing is that we touch. to frustrate the child of its parents' affection..Freud indicates in the first part of his discussion.atthe outset _upori_a_ . pLirr_cannotbe_unrelated to the fact that it is. says Freud. here.arid the relation to thelather instituted. there is the one who suffers it.My father is beating a child who is the child that I hate. . when one analyzes the facts. and that he sees as fallen from the parental preference which is at stake.a question_of But let us leave the explanation of the problem for the future. The one who suffers is named as a child bject. Thus we rediscover through the progress of the analysis what will present itself as something primitive. There is the relation of the subject with two others between whom relations are motivated by an _element centered on the subject.. The fantasmatic situation has the manifest complexity of including three Tersonage.s_-:_. by way of A triple dimension and tension are implied herv. Without insisting on this point. It is especially a question of the father here. thete_is the agent of punishment. bistoricaLp_erspective_that . My father. in a way that is inscribed in his current speech and by his present power of symbolization. and there is_ the subject. This fantasy seems more or less tied in the history of the subject to the introduction of a brother or a sister. while he senses himself privileged by the fact that the other falls from this preference. one can say.

situation set up in the primitiyefariny_in_ itself bears the mark of the intersubjective structure which all full speech constitutes. which is finally a communication about love.. The introduction of the second subject is necessary. a temporal dimension. animates and motivates the action bearing on the second personage. The point is not that the thing has been spoken. which supp_oses. particular way. I follow Freud's text. a reference to the subject. the spria. A causality. We thus find ourselves before a full intersubjective structure. Why? Because for what must be bridged between one subject and the other. The latter. or rather which describes it as a . of precedence. is taken in this instance as the instrument of communication between the two subjects. in whose favor the thing occurs. of his desire to be preferred or_ loyecUtia_thus_aquestion of a formation_that is_alreadnatized and reactive. taken as a third. jria very. is beating my brother or my sister out oar that I do not believe he prefers me. the issue of a complex situation. reconstructedstage_which is indispensable in understanding the 127 . but that IfleternaLy. in as much as the subject must believe or infer something from a certain behavior which bears upon the second subject. a tension in advance. the one who suffers. a situation that is reduced. And there is a reference to a third as subject. namely the expression of his wish. the privilege of preference. Let us go on to the seconcLstage. without leaning on it. in the sense that it is established by the complete seal of speech._the means. a tension. Thus there is the idea of fear. to two characters.. The third who is the subject is presented in the situation as the one under whose eyes this must occur.accentuating this sense. that is to say a sort of anticipation. introduced as a motor within the triple situation. he is the instrument.the_triple intersubjereference. since it is at the expense of this second that what he receives is declared for the one who is the central subject. witlaialLthat_it_introduces of a temporal reference and scansion.. to let him know that something is given to him. with regard to the first._the medium. which explains.g. The latter represents.

At the preceding stage. One can. Here it is he. which is also exclusive. Freud said. Something is indicated by that. and the continuation of the discussion shows it. the situation. The subject is included with the other in a relation that is dual. The second stage is dual. To resolve it. This situation. is marked in the second gage. the second presents a situation so % The subject is in a reciprocal position with the other. It is eitlier_he or the other who is_beaten. arrows. extremely structured as it was. was pregnant with every_ possibility.motivation of what occurs in the history of the subject. and thus ambiguous. but remaining__ ambiguous. nor especially sadistic.I am being beaten by my father. But they themselves will remain marked by the greatest ambiguity. This second stage produces the fantasy -.that this raises on the libidinal plane. 128 . Whereas the first fantasy covers_ an organization. a structure which gives a direction that one could indicate by a series of ambiguous that one might wonder for a moment to what measure the subject participates in the action of the one who aggresses and beats him. Freud says that we are almost always forced to reconstruct this stage. which excludes every_ dimension other than that of the relation between the subject and the agent_whols beating could lead to all sorts of interpretations. with the whole problematic. but is not however resolved. one must conclude with Freud that it is linked to the essence masochism. see in the very act of being beaten a transposition or the displacement of an element perhaps already marked by eroticism. it contained these characteristics in potential. It was neither sexual. The very fact that one can speak in this instance of the essence of masochism is indicative. This fugitive quality is so truly its characteristic that the situation is very quickly precipitated into the third stage. It is the classic sada raassishisticAmhiguity. One finds that either/or which is so fundamental to the dual relation. but that the egQ1S in-thisinstance strongly_accerltu_ated. Precipitation_in_ one direction or another. so fugitive is it.

as in the first stage. but whose evolutions are yet manifest in all of its constituent symptoms. e_litnit. and the passage to the second situation. but in general the father is not recognizable.In the third stage. . In this Someone. a radical desubjectivization of the whole structure remains. that is to say. Someone is beating a child. is found here in an element of the clinical picture.at the point of the final reduction. my father is showing me he loves me. not always a subject. what alwm_s_at_th. more or less marked by specularity and reciprocity between the ego and the other. which is the fantasy. Freud wanted to respect the formulation of the subject. charActerizes e_ver_ys to2to121:) ect. or simply an eye.the_relatis)n. To see it one needs. which one has had to discover through all the_artificea_oLthe_analysis_othansference. How can we translate that into our language. which is dual and reciprocal. at this precise point in our process? To refer to our schema the imaginary relation. The fantasmatic production makes it explode. but at least an eye. isinscribed between_the_twa angles_a. more or less fantasized. multiplying it into a thousand copies._. and at this level the subject is no longer there except as reduced to the state of a spectator. One apparently finds the subject here in a third position. In addition. In effect. Or this -.ch. the subject is reduced to his most extreme point. which can be only a screen on which the subject is instituted. It is also very much this --By beating the child who is the child that I hate. Or any other formula that brings out in any way whatever one of the accents of this dramatic relation.My father is beating a child from fear that I believe I am not preferred. What is excluded. which well shows the essential desubjectivization that is produced in this relation. but it is often a question not of one child but of several. — 129 . the paternal function is vaguely found.d_of. But here we find ourselve of an element which_takes_Its_ place on the line S -A. one comes to the desubjectivized situation which is that of the terminal fantasy — namely. After the reduction of the first intersubjective situation with its temporal tension. in the form of a pure and simpleobser_ver. what is not present in neurosis. there is only a substitute._namely_unconscio_us_spe_e.

which is in the end engmatic. the situation. It stops in effect at the hem of the dress. take the_f_unction. There is something here like ksymbplic reduction that has progressively_eliminated_the whole subjective structure from the situation leaving only_a*sisiugraat is entirely desubjectivized.La-Fure-sign Is this anything other than what we encounter in perversion? Think now of what you know.How does this fantasy present itself? It bears in itself the evidence.the child stops in his observation. to a precise situation -. but is so und. where unconscious speech is articulated. just where one finds the shoe. of signifying elements of_thespeech articulatevel_of that trans-object.. about the fetish. memory. articulated structure. that is at least his memory. the intersubjective relation. but exemplary. history. still very visible. at least in certain cases that are particular. and that is very much why the latter can.namely. at the hem of his mother's dress. has a papeLithatwe can now disengage. You notice here a remarkable concordance with the structure of what one could call the screen memory. most often after a brief analytic effort. which is thg_gregpther. at least in the memories that are still accessible to him. the perverse fantasy.the penis of the phallic mother.of what in the Ptheri_s_b_garticulated structure in which the_subject_ is engaged. that this is linked by the subject. What is indicated here of fundamental structuring relation ' fin the history of the subject. if one may put it so. namely. the S in so far as it is speech. not assumed by the subject -. no higher than the ankle. for example. the place .ctLagthstituteloy_what was not seen but r 130 . Perversion.fiation of the signiti_gs_uf ..er_theJorm-Q. and for good reason. which you are told is to be explained by that beyond which has never been seen. All of the elements are there in the perverse fantasy. them_o_meat_ when the chaitiof the_memor-y-stops. but all that is signification is lost. We have instead a sort of ohjecb. at the level of perversion. because it retains the who charge -. WhaLortecauld-call-sigiailiers in a pure state are maintained without _the intersublatim_ckvoislof their subject. or rather to limit ourselves here. is at once maintained and contained.but a char egret revealed. not constituted. -. It turns out.

by arresting it at that paint which is called the screen- memory. and put into _ play again in the dialectic of the_transference. namely.zgcLin_the_fantaay. and corj8i.that the_subject_must receive from the Other in an inizerkd can_also very well remain in the_Othgt. as_being truly_ for the subject something that the mother possesses namely the pliallus„imaginary_no doubt... but as it is. once again L - . which remains charged with_all_of_theerotic. evidence and support. but / essential to her symbolic function as phallic mother.that does not say it all — there must also be some impossibility here. Think of the way that a cinematic movement which unfolds rapidly might stop suddenly at some point. We touch there upon the question of how what one could call the mill _ of perversion is formed. must be articulated.itlivalorization__ot thi._ valueiincluded in what the scene expressed. time_thaLthere is a question of perversion.analytic dialogue. without which it would not be repressed._ which must again take on its full di . -. It is very much because there is this impossibility in ordinary situations that we need all of the artifices of the transference to render passable.iinaTe71 it is a question of the image in so far as it remains the privileged evidence of something_which.ensioni. It is speech which is yew much that of the subject. Theimaginarystmerisim thus app. message.__inthe_unconscious. This instantaneousness. that is. in so farprecisely as it is repressed. With the fantasy we find ourselves before something of the same order. the last remaining support. formulated.. reduced to the state of the instantaneous. .earsprevalent each . or more exactlywhat yelonging to the_stAbjgctisiefLto be situated in the Other. thus inaugurating a relation that is possible but not realized.which is articulated.tItte_the xepLemest and the unconscious. and of which it is both. by virtue of its mature_as-speech. Possible.thin the. freezing all of the characters. This imaginary relation is on the way to what passes between the subject and the Other. which fixes the course of memory. acteristic of the reduction of the full signifying scene articulatecLinsubjecLafter-subject_to_omething that is imcm3i)Lli.

in so far as the I of the subject comes into being. to the subject. of the subject and the Other. as primitive as we may suppose -. installed in. which correspond to his desire. a_pLirsand simple survival. indicates sufficiently that any perverse structuration. an element of something that. organization. what must be communicated by the Other. in this important article. the-wholeactuaLgerlesis_sahcathita. Freud. that of the young homosexual girl. by and for the process. Freudian analysis gives us this indication in the clearest way. Symbolir_signification. It is stupefying that one should have even thought of understanding Freud's formula that perversion is the negative of neurosis as its somewhat popular translation has it. when all is said.axisthe other hand. and everything is developed still much further than what I am saying here. understood.. _suctil_2Lhirn.t take place and be estahlisbestoLthe. going through the avatars. 132 ..formulable.which are immediately attractive to him. his structure as object_recognized. In this instance. and articulation of the Oedipus complex. ascertain me-ness with regard to objects. the revolution of the Oedipus.m.. and articulated only in.us. the adventure. a link. on _ the contrary. Perversion would be a drive_that_has_ not been elatoratedJay—the_OedipaLanthneursgicanechanism. Freud notes very clearly that the problem of the constitution of every perversion must be tackled by beginning with the perspective of the Oedipus complex.. the persistence of an irreducible partial drive. can be conceived.at least among those that come to our knowledge as analysts -. in so much as he is engaged on the imaginary rails that form what one calls his libidinal fixations. 2 We shall now try to inscribe our case from the other day. the great Other.. the imagirlaryinterposition a-a' is that in which the subject finds his status.is articulable only as a means. onto our schema of the crossed relation. and at many other points.

and not without cause. Let us try to understand the avenues which Freud himself has disengaged. and leads her to become interested in love objects marked with the sign of fernirtillity. Freud tells us what. we know when its presence was indicated. she treats this lady in a style that is rich with elements which are chivalric and properly masculine. Let us set off from thcphallic phase of the genital organization. In short. These are women in a more or less maternal. that of maternity. and we have its springs and its origins. une can atstinguisnes i n m e m a j o r phenomena of the installation oktis_perversion)-. the child subjecLmasculine or fe_minine. to whom strong ties of affection bind her.1 Although we shall not push this exercise to its final term today. namely. with the character of a gift. She thus shows herself in the eyes of all to be particularly well oriented in the direction that that they wish for her. desire. something then occurs. which does not mean that it did not have its premises in very early phenomena.whether we consider it as fundamental or acquired matters little. In this instance. or even hope of return. Let us begin with a state that is primordial. It is a perversion that was formed late.t before the latency period. How to conceive this transformation? I have given you the first stage and the result -. this young girl cherishes an object. She will finally led toapassion literally qualified as devouring for that person whom we call. maternalizing. the lady. At the moment towards thirteen or fourteen years. with a love projecting even beyond any sort of manifestation by the beloved. then established. a child for whom she cares. On this base.between the two something happens. the typical vocation of woman. we have there one of the most characteristic forms of the love relation in its most highly cultivated forms. with a passion offered without demand. we can attempt a resume.arrives at the 133 1 . We are going to take this up and show its implication in the very terms which served to analyze the position. which leads to a sort of about face. then precipitated. What is the meaning of what Freud tells us with regard to it? 11. In effect. position.

which is the pre. but that is only to push the problem away.by which the subject. Given that. that is to say. however. which indigates. structured and organized in a way that is real. which one must take as fact -. and they are thence forced to have recourse to extraordinary modes of explanation. but the general style can be summed up somewhat like this. at the genital level. These formulas of Freud suggest a problematic from which authors cannot exit when they want to justify it by motives which could be determined for the subject in the real. as everyone knows. meaning_that_there_are_far_the subject two types of beings in the world -.alence_a_the_phallus. It is in fact not inconceivable from this perspective.the rules instilled by the law as to the exercise of genital functions.the_pointof realization of thergenital Everything isthere. namely. the phallus turns put_to_be that imaanacy_element -. up to and including the choice of object. it must be that the phallic prevalence is some sort of formation in which the subject finds an advantage. is introduced into the symbolic_of. linked by a factor which is included in the rgat_human situation namely. And that in effect engages authors in a series of constructions which only refer the whole symbolic dialectic back to the origin. I have already told you that I shall keep the latter in parentheses. and that there is in it a process of defense. There is. It is because things take place at this level that the 134 . preformed. by nature.this is a fact. and given that the subject already has. and which become precisely more and more unthinkable the further one goes back towards the origin. essentially ._who are castrated. which are two different things. the full realization of the genital function.v.beings who have the phallus. There remains in effect a fantasmatic element. in so far as they effectively come into play in interhuman exchange. that what will render the cooperation between the sexes adequate.theziftThe symbolic of the gift and genital maturation. are. and those who do nothaveit.phallic phase. howeier. It is easier for us than for these authors to admit that in this instance. everything is already divined and inscribed in the unconscious drives.smnethingwhich is not there.

that is. plus or minus. Simply_it_is_marked-b-y--a minus_sign. But for the subject. Freud says. that is to say the female child -. What is at stake. what one does nothave. in a syrnbolic_dialec. surely.he_exits-by-it_Atihe_. biological. is the spring of the girl's entry into the Oedipus complex. Freud goes much further still. It still remains that there must be something. That. and what is at play there is the phallus. this has no internal.omentw_herLon a certain plane_he realizes the symbolic of the gift. in so far as it is a question of having or not having the phallus.the gilLinso_lar as she does not possess the ph_all_u5Atis in so_lar_as5he. enters in so far as what she does not have is to be found in the Qe_diptss. The girl. as Freud underlines does not enter_by this route. the latter should be satisfied only 135 . formulated in raw terms. the dramatic elements of the Oedipal relation.is_every_bitas_extant_as_the_. that it is why we see so many equivalents of the phallus in symptoms. and you will find indication of that in his Someone is Beating a Child. takes on value within the symbolic of the gift.what does that mean? We are already here at - a level wl =niL&Tia nary element enters into a symbolic dialectic.phalligizes_the situation. presence or absence. Thus she enters with this minus. he must make a gift of what he has. as the boy does with the plus. Within this symbolic of the gift.tle phallus does not have the same value for the_one who really_ possesses the phallu_sJ1athto_s_ay_the_male_child. tlaastles„rders_the_Oedip. if one can add a notation. or individual coherence. the accidents._coniplex The boy._when_according to the premises.. on the contrary.link_between the symbolic of the gift and genital maturation is so close. frustrations at the oral and anal levels tend to occur and come to realize the frustrations. For . that the fantasy of the phallus. Freud insists ? on this -. What she does_not have. all sorts of things can be given in exchange. It appears. rest.tic. and for_the_chilthwito does - not possess it.us.end of the Oedipus complex at the m. so many things.and for good reason. Why do s° many pre- genital elements come into play in the Oedipal dialectic? Why_do. at _the genital . coraylex. if she enters the Oedipus complex. The female child is introduced into the symbolic_of.

'the girl's first introduction into the dialectic of the Oedipus complex consists. that the penis that she desires is the child that she hopes to receive from the father as a substitute. he says.) Symuolic Father THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GEL 136 . the function and the existence of his urine as an object. which is in the picture. according to Freud. for the girl. Are_rnore accessible to verbal representation.chil&in what occurs at the genital level. Freud goes so far as to say that if the pregenital objects are put into play in the Oedipal dialectic. and difficult of access. of which of course he has no experience -.the objects that arepart of pre-genital relations. I I Yes.__But in the example that concerns us. d [Schema. because he knows very well the use.. 124] Imaginary Mother Real Child orF Imaginary Penis ( . Worporstellynep. It is easier to symbolize that is to say.inille_genitaLelaboration? Freud's answer_points towards what is obscure for. p. homosexual sirl. it is in so far as they lend themselves more easily to verbal representation. That remains. The girl cares for a real child. to provide a plus or a minus sign. in this. The child can say to himself more easily that what the father gives the mother is his urine. for an object that already has a certain realization in the child's imagination. that of the yo_w_gi. it is a question of a real child.„the. despite everything. difficult to seize.

or the very marked oppositiorLylich. as subject. one puts the whole accent_on„the. what does this child. it is the bipolarity. the mother. there is a 137 . one thing on which I have insisted in the preceding lessons. and can create in the child that famous depressive position.that the frustration realized-by-whatever is. without knowing it. it is because with regard to the early mother-child relation.On the other hand. she is constituted.namely the mother's breast AzgLpt-Lthe other hand. in her most : udimentary form_an_object-marked--and_designated with a possibility-of plus or minus in the form of presence or absence -. and following that.that she is already.eveaobject I introduced by a realized frustrationsly_be an object that the subject takes in the.elated_to the_rnother is__a frustration_pf love that everything that rnrnes frorn_the_mather_in--response_t_o_thesalLis_si.cAss•fthe_object_of_lome_usecLindifferently.gift. One considers that the child has its first experience of the relation between the pleasure principle and the reality principle in the frustrations which he senses in the mother. and on the other.r. This distinction between the breast and the mother as a total object is made by Mrs. Melanie Klein. It remains in effect that the mother. as the imaginary_ mother. there is betwetn the real object in so far as the child can be deprivecLoLit. you see the terms frustration of tl . But if there is . is instituted by the functictrulf a_01. ambiguous position which is that of an appurtenance to his own bo j If I am underlining it. as agent. in so far as she is in a position i of_granting or not granting this real object.tha tit is to say. that she cares for satisfy in her? The imaginary phallic substitution by which. it is because she thus acquires the imaginary penis f which she is fundamerstratecawhich I notate_b_y_writing_theiMaginary_ penis with a minus sign. something other than_the_objeci_ In other terms. That is one way to see things. on one hand. the mother in so far as she is instituted as a total object. But what is avoided is that these two objects_ are_not of the same nature.1_-.passive aspect of frustration. I am doing nothing other than underlining something which is characteristic of the original frustration -. She clearly distinguishes the partial objects. If she is satisfied in caring for this child.

a beyond. he is hungry. Contrary to what is said._hut no sort of. the gift as a_sign aims radically at something other. The frustration of love and the frustration of jouissance are two distinct things. The frustration °Clove m itself Is pregnant with all of the intersubjective relations which may later be constituted. the object whatever it may be. . In other words. what does the frustratiou_of _puissance produce?aproduces at most a newthrustoLdesire. and not just any sort of image_either. as Mr. which allows us to clarify that there is effectively a progression. If he does not have the breast. We cannot found the least genesis of reality on the fact that the child has or does not have the breast. It is not sly the child is deprived_ of the mother's breast that he creates a fundamental image_of it. The image must in itself be talcen_as_an original dimension. which requires an original explanation. the love of the mother. and on the other hand. It is not the 138 . it is not the frustration of jouissance that engenders reality. Winnicott has very well perceived.radical difference between. -._is not pregnant with anything at all. that comes in for the satisfaction of the child's needs. This is very much why Mr. and he continues to cry. The frustration of jouissance. though not without the usual confusion that we find in analytic literature. Winnicott is led to have us note what is really striking in the child's behavior.. on one hand. constitution of any object whatever.

1G.11 1 e .7. LILL 1%A biLALLLOG. LL 10 0. but accentuated in a way that is observable in the child's behavior.. . ALL LA IA.? The phallus is substituted for it and si_Iptrimposed uaon it. 10 engendered by frustration leads _us_tz.111. like the lure that always orients animal behavior. object of the desires of which he was frustrated at the origin.6 Gl0G• 11L1 1. LAI 6. and one can always locate what individualizes the image in the biological realm. going towards something that he desires. the problem is not that of knowingtohow great a degree narcissism is elaborated..71. This is no doubt also present in man. What follows the frustration of the object of jouissance in the child is Inoriginal dimension that is maintained in the subject as an imaginary relation. Without them. . 139 .1 1 . but one must not sAy_that it is with regard to the.1 CL0 11. That is why Winnicott spends time on those objects which he calls transitional. we would have no evidenceafthe way that the child__ couldconstitute a world by_starting with his frustrations. .• SALA. he can encounter something b which h_i_bmised or by which he is burned. where the images are.6.J11M1.1 P . r t •-• es 1: .. There is something significative in the plumes or the fins of the adversary which makes it an adversary. it is on the contrary to recognize what the unction of narcissism is in the constitution of an object_world_as_mch. • 1• - • .an imagearound_which subjects can groupthemselves and disband aslaelorag. • t • 1 • • 1 • - • ' - ' • ..1 cauratica.-1. It is not at all an object which would be engendered in any_way whatever by 1 .L - _1 __ 1 1 1 11 LL a• . in so far as they are constituted as images. referred to the fundamentaLimagewhich_gimes_hirn_his globiLatatureatis a matter of that form of the whole which he latches-onto.breast. In sum.1C V G1V1-0111G1LL.. thenipple. _1_ •1_11 1 1 -I 1.1 ALL 01-1 161.i e v e .1 - • 11 11 .11.admit the autonomy of the 2 English in the original. It is not simply an element polarizing the launching of desire. The two have in common the character of being able to arrest us. LO AL 1. but the tip of the breast that is essential here. Certainly the constitutes a world. the form-of the albeit. in orriotzLeog___ n Mg. LAO Li Mil.71./. He constitutes a world in as much as.u.

no one would dream of saying that you believe as strong as steel. to which the child holds and to which he is more or less hooked on. Transitional objects-are those objects. and with regard to which one can speak neither of reality nor of unreality. is like your philosophical notions and your religious system. This is not observed in all children. which he is wrong to call a primitive fetish. half real. which is between the two. Winnicott clearly sees the ultimate relation between these objects and the fetish. In short. as an object to which they must adhere. this object which is neither real nor unreal.imaginary production in its relation to the image of the body. half unreal. with a great deal of pertinence. It is a matter of a domain that_is between the two. or the tip of a bib. it is really in the midst of all this that life is to be situated. character of demi-existence. That is how Mr. in which things are instituted-with the. but which is in fact at the origin. Winnicott spends time on this and says that after all. the authenticity or the strong as steel reality of what he promotes as a religious idea or a philosophic illusion. Mr. This character is well marked by the fact that no one normally thinks of imposing upon others. but in most of them. Winnicott expresses it. Whatever doctrine you might hold in religious or in philosophic matters. no one would dream of taking it away from you. How could we organize the rest if there were not that? 140 . Mr. t h c o u n t e i n s d t a o f t r nomadism of the transitional object. to which we grant neither a full reality nor a fully illusory character. for example a little corner of his sheet. the instituted world of the British Isles indicates to each that he has the right to be mad. even if it must be regretted that instead of dealing with the problem which provides the introduction of this object into the symbolic order. on the condition of remaining mad separately. all in the midst of which lives a good English citizen who knows in advance how to behave. if one wished to -11 m ip o s h e p s v i r a y o f e l t s u n a l b e j a c s . Winnicott is not wrong. It is an ambiguous object. It is there that madness would truly begin. Mr. because one is really forced to reach it from the moment that one has taken this path. he comes to it as though despite himself.

.

that ter transitional_ object. beyond the subject. when she tags care of a child. because sheis the oltectelectolall_ the . and she loves like a man.the y_irile_positice.Let us come back to the case of our young_girlin19ye.. is_in. miinnliches Typus -.schema -. subject's adoration. At A. that is.great A in the first stage. [Schema.the. She. If the_ lady is_ loyeckit is in so far precisely as she does not have the symbplic penis. who was at the place of the_. That is translated thus by ott_r_.1Lis_said. 1281 Child Real Lady 0 Imaginary Father Symbolic Penis THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL (2) &Retrmgation is thus produced whicbmakes. the symbolic that is. p. In a ' there is the lady. to the second stage of the five situations that we shall not get through today? She is homosexual. says Freud.the father. What is needed for her to pass to the third stage. what is benc:l ittglomed_subjectia rove at its mostglaborated_point_WhAtirdave is loved is in effect what ja..symbsalic_fatherpass into the _imaginary. passes to the level otthe ego. through the subject's identification with the function 142 .though the translator has translated --feminine. it is literally what he does not have. the_ imaginaly_pfnis. of wit90. but she has all that she needs to have it. the object of love who is substituted for the child.

Simultaneously. it is in_so. on the condition that they are distinguished. For the desire of the penis.the_ symbolic penis. which gives the situation its drama. in effect. is given to her own mother. or of the drives. Now for this child that she desired unconsciously._a real which replied to the unconscious situation on the plane of the imaginary. already disquieting enough that the child is real.. the fatherisnow realized on the plane of the imaginary relation. has one really taken a strong start from those three elements which are absolutely essential. a touch which already shows an accentuation of need in her. in which she found her satisfaction.fiAlte is_symbolic. it_ is. an imaginary or a real child. he enters effectively into play as imaginary father. the symbolic and the real? You can see that if the situation is revealed for reasons that are highly structured to be a relation of jealousy. When one says that it is because of some accentuation of the instincts. Onlyhere the father really gives a child not_ta_his_daughtm butt° the mother. the girl gave him_a_reAl_substitute.of the father. That is what is characteristic in the observation. or of some primitive drive. 143 . substitution of_ thes_laild_that_the father will give_her. the real lady comes to the position on the right. much as the real is introduced. In the present case. One understands after that that the_s_ubject has been frustrated in a very special way. just by having precisely_thatbeyond._this_ symbolic father who was in the unconscious. inicdar. and no longer as symbolic father. there is for the girl. while the father remains unconscious as progenitor. By a sort of interposition. is that a real action has been introduced on the plane of the imaginary relation_by the father. as an object of love. which is found at first at the imaginary level. and which we find again in the fourth. and if the imaginary satisfaction _to which the girl gives herself has taken an untenable character. What occurs between the two? The characteristic of the observation. that things turn in the direction of a perversion. when the real child comfrom_the father. which are the imaginary. and all the more so as the child is real. which appears in the second stage.

_She becomes herself the imaginary father. She also keeps his penis. in order to study in depth the dialectic of the gift as it is first experienced by the subject. I have not yet said what the frustration of love offered.and the girl completes it as she can. to which necessarily_she_must_give_this something which it at does not have. This need to set love on the axis not of the object but on what the obt does not have. The_girLideritifies with. and it is for this reason and not for any other that it will end in a perversion. It is there that we shall take things up again the next time. and to see its other face. and becomes attached to an_objeawbich. 16 January 1957 144 . in the style of perversion. For if I have accentuated the paradoxes of frustration with regard to the object. begins_tabe articul in an imaginary way. does not have. nor what as such it signified. puts us just at the heart of the love relation and of It is this something that the object does not have. This relation is marked by the fact that what had been articulatecljn_a_ _ay that was laterktaLtheleKel of the great Other. which makes the tertiary constellation of this subject's history necessary.From there on. which we left aside just before.her_father arid takes his role. another imaginary relation is inaugurated.

-if4au_firat. that is to say in our practice. it no longer depe_nds_on- 145 . presence or absence. neurotic metaphor. This fascicule. I am alluding to the famous game of odds and evens..-the. Perverse metonymy. The seconsimgment is to be found in the fact that the declaration you make in saying by which you put_ i yourself in a condition_of being gratified_or not by the_otheron. impotent father. the second number of the review La Psychanalyse. Dora between question and identification. Potent father. problem. namely the opposition.zera_ppsitiono_LtJae. and I refer you to the introduction that you will see I have given to my lesson on The Purloined Letter. contains certain texts which will allow you to find a new attempt at a logic.sc _btit since this other akeady_has the dice in his hands. theinstitutionof the pure symbol plus_or minus. You will easily locate the three temp_gral_mornbjectivityinso far as it is related to frustration. and to find it in a place where it is particularly lively.ect_on. . which is nothing other than an objectively verifiable position of the game's givens. on the c_onditim_of takings e.xefl. Love.latte~ir~ the sense of lack of thesthject.VIII DORA AND THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL The symbolic insistence of the transference. lack. and the gift.

1 Wie had arrived at what I called the third moment.nLcharacter.steals it at every instant from the other. under our jurisaiiction in analytic practice. what is at stake? The other is evidently called upon to suggest a regularity at every moment.in the arrie is established.that_of_theiaw.hancl. in the history of our case of feminiine homosexuality. For by the sole fact that it comes within our reach. please note. without forgetting that by 146 . but ternary.in_a_form which is always latent to the exexcise_of_the. in other words.garne. on which frustration is established. lit is already.all the while suggestirigh. We do it to facilitate things by coming more quickly to what is abiltually done in the dialectic of frustration. to make a concession to a progressive point of view„ to admit this chronological ordering of terms from the past towards the futture. which at the same time he tries to steal from him.ta_satisfy.. Thatt is what we had reached the last time. it is very evidently because you introduce thellattamension_which_Orssitits_meaning. namely th altit is necessary to introduce three terms if one is to begin to articulate somethijpgthat resembles klaw.situating a dimension that is no longer_dual. It is at this_moment_that_whaLis fundamental. from the point of view of the one who demands. the moment that is consttituted in the following way. which gives it its intersubjective meaning. a law.impos_sible. the object must really enter into this chain.will satisfy_your demand.literally . In fact. which I shall sum up by taking a first situation chosen arbitrarily as the situation at the start.he who proposes the hidden Eart of the ame.call_ and its P response. Tl_stitution_of_a_law or of any regularity conceived as possible -. chit tin. Thus you have here the second stage of the dual_relation. You can see its absolutely_emarie5cg.him that what is in_his._ It is on this essential dimension that the value of my text rests. If the game has any interest.. In following those three intersubjective muiments we shall try to see how the object is introduced into theaymbolic.inso_far as it _institutes_the.

At first we have the position of the young girl when she is still at the stage of puberty. This is after the decline of the Oedi2ussornallnatl. It is at this stage that there occurs.passes_into_the_imana relation. with which the subject is in an imaginary relation.nquotation marks„an irnaginary_relatis. the lady. the relation u f sub'ect with her father. there is a projection of the unconscious formula. is_the_. that is without distinguishing the planes of the real. we shall try to establish the prindples_of_the_ relations between the object and the constitution of the symbolic chain.father. the fatal moment in which the father intervenes in the real by giving a child to the mother. Or.one__who unconscious. as ordained by theory. a child that is real. p. produces the transformation of the whole equation..•. that is to say as the one who can give the phallus.•••••••■•• [Format schema. . which. The say mower of the father is then unconscious. her relation with the lady. which is to say that he makes of this child. The first symbolic and imaginary structuration of this position is made in a way that is classic. which is hence posed in the following terms -. intemening-as . That is the third moment.n. By a sort inversion.to_that_beyond which. that of the first equilibrium.. one could say.•■•••.a symbolic function. one ends in impasses which I hope to make you sense the further we advance.. into a relation that is perverse i. and the symbolic.the imaginary father. the symbolic penis. namely. as a consequence. The intervention of the real father with regard to the child of which she is thus frustrated.conceiving it in a summary fashion.s_situated in the symbolic-order.-. which wa. We find ourselves now at the second moment._ if you will. Something is realized. 1331_ 147 . can no longer be sustained by her in the imaginary position in which she had been installed. 1--•.. The equivalence penis-imaginary child installs the subject as imaginary r_rioAerwith_regard . But for the moment. the imaginary.

could have given great hope.Lady Imaginary father Symbolic penis THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL (3) Thus. impose a structure.. and because of an intervention that he makes in this direction. Let us now try to see what that might mean. his presuppositions concerning her position. if we were to change the position of one of them. we would have to resituate all the others.. and over which we can for a moment pause... one is far from being led to put the whole charge to an impasse in the patient's position. Let us review what this position is.. we have the position of the terms at stake. It is. and how Freud formulates it.. What does Freud say at the crucial moment of this observation? Because of the particular conception that he has taken of the position in question.Child . His own intervention. he crystallizes the position between him and the patient in a way that is not satisfying... he himself states. and never just anywhere. Whatever Freud thinks of it. such as they are.. his conception. since. must really count for something in the rupture of the situation. useful to note that these terms. it is at this moment that the analytic relation is broken off. that is to say. after a first application of our formulas. He says that the resistances of the patient were insurmountable. namely that the 148 . How does he materialize these resistances? What examples does he give? What meaning does he give them? He sees them expressed particularly in a dream which.. Its signification is given by the analysis. a position no doubt enigmatic.. paradoxically.. however.

He also takes it up in another observation. Intervention sur le transfert. if there were not another desire. in Mitchell and Rose (eds. Freud. the case of Dora. the unconscious can lie? Freud stops for a long time at this point. both at the same time. Freud takes a passage from The Interpretation of Dreams. far from taking the text of the dream at the letter of the word. which consists in the fact that he Js addressing someone when he recounts the dream in 1 Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria. as Freud notes. represented here by the family.2 The Traumdeutung introduces a comparison between capitalist and entrepreneur with regard to the relation between unconscious desire and preconscious desire. in the intersubjective game of guessing. which is from the level of the_unconscious. which we shall get to a little later. Report to the Congres dit de langue romane. if not Freud. the dream manifests a desire that goes in the direction of what. up to but not quite drawing the final consequences. which gives the foundation of the dream. Rose as Intervention on the Transference. Fortified by all that the patient is telling him of her position and her intentions. that one could object --But then. a fecund marriage. p. The patient has submitted herself to an ideal husband. but the dream would not have enough to set itself up as representing what is called the unconscious. Thus Freud makes a strong distinction between the_t_woslesires.' on which I recently gave.situation was becoming normalized. 2 149 . and has children by him. and which is an unconscious desire. and takes care to reply in a way that is very well articulated. In short. more exactly to give him illusions and to disillusion him. That supposes. conjugo. and the factor of the dual relation. discusses it. pp. 1951. 62-73. at least society. a short intervention summing up the positions through which I think that one must conceptualize the case. following a report by Lagache on transference. Preconscious desire is the entrepreneur of the dream. as in that practice which I alluded to earlier. Published in Ecrits. could best wish as the outcome of the treatment. Translated by 3. 215-226. It is in effect a dream about a union.). sees in it only a ruse of the patient's. intended expressly to disappoint him. There is room to make a distinction between_wpatient brings in his dream.

is. 150 .. for if we look at it closely.anthissensethatIsay. with the notion of Wiederholungszwang. and in consequence. and in the dream a situation is articulated that fulfills this promise. what do we see formulated? Without doubt .the game of deception. it is. i n its Preconscious intentionalization? It does not seem so. or in so far as the Oedipus has not been resolved. her fidelity to the lady.kand_thisdirection is not always necessarily the unconscious orientation._ Still. when it is broughtto_the_signifier. at the entry into the Oedipus. the promise on which the entry of the girl into the Oedipus complex is founded. namely lz~ar own message coming from an inverted form under th have a child r_tne. because he has not arrived at a pure formulation of what transference is. and that it comes to the third stage as existing and formulatingitself in a dream. the sole fact that it is reproduced. but what is forrrualatein_the-unc-onscious. Must what is expressed in the dream b e c o n c e i v e d e e i a p e s _ t l y _ e _ o f _ s i e c i p t i el t h a t i s . It is always the Lames ro jtenlp_f the unconscious that declares itself.4 the first as at the third stage. This is. In L e.}7.roduce-d_durthecourse(2Lgn_aaalysis. on which I have taken care to spend a year to make you see what that might mean. Certainly.thatadreamthat-is-. The whole question is to know if one must put the accent on the intentions that Freud says are openly admitted by the patient -.fiethere are in the transference an imaginary elem_ent ancl_asymbolic element.whatorigin. very precisely. it is because it is in so far as there is an insistence proper tothe symbolic chain as such that there is transference. and maintaining her position. If transference has a meaning.the patient herself manages to formulate it -. If Freud hesitates before this content.those of playing with her father -. if there em e4104 are mywjfsscgLa • II •∎ • is a meaning in what Freud later brought us. by_definition. It is there that the position begins. this insistence proper to the symbolic chain is not assumed by the subject. pretending to let herself be treated.aLways-carries_a__certain_directitaw_atdsthe anal. a choice to be made.it is in a dialectic of deception.

I would say_that there is no better illustration of Freuclis_fou taulathateip____Trsionisthenegatiyeof_rve_urosis. This remark is not valid only for one particular case We also have another case where the problem opsn_s_o_n_the_same plane. before the subject has assumed it. It is there that Freud could have securely placed his confidence and jntprveneri holdly. in their total constellation. as one sees here in _something that is a transference dream. The two cases balance each other admirably. and by itself alone. When we speak of transference. If Freud notes all the same that something was produced that was on the order of transference. He would have needed a notion c7f transference-founded_on a less vacillating_position and he would have had to conceive very preciaelythat transference occurs essentially on the plane of symbolic articulation. he does not draw its strict consequences from it. 151 . when something takes its meaning intbe_fact_that-the-analystmes the place of_the_. one must develop that. )___eccept that Freu_dmakes an error that is exactly the contrary. they correspond strictly. 2 Let us quickly recall the terms of Dora's case for what they have in comrnon with the constellation that is present in the case of the young homosexual girl. It is the_ ~ase. or the correct method of intervening.transfe iteige_cit is very precisely in so far as it is a matter of symbolic articulation as such. and this. First. _becausethesonfusion between the symbolic_position_and_the-imaginary position ' produced in opposingway. in the_same_ _w_ay.permits one to say that the dream. But much more because. is nonetheless. Still. ceiztai_yril . almost so much that one can be orgAnized with regard to the other as the positive form of a negative. They_intersect.sin the two cases.9 Dora. the representation of the transference in thepropeLsgnse. even if it seems to be a deceitful dream in that_itis on theimaginary_leveLand in direct relation with the therapist .

the mother in effect is present. She is a young hysteric.. as we advance.. because of a position which is at first dissimulated to Freud. whom they bring to him because of some symptoms she has had.we_haiesxacity_the_same characters -. What is striking is that Dora immediately lets Freud know her extremely keen demand for justice concerning the affection of her father. of its permanence and its importance.. The_lratiagr is abaent from the situation.. denotes a crisis in the social group in which a certain equilibrium had been maintained up until then. thecontrast with the preceding situation._Era. no doubt. and that she has become unAtle191.e_elem. On the other hancI Ethe_case.itis_the father who introduces thela. couple formed by the father and daughter. who. while in the first case.. The situation became intolerable following a sort of demonstration or attempt to commit suicide which ended. and also another lad.In the case_o_thstra. It is all the more striking in that it is againb.e laciy_that the whole problem turns. sigierminantimihemfo a_tion_oLthe_perverse constellation.K. no doubt. married to a gentleman named Herr K.L. a daughter.c. ancLiptc...in the foreground a father. L 152 . _In the case of the young homosexual girl.. but still quite marked. it is the daughter who introduces her. The father presents her to Freud as a patient. minor. has been ravished from her by this liaison.by alarming her family. This couple lived in a sort oictuarte.of_Dor. namely that the father had as mistress a certain Frau K.y. this singular equilibrium had in fact already b_een12roken for_ tweLyeap.cland seems to keep her there. Nevertheless. justice with regard to this relation. She immediately demonstrates to Freud that she had always been aware of the exi nats_e__QL this liaison.o■uces_th.a. she says. All of her behavior shows h. and this passage in the consultation is an'element which in itself alone..u. We see already. although the thing is dissimulated to Freud in the daughter's presentation of the situation.r_clan.wilLbeilae. since it is she who ravishes the father's attentintLirara_the - _daughter.

indeed. e_arnorous relation that linked her to Herr K. and this rapid reminder cannot in any way replace an attentive reading. but if one looks closely. The case is of a richness such that one can still make discoveries in it. this position had been sustained in the most efficient fashion by Dora herself. the most derisive forerly_speakingclialectical quality. it seems.which Freud believes he discovers because the patient gives it to him in a symbolic fashion. was the veritabl institution Dross primitive position. the first step in Freudian experience. as well asof her crisis. to the extent that one goes farther into the structure of the case. that she was her confidante. up until a critical moment. she was really its pivot. by taking care of her children.Df_a resistance in the patient to afiinaitting_th. it appears clear that she had a very special tie with the lady.Freud then takes a step. No doubt Freud lot lat rperceived that if he wentwrong. is it not something in which you haveATurseyparticipated? And in fact. and that he should have un attachment to Frau K. because the number fifteen appears everywhere in the obsentationand this element is useful in our rstanclingdrithat itis_founded on numbersa purely symbolic value. He goes as far as to indicate in a note that without doubt there was an error on his part. She showed herself more than complacent to this singular position. and that she went. Freud very quickly gives evidence that. extremely far with her in confidences. I can only remind you today of the terms in which the problem is presented all throughout the observation. even substituting on one occasion for the lady in her functions. one notes that in reality itis_a que5tion_offifteen months_And these fifteen months have a meaning. it waslaecause.. protecting the private meetings of the couple of the father and the lady. as Freud suggestecLicther with all of the weight of his insistence and his authority. But the 153 . He leads Dora back to the following question --What you are rising up against as a disorder. On the other hand. Let us signal out among others the interval of nine months between the hysterical symptom of appendicitis and the fact that makes it take root -the scene by the lake -.

for all through the observation. She_is not imp91tarialy_hecause-shedsjnvested with the narcissistic function which is at the basis of all inamoration. — it is at the imagi_nar_y_p. and_you__w_ill-find_it_in_a_host_a_. and I said -. you can_yead_that. Starting with the narcissistic relation as the foundation of the ego. and which would allow one to conceive both the progress of the adventure. In what terms should we articulate the position of the problem? Here again. Verliebtheit.he remains In_the greatest ambiiglitysgriceming the real object_01. at every instant_plays its ro_lia_thelibidirial bond of Dora with Frau K. which is in some way unresolved. I went still a bit further. it is by the intermediary of Herr K. that Dora is . . Lb-bad. 154 . five years ago. Why? She is imortant only because she is the Qb_jeCt _Of a choice among other objects. Attached to the person of Frau K. 4 prevalent importance_ for_Dora. in so far as it is a matrix.Frau K.oint constituted-by-the-personality of Herr K. of the constitution of the imaginary function which is called the ego. that she is Herr_K„and that men for her are so many possible crystallizations of her ego. egablished_with bim. its crisis.approaches_this homosexual object by identification with someon( of the other sex.important thing is not only that Freud should recognize it after the fact. It is clear that HersK„asaphas 1.__-_only the ego — of Dora has made an : identification with a male character.the ] hysteric.the hysteric is someone whose object is homosexual -. it is a matter of giving a possible formulation for this ambiguity. and_that_something like a libidinal bond i. and in so far as she is Herr K. I indicated that the hysteric is someone who loves by procuration. in conformity with the structure of hysteria. How to conceive one and the other in a way which would justify.. The situation of the quadrille in effect can only be understood in so far as the ego. In other terms. observations -. and the moment at which it is arrested.. a first approach to this observation.. is someone important.Ddrals_desire. It was a first approach that was in some way clinical. the point of rupture in the equilibrium? I made. I went further. I showed that we had traces of it in the observation. where. It is also clear that 01 of very great weight.

ains-after_the_fzustration__The mother then intervene_s_art another register . is(ttezha_is_desi . that is to say someone who has arrived at the level of the Oedipal crisis. Dora is a hysteric. we see one cf its issues.she gives or she does not give. he does not have 155 . and it is around the dreams that the essential of the o turns Frau K. What_is_the_ father's function in _salar_ as he is a donor? This situation rests on the distinction_thatnamakeady made_ regarding primitive frustration.egree by the fact that the object can be given or not? In other terms. and in a way that is particularly exemplary. : of the fatilg_t_tsimpotence.begpi7st it. Thus we have anoccasiosLIQ demonstrate the value. in this quartet.? That is the question. and in the observation of Dora. The whole observation rests on the central notion . Ille_phallk_deficiency_of the father crosses the whole observation like a_ fundamental note.he II" ■ GS Ives this missin • ob'ect. nhiprt through which thk_girLenters into the Oedipus complpc.• • • . But after the frustration. and to situate what. There is a reason for that -.em.it is that her own father. is n. What isgivirgi ? Is there not another dime_rion_int otrsiluce _inta thesbiectrelation_when_it_is_carried to the synakol. his desire remains. In th ■• Ioesjasatzky_e_g. then. as the dreams indicate. an appurtenance of the Lsuhjeci. but it is in as much as the gift is a sign of love. Frustration has a meaning only in as much as the object.i.ias.the function of the father might be with regard to the lack of the. the frustration that can be established in the relation of the c ilitto_the_tricither_Thereds_an_ohject_a_w_hich_thechild is frustrated. is it on a single plane that we find it? Is it purel_y_and_s_imply_with ±egard to this lack that the crisis will be developed? Let us observe what is at stake. can be organized on our fundamental schema. in cpntrast_to_the father of the homosexuaLis_impotent. is it ever the obiectthatis___ _given. of what Here. Let us try now to transcribe that into our present formulation.No.c_ci. conllibiting_t_ixpcit then again. and who both was able and unable to get through it. which is exemplary.

moreover. This formula. Thus we have a very clear distinction. .gd which can beimly_nothing. for nothing ..In fact. for what establishes the relatiQn of love is that the. something's given for tiothia. struck down in his=_yirttalp_pwns. ''. what makes the giftistlitat a sub'ect • ives something in a way that is gratuitous behind what he gives is all that he lacks. It is the same. As all of sociological reflection affirms. the_gift that you give is always the gift that you . the gift is Al* something that circulates.. 3eems to be the very formula that would express interest. .1.— 156 . _s given.he has for this father is strictly correlative and coextensivh the_ diminution of the latter. The nothurinciple of the exchange. the cycle of gifts still comes from somewhere else.9.gifti_. there is no greater gift possible. Or. In other words. whatissiemandecl_a. The love that .liieypncias. But when it is a matter of a gift between two subjects. thanhe_gill of what one does not have. if one can say that. but it is also the formula of the purest gratuity. with a whole series of hysterical accidents_slearly linkecltofe. But note well that the dimension of the gift exists only with the introduction of the law. it is that the_subiect Sacrifices_.at_that_rnomentp-marethan_everAecippears as alather wjia is sick and injured.tabie only__0A a sigja. no greater sign of love. she is very attached to this father from whom she does not smbolically—remi-ve tbPvirile_gift so attached that her history begins exactly the age of the issue from the Oedipus.sa_aipatily samPthing_that _ j§ '411.atAtions of love for this father who. What intervenes in the love relation. as it. to go still further. In the gift of Jove.hav_e__LeysLI. with the primitive gift. •. like every formulation in which the ambiguous nothing intervenes.

and which allows one always to suppose that he might not exist.3 Imagine a subject charged with every possible benefit. p. a qiibject who had the fullness of all that one could have. in the form of potlatch. there is the notion of I do not know what that is always missing in him. without a doubt lacks the thing_that is principal in being. which Dora even seems to have induced. What is certain is that Dora is at a moment when loves her father. Dora. Well. there is still something that remains — this being who_is supposed to be whole. One must now conceive how it could have been supported. existence. a fullness of being. tolerated. At the basis of all belief in god as perfectly and totally munificent. if it is not that perhaps he does not exist. every wealth. T h e w h o l e situation is unthinkable outside of this primitive position. given that the father engages before Dora in something else. a gift coming from him would in no way have the value of a sign of love. There is no other reason to love God. But if this recognition with regard to a god who might be whole is even thinkable.the father.was practiced effectively at the origin of human exchange. [Diagram. it is that at the basis of all belief. The observation rests on the following _ternary group -. S h e l o v e s h i m p r e c i s l o e s _ n o t g i v e h e r . Believers imagine that they can love God because God is supposed to contain a total plenitude.141. Dora Father DORA 1 3 English in tne original. Frau K.] Frau K. which is maintained until the end. namely. 157 .

and that is why Dora senses herself interestestin this position. thehalite IszalDsent or present_elsew. understood. is that_the femininesubject_can. The real need which springs from the female organ as such. Frau_K. .rnust.k is within this that the real_ need whose stence Freud never dreamed of denying. dual relation with Erau_K.--is-what is lov_ed_lnyond_Rora. appears as something_ that her father can love beyond herself.? Frau K. Dora asks herself -What i_$_gmattlanLAnd it is in as much as Fr au the feminine function as_such. on the conditionjLis. In so far as her father loves_a_ K. What_Dora is Otached to is what is loved bylier father in another. This position is moreover 158 . that_the_position_12e_m. but it is never symbolically_ losated_as something which might_hA_ve_a_meaning._flesire_aims at the phallub in so faragitinuathe_receiveci_as_a_gift..stand in this situation in which she finds no place to lodge. Cre212es-hat she.The whole situation occurs as if Dora had to ask herself the question -Wha_Lis_iLthatilny.here.thesigestinn.alataine.It is always essentially itself_pro_blematic.jn_the_end. but it isne_ver_gis_en_as_e_atering as such in the establishment of the position of desire.__caruneither_knaw nox_under._ Dora is situated somewhere between her father and Frau K.only_enter_into_the_ dialectic of-the-symbolic order by the_gift_of the phallus. up to and including the essential prohibitions which found the general movement Pf_exchange.which is linked to the female organ its place and is satisfiectikterally. placed in advance of a certain symbolic crossing. from the physiology of the woman. in as much as she does not know what it is.or_rather_Erau-K. ThaLis____y_ejy_ consonant with_what the whole theory of the phallic object .rnakes_the subject enter into the dialectic of exchange which will normalize all his positions. that she is for Dora the representation_of_that_into which the latter projects herself as being. Dora. To this end. And it is in so far as it is brought t_Q__the dignity of the object of the gift that it.._d. What is loved in a being is beyond what_he is.be brought to the level_ofthe gift. supposes.father_loves_. is not denied by Freud. Dora feels satisfied..in__Frau_K. Do_rais_on_the path of_a__ . thatis._wilat-he-is-lacking. _which.. That is really in fact what is in question during the deployment of all the symptoms.. and all throughout the observation.

that is no longer enough. 159 .II 4110•11 ite direction„Dnean that it is n.\ symbolized in a thousand ways. that she tries rian • lar ittatiatialate-them intervenes giabacrathetrianglf could effectiielyheslDsed. Nevertheless. with a munificence which is bestowed equally upon the mistress and the daughter. 12. and . and he in effect makes Dora benefit in passing.• . including material gifts.Dora tries to restore access to a °sit' • • . Thus the impotent father_ substitutes by -- all I the means of the symbolic gift. foLwhallecannat__ realize as a virile presence. thus making the latter participate in the position. Frau K.• .alonger v i w o m a n h w w h o m s h e h a s b e f o r e h e r .ut_in_the_potion that is inverse.

as participating in what is symbolized by the question side of the presence of Frau K. Herr K. When doesshe_strike_him? Not when he courts her nor when he says that he loves her. What he saysin_sum_withdrawalan from_the-circ_uiti as constituted. namely. it has a particularly lively sense. is the object of adoration for all who surround her.[Diagram. p. Dora Father DORA (2) In the interest of her question.rder_is_estblished thus -160 . Dora considers Herr K... isthe_rneans_b_y_which she normalizes this position. in trying_to_reintegrate the masculine element in the-c-ireuit. expressed by a very clear symbolic assaciationof Frau K. Frau K. The German formula is particularly expressive. Not even when he approaches her in a manner that is intolerable for a hysteric. whose Q. to the Sistine Madonna. 142] Herr K. if we give the term nothing_ its full weight. kis at the moment when he say_s_tsLher Ich habe nichts an meiner Frgy. adoration. and it is as a participant in this adoration that Dora finally situates herself with regard to her. Frau K.

. an association.- •• a What results? aoucannot tolerate his being_ interested in her in so far as he is interestecThe whole situation is broken off with that. for example in the expression Es fehlt ihm an Geld. If__Herr ICIs_interested_only in her. the sam_e_ttang_as that nothilig which has to be beyond. p. he sa concerned. Dora must be loved by him beyond his wife. what is beyond. .i_n_this instance hat his wife is nothing for him. Why? 161 . Frau K. wants to say that where_hiswife is concerned therei A 9 rireilit.. there is nothing. and by her. It is an intimacy._Dora. This 5am_e_thing_is. 143] Frau K. he must occupy the function that isexactlydnystin balance.Herr K. in the beyond of what is lacking. nam0y.[Diagram.. with whom Dora identifies Dora Father remains the other par excellence DORA (3) Dora can well admit that her father loves in her. to be tolerable in his position. then her father is interested Frau IC. That is. the question Herr K. That is precisely what we discover here. and from there on js_he_can_zio_langer-tolerateit. but for Herr K. but in so far as his wife is something for him./ We find the an in a thousand German expressions.

and she thence begins_to demancLher_rigb_ts. a perfect orientation.I have received a woman and I owe a daughter. There is a rupture vi the links. it really is a way for the father to repay the complacency of Frau K. to tolerate in a veiled fashion that the latter should carry on this courtship of Dora to which he has been given for years. which is the very principle of the institution of exchange and of the law. which permit Dora to find her place in the circuit. : 3 152 .In the eyes of Freud. the exchange of ties of alliance consists exactly in this -.y_father is sellin_g and simp_ly_to_the-istate of anIcainan. that is. which she might receive from others. Dor_athaolutely revolts. In fact. that is fro-: another man.-whichis_thei_ove_of her father. She demands what sb.. As Claude Levi- Strauss explains in Elementary Structures of Kinship. been very disRosed until then_toconsiderih_at she receiyeL1 intermediar_y-o-f-anothe-r. She is integrated into it by nothing. but endowed with a direction.'s husband. if she has not herself renounced something. That is very_ much what happens at this naorne_nt. The situation is disequilibrated. It is in effect the clear and perfect statement of the situation. is thus revealed as not being part of a circuit in which Dora could either identify with herself. Dora sees herself fall to the r(1921aire anl arapleshject.e_had .ved as object of the gift. or_belipve thatshe. by itself makes of the woman a pure and simple object of exchange. and begins to sa w-.. To_the extent that shejasi_ccluded from the first institution of the gift and of the law in the direct relation of the gift of loveshe can live this situation only by feeling reduced an object.„From that moment on. In other terms.prec_isely the_patemal halit. subjectively_speaking.she_canconceive_noth4g. Herr K. even if it is in a way that is unstable. in so far as she is maintained in a half-light. since it is total'y refused to her she demands it exclusivP ly. she enters into a typical situation. .liaohject beyond the woman bywhom_sheis_attachecLio _him. This alone.Dora4s. which are no doubt subtle and ambiguous.

and in fact. which is made of a heap of small. what one calls. -• •-•• • • . If it is true that what is maintained in the unconscious of our homosexual girl is the father's_promin. a counterpart. You will have a child from me. for this ny_jivilspenis that she well knowsshewilLnot find in the lady because s he knows very_welLsathereals.d_refused her? No doubt e there is in the unconscious of the subject the thought that the father is involved with the mother because he finds more advantages there. who is not. What difference emerges from that? In order to go quickly. sensible details of the real which mean nothiriz.hasno_valuedatdoes not 163 . If you do not get to know this fundamental not • m. by contrasts and allusions. while necessarily implying. approximately. is expressed between the lines.Dora and our homosexual girl are thus implicated in two situations and two orders that are distinct. which is precisely what one wants to make the other hear.• • in all its :enerality. and if in her exalted love for the Jacly. which consists in making something understood while talking about somethinnp. this relation is fundamental in the whole entry of the child into the Oedipus — that is to say. You find there what I have in the past called metonymy.• . this In other terms. and to end on something that will make an impression. she_shoyys. the perversion in this case. the crushing_ of the adult rival. letely other. it is inconceivable that you will arrive at any notion whatewf of what a perversion miht mean in• Metonymy is the principle of what one could call realism in the realm of Tabulation and of art. do you not see that everything_hap_perjsas if the_girl_wished to show her father wh.at he does not have. as Freud tells us the model of a love that is absolutel disinterested a love for nothiLgl . I shall say something that will be confirmed later. It is a way of speaking about something else entirely. What the girl demonstrates to her father here is how one can love someone not onl for what but literati . by the rigorous progress of the terms at play._namely Withdieriather. A novel.

ppiacealo not_knaw_what_place to take nor where she is. In the case of Dora.behavior which indicates a signifier which is further away_in the_signifying_chain. She simply knows that love exists.ysjgaifit.when a film is good. which is the way in w' Dora is implicated and interested.mic fielaajOLL. nor what use she serves. Friedhof. by her symptoms. It is to the extent chat it is metaphorical that Dora's neurosis takes on meRning. iLis_in so far as ) 201a_aalc$__Kerself whatitis_ta_be_a_woman thatshe expresses herself as she does..If we refer to the schema. it is in so far as evelything_that their apply_ themselves to showing us has a meaning not_ at all. She finds in the situation a sort_of_perpetuatmetaphor. Vorhof . These_ symptoms are signifying eteme_nts. we will find that in perversion_we_have to do with a signifying. nor what use love serves._hat_they_keep_aLa_distance.which sigaify_nothing other than this question. the theme which arises from the nude shoulders of the women counts for something else.syrnb_olicalLyor_allegaricallybut _throi. Herr K.and_can be_ unraveled. It is the same for the cinema -. is her metaphor. In short. but that is to the extent that a perpetuallymoving.the jewel box. something tended to be normalized in the situation by the entry of Herr K. Of course. in which she finds her place in the form of a question. This question is centered by the content and articulation of all her dreams -. or wanted to force. at the beginning of War and Peace. in_that it is linked toit12yanecessax. Thus. but this somethire remained in a metaphorical state. because Dora can say nothing of what she is.piAlce_a_ineaning_beyond_therrLvibrate_harmonically. Bahnhof. FreuciwantecLta_iatre into this metaphor. it is because it is metonymic. the real element which tends to be reintroduced into_every_metaphor. Is it the same thing Dora who is a neurotic? It is something completely_different. If the great novelists are supportable. 164 ._b_y_saying to_Dora. Literally. Dora as subject is placed at ever_y_s_tep under a certain„number_of_signifiers in the chain.._Whato_u loveis precisely_ this. And _iii functionof_the_subiesS5 perversion is a_metony. signified_runs beneath them. and she finds a historization for it.

and which Freud perceived with that prodigious intuitive sense of meanings that he had.• efus._snc6v1 the imaginary relation with the lad _ay-to-maintain desire through •• longer bear anything.• . and this nothing_in which she was instituted in order to show her father how one can love. It was in fact a matter of fifteen months. the e s r=1 h e r e is only a metaphopi to join in the law of symbolic exchanges. As Freud underlines. Until then. the birth that is also found at the end of the observation of the homosexual irl. but she hac1fcn1s1.suddenly.. which is beyond the normal term for a pregnancy. in relation to the man with whom she can unite or not unite. th loss of the c■l2ject. It is significant that Dora sees in it the last resonance of that link by which she remains tied to Herr K. That occurs at the moment when the real fatheines_canca-agai4+-to show his irritation and his vexation an interven the S .ed to her falls. Thealf_a_here_has_the_staIue_of-a-d_gliaitist. The_object is definitively lost. If Freud can interpret the act of throwing herself from a railway bridge at a critical and terminal moment . And also is r of a sort of s mbolic giming-birth—Yagfingatieze-the rinstorriciside of which I was speaking. The • hallus whi h i • .• • II woman who is with her in saying to her that she no ledger wishes to see her. In contrast. The mug& girl is thus deprived of her last resources.e privation. It is in fact a strange significative miscarriage.av_-. n iederkom m t. Freud says. A: 41.' ment she attempts t of a • efinitime- suicide. Once again. which occurs at the term of nine months. before she co vg_■r.The _proof is that sort of pregnancy which Dora produced after thesrisis of the rupture with Herr K. We find there the equivalence of a sort of copulation which is translated into the order of the symbolic in a purely metaphorical fashion. has no loner even a r a gi 111. acknowledging in ettect mat tnere was something like a pregnancy. she throws herself from a little railway bridge. she rustibaribeenthat_ogglit to have been giverdaer„ the paternal phallus. because llora says it herself.

namely. onthe_extsleac. makingherself into this child that she has not had. and which is the one and only sprig of her whole_p_eryersion. in conformity with what Freucl_has_many_times affirmed concerning the patho enesis off a certain type offemale homosexuality_. the term of suicide.Ley. This word metonymically indicates the final term. THE FETISH OBJECT 166 . a gatkaiaciparticularly_atrong love_for_the-father.of her relations with the lady and the father as a demonstrative way of . in which t young-hornosexual girl--expresses yshat is at stake. and at the same time aegroying herself in a last sioificativeact of the object it is founded J.e of the word niederkommt.

167 .

How to realize the lack. an arrest at the image. The structure of reactionary exhibitionism. Pursuing our reflections on the object. This fundamental schema which implies in symbolic exchanges whatever the ag_oLitsfimctioningthepermanence_af_the constitutive character of a beyond of the object. and lets us establish differently what I might call its fundamental equations. The alternation of perverse identifications. permits us to cast new light on a perversion which has taken an exemplary role in analytic theory. 168 . You will again see the fundamental schemas that I have tried to bring you recently.what is loved in the object is what it lacks -. which are particularly well expressed by those paradoxical affirmations -. the fetish and fetishism.IX THE FUNCTION OF THE VEIL The symbolic phallus. The screen memory. I shall today propose to you what can be deduced with regard to a problem that materializes the question of the object in a way that is particularly sharp — namely.one gives only what one does not have.

169 . For someone who does not use our keys. which habitually sustains all sorts of speculations as to the future. Freud underlines that this is not just any penis. and if others take up the question again later. for a lot has been said about the fetish since people first began talking about analysis. and as I have been able to ascertain by an ample reading of everything that has been written about fetishism. these two are the most precious -. immediately afterwards. Freud says straightaway in this article that the fejish is thesyml)1 of something. Only.the paragraph on fetishism in the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality and the article entitled Fetishism. it is simply an affair of misconstruction of the real matter of the phallus which the w_am. This precision scarcely seems to have been exploited in its structural basis. tlaemdsin_question_is sa in so far as she does I . that is. To spell it out.arte-Bees-rtet--hame. for the fundamental suppositions that it implies when one reads it naïvely for the first time. I underline this vacillating point where we must stop a moment in - order to perceive what is ordinarily avoided. but that we shall no doubt be disappointed by what he will tell us. 1 The question of fetishism is broached by Freud in two fundamental texts which range between 1904 and 1927. This something is. and Freud has spoken of it too. once again. Cie development and the crises of fetishism. the penis. it leads to all sorts of impasses. and which she must have for reasons belon • in: to t ild's dubi s us relation to realit That is the common path.It is thus a question of fetishism.

I am going to try. qu • sti in an exchange as absence absence functioning as such. it exists or doesnoLexisi 'is_a_ . In other words. for there is nothing as delicate.wicual - r as it is there or is not there. not only hours. Thus I shall give you. it disappears.n. there is a subject here which.a. =gibing that can be transmitted in the symbolic exchange IS jbAl is as much absence as_greactice. In order to avoid the wandering into which authors have been led over the years if they avoided this point. p_hallus.this is_the symholiclunction of_the. H ■ • uch as . the phallus in question. to be treated effectively. indeed as painstaking. In effect. In fact. at the point whence it came. but indeed a detailed history.. the more or less decanted result of my reading.its to be present. hidden by the more or less fearful fantasies in the man's relation to prohibitions which may concern the use of the phallus -. which is.it is notat_albutitestion of a real phallusin_sofaras. Thei_go_rnan does not have this2111141§. one side. ediatembolic objet. and it is in this that the man is caught. Rut_there_is_Alsa. the differential nerve is the following -. as situating the precise point where a subject matter eludes us because the author is avoiding a crucial point in a discrimination.aAjs thus in som_e_way to have it. here as always.anothe-r-use. a structural cycle of imaginary menaces is established That is the meaning of the castration complex. It is made to have this sort of funclamentaLalternation. one might say.is_there_ards_not_there. and to give its just position to what is at stake. in order to reappear at another. in one part of what I am going to present. Qn. not to go too far into what is really the forest of the analytic literature. In still other terms. it circulates leaving behind it the sign of its absence. that the symbolic differentiation between th sexes is established. The phallus is always mryrelation - 11 - 170 .aebg_real. would demand. It is in as much asit. and I shall ask you to follow me. we recognize k n m .._5_ CI0 Bu tl Lephallus symbolically is to p_articipatejnithy_y_irtue_ofits. which means that having appeared at one point.

disciplined. which I placeder day on theAchema_of Young homosexual git l.They i t e r b . a function of substitution. typified. by the fundamental structure of the law of incest. women are exchanged like objects between male lines.0y_e) We see here what justifies. that is also to sa in so far as she enters into the symbolic dialectic& having or not having th_____phallus._in as much as she is caught in the intersubjective relation._ h has it on the s mb . ordered. in that she has only kvery little_ But this phallus which she may experience as insufficient Iscat the only one that_enters into function foraer„since. structurally speaking.plays an essential function in theirlgLsentry_1=. It can on occasion become the object of an imAginary nostajgia for the woman. .that the girl ea -I • t Alex. That is what Freud means when he writes that it is by the intermediary of what he calls the idea of castration — and which is precisely this.phallus. his symbolic penis. but that she does not haysiLsycally„thiis she is -. there is for the man this Ao-say the symbolic phallus. chosen precisely because it is symbolic and It is a fact. hallus which she does not have phallus. in the schematization of Levi-Strauss. that she enters into that ordered ansisymholized-telation which SI twe . the androcentrism • which. VVoraesi are exchange&between lines founded on thtlTiale line of descent._ the symbolic exchange. while it is 0-11 by this route that_the_13. marked. that she does not hays the phallus. which exists here as absence III II SO'•"1111-111 . It is in as much as the girl does nothaxethis. by which they introduce a natural fecundi v into the patrocent icsenealogysterile in itself. indeed.ofequivalence_mr_i_th the phallus. It is in as much as they are tied to . symbolisgy. that of the phalluswhich_they_receiye. stricken with prohibitions. an interhuman I"• " 1 ' • relation assumed.1 inferiority that she may feel on the imaig=_Elkacjar_w_hat_she has of a reaLpacticipatio14-in-the_ph anus. beyond her. and in exchange for which they give the child which takes on an ersatz_funstion for them.between man and woman. marks the elementary structures of kinship. - 171 ..

on this occasion. Fetishism is extremely rare in women. You find that expressed in a thousand ways once you have seen it. Freud tells us. in the proper and individualized sense in which it is n ig o r e s p o n d i n c a r n a t e di na no b j e c t _ _ w h i c h w ec a nc o n s i d e r sc s y m h o l k w a y _ _ t o _ t h e _ . itself most openly..terize.this_uniquesentral objectsharac.if not tbe_affirmatiatuCtkezift. If everything were on the plane of deficient . that she must give something in exchange for what she receives. she receives much more than_she_ghtes. as it is given to us. that there is no position that is more that of the captor. and analytic experience stresses this. really. p h a lu s _ w h i c h a b p r y Let us try first to see how this singular relation of the subject to an object which is not an object can be engendered.cLby_the_fuLthatit is_preciseluiQt.t all_the case. Pius we have the fetish. or even of imaginary inferiority. that they are1-LLe_re_ installed. on the injaginary_plane_11. that they there assurii_etheir plac. which represents the phallus as absent. the symbolic phallus How can one not see that this sort of initial reversal is necessary if we are to understand things which would_ otherwise be_pmadoidcal? For example. Everything in&ates.. which. that the woman herself. or indeed more devouring.1W they enter intothe_chain_of_symbolic_exchange. that is to say. it is the yagnan who receives. but_ an object_that_h_as suffered _a_symboli_c_y_ato_riza ti on in the_m_oat raclic_al way. is paradoxical. But that is_not _a. What does the fundamental theme that the woman gives herself express if you look at it closely? -. it is always the boy who is the fetishist._thatisseyersed into its contrary affirmation.er_elation to the phallus/J. it is by the intermediary of_th. for the symbolic phallus. 2 172 . never the girl. In the act of love.311_ object. Here we come back to concrete psychological experience. of the two sexes it would rather be in the one which is really_deprived of the phaltus_thatietishism_sho. it is in SO far as it mu b licall namel .e_ancl_their value.

the idol of absence. most clearly. In this regard. absence is pairAggj This is nothing other than the function of the curtain. let us pause for a moment at that point of interposition which has it that what is loved in the object of love is something which beyond. It is really there that man incarnates.the veil. But if. but from the point of view of analysis.• •• -•-•*• ■ • if it is not this.scanethingisnatbning. one must look at it quite closely in order to confirm it in structure. makes an idol of his sense of that nothing which is beyond the object of love. its being. the curtain in front of something. and go so far as to place fetishism on the boundary between the perversions and the neuroses. imithietishism. The curtain is. atis__ al .1_YvlanredsOthemiclia. In reality. What can materialize for us. which is truly one of • the most fundamental images of the human relation to the world -. with the presence of the curtain. this relation of interposition.and its consistency. be this nothing. analysis tells us. but it must. many authors show some hesitation here. one could say. but of a perversion. 1. One can even say that .is_almost placed fr m the be in on the same facaingas_em:y other_aeumtic symptom. is a symbol. not only can it. 173 . Because it's a s_y_rifbol. precisely because of the electively symbolic character of the crucial fantasy. what is beyond as lack tends to be realized as image. is still what best allows us to give an image of the fundamental situation in love. that is no doubt not without reason. Having started from the top with structure.it. but surely pertains to the sentiment that he has of a certain fundamental illusion in all of the relations woven from his desire. That is how things are classified nosologically speaking. that is not self-evident. the curtain.it_is-a_not_a_queurosis. The curtain takes on its value. On the veil. whatever it may be. for reasons of clinical resemblance which no doubt have a certain value. The veil.m1 d o u b t h u t as the property of being there symbolically. If the veil of Maya is the metaphor most commonly used to express the relation of man to all that captivates him. This.Lasence is projected and supposed.The fetish.

You must keep this fundamental schema in mind if you want to situate correctly the elements which come into play in the establishment of the fetishist relation. at whatever moment we might consider it. p. 156. [Schema.] Subject Object Nothing Curtain SCHEMA OF THE VEIL 174 .

But from_the moment that the curtain is in place. - . The language of Freud. will speak of what 1 English in the original. certain wa • . • sears • 11 • • ■ t what draws it. he say_s.the object is beyana. . The object can then take the place of the lack. the object. That theietish is there means precisely that she has not lost the phallus. The horror of castration.In. or whichisyet the smly:xA.s_in_ this creation of a substitute. on it can be painted something that says -. authors. when we follow his text. But he also says very clearly that it is a matter king this com relation stand d upright aufrecht zu halten. that is. The ambigLIity of the relation to the fetish is constant. set in behind ► ■ ► ■ . an illusion sustained and cherished as such.Here are the subject. The wordln2/2* does not enter in here. but thisish Lso far as it is preciselynot the oink to which des. as though he were speaking of a decor. speaks of Verleugnung with regard to the fundamental position of denial in the relation to the fetish. and that beyon_d_whigh_is_nothing. provides terms which have their full value here. at the approach of the typical phenomenon of the fetish.• • castrate her. 175 .ire is attachd. the_sign_ofiLtriumiah. and can also as such be the support of love. and the object. to it Ptich is a Denkmal.or the phallus in so far as it is lacking ja woman. but ache same stroke one can make . but in fact.Jia. and is ceaselessly manifested in the symptoms This ambiguity which proves to be lived. Freud. das Zeichen des Triumphes. is at the same time lived in a fragile equilibrium which is at every moment at the mercy of the curtain's fallingpr of its being raised This is the relation at stake in the relation of the fetishist to his object. itself appears in so far a valorizpel as 11111SO The famous splitting' of the ego when the fetish is at issue is explained by saying that the castration of the woman is both affirmed and denied by it. at once so imagistic and so precise.. it is there. Often.

in dealing with perverse structure. in conflict with it.41 I 4 •I What sDnstitutes a■ the veil. short of using the word tr. 2 176 . women are called. a relation to a beyond which is fundamental in every establishment of the symbolic relation. and of the relation between the lines. and feel arrested or menaced by it.the subject uses to herald his relation with the sex. Let us stay for the moment with the structure.2 Freud makes us take one step further here. it is a • uestion of th intermediary_position of the obje. As always. simply. In an absolute sense. isigefisilLyiaarrasyssLfrom the histnrical dimension. Freud does not say anything other.mel the phallus which be seen as presence-absence. we are going to see another way in which there is an institution of a symbolic relation in the imaginary. like t he English._ The rememoration of thellistoryis_giTgecl suspended at the moment just before. In other words. It is the mamerii. and absence-presence. Le sexe. a pandemonium of all the drives. On the veil can be imaged. Why does that occur? Why is it necessary? We will come to that. T he Fr ench wo rd. and also of allusion. If one first goes to the why. that is to say. The structure is here. established as imaginary capture and place of desire. ha s a ra n g e o f si g n i fi c a t i o n s. of metonymy. It is a matter here of a descent onto the imaginary plane of the ternary rhythm subject-object-beyond.a_thehisigtyalxhichtheimageiso_rresied. one enters immediately into a chaos. I spoke to you last time. in the function of the veil." Le sexe also designates the sexual organ of either men or women. in the relation of the beyond and the veil. which crowd in to explain why the subject may be more or less distant from the object. Before going further and tackling the exigency which causes the subject to need a veil. which are higher forms of metonymy. just before the moment when what is sought in the mother. rjL. In the clearest way._ I remember having in the past used the comparison of a film that is suddenly frozen. one presses ahead too quickly. "the sex.yt the f h s mbolic .

you will see that this way of articulating things gives full weight to the expressions that he uses in the clearest way. and the_mament at whichit. and a_ Rol image.Thes_e are two different relations.is_ interrupted... breaking there. the Deckerinnerung. It is th • :111 1 1.10.. CQ • • • $ 4 eject' Thatis. 177 .. The_scren-memory is linked to the histarV by a whole chainJt._11 is throu:h_a rnPtaphor--that-lo-ve_is_transfemed. Once again. it is that this imageiasmly_the_holindary pointhebyggn the history in so far as it continues.ere that there begins the beyond which the subject constitutes. - constitute this beyond? Why is the veil more precious to a man than the reality? Why does the order of this illusory relation become an essential tuent • II raisec afetislisna. and the relation of frustration istinguisheit._d_esite which is attached to I SI • metaphoric b ail • • I I IP It is a point in the chain of_the_hissory_gt which the history is arrested.ark... It ig 11. wesee_thetelation to the object of love.Jay_its_nature_continues.1 • •0 1 1 If you read Freud's text attentively. for in a certain way the fetish is an image. the chain indicates its continuation henceforth veilecLits. ' hain and it is t h he . '. Ln ol •- Is a 111 .c. absent continu I clearly says. is not simply an instantaneous moment it is an interruption of the histcli_y „amomentitis arrested and fixed._ . as Freud as se e J0111 $ 6 We are s ■ eakin of re • ressi • n 1• •I • Ifonec •s • s I•plienomeran-3Achicla.bass for imaginary. In . Why? Why must the subject . ssreen-memory. and in which it simultaneously indicates the continuation of its movement beyond the veil.I am speaking of the_rememoration of the history because thertis_ao c2t1 termearomcangkLe1211m creen-mema which is so - fundamental in Freudian phenomenology and conceptualization.is_a_bre k.

Before going further.. which nose itself was. a sentence in a forgotten language.le_senteac. which he had seen before. What are the causes for the establishment of the structure of fetishism? On that subject. That does not mean anything other than a glance at the nose. is the _historical chain. and much more. up to and including the fact that Freud gives as the first example of an analysis of a fetishist that marvelous story of a pun. What you see coming into play here. a symbol. 178 . you can already see all sorts of things becoming clearer. The German expression only transposed the English expression which came from his earliest years. and projected into a point on the veil. the grammarians certify nothing. ein Glanz auf die Nase.e. A man who had passed his early childhood in England and who came to Germany to become a fetishist. which can even con'tainawh. always looked for a little gleam on the nose.o. of course.

3 Authors have been highly embarrassed for some time. On one hand, we cannot lose contact with the notion that the genesis of fetishism is essentially articulated with the castration complex. On the other hand, it is in prezPeclipaltelations, and nowhere else, that it appears most certain__
that the phallic mother is the central element, the decisive spring. How to join the two things?

Authors do it with more or less ease. Simply observe the ease -moderate, in fact, that the members of the English school are able to have here, thanks to the system of Mrs. Melanie Klein. The latter structures the first stages of the oral drives, particularly in their most aggressive moment, by introducing the presence of the paternal penis through a retroactive projection, that is to say, by reactivating the Oedipus complex in the earliest relations with objects in so far as they are introjectable. One thus has an easy access to material which allows the interpretation of what is at stake. As I have not yet launched into an exhaustive critique of the meaning of Mrs. Melanie Klein's system, we shall leave aside for the moment what one or another author can bring in with regard to it. In order to stay with what we ourselves have brought to light, let us start off at . t of hi I with the-fund-am • - eal child the s mbolic
I_

mother, and her own phallus,which for her is imaginary.

This is a schema to be handled with caution, for it is concentrated on one same plane, whereas it in fact corresponds to sexeral planes, and it comes i i • function at successive stages in the history. For a long time, in effect, the child is not able to appropriate the relation of imaginary ownership which creates a profound division in the mother with regard to him. We shall try this year to elucidate that question. We are on the way to seeing how and at what moment this comes into play for the child, how the child's entry into the relation to the symbolic object comes about, in so far as the phallus is its major currency. There are temporal, chronological questions, questions of order and of succession, which we shall try to 179

approach from the point of view of pathology, as the history of psychoanalysis teaches us to do. What do the observations show us when we examine them closely? They show us phenomena that appear in correlation with that singular symptom which places the subject in an elective relation with a fetish, the fascinating object inscribed on the veil, around which his erotic life gravitates. I say gravitates because it is well understood that the subject retains a certain freedom of movement, which one perceives when one analyzes, rather than simply making a clinical description. In taking an observation, one sees very clearly elements that I have already spelled out today, and that Binet had already noted, for example that striking point of the screen-memory which fixes the arrest at the hem of the mother's dress, or at her corset, or again the essentially ambiguous relation that the subject has with the fetish, a relation of illusion, lived as such, and as such preferred, with the particularly satisfying function of an inert object, fully at the mercy of the subject to manipulate in his erotic relations. All of that can be seen in an observation, but analysis is necessary to get a bit closer to what happens each time that, for whatever reason, the recourse to the fetish founders, weakens, is exhausted, or simply fails. The amorous comportment, and more simply, the_eroticrelation_oLthesubject, is summarizesdefense. You can check that by reading, in the International Journal, the observations of Sylvia Payne, XX 2, of Mr. Gillespie, of Mrs. Greenacre, of Mr. Dugmore Hunter, XXXV 3, or studies that have appeared in the Psycho Analytic Study of the Child. This was alsoglimpse_cLbyFieud, and is articulated in our schema. Freud tells us that fetishism is a defense against homosexuality, and Mr. Gillespie notes that the line between the two is extraordinarily fine. In short, we find ternation of iderfiti icationsinAbgAmorous relations with ...the cl " I 4.ohject which organiz entification
-

c

dasirlistie.T.eniapihejmagingr_ phallus of
r

the primordxperiences-of-the_oral.a n a 1 stag e _c_enteredsn_the_ 4ggressiAty_of_the_sactistiG-theor-y-Gf-c-oItus -- and, in fact, many of the experiences which analysis brings to light show an observation of the
180

'primitive scene perceived as cruel, aggressive, violent, indeed, murderous.

with the ima: nar • hallus, which makes of him a pure object for the woman, which she can devour, and at
Inversely identification of the subject

This oscillation between the two poles oftheprimitive imaginary relation confronts the child in a manner that one can call brutal, before the __ establishment of the relation in its Oedipal legaliVALratig. lLths introduction of the father aSallaj.e,Ct...S..e.atPr oLarcier_anslaegilimate
.

the limit, destroy.

possession. The child is delivered up to the bipolar oscillation of the relation between two irreconcilable objects which in any case ends in an _ that indeed murderous. That is what one finds at

the base of amorous relations each time they arise in the life of the subject, take on their first shape, and try to attain some order. In one way of understanding analysis, which is precisely the modern way, and which on this point is not without similarity to my own path, it is here that the analyst intervenes in order to make the subject perceive, the aiternation of these positions as well as their signification.. One can say that, in a certain fashion, he introduces the symbolic distance necessary for the_subjEct_to Rerceixua—the-4rigaraicig. The observations are extremely rich and fruitful when they show, for example, the thousand forms that there can be, in the actuality of the subject's early life, ofa funciamentaLincompleteness„which delivers him u • to the ima • inar r 1 • • s 1 m - • • il arti■ of identification ith...the New twol_nan, or with the plact_taken.lytheimaginamp_tallus, that is to say, in any case, in an insufficient symbolization of the ternary relation. Authors very frequently note the sometimes repeated absence of the father in the subject's history, the deficiency, as one says, of the father as a presence -- he leaves on a voyage, for war, etc. Even...more_nates 142arhozlartype of subjective posing,, sometimes singulatly_repraciured in fantasies. that of a forced immobilization, This is sometimes manifested in a binding of the subject that has actually taken place, of which there is a very fine example in the observation by Sylvia Payne. Following an extravagant medical
,

1

181

prescription, a child had been prevented from walking up until the age of two years, with secure bands confining him to his bed. That was not without some consequence. The fact that he lived so closely observed in the bedroom of his parents put him in the exemplary position of being completely given up to a purely visual relation, with no attempt at muscular reaction coming from him. His relation to his parents was assumed by him with the sort of rage and choler that you can imagine. If cases :hisexemplary are rare, certain authors have insisted on the fact that the phobia of some mothers who keep the child at a distance from their contact a little as if it were a source of infection, is certainly not for naught in the prevalence given to the visual relation in the constitution of the primitive relation with the maternal object. Much more instructive than such an example of the vitiation of the primary relation, is the_pa jolmical relation that appears as the inverse, or the complement, of the libidinal tie to the fetish. Fetishism is in effect a class that nosologically includes all sorts of phenomena whose affinity or kinship with fetishism is indicated to us in some way by our intuition. That a subject like the one of whom Mrs. Payne speaks should be attached to a raincoat would appear to be of the same nature as if he were attached to shoes. We are not mistaken in thinking that. Structurally speaking, however, the raincoat itself accommodates relations and indicates a position that is a bit different from those entailed by a shoe or a corset. These objects are themselves, dirssgy,in_the_pasitiseil between_the_sulliect t h e o b e c t . I t i s ot the same with t h e _ t .
j

with other sorts of more or less enveloping fetish garments.,One must also,

allow a •lace to the s ■ ecial • uali of ru?

This feature, encountered

very frequently, cannot but conceal some last mystery, which no doubt could be clarified psychologically by the sensory quality which the touch of rubber has in itself. Perhaps there is something here that can, more easily than other things, be taken as a double for the skin, or again, which has its special capacities for isolation. Whatever the case concerning the structure itself of the relations which are confided in certain centers where the observation is taken analytically, one sees that the raincoat plays a role 182

w h t i whichisnotexactlythatoftheveil.Itisrathersomethingbehind thesubjectcentershimself.Hesituateshimselfnotinfrontsttb.e_y_eiLhu_t_

behinclate rnothebadhering to a position of

identification in which the latter needs to be praWecttreay envelopment.
Thisis_w_hat_gixes_us the transition between cases of fetishism and cases of transvestism. The envelopment does not belong to the order of the veil, b t is a • rotectio t is a u • I • .. • which the subject
!),

identified with the feminine serge envelopes himself.
Another typical relation, sometimes especially exemplary, is that of the explosions of exhibitionism in certain truly reactionary cases, and indeed, On occ ation with feti
-

Atte--51.1biect-tries-te-getettt-G

That is always observed when

mething_real that has

been brought into play_places him in an unstable equilibrium, in which a
crystallization is_producecLor a_r_e_versal_a_his_positiori. That is yery

manifestly illustrated by the schema of the Freudian_case_ of female homosexuality, where th ititrInitraton of the fattier as a real dement
makes the terms ch • o.•_e • laces so that what wa
-

in the • - and

the symbolic father, comes to be taken in a ina relation while the j_jb'ect takes a homosexual position which is ripmnnstrative with regard to the father.
We also have some very fine cases in which one sees the subject, in so far as he has tried to accede to a full relation under conditions of artificial realization, with a forcing of the real, express what was symbolically latent

183

in the situation by anacting out,3 that is to say on the imaginary_ plane. We have an example of this with the subject who for the first time attempts a real relation with a woman, but who engages in this position of experience by going in there to show_what he can do. He succeeds more or less well thanks to the help of the woman, but in the hour that-follows, and when nothing up to the present had let one foresee the possibility in him of such symptoms, he givea_himself up to a_most singular and very highly calculated exhibitionism, which consists of showing his sex as an international train is passing, so that no one can catch him with his hand in the sack. The subject has here been forced to • IV +I1• I.
that was implicit in his position. His exhibitionism is only the-expriission, ortlprojection on_to the imaginary plane of something_wilosesynabolig,
-

underpinnings he had not himself full I I I I. 1 1 • he has just committed was, when all has been said, only that of trying to
-

show to show that he was capable of having a normal relation like anyone elserr]

We find this sort of reactionarye,xlmbltionista observations which are very

on several occasions in

observations of fetishism. It is a question, one senses clearly, of delinquent a

cts which are equivalents of fetishism. Melitta Schmideberg presents, for example, a man who had married a woman almost two times taller than he, a veritable household a la Dubout, in which he played the role of the ubuesque victim, the butt and scapegoat. One fine day this man, who was doing his best faced with the horrible situation, learned that he was to become a father. He rushed into a public garden and began showing his organ to a group of young girls. Mrs. Schmideberg, who seems a bit too Anna-Freudian here, finds all sorts of analogies with the fact that the father of the boy had already been ever so slightly a victim for his wife, and that he had succeeded in disengaging himself from the situation by getting caught one day with a maid, which by arousing jealous outrage, put his spouse a little bit at his mercy. That explains nothing. Mrs. Schmideberg avoids the major point of
3

English in the original.

184

the thing. She believes that she has analyzed a perversion, that she has done a short analysis.4 There is no need to marvel at it, for Jit_is_nota

matter of perversion at all, and she has not at all done an analysis. She leaves aside the fact that it is by an act of exhibitionism that the subject became manifest on this occasion. There is no other way to explain this act than by referring to that me1clartismof release by which what comes as a jurp.us in the reaLaynatolicallyinmilable, tenCls_to_s_ause_tlie. ipitatimDf36thatilatthelasi s_otthesymbolic relation, that is, the
-

e

B

t•

•"

a

wa a 1

to assume this atei_p21:Linable

eV • n to believe in it this ood man went to the ri:i lace to show the

equivalent of the rhild,narnely, what_then remained to him of the use of his phall x.
30 January 1957

4

English in the original.

185

X IDENTIFICATION WITH THE PHALLUS

Transvestism and the use of clothing. Showing # exposing to view. Girl = Phallus. The object and the ideal in Freud. Frustration of love and satisfaction of need.

The last time, I took a step towards the elucidation of fetishism, which is a particularly fundamental example of the dynamics of desire. Desire interests us to the highest degree for a double reason. On one hand, we have to deal with desire in our practice. It is not a constructed desire, but a desire with all its paradoxes, just as we have to deal with an object in all of its paradoxes. On the other hand, it is clear that Freudian 186

thinking began with these paradoxes. In particular, where desire is concerned, it tiegan with...perverse desire. It would really be a pity to forget this in our attempt at unification or reduction, when we have to deal with the most naively intuitive theories to which psychoanalysis has recourse today. I have, from time to time, some echoes of the way that you receive the bit of novelty that I bring each time, at least I hope. But this little step that I took surprised some, who were already quite satisfied with the theory of love as I had presented it, in which love isaundecae_. sub'ecttl,__ _iecd:,ject. That had already furnished some with the occasion for a meditation which seemed sufficiently enlightening, though they had some trouble in perceiving that to the subject-object relation, there were added a lack and a beyond. I brought in an additional complication the last time with a term situated in front of _the_0143'ect, nameltl eyea, the curtain, the place where imaginary projection occurs. Here there appears what will become h fi uration of
. -

th le lack the fetish, which can be the support offered to something which tikesprecisely AlLssalgLAsjidser.v.erse
It_is_ wattle veil that the fetish comes to figure_g_reciselv what is lacking_

12syNdAbigct, This schematization is intended to install the successive planes which should allow you to find your bearings a bit better in certain cases, with their perpetual ambivalence and confusion, where the yes is equivalent to a no, where what is aimed in one direction equals what is aimed in precisely the contrary direction -- in short, with all that, unfortunately, analysts habitually call, in order to get out of the embarrassment, ambivalence. 1 At the very end of what I said the last time about fetishism, I showed you the apparition of a position that was in some sense complementary.

187

The latter also appears in the phases of the structure of fetishism, indeed in the fetishist's attempts to rejoin that object from which he is separated by something whose function and mechanism, of course, he himself does not understand. This
GI

■I

ca

the s mmetrica],

corresponding, opposite pole of fetishism. is the function of transvestism, transvestisme.cticlentifies_hith whatilkeh d the
.

veil with that abject in which something is lacking. Authors have seen it clearly and said it in their language -- the,transvestite identifies with the phallicmather,..in_so_faranwemer veils the_lack...oLthephallus.._ Transvestism takes us very far into the question. Moreover, we did not need to wait for Freud in order to broach the psychology of clothing. In,
I. P. 01 •every_use_dcluthing,-there,-is_so I I ' I of_transmestism. If the immediate, current, common understanding of the

function of clothing is to hide the pudenda, the question must be complicated be it ever so little in the eyes of the analyst. It would be sufficient if someone among the authors who speak of the phallic mother were willing to see the meaning of what he is saying. Clothing is not only made to hide what one has, in the seriap_l_ada precisely what one does not have. Both functions are_ essential. It is not a matter, essentially and alway_s„afik&ng. the object, but also othiclinggg. coLlleakjact. It is a simple application, in the case of the imaginary dialectic, of what is too often forgotten, namely thig_presence and the Inversely, in tx,Ii_gr_nassive use that is madepithssioptapj_c_r_elahaniili
. -

one always implies as following of itself that the act of showing oneself iS absolutely voyeurism. There t
SO 01" 11

hat it is the correlative of the activity pf seeing,_of_
01

•-

"

It is not.ftueeial in evLtance

1.1,11am I h ws

himself, in as much as showing_himself is the correlative pole for the

activity o f s e e i n g _ . I t i s n o t a q u e a t i c t a _ s i m p l y o f t h e s u b j ,
•u•le bas -d on ••• There is in scoptophilia a supplementary
.

_dimension of involvement, which is expressed in la guage by the presence of the...reflexime,tbat_foxm of the verb which exists in other

188

langua es and which is called the in'• dl• voice. Here that would be to give oneself to be seen iozxoose oneself to view. By combining both of these dimensions, one can say that, in a whole range of activities confounded under the heading of the voyeuris.Lexhibitionist relation, hat the_subjec_t gives to be seen in showing himself is somethingotheriJaart what he shows. One is thus wrong to tie all of that into what is massively called the scoptophilic relation.
z

Authors like Fenichel, who are very bad theoreticians under their apparent clarity, but who are not for all that without analytic experience, have perceived it very well. If the effort at theorization in some of his articles ends in a desperate check, you sometimes find some very pretty clinical pearls there, and even the presentiment of a whole order of facts which, by a sort of flair that the analyst fortunately takes from his experience, are grouped around a chosen theme of the analytic articulation, starting with a branch of fundamental imaginary relations. Around scoptophilia or transvestism, for example, are grouped slender stems of fact which are distinguished from one another in phenomenology, but in which the author more or less obscurely senses a kinship, an association. Thus, while informing myself about a whole vast and insipid literature in order to take account of the point to which analysts have penetrated in a real articulation of these facts, I was interested recently by an article of hich appeared in the Psychaandytic—sakarteriy,_vsalurrie-X-VIII, n° 3 1949, which has to do with what he calls the equation Girl = Phallus., which is not without relation, as he himself notes, with the well-known series of equations feces=child=penis. Although one sees a flagrant lack of orientation manifested here which makes us continually wish for a logic that were exempt from it, it emerges from the facts encountered in analysis and brought together by the author, that the child can be taken as the equivalent of the phallus in the unconscious of the subject, particularly the feminine subject. That in sum is the phylum of the proposal -everything is tied to the fact that the_childis_given to the mother as a
substitute, or even equivalentalLus.

189

Many and various facts are gathered into the same parenthesis, which does not leave one very surprised. When I spoke of the child, it was not particularly about the feminine child, whereas this article is especially concerned with the girl. It starts with traits that are well known in the fetishist_or quasi-fetishist specifics of certain perversions, which indicate that the girl can be considered as the equivalent of the phallus of the subject. The analytic givens also indicate that the girl, indeed in a general way,Ahe child -- can conceive herself 4,5 .an equivalent of thep_hak is can manifest this in her behavior, and live the sexual relatign irt_kmay that requires that she herself bring_theThallus to her masculine partner. That is sometimes seen even in the details of her preferred position in the act of love, when she embraces her partner, curling up into a ball in a certain part of the latter's body. This sort of fact cannot fail.,to strike us and to hold our interest. It must be added, finally, that in certain cases, tlieJnasculine subject can also give himself to the woman as being what he lacks, himselfbearingdhe phallus as what he lacks, imaginarily speaking.
j

The facts brought into relietand_gathered here are.taken in one a.ncl_the_. same equation, towards which the whole seems to point 1314_, these are facts belonging to extre different orders. In the four orders of relations that I have just sketched, the subject isahs.olutely not in the same relation to the object when he brings, or gives, or desires, or even substitLites himself for it. Once our attention has been drawn to these headings, we cannot but see that the grouping of these facts under the equivalence thus instituted goes well beyond a simple theoretical exegesis. That-the little gir.1, Might he_the_object_of.a_pre.v.ailing_ attachment for one typeofsubje_cLgiyes evidence ofa function that one could call mythic, which is distinct ,both from perverse illusions and from a w 1:toksetary_constmctions. which we can group according to the authors, under more or less illustrious headings. Some are willing to speak of a Mignon type. You all know Goethe's_ creation, glelaohemian Mignon,_whos_e_bisexual pgaitignis underlined by the author himself, and_who...liveswith a sortof enormous brutal, and manifestly super paternal pxotector, who_is_named Harfner. He serves in
:

190

sum as a superior servant, but she is at the same time of great necessity for him. Goethe says somewhere of this couple -- Harfner, of whom she has

the greatest need, and Mignon, witho4t_whom he _cdn_cia_tiothiug. We
find coupled there power incarnate in its massive brutal stale, anciQathe other side, that !without which it is deprived of efficiCirlthat_yvhich is lacking in power itself, and which is in the end the secret of its true powers

This something is nothing other than a lack.
That is the final point in_which we find the famous magic that analytic them always attributes in such a confused way to the idea of

omnipotence. As have already said, the structure of omnipotence is not,
contrary to what one_rnight believe, in the subject, but in the_mother, that
trr

is....to_say in thelolmitive Other.\1 is the Other who is all-powerful. But behind this omnipotence, there is the ultimate lack_ on whicliher. power depends. From the moment that the subject perceives, in the object from '

which he expects omnipotence, this lack which makes her_powerless, the
last resort of omnipotence is referred beyond, namely_to where,_to the

i',maximum, something does not exist. This is what, in the object, is nothing but_asymbolism of lack, fragility, littleness. It is there that the subject stresses the secret and the true spring of omnipotence. That is what makes the interest of what todays LecalltheMigype, which is reproduced in
,

literature in a very great number of examples.

191

Three years ago, I was on the point of announcing a lecture on Le Diable amoureuxt by Cazotte. There are few testaments so exemplify oft he.rnost profound divination of the imaginary dynamic that I am tryi_ng to develop_
before you especially today. I remembered it as a major illustration of

what is at issue, one which accerivates the meaning. of this magic being beyonciathe_obj_ectto which a whole series of idealizing fantasies can be attached. The story begins in Naples, in a cavern where the author delivers himself up to an invocation of the devil, who, after the appropriate formalities, does not fail to appear. He shows himself in the form of a formidable camel's head furnished with especially large ears, and he says to the author in the most cavernous voice there could be -- What do you

want? Che vuoi?
This fundamental interrogation gives us the most striking - illustration

of the function_of the superego. But the interest does not lie there -- it is
that this_sarne being is supposed to transform himself, once the pact is concluded, into a little dog_ that by a transition which surprises no one,
,

becomes a ravishing young man, then a ravishing young girl, the two nt2. rerseasing until the end to intermingle in a perfe_ctambiguity. This beloved personage, who has a significant name, Biondetta, for a while becomes for the narrator the surprising source of every felicity, accomplishes the magkaJ satisfaction of all that he can wish, The whole meanwhile bathes in an atmosphere of fantasy, of dangerous irreality, of permanent menace, which does not fail to give an accent to everything around it. The situation is resolved at the end by a sudden rupture of this always more accelerated and mad course, and by the catastrophic dissipation of the mirage at the moment when,_a_s it_is fitting< the„subjectreturns to the castle of his mother. Another novel, by Latouche, Fragoletta, presents a curious character, clearly transvestite, about whom, up until the end, nothing is finally brought into the light, unless it is for the reader.it is about a giLlwhoisa

boy, and who plays a role functionally.analogous to what I have just

1

The Devil in Love.

192

1:: "

1

described as the Mignon type; There are details, refinements there, that I leave to you. The whole ends in a dual in the course of which the hero of the novel kills Fragoletta who appears to him as a boy without his recognizing her, which shows very well the equivalence between a certain feminine ob'ect of ..tb. rival. This is the same other whoisAtissue whenHarrapt1411$Lele brother of_Oph,eliA. What we have seen at work here is a fetishized or fee character — it is the same word, both going back to factiso in Portuguese, from which, historically, the word_ fetish is born, and which is none other than the word Lictice, factitious. This ambiguous feminine being_incarnates, in some way, beyonglAlle rmather,1110 phallus that she lacks,incarnates it all the better in nolpossessin it herselLbeing_ rather engaged l representa.tion,its Qrsielign We have there-one more function which clarifies the relation_of falling in love as it can be established.in perverse baths of desire. These care)exemplary_in_e.nlighteni,ng_us _on..the positions to distinguish when we analyze desire. And now we are finally led to ask thetcuestimatyliatisobjAcent. perpsltally brought_into_ause by this very critique, namely, the notion of

identification. 2

*AY.

■nbelea

The notion of identificationlis present in Freud's work from the beginning -- latent, emerging at every moment, then disappearing again. There are already hints of it in The Interpretation of Dreams. Its major explanation is attained in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego, which includes a chapter, WI, expressly consecrated to identification. This chapter has the specific of showing us, as happens very often in Freud, and that is the value of his work, the author's greatest perplexity. Freud avows his difficulty, indeed, his powerlessness to exit from the dilemma posed by the pprpetual_ambiguity_that appears_between. two terms that he specifiesay identification and the choice of the object. The t , : lyst_terms_appinber of cases to_actas..subs_titgeifor one 193

another, with the most disconcertia&power of metamorphosis, so that the transition itself cannot be graspedckJhere is, however, a clear need to maintain the distinction between the two, for, as Freud says, it is not the

same to be on the side of the object or on the side of thssi.kject,That an
object becomesthe object of choice is not the same thing as its becoming_
.

iles_uppsrtof the subject's identification.
•■•rw 7 ,CN

This fact is formidably instructive in itself. It is no less instructive to see the disconcerting facility with which everyone seems to accept, and to use both one and the other in a strictly equivalent way, without asking any more about it, whether it is a question of observation or of theorization. When one asks more, one produces an article like that of Gustav-Hans Gruber in Imago, in 1937 -- Les Deux Especes de mechanismes d'

identification —, which is really the most numbing thing that one can
imagine, for everything appears resolved for him by the distinction between active identification and passive identification. When one looks more closely, it is impossible not to see, and he himself perceives, that the

two poles active and passive are present in every kind of identification, so
that we really must come back to Freud, and take up point by point the way that he himself articulates the question. Chapter VIII of Group Psychology and theArialysisof the Ego, which follows the chapter on identification, begins with a sentence that immediately brings into the atmosphere something purely different from what we are in the habit of reading -- Linguistic usage remains, even in its

caprices, always faithful to a Wirklichkeit, some effective reality, whatever it may be.
I would like to point out in passing that Freud began to deal with identification in the preceding chapter, by speaking of the father as the example by which we enter most naturally into this phenomenon. We arrive at the second paragraph, and here is an example of the bad French translations of Freud's texts. We read in the German text -- At the same

time as this identification with the father, perhaps also a little bit earlier -which is translated as a little bit later --, thaittle...bay kgins

194

identification is a most primitive.Anowajinder. It is about the state of being_ in love anclitmelation with identification.the name.juilesLmimifestations. let us say that this object is a sort of other ego in the subiecIlis„ a question then of knowing how to articulate thsdifference between identification and Verliebtheit in its .17122learstgase _jheegajsenriched__ Aythe_clitalities of the abject. and that I have chosen as the most condensed and the most appropriate for showing you Freud's perplexities.avetry_proNematic for Freudian analysis linlssitprcgsvndly_laaamissism. If one follows Freud's text.eeds_to_be articulated in away that itself.. highest.fundamental function. which is easy_ to describe.ofjergination. In order to go as far as one can go in the ' direction that Freud articulates perfectly.1ich_s.libidinal desires towards his mother.. with this translation.n. enfeoffment. if the identification with the father should not be preliminary.. most ..katachoice„oLobjgCLIY. We find another example in the passage that I want to reach this morning. j 195 .1. FlOrigkeit._.till. in that it implies a choice of objeg.whereas it is only necessary to read . We read in the French translation -.and one can wonder. is assimilated to the latter -. -.

in which one does not see that being effaced before it translates something so articulate. Freud stops here at hglapppsition between. which is introject.the vezr same that he puts in the place of his most important constituent element. That is not at all what Freud says. for even the state _ introjealon otif_lubject into the ego.In the case of identification.himself.to the benefits:4 tfloyed_L. he advances. what Aakes-frorn-hinv-something. Itis_a_question. 2 Th u s in the or igina l. That is the approach that Freud takes to this problem.he is_irripoyerishedds.. which is -. it is a matter neither of enrichment nor of impRerishment. In the second case it is impoperished..of. and on the other hand. nicht bestehen.what Ferenczi2 has said. the object is volatilized and disappears in order to reappear in the ego.of-the-relation_ between introjection and identification. effaced before it. He is filled with humility and falls into a complete si11. Bestandteil. do not exist. and at its expense. From the economic s pointgf view . 196 .object that he has put_injkie place_of._whererthe subject is dispossessed more and PlorP_Of all that is of. entirely_ to the object. In the other case. That is entirely erased in the French sentence..his_most congituent element. from the economic p__oLint iew. This_Qbject_for whose benefit.and impoyerishes him. the su bstituted object is found to be endowed with every quality by the ego. as they translate it in French. He pursues it by turning back -. what the subject introjects and by which he is enriched. which undergoes a partial transformation. and noticing that all is not complete..himsglf. In fact. in reality. being in love can be conceived as an • The following distinction bears perhaps upon the most essential points -._beilig sivo.13'ec. Freud had earlier paused for a long time over what happens in the state_of heillginiove. he retraces his steps -.in order to say that this description makes oppositions appear that.ticinmith regard to the oblect of his investment.for he does not neaten up his movements. on one hand..)12Lect. after the model of the object that has disappeared.

is marked by an ambiguilywhich Freud makes .it-is-then-rezerWed anew_injhe ego. Why should the object become volatile and disappear in order to reappear in the ego.c. erhalten geblieben. This is a text whose project leaves us highly embarrassed. we must also stop a moment at the consideration which we are presenting..thAtjaLAEliebtheit --the object is preserved. from these movements forwards and backwards.Log this is a reference to_that fundamental notion e have fcluncLester_sin. uberbesetzt..arfflaiush itis overinvested. The_ formation of the object. transigrrned partially according to the model olie lost _abject. it seems.That is what the French text says.. on behalf of and at the expense of the ego.patenth. It is thus not a question of an object which becomes volatile.aLthe_ohject-lost.. even if it is one of those in which he reaches the height of his theoretical elaboration. and it is that alone that I wished to highlight. of the ego or of the ideal of the ego.-_. One cannot say that this is Freud's testamentary text. Nothing veLy_skar results._ rests upon the_fundamentaL -- molion..or abandoned.. it dssLacridisappear.-. in the case of ident t hqsbeen. or which disappears. according to whether it is constituted as the object of identification or as the object of amorous capture. and which is namely that the object mapeput at the place_ of the Ich or of the Ich-Ideal.. after having undergone a partial transformation along the lines of the object of the model that has disappeared? It would be better to refer to the German text Perhaps another distinction is the essential one.ce_the_b_egiaping. precisely. The very place to be given to the object in these different moments of departure and return. But this distinction in its turn raises a new reflection: is it really_sedais that identification supposes the abandon of the investment of the_dject? Cary _one_not_ also have _an identification with an object that is kept? And before entering into this particularly thorny discussion.ancLthe_ego_is.. because.. as Freud explains it. 197 . affie_f2thzsgs. anditremains almosi entire in astAteatinmsLogatim„ At least the interrogation has the merit of being made. that there is another alternative in which the essence of this state of things can be conceived.

for example. in order then to be pushed from the inside back into the outside. it is impossible to construct any order at all not only in our thinking but also in our practice and in the clinic. in ti1i.taphor. How to conceive this correlation. he fink.s usage. So the object is perpetually in a sort of movement that makes it pass from the outside to the inside..Let us now try to take up the problem again by begiwing_witti_the bearings that we have gained fokri_our. impossible. to the famous constitution of primitive objects. seen it appear from the beginning of the piece by Freud that I have just read to you..ccupiect. considered as simple givens present in that famous primitive world without limit where the subject is thought to make a whole of his own englobement in the maternal body.sfay . perxerse.. moreover.m. One speaks of the introjection of objects. in our practice and in our way of speaking. In the cure of a fetishist. which are correlative t a turnin oin in the' • ' ' • • Nittjonof te object 1aiitti_which. if we hold to the vague 198 . that what I shall try to articulate for you is constructed.ose or . One refers. 3 It is a matter first of conceiving. the evocation of the oral drive atthis precise moment? Its conceptualization is les... we observe manifest bulimic im • ulses. One speaks of introjection and incorporation without differenti ating_thern. That leaves introjection and projection in a perfect symmetry.ky example. which we commonly_establish betinTen identification and introjestign. which are divided conveniently into good and bad.o.elal2Q_LatiorisiLthe_relations between frustration and the constittAtion_of thectject.we happen. introiection is held to be a function strictly equivalent and symmetrical to that of projection. It is against this abuse. You have. One commonly allows t oneself to slide into articulations given in the Kleinian epoch. when it becomes too intolerable in the interior.s_sijgcs. I'am proposing the following — the underlying metaphor:In_ introjectionraline. which is very far from being a Freudian abuse.to be__pre.

.are s of love. it takes its signification as symbolic. he regresses. and thus an object as much absent as . and no one will come and contradict you.. Does not the primitive schema that I have given you of the symbolic structure of love giye_us_s_ornething that clarifies it? Let us start off from the support of the first love relation that of the mother who is the object of the call.comp. You can always say it. The satisfaction of need is here_the. he is there for that. in this instance the breast or th e oujide_ --. and it begins at thp_same_time_tabe.7 - addressed towards the real object which is part of the symbolic object. there are he gifts. The pseyaleraxalue.it is a matter of balan g and compensation? Each time that there is frustration in love. trying to get some perspective concerning his fetish.Lreal. argthe_ . It is here that there opens up every possible understanding of oral absorption and its so-called regressive mechanism. As real object it becomes a part of the symbolic object. hich. When he has it in his mouth and is_satisfied on one hand. because. the child{cannot lag_separate di from the mother.the subject is regressing.. willLregard to the unfoldingslAselationlhat is syrnholically_clefined. Do you not see that between the_two.. and on the other hand it leaves him nourishel.the other side. naturally. it must be conceived.drive is - . that is to say. which can intervene in every love relation. From 199 . this is compensated by the satisfaction of a neeIt is in as much as the mother is theshilitwho calls her.MeJawild almost say. love. I am saying. there e presents to the child in the form other_breast.Djec on its function as part of — em the object_ pilove.and_the.. at the very moment when the subject is progressing in the analysis.resent. that each time-that thestlys_appsirs in analysis or elsewhere..... On one side. on the contrary. (_l_A. one says. Qn. and that this breast becomes more significant than anything else.CP. and as such are only that. that is to say. Thus. bar is fact the are annulled in so far as themt_a& thing. rested.notion that is always at our disposal in these cases -. frustration of. other than signs of love.. that heiachea onto her breast. as to its _e_coilorrtic :unction.emation of the.t4kgrkby the object. an excuse for it. and satisfied.

but in so far as it is theisubstitute_ for th.another Rathin the 200 . its Vorbild.starting with which he will find himself engaged incoming .i. to that sort of incorporation which is the incorporation of certain words arnong_others.but also perfectlangenalized). choosing. not that it is_ in itself.one_ superego. himself be a substitute for it. It is thus an oral form of . cFirst the penis can at a given moment situate itself as object in the lineage and at the place of that object which is the breast or the nipple.. lacking? When and how does he make this discovery? -.the moment a which a_ real need t real object h a satisfies t . whichis_at_ the origin of the early.e. and which is beyond her and herpowet_of __ love. this reaction_of. and enter by two paths that are at_firstvery different in the\ imaginar?economy of the subject.which isspeech. What the subjectincorporates under the name of the superego is somethingarialogo*Lto the_object_oineed. which isitilLa. It is about the phallus in so far as it is lacking that I have been asking this question since I began this year's seminar -..the gift. incorporation gives its model. and is lacking in the latter.n. but in so far as it is beyond the object of love. incorporation of the penis which plays a role in the determination_of ..thezift whichis_notat all the same Again..rnagina. its mold. starting from that.. But there is anotiLer waytrrit'vhich - the penis enters into th(knagmTia economy. It may enter not as an object that compensates for the frustration of love. the fact of possessing or not possessing a penis can lake adouble meaning. that (objectlyvhich is already symbolized.at what moment does _the_ subject discover that it is. lack_of. To the extent that oral regression to the primitive object of devoration enters as a compensation in the frustration of love.them.fixstoamong .. • • Let us call one the penis.ry function in as much as it is imaginarily that ij is incorporated. has been able to become an element of Ale symbolic object eyer3Lother_object capable_of_ satisfying a real need can come to take its place and. formation_ of _what. certain symptoms and certaip. functions. that is to say. The other is the phallus that is lacking in the mother.

and allows us today to pose a first plan of what is more or less required for this moment to occur. necessarily. is not before the sixth month. itsan appear thatin the mother. beyond what he himself constitutes as an object for the mother. in something which he himself. is articulated nowhere. that the relation to the image of the other occurs. as object. something may be imaginarily lacking It is in the specular relation that the subject has the experience and the_appreh. which gives the subject the matrix around which wikbe organized for him what I would callhis_lived incompleteness It is precisely the fact that he is in default. crystallized. by himself bringing it his own lack.and_fro fing begins to be organized between the subject and the other. as he who speaks to you here has defined and articulated it. It is in a second phase that Verliebtheit occurs. which is related to the very lack in the object of love.namely. and in so far as_a_tense. as in himself. held. if not in the register of the narcissistic relation. which is a lack : : ' It is only beyond_the narcissistic realization. not only fulfilling. a nostalgia.sz refinding of the object of love that vanishes. which is as such the most characteristic form of primitive Freudian identification. successive layers of what will constitute the egd. It is with regard to this image which appears as total. that he realizes that something may be lacking in him. - 201 . 02foundlyaggressive to ing. We have symbolic structuration and a possible introjection. the idea (forme] that the object of love is taken.emiQD of a possible lack. This distinction is capital. captive. and which. I remind you that it is at a date that can_be situated. around which will be constructed. It is in so far as the imaginary enters into play that. otherwise called the specular relation. The latter is not conceivable. thatpiiithing beyond can exist. does not succeed in extinguishing -. that something is introduced which makes there appear to the subject. but source of jubilation because of the specific relation that man has to his own image. on the foundation of the first two symbolic relations between the object and the child's mother.

.in Verliebtheit. Besides the relation to the child. which makes us suppose -.. which is at the originalhis_ego and_which will provide its matrix„that the subject can realize what is lacking in the_ mother.cm ever_manage to fulfill the lack in the mother.. 202 . I have not sufficiently articulated . What does this form correspond to? What you see being traced here is a new dimension and a new property of what is presented in the completed subject. and ego are differentiated. In what I have up until now explained about narcissism. of the ego that the ego will detach itself. I have had to put the accent on the ideal formation of the ego.the. japroposing himself as the object which can fulfill it. It is only after the_seconclphase ofimaginaryspecular identification_with the image of the body.„ the difference that is there. the imaginary. phallus remains in her. rests on the effect of transmission.. ideal of the ego. comes to_put itself in the place of the ego or of the ideaLof-the ego. I mean the formation of the ego in so far as it is an ideal formation.All this. in so far as it is from this ideal. what this object_is that. The subject thus bears beyond the object of love this lack for which he can be led to substitute himself.because experience imposes it upon us. I have led you today up to the presentation of a form that you must keep in mind so that we can take things up again at this point the next time.. at the point we have reached. totality conditictn„Jt is in relation to this image that the subject realizes thatinhirnself_too something can be lacking. It is a matter of knowing. and look at the diagrams which pass from hand to hand without anyone's ever thinking for a single instant of reproducing them. But simply open Freud with his fruitful obscurities. What do you find at the end of this chapter? This diagram on which he places the egos of three different subjects. as he point of iffiChiiiiht"Of her iirs ettiFfOinto . the lasKof.. in whom the functions called superego.that no satisfaction byany_real object whatsoever that comes in as a_substitute. as Freud says very well at the end of his article. and because Freud remained completely attached to it up until the last moment of his formulations -. The specular experience of_the other 45 forming .

which is behind them all.] Ideal of the ego Ego Object External object FREUD'S GRAPHISCHE DARSTELLUNG x It is a question of knowing why subjects commune in the same ideal. with the relation of the ideal of the ego. and the object.. Freud explains that there is an identification of the ideal of the ego with objects which are thought to be the same._and in sum. 6 February 1956 203 . as Freud says. on the first veil. 177. one sees that he has taken care to link these three objects with an external object.[Diagram. if one looks at the schema. in its first exigencies._ not . and which comes to be reflected. in so far as it •• is the object that is lacking. but in something which is in the very subbasements of the ego. which no doubt feels something and can be impoverished by it. but something that is beyond the object. in its first forms. Simply. the fetish. I shall begin again next time at the point where I am leaving you. which is to say. and which is projected there in the form of the ideal of the ego._purely and simply in the ego. the phallus. Do you not find a striking resemblance there with what I have been explaining to you? With regard to the Ich-Ideal. what is at issue is not simply an object. p.

let us accentuate what has been revealed in some of the terms that we have been led to articulate up until now. The erotization of need. . The substitution of satisfactions. it is possible that the split will not cease to grow greater between the dominant theories in psychoanalysis today. and Freudian doctrine. The mirror. from jubilation to depression. but everything that we have done earlier has prepared for it.•• XI THE PHALLUS AND THE UNSATIATED MOTHER The gift replies to the call. I intend to take up again today the terms in which I am trying to formulate the necessary recasting of the notion of frustration. The role of the imaginary phallus as signifier. Before beginning. What I shall try to articulate today will perhaps be a little more algebraic than usual. what one calls its current tendencies. 204 . which in my eyes constitutes nothing less than the sole correct conceptual formulation of the practice that this very doctrine founded. Without such a recasting.

we believe that they leave traces. with which Freudian doctrine began. it is that it 205 .klesire redressed. one uses the word without looking any further -. The frustration of a need entails diverse modifications which are more or less supportable for the organism. it nevertheless leads to impasses. to which certain authors refer it. I have tried to situate frustration in a tripartite table between castration. All the experience that one has of what happens in an animal economy shows us that. • This property is strictly speaking inexplicable from the sole perspective of need. Satisfactionineans. and indestructible. for if analytic experience has brought it into the foreground among the terms in use. it would be useful to explain why the desire which has thus been frustrated should have that ch4Pcteristic. through a good number of examples. To the extent that you make a practice of reading psychoanalytic literature with an open eye. We must understand it as a fundamental experience if we are to make valuable use of it. I hope with success.which_Freud_accentuates_so stronglyfrom the beginning. Let us say that it is referred in different ways. when one speaks of frustration. Though its prevalence does not profoundly modify the economy of our thinking when we are in the presence of neurotic phenomena.we have frustrating experiences. you will see these impasses always more patent. and I do not need to insist on that point. Psychoanalysis today puts frustration at the heart of all the faults whose analyzable consequences are marked in the symptoms that come up in our field. if things are to be so simple. and whose enigma _the_whole development-of his work is precisely designed to question. We simply forget that. namely. and privation.satigaction of a need. that cannot be absolutely without reason. but if there is one thing that is evident and confirmed by experience. Usually. We shall first posit that frustration is not the refusal of an object of satisfaction in the pure and simple sense.1.. as I am trying to demonstrate. that inihe unconscious.

] This is very often the case with words preceded by ver-. It is not to be found in that. for the word can mean botlOrgrnise)and - rupture of promise. except by allusion. That is so true that one can even sometimes put the Versagung on the opposite side. Frustration thus is not the refusal of anobjectof_satisia.I do not say the beginning of development because it does not have the character of a development. or of a retreat from an engagement. but from the earliest 206 . to use the term that I was led to put in the foreground when we spoke of the repetitionsompulsion. if it is given like that.caseis a connection imposed between frustration and the permanence of desire indeed. There is no reason not to take any other series whatsoever. such that you can retain its principal articulations in order to see if they are useful. which is inscribed much more precisely under the concept of_armulation. or the desire is modified. It is thus a matter of our. or it dectines. I want to unfold a sequence regarding this. its insistence. a prefix which is essential in German. I am saying that it is not at all satisfactory. I am not saying that what has been done is false.I could invent many others.ction. regression. Besides. It is enough to consider it for an instant to see that it is not comprehensible in itself.. Freud never speaks of frustration. Let us submit ourselves to that path which consists in taking things from the beginning -. Either the individual succumbs.does not engender the maintenance of desire as such. I am relatively dispensed. Let us say straightaway that the triad frustrationaggression-. Completely at random I will say frustration-depression-contrition -. is very far from having the seductive character of immediately comprehensible signification that one supposes. ---_ _ _ _in the sense that one speaks of annulling a treaty. because the concept of_ regressionitself has not been elaborated in thisinsiance.posing_the questiort_ot the relations between frustration and re ressias never been done in a way that is _satisfactory. from making a proof. and which holds an eminent place in the choice of words in analytic theory. and as I shall be content to follow them with a series of formulas that have already been worked out here. He speaks of Versagung.

We find proofs of it is his behavior. There is a desperate attempt. Certain things happen which are only conceivable if the symbolic order is already present. forgetting that the subject as subject cannot be identified with the individual. Even if the subject is detached.est„but That is given in many passages in Freud as the relation at the beginning. frustration -. What does that mean? It does not mean that the child has done the philosophy of love. and that he \ distinguishes. We always encounter an ambiguity here which is born from the fact that we have a science which is a science of theAuttiect. The order of gat!rnity exists as such.relation of the child to its mother. and thus implicates him in that order. with all that it implies of elaboration __— not at a first remove but at a second .. this order nonetheless exists. whether or not the child has experienced infantile terrors. whether he is conscious of it as an individual or not. does not simply imply before one ara. we succumb to the need to start with the subject.gift ` the symbol of love. Thg fundmeatal character of the love relation. It means that he is Ay in a bath which implies the existence of the symbolic order. This effort can be made only with the aid of threads as thick as one's arm. the law of intersubjective relations profoundly governs those on whom the individual depends. as an individual.. The experience of the child is at each moment taken and retroactively 207 . but the frustration which is usable in our dialectic is only thinkable as the. We can say that at-the-origin. which is yet tried again and again. which is profoundly organized symbolically and forms the subjective context in which the child develops his experience. But. which only come to have a clear meaning in the intersubjective father-child relation. In saying that. not a science of the .Aj)1. from the order which concerns him as subject. refusal of a gift. I am alluding here to what someone named Mallet articulates about primitive phobias. for example. between love and desire. to have the image of the father rise up from the anxieties of the child in the dark.not just any frustration. in so far as the. individual. In fact. I am saying nothing that is not clearly written in Freud.

and founds the symbolic orclex.. with regard to which satisfaction is situated and takes its meaning.. already. The gift replies to the call.flie little child with hisE. The gift arises from a beyond of the object relation. call. xchange..a. It is against a backgroancl of revocation th. I shall say more. •.._arLcLis_totally_engaged symbolic game thus has a fundamentally disappointing character.the.introcluction in the symbolic order..and it can only arise from that beyond with a character which constitutes it as properly symbolic. it is on this . The_calliul_ready_an. since the structure_of speechimpliesin the Other that the subject rggeive_his. in thefirst_atag_e_oLspeech. which is. they will take hold.. which are starts only because.n_by tbe.at first annulled in Qatar later to reapp_earAspure_presencer-that-thesift is given or not giyerLin reply_to.fundamental. To call situates him.. round.itis nothing.ntered.becauseavliaLis called can be pushed away agairt..--imagine._ The gift exists only because there is an immense circulation of gifts which covers the whole intersubjective ensemble.reworked by the intersubjective relation in which he is engaged by a series of starts.mesWe unstex. an. 208 . ansLas_a sign _ollove. I have talked about4he gift.a.tosay_thatas_an_ohject_oLsatisfaction. This to_speech.. the object appears essentidly_As being only the sign of the gift.__Alread. as is welt 4tIQW. „The gift implies the whole cycle of. tam speaking of_ the_ cal because it is there in the foreground. cannot be sustained in isolation. The call makes itself heard when_the Objectilnot there. precisely.Qtt:D. since it supposes behind it the whole order of . When it jilliere. but remember what I told you when we were dealing with psychosis. he must have his sojaa jasiraghim.at_the gift Nothing is a gift arises.yalthe level of the call.Thatis the essential articulation. It is there precisely_to be pushed away as this nothing..bythe act which has _previously awn fulled orrDMICed it.itis.. Ergu_diarLirnage. We have not yet reached that level. I said that the call was essential to speech. I was wrong to stop there. tli5notsonstituteci.exchange into which the child hass. but the call. inverted form.own. into which the subject is introduced as_ primitively as__you may . If the call is.

He relation which is fundamentally symbolic.to absence in as much as it constitutes_presence. in this instance. . on the contrary.satisfa. I compensation. If you are still capable of doubting that speech plays an essential role here. What is maintained in the dream as a desire. What puts him_tasleepin_this_satisfaction. It is the basis of the relation of the sub'ect to e couple presence-absencento prespace_or Lthe - _ground of absence. satisfaction. They have already --entered the symbolic order so well that they are precisely(forbidiebjects. He stills the game by an oral ca • ture. both there and never there. is the desire of the impossible. She says in her dream -. at ' which he practices. in its detached form.a. Look at the so called extremely simple dream of the child.-The child crushes the . there is nothing astonishing for us in the fact that it is precisely in sleep that the persistence of desire should manifest itself on the symbolic plane. playing this game. thebreast. After that.1mnental insatiability of this relation in. that even the desire of the child is never linked to a pure and simple natural satisfaction.t.in this instance. The dolorous dialectic of the object. certainly expressed without disguise.Raspberries.. I would have you note that if little Anna Freud had not articulated it in words.s oskrThe. his frustration. for example that of the little Anna Freud.ctiqnheregs. the refusal that he has experienced.oniy.stlbsti. custard etc. The child crushes what is disappointing in the symbolic play in the oral seizure of the real objegt:Dtsatisfaction. is symbolized in that exercise so brilliantly caught by Freud in its pure state.isprecisely his disappointment.. I would underline. I am saying that all satisfactionsallecljApin frustration comes_in against the background of_thefundamentany disappointing character of . the sry nl2c2E. Nothing forces us to believe that little Anna Freud was hUtigry that night.I do not mean to say that there is not for the child. 209 whatsprings from the . AlLoLthes_e_objects are transcendent objects for her. we should never have known anything about it. a satisfaction accorded to something that would be pure vital rhythm. but with the whole transposition of the symbolic order.

From the moment that it enters into .. on the subject of the erotization of the breast. but that would be only a pure and simple sleight of hand. - All of that is not vain rhetorical articulation.„__that_is t9jayin t e sym o is requat. it is even what entails the destrudo . but by the bottle? It is precisely to this objection that what I have just constructed for you replies.reaLobject.for example M.2 Let us pursue the dialectic of frustration. That is how orality becomes what it is.titated_for--a-symbelie-satisfaction? By the mere fact that it is a substitution. it suffers a transformation. or almost. but it need not be specific. it is the bearer of a libido that conserves the body itself.is not in itself indifferent. I could say that it has thus become a symbol. but what do they make of the case in which the child is not nourished at his mother's breast.v1sthe._the. This author says in one of his articles. for example. which R.b. as Mme Favez-Boutonier reminds us -.. and ask ourselves -.is it the libido of the conservation of life or sexual libido? Certainly it aims at the conservation of the individual. Freud wondered about the identity of this libido -.. When th real ob* cUtself becomes a sign thedemonforlove. in the latest issue of Etudes Philosophiques consecrated to the centenary of Freud -. the cMectic nfirustration.I am willing to understand it all.irimme lately entails a transformation.child in possession of the object. Which? As I am saying that the real object then takes on the value of a symbol. it is also very much an eroticized activity. It is libido in the strict sense. What takes on a symbolic accent and value is the activity./the mode of apprehension. but it is not only that. Being an instinctual form of hunger. but replies otherwise than by evasion to the objections that some people who are certainly not excessively fine -. it loses for all 210 . and sexual libido. Charles Blondel.s.have been able to make to certain analytic remarks..what happens at the moment when the satisfaction of need comes into_play and iss u. Even if it is not the breast of the mother. but pcisely_ because it has entered into the dialectic of substitution for satisfaction in the demand for love.

that is precisely something which exists on the symbolic plane. able to refusejadefinitely. What happens in specific is that the child eats nothing.whichAs_organized in the symbolic order. Other activities are then also caught up in the libidinal dialectic. I insist -. This point is ri indispensable for the understanding of anorexia. In effect.. whence arises the erotization of the oral zone. which in German identifies efficacy and reality. As I have told you.that the activity has taken on an eroticized function on the plane of cl_e_sire. she can literally do all. It is not the object which plays the essential role in that. The 211 . I have thus situated the moment of reversal which introduces us into the symbolic dialectic of oral activity. it is a nichts essen.that none of the value of its place in the sexual dialectic. and because of it. but also of other symptoms. Inversely. the simple locus in which presence or absence could become manifest. and you will make the greatest errors. Thanks to this nothing. — and not with regard to I do not know what hypothesis of a sort of megalomania which projects onto the child what is only in the analyst's mind — thaLthe dimensionofsaanimericeappears for_thelinttime. which is„somethingta_negation of theactiyit6 He uses tbisatsence savored as such vis-a-vis what be has facing him. I have already said that anorexia is not a no_Leafing_b_utan_eating-nothing. Wirk!ichkeit.it means to eta nothing. but the fact. subject of the symbolic demand. it is here. It is not a nicht essen. If you do not understand that. Nothing -. namely the mother on whom he depends. activity is introduced into the real the mother who was until then the . But that is not all that happens. he makes her depend on him. at the MOMPra-When the symbolic reversal of the substiitRtt. which raises the question of the unreality of the early relation to the mother. being.. I would have you note in passing that this goes so far that it is possible for the same role to be play_e-d-whe_re_thereis_no matabject at_all It is in fact only a matter of what gives rise toakatistaction_whichsubmitutes for symbolic saturation. That alone can explain the true function of a symptom like that of anorexia [anorexia mentalel.pacomes a real being. you can understand nothing not only of anorexia.

a micromaniar which is the contrary of megalomania. according to her. It is a sort of reduction to nothing [ aneantisationl. Melanie Klein. come to light as omnipotent. they were ready to arrive there one day. Mrs. They are there in effect. he must still be able to reflect upon himself.into_the_womb. In order for a real omnipotence to engender a depressive effect in the subject..of the maternal body. Simply taking the subject at a slightly more advanced level. she was dreaming.pteaceof_the_reaLbeing.erconatittnes a virtual field of symbolic annihilation [nearitisaticAJTQm which.abaolutely andwith. they were there already. And one could say in a certain sense that... that this is an essential condition for understanding anything at all of value. Clinical experierzeglows_us... Of course.giflor noasifIclepends. and upon the contrast of his powerlessness.n w_laom. is real.. That is another affair.couxse.all_objects_. like everything else. since_the moth.. and she was right to dream. That it is possible. since. We can now glimpse how it is possible that all of the primitive fantasmatic objects are to be found together in the immense container of the maternal body. At this point.outre.essential efficacy appears first as the omnip. the child finds himself in the presence of n aternal ornnipotence7- Since I have just made a rapid allusion to‘ he paranoid positicirt as Mrs. but she has always been highly embarrassed in explaining how it was possible.. for example a child at about the age of two..the. because the thing is posAhle onl b a retroActive projections) _the whole ensemble of imaginary objects. and her adversaries have not missed the chance to argue that she was dreaming. it is not at all astonishing that she should find the objects retroactively reprojected. But let us take care not to go too quickly. Melanie Klein calls it. _ henceforth will each in turn draw their5ymbdolic_value.. because that is not given in itself by the sole fact that the mother.to_situate this point at around 212 .Q. tha Itle_mather_contains_everything. I am aot telling you._ I am telling you thatis RrimordialbLall-powerful) that we rhe mother cannot eliminate her from this dialectic. is not without a rapport to the relation to omnipotence. with Mrs. to which I allude only in passing. I shall add that we may suspect that the cieprPqqive position which then takes its first form. Melanie Klein has brilliantly shown.

ced.the sixth month_ as Freud _has noted. and the jubilatory character of this encounter is not to be doubted. But it is useful here not to confound the two things. You will object that I have taught that at the moment when the subject seizes the totality of his own body in his specular reflection. 213 . which is not without confirmation in experience. it is rather a feeling of triumph that he feels. when he completes himself in some way in the other who is whole. That is a reconstruction.. and becomes present to himself. and_ at which_the phenomenon_of the mirror stageisprodu.

and to introduce the dimension of negativism. which will give the relation_of thqchild to his ownego an essential element of splitting. From there on. I would nevertheless have you note that experience shows us. at the mercy of the manifestations of his caprice. that it is not with regard_ to action and under the form of negativism that resistance against omnipotence in the relation of dependence is elaborated -. at the mercy of his omnipotence. When he finds himself in the presence of this totakty_in. the encounter with the reality of the master. her omnipotence depends upon his desire. live._the forrnof the maternal body. on the other hand. - This is where what I alluded to just before in talking about anorexia comes in._whichAppears under the siga_of nothingkis with regard to e object annulled as symbolic{_ that the child puts his dependency in check.it is with regard th_eohject._The oqiipotence_ctLthemother is_then reflected only in a clearly depressive positiota. on one side.' of distinction from himself. but it is otherwise when. once this form has been given to him. but closely linked to him and dependent on him. When the reflected specular structure of the mirror stage comes into play. and not without reason.There is.--and-in--the-child!s-sense powerlessness. it is jubilation. In as much as the_fortn_Qf mastery is givento_the subject in the form of a totality_ that is alien to himself. 214 .who_depends_uponit. which will remain until the end._he must realize thatit does not o12eyhirn. making himself by this means master of the avid omnipotence to inake_hirn. which is not unrelated to the moment towards which I am aiming. Thus the moment of his triumph is also the expression of his defeat. There is. One could go a bit quickly and say that the sole power that the subject retains against omnipotence is to say no with regard to action._preciselyby nourishing himself on nothing It is here that he reversesependence. he encounters the reality of the master. the experience_of mastery. : English in the original. it is at his mercy.

knows. at least the domestic animal. You will tell me that it is curious that the animal too.We thus really need to keep in mind that the symbolic order is. Still. It just proves that the animal can arrive at the sketch of a beyond which puts him in a very special relation of identification to the one who is his master. a child does not react in the same way to an accidental hurt and a slap. in recalling that M. Saussure taught that there are a signifier and a signified. it remains that he arrives at something as elaborated as distinguishing between the fact that someone taps him on the back and the fact that someone gives him a correction. Even before speech. you have perhaps seen a sort of notebook that came out in December 1956 as the fourth number of the International Journal of Psycho-Analysis. The article by M. Experience demonstrates it. which consists. Since we are for the moment clarifying the outlines. Loewenstein is marked by a prudent distance not devoid of skill. but that awareness remains absolutely without connection to our experience.the intentionality of love very precociously constitutes. one shows that one is a little bit aware. It seems that someone must have said to himself that there was something interesting in language after all. before any beyond of the object. except for underlining that one 215 . from a very early age the child ' distinguishes a punishment from an accidental blow. which is impossible to conceive other than by saying that the symbolic order itself is as such already instituted and present. the animal is not inserted by all his being into an order of language. after a citation of several lateral characters in Hamlet. the layer necessary for the entry into play of the first imaginary relation on which the play of projection and its contrary occurs. unless it is that he is a good little dog. To illustrate it now in psychological terms --but this is a degradation in comparison to the first explanation that I have just given you -. In short. if one may say so. and it seems that certain people were called upon to reply to the command. This objection is easy to overturn. But precisely because. in contrast to man. As Mrs. a structuration that is fundamentally symbolic. I will leave you to meditate on what that implies. Susan Issacs noted a long time ago. that leads to nothing further.

cry as a signal. The Fort-Da is essential here. if I may say so. It is false. perhaps we could succeed in reorganizing our experience. equal to its principle. who. From the beginning. to pose the question of the sign when it is a question of the symbolic system. indeed so that one must. It calls. each time. The prototype of the gift is precisely thfgitofspeech. the child is nourished as much 216 . if I may say so. and the interest he takes in the system of language in itself. If we began with that.fora_resp_gnse. a signal of need. that the theory of communication exists. The cry we are concerned with in frustration is inserted into a synchronic world of cries organized in a symbolic system. tries to add a bit more. render account of it to an other. in the name of the Londoners. as by something that. In consequence. As is shown by what Freud points out in the child's behavior. there is a certain total situation. as in sum we are doing. the child. Charles Rycroft. says the author. Perhaps one needs to remember.the child cries. we are in the midst of the theory of communication -. The human subject is not merely warned by the cry. and it is by virtue of the pair in alternation that he grasps it and articulates his first scraps of phrases.we are much further along in it. the analytic theory of intrapsychic agencies and their articulation. signals an object. There is also a Mr. riddled with errors. fallacious. nat±o_r_Ly_l _is language already instituted for the child. suggests the author. because in fact the gift is here.must be aware of what one is saying. beyond. It is a question of a cry in as much as it calls. and the mother receives hi. the cry in question is not taken as a signal. which includes the mother. I pardon the author for not citing my teaching -. but the latter already bathes in a milieu of language. One has only to see the child's essential need to receive those formed and articulated cries which are called words. against the background of response. In what I am in the course of teaching. the cry. Seeing the level of elaboration at which it remains. and to do. Thus he recalls that when a child cries. The cry is produced in a state of things in which. the cry is designed so that one will take act from it. The cries are already virtually organized in a symbolic system. From the origin. it is absolutely not a question of that.

e_activity-which. man does not perish alone by what goes into his mouth. but I would like to underline it for you so as to conclude this theme --. saturation and satiation in contact with_the breast or with any other object at all is what will permit him to enter into the necessity of the mechanism. The former opens the door to the latter.is_designed_for attaining_it zome_ to_ be substituted for the.symbolic demand. The fact that theshilct crushes his disapp. which has it that a symbolic frustration_ carjalways 12efollorecibLa_regression. but also by what comes out of it. You have perceived -..more exactly. The termegressionlis applicable to what happens_ when the real object.oixament_in his.. andat.the_same_tinie_th. r 3 217 .by words as by bread. As the Evangelist says. the term of regression can take on a weight here in which it would not ordinarily appear to you. you have not perceived.

If I spoke to you of a. you will never succeed. It is very droll to see. . You will only give yourselves up to contortions like those that I hope to show you in detail. it is that we must now see how the phallus is introduced into the dialectic of frustration. since it is very evidently in the material offered to him in relation to his own body thât the child can find the real made to nourish the symbolic. That retention can become refusal cannot surprise you either. all of the body's appurtenances. That excrement becomes for a certain time the preferred object of gift is certainly not surprising. In fact. the question absolutely is not there. beware of vain demands for a natural genesis. in fact. 2 English in the original. Jones. the avatars. In effect. we must make a jump.2 We could content ourselves with noting. there would be no problem. come into play and are transformed by their advent in the signifier. If you are hoping to deduce the fact that the phallus plays a prevalent role in the whole of genital symbolism from some constitution of the genital organs. 218 . when he tries to give a satisfactory commentary on the phallic phase as Freud affirmed it. the refinements and the richness of the phenomena which analytic experience has discovered with regard to anal symbolism-are not made to detain us here for long. That is a fact.We must now construct the following stage. Here again. jump. all the relations to one's own body that are established by the intermediary of the specular relation. that starting with the opening given to the signifier by the entry of the imaginary. and for that. If we had not discovered in the phenomena the prevalence. The question is first and before all a question of fact. everything follows of itself. without elaboration. and to show us how it comes about that the phallus that she does not have should have such an importance for the woman. In short. but that would be artificial. the pre-eminence of the phallus in the whole imaginary dialectic that presides over the adventures. those of Mr. and also the checks and failures of genital development.

existence_of_an.Certain authors wear themselves out trying to show that the feminine child must also have her own sensations in her belly. The signifier is not something that each subject invents in accord with his sex or his dispositions. since analysis was needed to discover it. as he says. The imaginary phallus is the pivot of a whole series of facts which require it as a postulate. What did I say to him? You situate the dialectic of 219 . it is in so far as the imaginary_phallus playsarole as a major signifier that the situation appears as it does. That may appear literally stupefying.. That it should be the lack which is the major _a desire. The first virtue of knowledge is to be able to confront what does not follow of itself. the woman has much more _ difficulty than the boy in making the reality of what hAppens in the uterus or in the vagina pass into a dialectic of desire that satisfies her. but that is absolutely not the question.. as Freud has noted. If. and can even come to be devoured. that it is because she lacks it that she desires it and_thatit is only in so far as something gives it to her that she can be satisfied.has_its origin in some physiological disposition. the phallus. ViriaTginasys. by something she is lacking. Qne_must the. and that her experience is without any doubt. Let us quit the terrain of analysis for a moment to take up the question that I posed to M. Well.which. But the reason which explains why that is so is certainl not to be deduced.anything. and perhaps from the beginning. One must study that labyrinth in which the subject habitually is lost. or the folly that presided at his birth. distinct from the boy's. subjacent leaves-no-doubt. In other terms. if we admit that this is also the characteristic of the symbolic order.That_the-role-of_the_phallus_as_signifier must he. but it is none the less essential. Thes_ignifier exists. namely. it is in effect hecause she mustpass_12y something to which she has a relation that is completely different from the man's. Levi-Strauss.kom. That goes without saying. we are perhaps somewhat prepared to admit. which is_to_say. one must start with what is stupefying. the author of Elementary Structures of Kinship. The thread for getting out of it is given by the fact that the mother lacks a phallus.

By a sort of postulate. you posit that one exchanges women across generations. that is to say. they produce them. One can imagine a matriarcate in which the law would be -. things will circulate very regularly in a circle which will have no reason either to close in upon itself or to break. It is for reasons inscribed in the symbolic order. for the exchange tends to converge after a certain time. The very bizarre anomalies in the exchanges. a system of symmetrical co-ordinates founded upon women. even in matriarchal societies. Everyone knows that they can have the phallus. an c srWii" c h belongs to the political context. and moreover. transcending individual development. they have sons. Levi-Strauss gives the following response. paradoxes. the political power is androcentric. phallophores. are explicable only in relation to a reference which is outside the play of kinship.And if you made the circle of exchanges by reversing things. the modifications. in particular.I have given a son. in terms of formalization. but if it is with parallel cousins. that they have them. and precisely to the order of the signifier. to the order of power. Thus I ask -. and saying that it is the female lineages which produce men and exchange them? Because in the end. I want to receive a man. In every case. in which scepter and phallus are confounded. or choice. If that is accomplished by preferential marriages with cross-cousins. but then a great many things are inexplicable. we are already alert to the fact that the lack of which we are speaking in woman is not a real lack. rather bothersome results can occur. one. I have taken a woman from another line. another woman. and to result in breaks and pieces. I owe the following generation or another line. exceptions. phalli. No doubt. one can describe the exchange across the generations in an inverse order. one could describe things in exactly the same way by taking an axis of reference. which appear in the laws of exchange at the level of elementary structures of kinship.the exchange of women across lineages. Consequently. that the fact of having or not having the imaginary and sEmbolizetphallus takes on tl teeconomisimportarice that — - 220 . It is represented by men and by male lines.

as experienceproves. as you know. Before leading you to the way in which the dialectic of the phallus is articulated. What is the role of the phallus at the level of its imaginary function. Abraham implicitly admits that the third gesture of the little girl indicates that she lacks this symbolic object. unless 4 221 . That is what motivates both the importance of the castration complex and the pre-eminence of the famous fantasies of the phallic mother. but really a mattetf . just as if_shewere a Jittle_bay. It is not at all chance if the little girl goes back and begins again. She gives the first to Papa. he gives on page 341 the example of a little girl of two who goes into the cigar cupboard after lunch. the second to Mama who does not smoke.it has in the Oedipus complex. achieved. ever since it arose on the analytic horizon. in order to satisfythe_one in w mit is ladingdfyou read Freud's article on fernale_sexuality. which has caused a problem. ' the level of the alleged demand of the phallic mother? I want to show you here once again how essential the notion of the lack of the object is. and returns it to the cigar box. on the sole condition of being guided by the thread of the fundamental role of the symbolic relation. that is. Mama collects the whole panoply.giving_it_taher_mother„or giving an equivalent of it. to indicate in what way she can desire it. Mr. in a direct way. and resolved in the Oedipus complex. I want to show you that I too can spend some time on the pre-Oedipal stages.that nothingofthe phenomenology of the perversions is conceivable. In an admirable article published in 1920 on the castration complex in women. because that happens just as it should. She shows the lack in this way. when one simply reads the good analytic authors. This history is recalled here in order to introduce you to what you must know how to represent for yourselves -. Abraham.you will learn that it is not simply_ a question of the lack of the phallusin_the_littlegirl. among whom I count Mr. But it is no doubt also for that reason that she first gave it to the one who is not lacking. I regret that this was not discussed in a more detailed way. and she puts the third between her legs.

They are profouaclly. as it happens. wehole in which the perversions have their origin.. of_certain lateLeifectaof_castration_in the end. In other terms. which produces a labyrinth in which one is lost.This is always the occasion of the first narcissistic lesions..x.m_4rke_db_y. discovery thaUlaelltile boy makes about.. This is an idea that is much simpler than what you are usually given. it is a matter of the fact that the little boy wants to be taken for a true male or a bearer of the phallus. It is a matter of the phallus. it is kguesIToSagmetimtisLaging utauesLa game of who's got the slipper or a three card game. or indeed our game. and Mr. and the profound insufficiency that he may sense.one starts with the idea that the phallus is implicated.e_v.taLosids.enhe phallus is fundamental as a signifier. himself. much more than a simple drive or sexual aggression. 222 . and of knowingluowthechild more or less conscioAsly that his omnipotent motheauxidainentallyiacks something. It is a matter of seeing where it is and where it is not. in order to understand the exact value of his attempts to seduce the mother.narcissisticsonfligt. She has known very well how to give a value to the fundamentally deficient character of the phallusathelittle bay. but to clarify one by the other. in fact. fundamental in that imaginal which one must rejoin. of projections. whereas he is one only by half..whiche orilLthe preludeLincleed even the presuppositions. Jones understood all the same that Mrs. the shame that he may experience because of it. of which_one always speaks. an obscurity of identifications. Karen Homey was rather favorable to the one with whom he was in conflict. Let us not forget that. since the ego of the child rests upon the omnipotence of the mother. and which he still lacks himself.. One must remember theigipatAns!pisii. indeed. Freud. and it is always a question of knowing how he will give_beribis object which the_ lacks. of re-identifications. a knit of every stitch. It is never . the phallus of the little boy is not worth much more than that of the little girl. not in an attempt to close the difference between the little boy and the little girl. That has naturally been observed by some good authors..

and which I founded for . there is again for the subject a question concerning his phallus. very clearly accentuates the fact that what is beneath these women's clothing is_ a woman.g_w_LLickcan_in_no case be taken at its face value. Let us take transvestism.. One forgets that transvestism is not . published in the IJP.eLlas_a woman. and the Oedipus complex It is 223 : ... The fetish must be worn by the subjectjenich51. We see there the essential importance of what I have called the veil. That is what one sees in transvestism -. When it appears. The whole classification of the perversions must be founded on that.. a castoff. calls his phallus into question..a little worn slipper. and the identification with the object. 4 61.\ The crucial stage conies just before the Oedipus_ complex.the.reallythere where it is.onamust_be_able_to-thirtk—that-it-rrtight-notbe_there. but curiously. you. In the same way. etc. i - When one lays a hand on it... Whatever the value of the findings on the identification with the mother.a_phalius. signifying object in so far as it is. In transvestism. The phallus must alyLay_spLrticipate in what veils it. 7 . when it i really unveiled:I that is theifetish.1a_the perversions alwaysplayja._i_t is never completely absent where it is not. for example. but a woman_wh9_114s.. between the _primary relation with_which I began today.some_fashionwith_this. It is through the existence of clothing_that. the subject . must always be possible to think that it is there precisely where it is not. no 2. simply_ she_hasst inensc)far as it is hidden. when one finds it and fixes on it definitively. in his article Psychoanalysis of Transvestism. but what it is --. identifieshims. that is to say scgiitt. by nature and in itself. to limit ourselves to that / for today. as is the case_i_a_the_perversion of perversions which is called fetishism -this is really the one which shows not only where it is truly. the essential is the relation to the phallus. The_ subject._thtobjectis_›esactly_nothing. simply a matter of homosexuality more or less transposed.object-is-materialized—Even when the _real _Qbjegtjs_thexe. 1930. it is about hi$in_so far_as_he_goes looking for itinanother. the relation of primitive frustration. It is an old used garment. in male homosexuality. a true signifier. that this is not simply a matter of a particularized fetishism.

like that of the cock robin.e real. the bait [leurre]. The gaping hole of the Medusa's head is a devouring figure which the child encounters as a possible issue in his sear. that there is constructed the whole path around which the ego takes on its stability.mothe 224 . On the contrary.imAgof.desirp..ing rnawahe2Fojectect. a dimension of exhibitionism would be missing. the child.. by whatever path he takes. the subject supposes desire in the other.in-itsiuncLungnt.r_thesatisfactior2...qyerens gum.. This insatiabk unsatisfied mother4a7o7ungThhom_thtshild s whole ascent inthepathQL i nalKissismiLcaustmclecjiis_s.11_the-..find_artyff before hintlike_Lga. It is desire aLone.0.onlyclegeiyeit. in the mother_wiaich. like one produced in the animal kingdom. intersubjective relation is completely constituted. is engaged in the path of making himselfaslecepithjgct..s. This desire that cannot be satiated must be deceived..remoxe that is to be satisfied.. isinsatiable.. as Freud showed in his last article on splitting..a desire that cannot be satisfied one earl.sheis. In that he makes of himself an object meant to deceive..rnay_p_ossibly.orneon.narnely.the stage in which the child is engaged in the intersubj. We find again here ttleLgtig.. It is opening a pair of trousers at a given moment. The most characteristic stages are always marked by a basic ambiguity of subject and object.seeking.p. What_theshild had himself earlier found to crush hiLsymbolic insatiability is what he.e Lession._this. and closing them. . she is there and like all uriatigesaeingx. dervret.sgis..whaLshe_callslyquz. las_atisfy what_cannothe. the oralsituation is foundagain_anthe plane of imaginary sexual satisfaction. and_as iti. c133.fied. It is precisely in so far as he shows his mother what he is not.. the child finds himself engaged with the other in a position in which the . It is not simply an immediate lure. One always forgets that human exhibitionism is not an exhibitionism like others. It there were no pair of trousers. where he who is adorned with the colors of parade must mount the entire situation by producing himself.ctive_dialectic_oi.

and we find it again at this detour.despite the cries of the big giraffe who is incontestably the mother --. the essential form in which phobia is presented We encounter this in the fears of Little Hans. Prevert has said. If it is very badly interpreted in the observation.That is the great danger his fantasies reveal. one still comes near to what is at stake.3 The case appears now under conditions which are perhaps a bit more clear. I shall go so far as to say that you will interpret the case of Little Hans better than Freud could do. little giraffes are rare. With the support of what I have just brought you today. 225 . crumples the little giraffe with his hands and sits on it. We find it at the origin. — is it not clear enough? 27 February 1957 3 Sigmund Freud. being devoured. By the sole fact that Little Hans -. which is how the function of the ideal of the ego is pr filed this background. where it gives us. big giraffes are mute. You will also see more clearly what I indicated the last time. Analysis of a Phobia in a Five Year Old Boy. you will see the relation between phobia and perversion more clearly. for there is a wavering in his observation on how to identify what the child calls the big giraffe and the little giraffe. As M.

Child. 226 .THE STRUCTURE OF MYTHS IN THE OBSERVATION OF THE PHOBIA OF LITTLE HANS XII ON THE OEDIPUS COMPLEX The equation Penis.

The symbolic father is unthinkable. In the second part of that lesson. 199] AGENT LACK OBJECT Castration S Symbolic mother Frustration Privation R We tried the last time to re-articulate the notion of castration. p. and in keeping with the demands of the exposition. sketching the types of 227 . between the mother and the phallus. that we found ourselves progressing from later to earlier. Masculine bigamy.The monogamous ideal in woman. [Format chart. I told you that it was only in a way that was purely apparent. I situated for you the place at which an interference of the imaginary occurs in that relation of frustration. which unites the child to the mother. or at least the use of this concept in our practice. infinitely more complex than the use that is habitually made of it. The Other.

it is always a matter of grasping what. the fetish object and the phobic object. -. the use of the castration complex. the legal milieu. It is the particularities of the symbolic order. The father. Not only is he not alone because of the biological entourage. retroactively reworks what had been begun at the preceding stage. it is krnatter of his being confrontedat Qrger_which will make the function of the father . in a way that is both insistent and repeated. We shall simply try to speak of it again. We shall not be tempted to re-articulate the notion of castration. we have signaled out two objects as exemplary. the symbolic order. as I have underlined in passing. That.stages that might succeed each other in a line of development. and to begin the third part of my exposition. and at the border of tfigaeclipus?_ It is a matter of the child's assuming in so far as it is a signifier. for example.. in so far as it presides over the constitution of lineages. That is where we had arrived. order of exchanges. That is not so simple. that is not so simple. the father. namely. to that element of the imaginary which is called the phallus.indeed. I put you on the track of Little Hans's anxiety. Much to the contrary. 1 What is at issue at the end ofthepiC)_e_dipal stage. From the outset. his existence on the 228 . We shall try to develop our proposals today by speaking of Little Hans. for the simple reason that the child is not alone. but there is a still much more important entourage. in fact. and in a aylAyhich makes j.tlie__instzumeat_taLthp syrrholic.he pivot of the drama. have become more and more rare in observations. the reference that one can take from it. since.. that give its prevalence. during the time that one has avoided speaking of it. because God knows that it is powerfully articulated in Freud. something in you replies. intervening at each stage from the outside. Dr um. so that when I say that is not so simple. At least I have said enough up until now on this subject.

in which the mother may be taken captiirejLonernay_ssly_so. we who are outside can perceive imaginary elements.symbolic plane in the signifier father. When he exhibits himself. we have seen that without this essential distinction. good faith. for instance. The lure in question here is very manifest in the actions and even the activities which we observe in the little boy. and the real father. it was impossible to find our bearings in the case of the Wolfman. for example by presenting the desire of an adversary with a mere coat of arms. which is proposed to us by the chronological order. how has this function come to the center of the symbolic organization? That leaves us to think that we shall have some questions to ask ourselves as to the three aspects of the paternal function. It is not. We have learned in fact. To which is i added what rises up behind the mother. We left the child inthepasition of lure in which he tests himself with arcr. it is monstration 2- of himself by iirnselrniso11. a simple lure. the imaginary father. which captivate the partner. it is not pure and simple monstration. - 229 . In particular. in the end.111is mother. In the play of sexual parade. in which he is completely implicated in the ethological sense. is at stake in the Oedipus? It is a matter of the subject's himself being_ca_ughtin_this_lure-in-such_a_way_thatteiiiith. to distinguish the paternal presence in the conflict under the triple heading of thesymbolic father. I have told you. roughly sketched there.. appearances. to approach the introduction of the child into the Oedipus. What._ himself n aged in the existing_ order. Let us try. in his seductive activities with regard to his mother. which we examined during the second part of that year. which is adifferent dimension from that oft1 2splytolo ical lure by which he entered and where we left him. with all that the term carries of the profoundly problematic --. We do not know to what extent subjects use them as a lure. There is already a whole trinity. indeed a -••• . though we know that we ourselves could do so if the occasion arose. from the point that we have reached. from the first year of our seminars.er i _wtio exists a third.

The frankly heterosexual relation can on occasion cover an atypical position. which analytic investigation will show to be derived.from the pre-Oedipal point of view. 230 . in the specula arison with a peer. If it appears much more complicated in Freud.for-her_iLis_a_ matter_Qf sliding this • hallus from the ima:ina into the re I. but that this choice of object must further be heterosexual.the - phallus in the imaginary where it is to be found.. thspLoblematic sustaway as to be correctly situated with regard. arrivtatitinus center of the whole problematic of the Oedipus. phallus. let us recall that our experience teaches us that it is not enough that it lead the subject to an object choice. The subject. It is thus not enough for the subject to arrive at heterosexuality after the Oedipus..s. and how could it have been otherwise? We can speak of the greater simplicity of the feminine position at the phase of development that we call pre-Oedipal only because we know in advance that we must end up at the complex structure of the Oedipus..s_ really what Freud explains when he talks about that ritual postal is for the phallus which begins to appear in the little irl on the imaginary plane.. for example. 'Thatj. it is not enough just to follow the rules.._Thu. that is consistent with the order of the discovery.lx2yorzim± . We could say that ti nglithas more or less situated.. from a frankly homosexualized position. Our experience also teaches us that to be heterosexual. or appmched. in_ a beyond of the mother because of her progressive discovery of the fundamental dissatisfaction which-the_mother feels in the mother-child relation. and that there are all sorts of forms of apparent heterosexuality. That is the of the woman isLrucksinapkr..If analytic theory assigns the Oedipus a normalizing function.little girl or a little 122y_iand when he tells us that a child is going to be the substitute for this . We have already indicated it by our way of approaching ob'ect relations this year.rticulates it expressly in his article o feminine sexuality -. to the function of the father. Freud in fact discovered the Oedipus before discovering what is pre-Oedipal. andisLZa.

to_have_itt from the father. the situation pivots around him. the little ig will come to find the real penis where it is.That is a somewhat abridged form of what happens in the phenomenon that is observed. [Diagram.in_the_father. thatshe_will. It is in so far as she does not have it as a belonging. and as you see. Freud tells 1/5. That is why it is b thejglationicahe_phallus that theme girl. I am not saying that much more may not be there.11terSilit0 the Oedig_us.here is the ima • Mar . p. The little girl is already sufficiently introduced to the Oedipus.Nun aber gleitet die Libido des Mddchens -. as the 231 . but there is grgacLva_fixation_onthe_father as hearer of_thereaLpenis.in_themne_who can giveher a child. and here jJaa child. it is even in so far as she clearly renounces it on this plane. and with it all of the anomalies that can occur in the development of feminine sexuality. in a way that is simple.starting from the moment when the child learns to saturate the situation and to g?_t ot2Lofitby conceiving that as possible. who has to make the discovery of this beyond.. The has then onl frotnjtjeiamginary to the real by a sort of e that is the very term Freud uses in his article of 1925 on the p anatomical distinction between the sexes -. You see the position as I am outlining it -. Freuthtells ms. beyond. That is at least one of the possible issues -. that is to sa the mother's desire for the • hallus. the lack in the maternal object. that is.man kan nur sagen: longs der vorgezeichneten symbolischen Gleichung Penis=Kind.be_able. and also the little boy? In as much as the situation pivots around the child. 202] Ph M C NOSTALGIA FOR THE PHALLUS What do we effectively find in the fantasy of the little girl. our center.

impasses. After that. and becomes the appurtenance of the one to whom her love is henceforth attached. bringswhich paradoxically about. addresseclack in the obilsrt since it she has been led to this object which is the father. This object of love then becomes the one who gives the eibiecLoLsatisaction. fixations that are properly narcissistic. even if this Oedipus itself brings all sorts of complications. child.smal gosition. she needs only a bit of patience until there will finally come. indeed. • -. the role of the father. The Freudian discovery. the father.one who really can give a child and this is already sufficiently consistent for her that one can say in the end that the Oedipus in so faLasaistliL / path of integration into the typical heter. shows us the woman in a position which is. ethnographic plane. Evidently. theRIA4111Is isaljpured as an ap_purlerance.v-e s its - particular style to the development of the femininf(!iAperW'here is a sort of balance between the renunciation of the phallus and the prevalence of t na one.lianns is relation whose importance in feminine development Sach has seen very well. in the development of feminine sexuality. the object of the natural relation of childbirth. we have no cause to be astonished at this greater simplicity. is much easier for the womb. at a given moment.. as a substitute—far-the-father. This e_xpeciation_ofwhatis_ 4enceforth no more than her due. That implies a feature to which we shall return. This dissymmetry calls up all sorts of quasi-historical considerations which may make us see the reason for this prevalence on the sociological.=.o. by effectively giving her a . as other authors have noted. which allows the analysis of subjective experience. subordinated. in as much as the Oedipus is essentially androcentric osentric. puts her in a very special dependence. if one may say so since I have spoken of ordonnance. from whom she really expects a child. of order or of symbolic ordination --. one who will fill exactly the same role. anct which v. been made. once this renunciation has refioz.the obiPrt of the_feeling_that is : .i. She is in effect a being . In fact. . The father is at first for her anLaitjeaDilaye - or pati_: _=thalls_toaay.

. which we find traced throughout the confidences which he makes to us. and even of his attitudes within his family. theitmction_of the Oediears much more _ learly intended to allow the identification of the subject with his own sex. At certain turns in his writings. in_theddeal.imaginarbzelationto the father. But f accedeoneday_to_the-Iligkly-p-roblern a ti r and paradoxical position of being Lather. his dreams. he says. of soup and meatballs. n. from analysis itself. But.F most intolerant_of__a_certain frustration. In the case of the boy. this accession conversely presents a mountain of difficulties. Freud takes a singularly misogynistic tone and complains bitterly of the great difficulty there is. all that we now know of his life. in sum.What i be a father? ? 233 . because today it is the boy whom we want to follow. satisfactions to be drawn. The simple_reduction_of_the_situ of love with the42jethat_gives satisfaction also explains quite well the particularly fixed. Jones reports in a way that is more or less complete. indeed. It is not because they have not seen this mountain that people have shown less and less interest in the Oedipus. I am only indicating a certain number of approaches here. in mobilizing them. iflie shall perhaps return to that later. his habits. but in the experience of the subject Freud himself. We shall Lave to come back to Freud's developments on the subject of feminine sexuality. side of the woman's development in comparison to a development which one can qualify as normal. which Mr. aich occurs. which carries extremely imperious exigencies as to the. but reliable --the_entire_Exeudian interroVigL tis - ed up in -. the progress of his thought. The whole Freudian interrogation -.not only in the doctrine. when we speak about thejcle of. indeed isl arrested. It is just because they have seen it that they prefer to turn their backs on it. in making them budge from a sort of morality. at least with certain feminine subjects.lraeld by women.

that there is somewhere someone who can fully guarantee the position of the father. The primary question is that of the Wiwimacher. but that does not at all settle the question of knowing what is the particular. fills this role. Let us look at it more closely. and it is not without cause that Freud presents things in that order.-. which has been translated into French by fait-pipe.I am the father. the fer_tik_point which_truly orients all of his research.That for him was the central problem. this observation of Little Hans. The first pages of the text are very precisely at the level where I left you the last time. Let us start off again from Little Hans.. of the Cinq Psychanalysesi it is the one that I have left until the end in the work of commentary that I am pursuing. If. for others. 2 It is a world. intersubjective position of the one who. or acceding to the paternal position. and especially for the child. In our dialectic we are assuming. If we follow Freud to the letter. To ask the question what is a father is still something other than being oneself a father. pee-pee maker. Note that if this is a problem for every neurotic. but let us not forget that it is also a question of subjects finally becoming fathers. 234 . This_assurapitarlis essential to the whole progress of the Oedipal dialectic. So true is it for ever ry_rian that accession to the paternal position is a quest. the questions that Little Hans asks concern not simply his pee-pee Freud's major cases are published in the French volume entitled Cinq Psychanalyses (Five Psychoanalytic Cases). someone who can respond. it is also a problem for every non-neurotic in the course of his childhood experience. that is not for nothing. What is a father? This question is a way of approaching the problem of the signifier of the father. that it is not unthinkable to say that. no one has ever been one completely. in the end. and one must start with this assumption.

all of a pLayiLg. I only thought. you will be struck to see that it is thfire. He then puts the question to his father. a game of hideand-seek -. Up until then. then he is overjoyed to have seen the pee-pee maker of a lion. shows us a game of forfeits. 235 . phallicist. the subject had played at a three-card game. after the birth of his little sister. almost without intention. he stares at her while she is getting undressed. and after that. Everything is there.Do you have a pee-pee maker too? We shall speak later about what his mother replies.maker but the pee-pee makers of all living beings. and especially of those who are bigger than he is. it is first his mother to whom he puts the question -. and remarks to her that if she had one. If you recall the imaginary dialectic as I have approached it from the first lessons. the child was the one who pretended. Suddenly.1 on the surface.. Taken in order. Itis_noLa_question of all or nothing. a little while after this interrogation. before the appearance of the phobia. Hans then lets out -. a displacement.. It is not for nothing that. You have already seen the pertinent comments that one could make concerning the kinds of questions that a child asks. which is not entirely by accident. or who played at pretending.Yes. a little further along in the observation. and its proof in the real.. not without a certain impudence. Now it is a matter of knowin where it really is. iti§infact an effort to establish a standard between a sort of absolute the phallus. he clearly notes that if his mother had this peepee maker as she affirms to him. it ought to be as big as that of a horse. perspective in which we left the subject the last time. never there where it was found. From the imaginary. The imaginary game is truly brought to a grand completion. we shall see.the phallus was never there where one was seeking it. It is a matter of all the distance to. Up until then. he adopts a passle of imaginary little girls for whom he does everything that one can do for children. in his opinion it ought to be visible. up to and including the fantasized children. at the pre-phobic stage of Little Hans's development. in fact. which is to say that he is precisely in the process of simmering over quite a few things. as it was noted by Freud and the parents. that is to say. that the first dream in which there is an element of deformation. One evening.

.atis_enlarged. a cloubie_th. the phobic object comes_inaincfo gainst the background of nzdety. we remain on the plane of a fundamental insufficiency. schema of the entry into the Oedipus complex --Alae_cyIasi-frate almarvIli with We are led here to add nuances. either he or I. That is the first. Someone who is all or nothing. who suffices or who does not suffice -surely.one comes to the aid of the other.J.veas.en.-.If this is how the dialectic of the Qedigusi„s._specular dialectic of the relation between the subject and the small other. Its sanction does not get us out of that either lor.Ereudaells us. In effect. If there are two things which succeed one another.gage. On the other handation t o them 236 er who has beco a . which remains linked to_the first symbalicclialectic.The perfectly conceivable introduction of the maternal image under the ideal form of thegspleaves us' in thejmagingLy.. The_gameds_constitutecLonthe_model of the lure. common. many more than are commonly articulated. the manifestation of - He underlines from the beginning of the observation that one would d o well to separate anxielphobia.b_e_crossed separAting_one who pretends from one who knows tha_titas the power. But on the imaginary plane.-thaLuf presence orerlo not get out of the game of odds_ors.. that is not without cause -. nothing allows us to conceive of the leap that makes the child exit fromhisgame of lure before the mother. the aggressivity in question is of the sort that comes into play in the specular relation. What reveals Hans's first approach to the Oedip_thelation? What is played out in the act of comparison does not make us leave the imaginary plane.wecip not get out of theleld_oLtheAmhaiat is the result? We know it from an aspect as theoretical as it is exem~l only_the-emergenceoLthe-syraptom.12uLremains essentially hom_ser_laus. in which the either me or the other is alwa s the fundamental swing.d_by_him„Lewlloplyiruth.e end be Jgaling_with_a_ clau_bilf.Lestkillllaas_ only added the maternal model to his own dinaktiskos_ The image is larges. from the sole fact that the question is raised..

237 . which have to do with the imaginary spring that it causes to intervene. lived. We shall see a little later what we must think about that. that this complex expands in all its neuroticizing consequences. the superezo. and this from the outset of Freudian doctrine. experience that is essential to the Oedipus on the imaginary plane. remains unchanged. that is not the whole of it. namely. and dated in the unconscious. by comparison with the first maternal object. But in the same sentence.eve feminine object will wa s be for him onl a devalorized object. When Freud speaks of it. Normally. which is the formation of lomething particular.real object after the earliest frustrations. however. he says that surely. he takes care to underline that this is one more moment in which it is palpable that the notion of repression always applies to a particular development in the history. a substitute. the degradation of the love relation to which Freud has devoted a special study._always partial. Let us not. or more precisely because of this central. by extension. Because of the subject's permanent attachment to thataimitive real object which is the mother in so far as she is frustratin . And this event leaves behind it a result. . something other than the effacing or the imaginary attenuation of a relation which is itself fundamentally durable.therais a resolution. which occurs normally between the ages of five and five and a half years. That in particular is where we see enter one of the major terms of the Freudian experience. and not to a permanent relation. It is because of this stage. is something other than what we have described up until now. but understand very well that the decline of the Oedipus complex. refracted. it is in the nature of the Oedipus complex to resolve itself. He accepts that. There_agisis. a type that is broken. its annulation and its destruction. the fading into the background of hostility towards the father can be legitimately linked to a repression. which we find in a thousand aspects of analytic reality. one can apply the term repression here. forget that if the Oedipus complex can have consequences which endure.

in order to give her complete satisfaction. and one finds it in a thousand forms in the case of Little Hans. the great Other. indeed the offering which the little boy makes to 'his mother. whereas up until that moment. This presence is implied by the sole fact of the presentation. which has its proper solution in the Oedipal relation. someone who. the exhibitionism of the little bo_y_12efore his mother can have its meaning only by bringingin. it is very evidently at the level of this Other that there must be produced the presence of a term which up until then was not in the game... and this. One finds it for example in his way of suddenly isolating himself in the dark in a little water-closet. thechilcioffersthemotlthe imaginary object of the phallus. and when the passage occurs that adds to the game the dimension English in the original..In short. There is a moment when everything wavers. the one who sees the whole of the_situation. in the form of a lure. [Diagram.. besides the mother. 208] Mother Phallus .. p.2 which is the same that becomes his very own. he had been in the one that was for everyone. in the child's activity. as the expression has been accepted into French usage.. For. who is in some sense the witness.. we are confronted here with the need to_make something on and new arise. always and in every circumstance. 2 238 .. We need only use our habitual schema in order to see it. without italics.. is in a_positiontoplay and to win.Other THE PRESENCE OF THE OTHER One finds a thousand traces of the schema of the game of forfeits in observations... For the Oedipus to exist.. At the point we had reached the last time..

which characterizes the symbolic mother. Precisely because the male. : one can say finally what it truly is to be a father.truly_tbaiather And that is why no . It was from this • point that the subject set out with regard tolei_g_r_y_plAect. and one could always play at the presence or the absence of an object.. namely. a game of losers win. or that he has it insufficiently. becomes illtia. if I may say that. but the 0 1 I i 4 LiLisalgsin. who has it in every instance. who knows he has it. ition.. that the child can conceive that this same s mbolic object will one day be given to him. the plane of the-symbolic_relAtion_What_had_up m4. h e i s d e p r i v e d of the object by the one who has it. the object is no longer the imaginary object which the subject can use as a lure. there is someone who can respond with every right.ftieR92y an Other to show that the - subject does not have it. It is he whalias is introduced into the s mboli _sition of the mothers d real b h hallus t resence and id her Up until then. it is necessary for him_to_havP if froni_someone. of masculine heterosexuality.Implies_castxation_from_iiteoutset That is what the Freudian notion of the Oedipus teaches. the real penis.aLat the of A level of the neat Other. perfectly _possesses a naturaLappendix. the object was_ both there ant tom.ancLhas_the-pen.one had been expecting. it is that it is necessary to the assumption of the maternal phallus _as a_ symbolic object. _and true. Ater this turning point.It is the game played with the father. It i s o n l y 1 2 y t e n t i a l Q e _ d i p a L e x p e r i c r i s e .is_asJaisbelonging. and this is absolutely the contrary of the feminine position.' 4' until then_been_nialy_thiscalling_and calling_back time. which alone 239 . that an object was both present and absent. the ass_umption_of the very signilLthe_vitile_po. if it is not that it is srecisel somethin re in • • is .QtherjELtbis relation to what is real in the_symb_alic-the-one-whcx-is. In other terms. If castration plays such an essential role for all the rest of development.

so all that will be resolved by the You are that you are.someone who responds to him. bfl_e) somes_a_little crimin It is b the _path of an imaginar_y_crime that he enters into the order of the law.You have taught us that the message that we receive is our own in an inverted form. of the one who simply has the power and answers for it. . does not intervene in any particular dialogue. for. had a real partner before him.. like the. Now. the fundamental annihilation of the symbolic -. But this sentence which we come upon in the sacred textcan. It is not without reason that the required dimension of absolute otherness. is one who could say. The proof is to be found in Freud's own work. the couple of presence and absence. God of monotheism -.I am he who am. someone who has effectively taken to the level of the Other something which is not simply calling and calling back.allows the child to conquer the path by which there will be laid down in him the first inscription of the law. Do not believe it. The only one who could corres and absolutely to the position of the father in so far as this is the symbolic father. One had to have a mind as tied as was Freud's to the demands of scientific and positivist thought. You will tell me then -. but these real personages are themselves always dependent on something which in the end appears like an eternal alibi. in order to say that to anyone other that there might be. who am I? In other terms. it is on the plane of the imaginary game that the trial must be made. what I want to indicate here is thatitis ie s mbolic fath unthiakabiai IS • 5 The_symbolic father is nowhere.12elkeitypall ronomicecLitynoon. It is incarnated in real personages. He intervenes nowhere. 3 What does the subject become in this drama that he is in? As the Freudian dialectic describes. at least for an instant. if things seem to be expressed thus on the plane of the imaginary drama.e. But he can enter into the order of the law only if.

for fathers to exist. a success which seemed to him like a performance. Totem and Taboo is written to tell us that. it is absolutely absurd. But the one that was dearest to him. as an immortal being. He did not put it into the foreground. is something which does not intervene at any moment of the dialectic. The essence of the major drama which Freud introduces rests upon a strictly mythical notion. for his major work. unless it is by-tle_interraediazy of the real father. also shows us what he was really_ aiming at in the notion of the It. the only father. it is necessary for the true father.i ' to make that construction which Jones confides that he esteemed above his entire work. that is to say. the unique father. and in some other languages. in the end. brMging_the imaginary_ 241 . more -. a myth. affirmed it. as far as I know. the only one -. before the entry into history. the unthinkable. whose characteristic is that he has been killed. Even . the father in question was not conceived by Freud. which was -. how can that even be thought outside of its mythic value? For. and he must be the dead father. and never went back on it --. to be. nor by anyone. tuer [to kill] comes from the Latin tutare which means to conserve. is The Interpretation of Dreams. And why. And really. who enters at some mome_n_t_to_filLthe-role-a_nd-functinn. This mythical father who shows us the sort of difficulties Freud had to deal with. among them German. which is nothing other than a modern myth. if not in order to preserve him? I would have you note in passing that in French. Why must the sons in some way have advanced his death? And all that to what end? To forbid themselves.Where isthe father? It is enough to read Totem and Taboo simply with one's eyes open to see that if it is not what I am telling you.he wrote this. They killed him only in order to show that he cannot be killed. what it was a question of ravishing from him. namely the eternization of one sole father at the origin. in that it is the very categorization of a form of the impossible. indeed. a myth constructed to explain what gaping in his doctrine.he must be a father who was killed. is Totem and Taboo.

and they area11.tu es celui que tu es. There are even many more than one. imprints.. He comes out of the pure specular game of either me or the other in order to give an incarnation to that sentence which we have just said was not pronounceable -. The play on w ords de pe nds up o n t h e h o m o p h o n y b e t we e n tu es a n d tuais. the permanent kernel of moral conscience -. nor who was there to respond. after all. is that cim. in effect.ledians develops his phobia.ed s mal toms. in fact. If you will allow me a play on words and the ambiguity that I already used when we were studying the paranoiac structure of President Schreber. It is to this extent that there is something which answers in the symbolic.The_end of the Oedipus complex is correlative with the installation in_ the unconscious of the law as repressed. which allow s You a re he t ha t yo u a re " t o b e h e a rd a s Yo u a re h e wh o 3 242 . the most grimacing -. always participates in some accident. .li i y A relation_to_life arid givingit a new dimension. the signifier which marks. the most bizarre. even in non-neurotics. the community of men should be introduced into it and implicated in it. If it takes that form. and with it alone. it is not -. at what moment of the imaginary game the passage is made. and I which is called the superego.3 „. It is_ also based the _real thelorm_of_thaLkernetwhich the Oedipus complex leaves behind it -. / There is in man a siegier which marks his relation to the signifier. leaves on man the seal of his relation to the signifier. it is because its introduction into the Es as an element of the same nature as other libidinaLelemens.which analysis has shown once and for all to be cthe real forma under which is inscribed what philosophers had up until then indicated with more or less ambiguity as the density. It is with this key.. fundamentally paradoxical and conting. and I think I have been able to demonstrate it. that you can understand what is at stake when Litt. The tyrannical superego. One never knows.you are that you are. . but permanent. but tu es celui qui tuais. represents in itself alone.which we know to be incarnated in each subject under the most various forms.ite. What is characteristic in this observation. something about which we wonder why.giat.which is called'supere o. The law is not simply.

le phallophore or la phallophore.thanks to which we have observation.all the_fathei-s-love._alLhisintelligence.as if. insupportable. there is no reallather. by some concurrence of nature and the law. from which there is no exit. and if it is true that castration is the essential crisis by which eves subject is introduced. I would add here several considerations which will allow you to get used to the strict use of the category of castration as I am trying to articulate it here. without one's even stopping an instant to ask what the whole community might have to think of it. It is he or she one or the other. i dr am_m ossehtltalces. authorized to be.-. It is a sort of waking dream that Little Hans has. the big or the little giraffe. completely free.ccp_li iz_ed with full mss. If. From this perspective who would dare have recourse to the notion of object relations conceived in advance as harmonious and uniform? -. from ima iigiary harmonies Ic.nrutheir stability in the symbolic.. I All the rest_olth.of Little Hans's relation to his mother. be situated as arnatgingibelpliging. to the greatest satisfaction of the couple. and constantly.even where there are complex.Around which la s the Question of who has it." 243 . The perspective that I am bringing allows you to situate. one mightsay. and who will have it.e_game is_pmsued in_theszd. anguishing able. on the contrary. where their constellation is fixed. structures of kinship. indeed. and despite the great cries let out by the mother.e_orderofthelm. without one's ever knowing which. Despite the ambiguities of understanding on the_ part of the various actors who take the observation. w-_know how to distinvishih.eRgjjEomJhe very position of the love relation. it is clear that the little gkaffedst .play of _the ideal of the ego in relation t thanks to which the imaginary elements_take. the ilngginary. we shall conclude that it is perfectly natural -. like those we live kills.a11--his_gentleness. each in its own field and in their reciprocal relations. and it is there to underline the mechanism in the most clearly imaged way. this . each man would find his woman. ideally.

LIctiot 22 fkat e la as . every prc.to propose..it is nothing to be astonished at -. that every woman who is not permitted by the law is prohibited. one must still not suppose for all that that there is a new form of either/or showing that if incest does not occur where we might wish. at least at the limit. has pushed the liberty ofso far that hat it is always borderinun incest. and not simply that of neurotics. it tends to 244 . that is.. indeed the destitution of the love relation to the enduring fixation on the mother. In both cas_e_s.. legal union is always marked by castration. the ideal confusion. there is something_wbich_bears its limit withiself. bears castration in it. If the civilization in which we live has seen the flowering of the ideal.it-is-r-eally-a-mattera_Mcest.then the initial schema of the relation of the child to the mother always_ tends to be reproclucecLon the side of the man.even if it is a point of crossing necessary in the union between beings.phallusdos_ herself alone -. besides. in keeping with experience._fQraeasons which we stated_at the_12egiuning. in actuality. normative. an ambiguity always ready to be reborn..that is our sole advantage -.. that_she_wants_the. it is precisely because it occurs elsewhere. whatever it may be. of love and of conjugo. It is enough. 9articipates in incest. and not simply elementary structures -.riameLy. even momentary. of individual choice within the law. to lean a little on the very function of primitive laws of alliance and kinship in order to see that any conjunction. that if the ideal hie cQnjugaLconjunc. if Freudian doctrine attributes the checks. In other terms.with. It follows that in the final count. And in so far as the typical..tiorLis_monogamous_fctr_wnmaz. that is to say. That is what allows us to affirm. or in perfect households as they say.. it is in as much as it has put marriage in the foreground as the symbolic fruit of mutual consent.. a fundamental duplicity. This formula is a repercussion of the very clear echo that every marriage. and sees in its permanence I do not know what which strikes with an original tare the ideal of a monogamous union that might be wished.

But it is beyond what the real father authorizes as fixing the choice for one who has entered into the Oedipal dialectic. 6 March 1957 4 English in the original.-iniplies-that-maaphingsarereserved which does not allow us in any way to speak of the love relation-as_belongings I I • ta • •• • • II were that the most ideal.reproduce a division in him. indeed ancestral. and also. there is no longer any reason to liMit the game in this palace of illusions.diatysaLthe-law-. one can say nothing if it is not that everything occurs in some way by accident. that the subject sees. that is to say because one has an ego that is more or less weak.. butordy-by-theinterme. of course. the most motivated by the most profound affinities. 4 whiciumakes him fundamentally bigamous. a split. fixation. Mto any developed civilizations have not hesitated to make doctrine on it and put it into practice. we never see love and the consecrated union confounded. that the human being is a being deprived and forlorn. feels. I do not say polygamous. our daily experience. It is already in the primitive imaginary relation by which the child is already introduced to the beyond of the mother. in a way that is institutionalized or in a way that is anarchic. and one is more or less tied to one or another archaic. Freud. ads beyond this choice that theteds_vichati grasped in what it lacks. This structure leaves a problematic fundamentally open in the love relation in every life. experiences. his experience. nor the object of satisfaction. In a civilization like ours. • • • • I not thelegal object. The very structure which imposes upon us the distinction between the rience and the symbsilicexperience which normalizes it. 245 . or an ego that is more or less strong. to make us affirm it. although..buthetugest That is why. from the moment that the two is introduced. are there to make us sense it.

.XIII ON THE CASTRATION COMPLEX A critique of aphanasis. The imaginary father and the real father.

the precise psychical incidence of this fear. However. that Freud tries to articulate the formula for the Oedipus complex fully. p. or this menace."Being loved. His biography. The animals in phobia. or this dramatic moment -. 215] AGENT LACK OF OBJECT OBJECT Real father Symbolic mother Imaginary father Castration imaginary Frustration real symbolic Privation Today we are going to try to talk about ca stration. by bringing castration in under frustration and the imaginary phallic game with the 247 . there is no doubt." Anxiety._ Castration is everywhere in Freud's work. One might even suppose that this is the great personal problem with which he begins -. although it has been present in his thought from the beginning. with a question mark. in the article of 1924 which he consecrates to an entirely new subject. Freud never fully articulated its precise meaning. there is nothing similar anywhere. It is only quite late. Der Untergang des Odipuskomplexes.What is a father? In fact. On the lure of the moving penis. things are not the same for one as for the other.all of these words can be invoked equally. as is the Oedipus complex. confirm his preoccupations and the presence of the Oedipus complex from the beginning. about that. or this agency. When I began the last time to approach the problem. his letters to Fliess. It is only quite late that he explains himself on this subject. For castration. [Format chart. concerning castration.

as:itiLits iraplicit pivot. You will realize it if you read his work — Mr. there are some authors whom the singularity of such a consequence has not failed to attract. We shall see how to reply to them.. sign of the Oedipal drama. Thus he has advanced a term which is peculiarly his own. but which. What does that mean? Those are the questions whose echo I heard. It is aphanisis. I willingly grant you -. and to take it as a sort of as if. What. While it is not spelled out like that anywhere. 1 To take things at a simple reading. has made its way and has had its echoes. you can nevertheless take it as a point of departure. From his perspective.. is the following. while you grasped the picture that I was giving of the father's intervention. the fear of castration . Ernest Jones. and foremost among them. Jones has never succeeded in surmounting the difficulties of managing the castration complex as such. can such a formulation mean? What does it imply? What does it suppose? In fact. The solution that Jones tried to give to that mode of insistence which the psychical drama of the castration complex has in the history of the subject. But paradoxical as it is.in effect. What is this castration? For the subject to arrive at a mature genitality. One may want to avoid this formulation.. he must in sum have been castrated. one can say that rastationis_the. then. many of you.mother. it is. The current of analytic discourse these days goes that far. that is literally implicit everywhere in Freud's work. of his purely symbolic character in the dreams. still had some questions on the subject of castration. . which in Greek means disappearance. like everything that he has introduced into the analytic community. But would it not be worthwhile to pause here a bit as I am urging you to? That the abruptness of this affirmation might seem problematic. principally among English authors.

not rooted in any necessary constant of the interindividual relation. It is the difficulty that one has in integrating in its positive form the very management of castration. One must truly make a leap in understanding here and suppose that the subject is not only in a position to take. but the disappearance of what? In Jones. Thus he immediately encounters distinctions to which we give a form that is a bit more manageable. it is the disappearance of desire. which Freud. clearly articulates as a threat bearing upon the penis. In effect. that is to suppose that an immense gap'.cannot be dependent upon accident. is the subject's fear of seeing his desire extinguished. that Jones has tried to articulate his whole genesis of the Super-ego. it is around the notion of privation. but surelyiLisala anxiety that i' cingularly reflective. Aphanasis. or the contingency of threats.to put the notion of aphanisis into the foreground. aphanisis is disappearance. in so far as it makes the fear of aphanisis arise.has been crossed. but also can add to this frustration the awareness of an exhaustion of desire. Is it conceivable that this colaldjaelhesource of a primcal anxiety? Perhaps. the phallus. . however singularly these are always reproduced in the history of subjects threats expressed in the well-known parental statement -. In fact. That is what pushed Jones — at the moment when he tackled the problem of the constitution of the Super-ego. and I think that it will suffice for me to articulate it myself for you to grasp the extent to which it too cannot but present great difficulties.We shall have someone come who will cut that off for you. which has caused authors to pause. 2 4 1 . 9 . I think that you cannot help but see the highly subjectivized relation that such a notion in itself represents. which he sees as the formation in which the Oedipus complex normally ends. English in the original. I 2 English in the original. substituted for castration. Also. It is not only the paradoxical motivation of this threat.' and tried to establish its mechanism -. in his first relations with objects. Really. the distance which gives him a frustration articulated as such. however.

as they 250 . I am trying to re-endow it with its complexity as a veritable relation. in a wa_y_thatjAnzcie ty42. As for the term of frustration. in so far as itis what I have called a real hole. can he not -. let us on the contrary try to isolate it. has a constant incidence in_the_eyolutioa_o_f almost all of the cases Freud narrates.ti on. above all when one preserves them as synonyms. that dues not mean that they are equally so for an auditor who is a bit exigent. But if things are facilitated for the speaker. which has it that the subject is not satisfied in some one of his needs. privation is takenasafrustratiortrand-isfor the subject the equivalent of frustratiorLj&hich of course facilitates the articulation of the process. This. Rather than drowning the fish. It _is especially the fact that the woman does not have a penis.. is thQ crucial poinLJUs.lprivatioTis privation of the fish. It is not possible to articulate anything whatsoever concerning the incidence of castration without isolating the notion of privation. Thera§ffaTtiOrilhat we are trying to define take abase the_appielignsion in the real of the absence of the penis in the woman.the_ractstaalient evenLencountered everywhere in Freud's cases. for you to see that I do not employ the term in the summary form in which it is usually employed. that she is deprived of it. the foundation on which the . of privation rests. As it is not easy to start from givens that are so scantily sorted out. to articulate a passage from one to the other. it naturally follows that one will indicate that most_fre_quentLy. and it iz for the boy. one which supposes facing the subject another subject who refuses him the satisfaction that he is seeking.iLLma_y_say—so. no doubt. the assumptim of this fact. and I did this in a way that was very detailed in the meeting before the February break. This fact. in my chart I do not at all give the same meaning as Jones to the term privation. in the majority of cases.auhject. In fact.speaking of privation.even for a single instant --? not distinguish pure privation._kIthe T( erience of the rnale. Enough of that remains with you.mvol_a& n There is in effect a whole part of those beings in humanity who are. The Privation in question here is a term in relation to which the notion of castration is situated. from the privation that he calls deliberate.

fully. Jt enters into play_ animaginary obieLtThe problem is just for us to conceive why. and ourselves understand what it is about. by the effect of what necessity.) For in the real.Q110 lementa Thej1 3 ject in . The are cos for the sub'ectivit of the subject. an ima ina o n l t i n w ct. We shall thus start off again. Even when its terms are demonstrated in an author's discourse. suffered. i t • • ■ ■ " 1 • II At the moment.ais an object given to us in th_symbolic._ta coverdt_aatilak. nothing is deprived of nothing_AlLthat_is-real-issuffideat IsitoltsPlf By riFfinitian. To indicate that something is not there is to . in reality. as the necessary order of the chart indicates. No castration among those at f o r 3 z s i stake in the cause of a neurosis. Of course. without for the moment concerning ourselves with the experience of the patient.it concerns. . they are not well- 251 . In the real. and when we are sptakingat 1142thation. is ever a real castration. in a way that is more differentiated. The very notion of privation.. present in the genesis of a neurosis.that is to say. If weiattoslur_e the nntion of • rivation into the real it is in amuch as we alr • a sufficiently.asreale2cperience.) in so far as it is efficacious. the experience of castration turns around the reference to the real. than has usually been done. inwhatisdayolestc . Genital realization is in effect submitted in the human species to a certain number of conditions. experience such as this im lies the3yrahalizatioxLatifie_gijactin-thereill. castration is introduced into the typical development of the subject.state_. so sensible and so visible. Let us try to develop our ideas correctly with regard to this. We hope that we have articulated this stage better. supposeitspresence possible. it jntrnriiirps intn the rPal. this term is completely ambiguous. In the teaching of Freud's texts. and even. castrated. As toicastration-.Abs real is full.say in the texts. where it is a matter of his joining that complex order which constitutes the relation of man to woman. as we did the last time. from the original relation t t the mothe ge that oneLctiaAfies__ as_pre-Oedipal.

. I would almost say in a transcendence.handled and reasoned out. The symbolic father is. We find now. ag uprising. as a term which.it is that. - . To serve as a guide.Alt that happens at the level of the imaginary father. The imaginary father also participates in this register. 252 . It is to_tim that the entire dialectic most commonly refers tha • . I ask you to accept for the moment as acquired the hypothesis on which our articulation will rest and which we posited last time -. We are always having to deal with the imaginary father. . and so that we may refer to earlier terms. the real father and the imaginary father.there_is the symbolic father.. We shall set off again from that in order to try in some way to grasp from its very birth the necessity of the phenomenon of castration. for his part. He is the_tejLrifyiijg_f_ather whom we know in the background of so many neurotic experiences.t thus woricLoLthe_signifier. . effectively useful. in so far as it takes possession of this imaginary_objesLof its instrument. which are properly speaking species relations. as I have indicated along the way. behind the symbolic mother. If we call him itnagLinau. • • iv f identification.-forms-the-psychological support of relations toone's _peers.s.Ansimlaicb_werrua. and symbolizes a symbolic debtor symlaoliczInishment. in any case.h_one_can_sinlyspeak by rediscovering-both its_necessity_and its character. of the idealization by which the subject accedes_ta_an. a necessity of the symbolic construction that we can situate only in a beyond. and wh ch areAtihe_basis_otaildnal ca•ture • O . is only reached by a mythical construction. I have often insisted on the fact that this symbolic father is in the end nowhere represented. inscribed in Abe symb_olic_chain. ielations. and wiLgills. identificiather. if it will make us rediscover this element of the drama of castration in complex reality. If the symbolic father is the signifier& whic. the imaginary father and the real father are two terms which give us much less difficulty. It is for the remainder of our march to confirm if the thing is valuable. on our chart.it is also because he is integrated into the imaginary relation_which. and presents some typical characteristics..

It is not by chance. becauseoLthe interposition of fantasies and the necessit •- it 6 It is the same for each of us. Therea_l_la the • something_completely ather. any more explicable.. it is to the real father that the salient function in the castration complex is effective) deferred. nor because of some bizarre event in the earliest encounters of the subject._v_e. and which is solely linked to a moment of development. it is really that we have an enormous amount `of difficulty in discerning the mast rea • human beings such as they are The whole difficulty both of psychic development as simply of daily life. Why this castration? W_hy_ this bizarre form of intervention in the economy of subject. I beg you to accept for the moment what may perhaps at first sight appear paradoxical to you on this chart. can justly be considered as a constant element of what we these days call the child' s entourage.a. jasneyer_laaiLather_tham. If castration effectively deserves to be isolated with a name in the history of the subject. It offers us a recourse. But with_c_astratiQn. 253 . that the physician was first caught by those scenes of early seduction that one has recognized to be more fantasmatic than one had supposed at the beginning.ty_safficult grasp. fantasmatic... namely that contrary to the normative or typical function that one would like to give him in the Oedipal drama. and what can already appear as its contingency. These considerations do not render castration. which is_ called castration? That has something shocking in itself. is to know with whom we are really dealing. It is the same for this personage of the father. who. We frequently see in the child's fantasies the emergence of a sometimes grimacing figure of the father. which we must refuse. If there is one thing which is at the base of the whole analytic experience.no obliggary relation at all with the real father of the_child.of_w-hom-the_claad 1 . which belongs to the time even before he analyzes and doctrinizes on the subject. therejsalo question of ca ling the whole affair. You know that that is one of the stages of Freud's thought. and also of the mother. which has only an extremely distant relation with how the child's real father was. under ordinary conditions. as has been done with scenes of early seduction.

in order to try to find our bearings in the complex dramas which Freud elaborates for us. He is a very fine man. On the other hand..that in following it.iti&alimays--liriked—to_thejacidence. which is profoundly neuroticizing.the_real father and castration. As we see him at the beginning of the observation. when it occurs.oLthe real father. This atypicality. that is. on the basis of which we shall begin to try to understand the signification and the necessity of the castration complex. is bathed in happiness. by the a_bstaceof the real father. and Little Hans truly has the best of sentiments towards him.o_ne_cannotay thaLLittle Hans is frustrated of something. then demands a substitution for the real father of something other. This phobia is taken in charge by his father.to the intervention. the best that they make as real fathers go. It can be equally marked. in a way that is proiciund. So I ask that you provisionally accept this position. 2 Little Hansj from the age of four and a half. but without grasping anything of the motives that make us choose the right path at each crossroads. He loves his father very much.. develops what is called a phobia. a neurosis. by now taking up the case of Little Hans. He is the object of an attention that the father has certainly not waited for the appearance of the phobia to demonstrate. and he is also the object of his mother's most tender care. so 254 . an only child.... Little Hans. we have ourselves the impression of being guided at every moment. and he is far from fearing from him so abusive a treatment as that of castration. who happens to be one of Freud's disciples. We really often have the sentiment that he allows himself to be guided in advance by a thread that is from time to time so sure -. We shall now start from the supposition oftheliiadamental character of thediak_between.and_pidclundlY disequilibrated.as in the case of Little Hans -.

For the moment. of course._ w12ichstration complex. As Freud says very well. and that _this is just what will serve him as material for constructing what he needs. and has pronounced the fatal words -. this Little Hans. This is the question we have reached. which is not an element of comment. He is frustrated of nothing. it is certainly not to this moment that Freud himself thinks of assigning anything whatever that is decisive in the apparition of the phobia. Of course he will later 255 . I would almost say. whatever he says.this_ moment. The child continues. All the same. and the child continues to masturbate. The child hears this menace. and of the fact that we can in no way link it in a simple and direct fashion to the prohibition on masturbation. masturbation s n t br g any anxiety in its wake . as he should.tender even that he is handed everything. without the mother in question for the slightest moment taking account of the observation that is respectfully suggested to her by the personage of the father.But the question is just to know why he needs it. that the mother has gone so far as to forbid him to masturbate. for. and we are nowhere near immediately giving it an answer. at the beginning of the observation. If this intervention must be noted because of the scrupulousness with which the observation is taken. One must really have the sublime serenity of Freud to sanction the mother's actions. come. But we do not have the impression that this has been something decisive. which does not prevent them from behaving exactly as though they knew nothing. and this despite the express reserves of the father and spouse. You will see that it turns out later that there is nothing more that one can say to a child.If you masturbate. it is not a question of castration. we see. The parents are sufficiently informed. things continue nonetheless in the most decided fashion. but we can gage that he is entirely powerless in the situation. we shall have Doctor A. and he will cut it off for you. it is a question of phobia.. he is truly deprived of nothing. for in our days every anathema would be heaped upon her for each morning admitting Little Hans as a third into the conjugal bed. Not only does the latter show a very particular tolerance here.

and the outbreak of the phobia remains a problem which we must know how to introduce as such.in a way that is certainly different. which is that the mother_exists. There is for the child a . as one calls it.gttt__c_ iat we an in no case considgra5jctealltuted. isthere to spell out -. This presence is very quickly articulated in the pair presence-absence with which we begin. and it is what I am formulating by the position which I give to the mother on the chart. The mother is ALL= the symbolic math& and it is onl in the s t r a t i o n thatkelg i n o be realized. The mother 256 . and if difficulties have 12wnraisedsaicerning the_eaxly_object world of the child. which becomes manifest at the moment of his phobia. I am not the first to contradict. the sensitivity of the child to the presence of his mother is very precociously manifested in his behavior. because of a certain number of shocks and particular events that occur in the relations between the mother and the child. lus in the pre-Oedipal relation of the child to the The mother here is the object of love the object_desired forits prsence. The conditions that surround this child are optimal. The work of Alice Balint. with the veritably worthy character that it assumes.jt is because of - an inadequate distinction in the term object itself. but this certainly does not seem to be a traumatizing incident that allows one to understand its outbreak.integrate it into the conflict. from the organ which satisfies him. for example. that is to say the organ of nourishment. The mother exists as a s m -ct and as the object of love. Experience confirms it. It is on this condition that we shall be able to find the convergencies which will shed light.what I am in the process of telling you. The reaction. Ishall first remind you of the fundamental situation thatprecLaLs_ - regarding the Mother. - pat That the world of the child is made only of a pure state of suspension. p_E:_LcligLglajr. and which will favor our theoretical effort. with indeterminate limits. which does not for alliliatsuppose that there are already an I and a not-I. and I think less tenable -. That is a relation as simple as you can imagine.

the question proposed to us by the facts is to know liowthe_chialearns_what_hee matluilaasic hypothesis.kte_himselLintroclucgs the illuminationyAichLbrings_thispresenc in to surround him. he is not alone because there are other children.It is the fact that. but_ttie guegion-is-zaised. In fact. the mother meld. coextensive with the rolp_?jemthatwearetackling. with the signification that this carriesZ_The_child must include himself in the relation as the object of the motlier:„Llave_lt a mater_oLhis-learaing_thathe brings_his mother pleasure. that he knows if his presence commands. The relation of the child to the mother. tilie_experience of the child. opens the door to what one habitually calls. what fundamentally happensin the first concrete stage of the_lave relation. The revelation of the phallic mother for the child. that of the presence which is necessary to him. and if he himSall_b_rings_her_the-satisf-aetien-aloye. that of Penis-neid for the mother. which indicates to him that. It is one of the fundamental experiences of the child. which isthebackgraunfLoteshilca_sattsia..- relationship will One of the most common experiences is that at first. Something is articulated ittle111 litLA. But our basic hypothesis is that ere is anothei:terma_play which in itself iu-aplicaLsozatiependent of the c• • ■ . the presence or absence of another child. . As I have indicated. be it ever so little.ctiatuaccurs_ or does not occur. to a de subjects. the primary undifferentiated relationship.• 1.4 y. d ■ • Tat is the _ground on which is played eve thin that develo • s between the mother and_laira. The child fulfills or does not fulfill it. f can at eve moment nonlent be the deal other in as much as she frustrates this lave.• . as you know is that he is not alone. which is a relation of love.t that i - the whole dialecticofthtmathers. that is to say. 257 . because one does not know how to articulate it. In short o e love :eh'.Whi:Li5A11e 0 2 .. in his mother' • • • ■ et is not alon•• • • d_thia_poin.

y with the mother as bearer of the phallus. If I have chosen to start from a particular point in order to arrive at a particular point.ce not of abstraction but of & genetalizationsd_thelmaginary relatico_whickLcalLoneoatze.kre. and that there are ranged all the intermediate scales that can link him to that relation. even if they still necessitate its experience.homosexuality being reserved here. and as a constant reference in the relation of the mother with the child. contrary to what is said. to different degrees and in different positions. but also in her desire. it is because we must consider Penis neid as one of - the fundamentalgiyerls of_analytic experience. child. in the other. That is the bearing of what is worked out in the lesson to which I alluded just before.tbis_clesire of the mother. and if all be_saicldnisb_a_t_sliejs_lacking. There is here a high cjggr.through which the child attests to the mother that he can fulfilLiaq. in so far as. identify with the_phallus.They are not on the same plane. since it is uniquely around it that the relation of the fetishist to his object is articulated. He can identify the mother. or present himself as the bearer of the phallus. so complex and so elaborate that only analysis has been able to catch its accent in speaking of transvestism -. that-Yerv-prezisely-. At what point does something put a term to the relation thus sustained? What puts a term to it in the case of Little Hans? 3 258 .40-14. And he . It is in the relation to the mother that the_child-experienres the phallits__as_heing the center of her desire. The child presents himself to the mother by offering_ her the phallus in itself. to start from the pre-Oedipal stage in order to arrive at the Oedipus complex and the complex of castration. the real penis. This situation is certainly structuring. sittIatesiaimself_thereiasl.ifferent positions by which heis legLto maintain. since it concerns the need of the object. Experience proves that there is no way to explain the_perversions otherwise. they are not entirely explained by the pre-Oedipal stage.ngtgrily as .

If we are to trust in the words that come down to us.in this so extraordinarily_ evanescentrelation in which itiappears_to-us.. we see the child completely engaged in a relation in which the phallus plays the most evident role. and the doctrine comes afterwards. but I shall indicate that as_a_mecharlism.At the beginning of the observation. the phallus is truly the pivotal object.p_eachArne that_thesubject. which is as you ? I shall not give you a one sentence resume of the road Freud follows. They talk only of the phallus.anxiety is always present in the stages_of his observation. What is it that changes. by a fortunate encounter. by that fortunate miracle which is produced each time that we make a discovery. The important element is not so much that the mother intervenes at this moment. How should we conceive the anxiety that occurs in this instance? As closely as possible to the phenomenon. and you will perceive that the p. s-ur-ges-u. and we are trying to give it its meaning. They teach us that Little Hans is always fantasizing the phallus. . the central object. His penis begins to move.• •hen a. We are here with Freud's text before us. That is the massive fact in the observation. How to conceive of anxiety. as impsceptthly_as_ma_y_be -beeernesunglued from_his existence and when he perceives himself as beirigcmthepsecapturer . we must ask ourselves if there is not a relation between this fact and • . then in the father. I ask you for a moment to have recourse to that mode which consists in using a little bit of imagination. for one must take things in order. asking his mother about the presence of the phallus in the mother.nxiety. when nothing critical occurs in the life of Little Hans? What changes is penis begins to unethixag real. After that. then in animals._a permanent question all throu r 259 . The father's notes on what he has observed of the child's development up to the hour H when the phobia begins testify to that. I have not yet broached the problem of anxiety in this seminar. but that the penis has become real. know. and the child begins_ to masturbate. of the organization of his world.

anxietyiscorretative with thsrnony. with a bit of luck. dupe of his own game. and I am contenting myself here with indicating that all this dep_ends. and we shall try to approach more closely what Hans was for his mother.. the game in whicliong is what one is nElt„orja_w_hickLane is iorthe mother everything that the mother_wants. for a mere index. he succeeds. etc.• - e most elementary sense of the term. even very little.n1 when the_ stilib'ect is suspended between a time in which he no longer kriowsi6zharehe_is.by_something_that you will call. be it ever so slight. I cannot speak of everything at once. and nears a time in which he is going to be something in which he w to find himself again.. the child is in the paradise of the lure. depending on the circumstances.ears in Little H 1 1 1 I. We shall introduce a difference in a moment.after all. of which Isp2ke just before. suffices to sanction this so delicate relation. prey to every discord. . Up until here. Do you not see that _this is introduced here at the moment when there a. image of the_oilier..soraethingich moves the real penis. on what the child really_ is for the mo. and when what hadloza Joni time been paradisefor_him„happiness. He is caught by his own snare.ther.Aemplation. That is anxiety. The child tries to flow. In short. to inrate himself into what he is in the mother's love — and... But from the moment when(the drive intervenes. Is it satisfying for him? There is no reason why he should not play this game for a very long time in a way that is satisfying. begirt&-baseemjil<e a_ trap? -. We remain for the moment at that crucial point which gives us the general schema of things. confronted by the immense gap that there is between satis in an 260 .namely. his real penis there occurs this ungLiing.

ortftwimagiRary phallus._ itts_j. To the extent that the situation continues that is to za21b..03..31(stufilittig. I am here to show you why. with its zohibitionaapcLtheLeigil_ottlielaw.s.. The symi orderintervenes_pre.as something miserable„The_child is thus placed before the way open to becomingthecapliye. . 3 English in the original.we have a thousand examples of this in analytic reality -..3Athich. s the decisive role is that what he has torpssent in the end appears. or that he is.o.to present in cash..b.3 if I may say so.91. I indicated last year --it-is_vezy_preciselyatihis_p.leaves.ci$4. and having something real tosresent -.. What tl2er21.cif_a_ga=.J. The intervention of the father introduces the symbolic order. the passiusienien.and we shall see concretely how necessary he is --. s g a i j a . refused by his mother. but in a way that is outside the_reaLcotiplederis thus .... tb.Lthe symbolic—father -.elyirnaginary_plane everything that is at_stake concerning the phallus. For one who is not.Lamelythe affair both paces out of_ the child's hands and is settled elsewhere. for example.12. for one or another reason.. . the victim. plane._in which be..ation_isliteralLy_without issuety_itselLexcept for the issue that is. called the castration complex. The castratio_n_complex takes up on thetpg__. the child finds himself in the very particular_ situation of being entirely delivered up to the eye and to the_ga. itie_child is mitirelysil from what the partner indicatestoliin.. him outside.. 261 .image. It is precisely for this reason that it is convenient for the real phallus to be outside the field.him. and at the same time is still only a game of luring..t_there_daes not interveausg.to.oint_thaLtkurigin Df_parmoilltanche.e.ze_of_the.eamitp. What does not fail to occur is not simply that the child fails in his gtempts at seduction.It is not for nothing that castration. Thatis_the dilemma.thelmaginaa_.c. From the moment that the game becomes serious._a_the manifestationsartner become for him sanctions of hissulfkigac.. But let us leave the future paranoiac aside.aut. the ferm...t.-. Dthgr.y or of his insufficiency..othe. t ..p. The father is he with whom there is noshange of winning other than by accepting the distribution of _ parts as they are..

The same short-circuit occurs as that with which primitive frustration is satisfied. and this. if there were only one bridge to throw across. If it were so easy. with regard to his mother. as you see in the case of our little gentleman. that Little Hans has reached at the moment when precisely nothing of the sort is produced for him. What is interesting is the point that we have reached. Whatever horse may be the object of the phobia. that is to say. it is really a question of &horse that bites. I said then that in the presence of the mother's default. which leads the child to take_ possession of the breast to end all his problems. are immediately marked even to the eye of the most superficial observer by the characteristic of being objects which essentially_ ' 262 . which are animals in particular.remion_occurs when it is no lgager enough to give what there is to give.Reg. As is the case each time that we have to do with a certain number of fundamental relations. where it is the child who is the center.. the gulf that opens before him. With what is LidleJzians_confronted? He is at the point of encounter with the real drive and. What. namely. of being devouredbythe_mothe.egablfished within which the child will be able to wait out the evolution ofj J That may seem to you a rather simple solution. a bridge thrown across. I would prefer that you be astonished. since there is a neurosis. is then produced? You will not be astonished to learn that a i_lgressionis produced. it is really necessary to leave some aside if we are to articulate something clear. the child collapses into the satisfaction of nursing. for it is not just anything that bites or that devours. and he firlds_hirriself in_the disarray of no longer sufficing. when we spoke about frustration. the imaginary game of phallic lure. for I am giving this term the strict weight that I gave it in the last session before the break. It is not the solution. It is the same . The theme of devoration is always somewhere to be found in the structure of phobia. What is certain is that the objects of phobia. there would be no need to throw it across. here. Is this the whole of it? Certainly not. We cannot resolve everything at once. This is also the iiragarb that the phobia takes.r. it is a rapid indication.

many times. for example. It is nothing else that motivates the analogy between the father and the totem in the construction of Totem and Taboo. . you see Little Hans developing full steam all sorts of extraordinarily novelesque imaginings concerning his relations with all those whom he adopts as his children. the giraffe. of being completely lost.of the symbolic father. You will see that without a doubt this is a phobia. Ee do not see what the final term of thissifier is.belong to the symbolic order. something that belongs to the order of fact or of positive experience. but an apparatus made necessary by what we find in experience. The horse is situated at an extremely precise boundary. if I may say so.which is that of a stand . are precisely loreignA:+je. It is an imaginary theme in which 263 . and the father does not quit until the moment that it ends. and one can . The lion.borrowecLfrom-a categoxy_of signifiers of the sarne_nature„oLthesamtiartay those which one finds in eats of arms. You will have all the fluttering impressions that this reading can evoke. in what they have read. That is not the question. I would still like those of you who are willing to submit to this proof. 4 Here I ask you to take up the text of the observation of Little Hans between now and next time. in for the_s jsnifier. Besides.=4. These objects have in fact a very special function . you will even have the feeling.• 16. The parents have taken to the ranks from the moment it appeared. and to the irreducible. to tell me the next time if.cts. and above all when the child does not live in countries where this animal presents the least sign. At the outset. a phobia on the march. There really must be. we are not here to resolve the problem of why phobia takes the form of some particular animal. but simply of presence. I am not presenting you a deduction. the wolf.1■• wonder why it dons one form or another. in what we encounter. they are not struck by a contrast. not only of danger. which well shows that these_objects.are. I would like you to read this text.. but.1.

gives.it.isbeCa. who is the daughter of the proprietors of the place where the family goes for vacations. in the carriage.bitn_ ._in_the_fo_rm_of an a rticulated stoxy. everything that was tending to_be crystallized on the_plane of a sort of premature real.expressecLin_theslearest. But to the whole extent that he intervenes.. since it is a matter of an jmaginuy which playsin order to reorganize the s_prtlaolic_worict.. It is just there that the observation stops.we shall see what satisfactory cure means in regard to his phobia --. has been able to_clo so only because he has haci_behind him therxrataliciallagr:„. up to the little girl whom he loves from a distance. One thing is certain. a coherence is massively marked betweenwhat I shall call the imaginary_orgy.the mother. so radical .way. sAkenAheinstallatiorlzwwe_d_As_such. In short.so_littie up until then. If the phobia ends in the most satisfactory of cures -._ancl. on horses.wijh his mother there. Under pressure of the analytic interrogation. And if he feels totally at ease bere.whois_Ereud...use_he_ himself is inscribed in a position which blends in an isientifitaiita-witli . more or less directed.ring. in a chest. takes off_a_gain into a radical imaginary.the course of the analysil_azElltEintervention of the real father. He incontestably proves to have a refined sense of humor.. He in effect maintains a whole range of relations.. This episode is in contrast with what happens after the father's interventions. which go from the little girl whom he squeezes and courts at close range. that one no longer even knows very well where one is. which he pursues with very great ease on the plane of fiction.ssam. One wonders at every instant if Little Hans is not there to mock at the world. and it is that the cure occurs at the moment when_castration_assuchis. since it concerns adopting children... It is.another. a good many years before her birth.. he gives himself up to a sort of fa_atasnvel_irt_whichAe_reconstructs the presence of his little sister. unscrews it for him... One can conclude that the solution of the phobia is 264 .. it is in so far as the real father has intervened who had interYened. and all the forms of the love relation.he shows himself at great ease. It is that he_prolongs the_game of ki_JLe. and who moreover. made by the father at his side.clu.

Hans's imaginary orgy.allied to the constellation of this triad — imaginary orgy. you will find this at the bottom of a page -. an intermediate point in my discourse.It is better than nothing. But above all. Freud is forced to say continually -. The real father. to whom we shall return the next time. light of cast ti n to an end. intervention of the real father. The bringing . of the castration complex.. It does not matter. but what it was there to replace. and we shall try to disengage the value. 13 March 1957 265 . and also very well shows. and the advent of castration. symbolic castration. I would not say its finality. . all supported and bucked up as he is by the symbolic father.IQ . comes in as a sorry type.. With all the questions that he clearly presses upon his son.do not understand too quickly. you must let him talk. The next time we shall take up the dialectic of the child's relation to the mother. and I wanted simply to give you enough to let you see where the fan of questions rays out. under the form of the re1p_2cslent of what is real by something bigger and better. fully articulated. the true signification. as you will have sensed. the father takes a false path. This is only. The result scans around his intervention on two points -.

and to look at it rather closely.XIV THE SIGNIFIER IN THE REAL The network of The Purloined Letter. Edgar Alien Poe. Le s'éminaire sur "La Lettre volie" is also published in Ecrits. No 2. for example. I appreciate the attention of those who have devoted themselves to this examination. 1 2 266 . I allude to it in my own text. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis. under the title Seminar on "The Purloined Letter. 191-205. A certain number of you have had the time to read it. I shall begin with a precision concerning the article that appeared in La Psychanalyse. pp. This has been translated by J. 38-72. Cf. I shall now clarify what is in question. Phobia structures the world. Mehlman in Yale French Studies: 48. Still. 1972. that I was denying chance. Book II. They imagined. pp.' All alone with Mariedl. 11-61. I must believe that the recollection of the context in which we dealt here with what is taken up again in that introduction is not easy for everyone to recover. The Seminar. Something black in front of the mouth. since they fall into an error reactualizing that in which some could let themselves be caught at the moment when I presented these terms. The Purloined Letter." 2 and I shall deal especially with its introduction. pp. The child as metonymy. and I shall not come back to it.

discovered it. 8. y. is 13. One of those who examined the thing in the most precise. . Beginning with that. by its amplitude.+. We take by threes the signs + and -. To begin with even and end with odd. We ordain these groups as 1. is y. using a term that cannot be translated into French.1 It will not be unfruitful for me to remind you of the givens with which we begin. It is a simple question of definition -it is enough to posit it thus. 3 English in the original. or from 3 to 1. takes in a series of five signs from the first line.it is what immediately springs into view as being uneven. or that one could for a single instant take this definition as anything other than the convention of a starting point. + . This operation is founded on the observation that when one knows the two extreme terms of this second series. Though perhaps that was written in my text in a way that was sufficiently condensed to have caused difficulty for some. at first sight. another series of symbols which are constructed on the basis of the preceding series. in fact. the middle term is univocal. or on the contrary a suite which can be either + + -. 267 . That is what I call. From odd to odd. limping. one can construct a network like a parallelepiped formed with vectors. taken in a chance order of temporal succession. + + . by convention. that is from symmetrical to symmetrical. 13. is 8. odd3 -. for the existence of the symbol to be instituted. the context rules out any ambiguity.. whether it is from 1 to 1. To go from even to even. and most competent way. are different from the others in not having symmetry. is a. or an alternation. Those are the conventions.+ -. The convention is thus to write a sign there which. but also equally well . according to whether they represent a succession of identical signs.+. 2. from 3 to 3.-. We shall now call a. and 3. To come back from odd to even. groupings which.

It is a simple apparatus for the control of calculations. 268 .after y. you see that there is always a dichotomous division proposed starting from each of them. It has the interest of allowing you always refer to it as to a trustworthy instrument. which is not the case for the other points. I arrive at a disputable point. which will indicate. and a index 2. or a y. that you have forgotten a possible solution. this network gives an exhaustive resume of the possible successions. and the only successions possible. there are two possible issues -.from the lower 6. or that you are completely mistaken. and this is precisely how it is. One could. 232] THE NETWORK The network must be oriented. because I had not shown it to you here. Why did I not put that in my text? First. A series which cannot be laid down on this network is a series which is impossible. name the angles by eight different letters instead of naming them by four different letters. there can be a or [3 on one hand. p.[Diagram. The objection that certain people made with regard to the presentation of the evidence for this functional diversity is as follows. or on the other. y or 8. there can be a 13 or an a. The a can be reproduced indefinitely. and to be sure that one has not omitted any of the possible solutions. If you look at the angles thus marked. according to them. there can be another 8. From 8. or one could write a. there are in some way two species of 13. whatever the problem that you pose with regard to this series. You see that on this network. while from the other 8. which allows one to buckle the problem definitively. In short. unless that is expressly indicated by the loop thus defined. Another example -. and two species of 8.

whereas. What you call an ambiguity is precisely what one must make palpable.4 that is to say. which is pure chance. things are oriented.it_supposes-the-rrtirms. when one can express it more clearly by distinguishing them. One can in effect say that the choice of symbols introduces a certain ambiguity at the outset. In so far as the symbol is pills. Thus the play of symbols which would make that internal law always implied by the creation of the symbol arise from itself. for it ' • I .. and I took the minimal step that one could take_in_groaping the—symbsALtrahrees. To confound them would introduce an ambiguity into the symbol itself. it supposes the plus. What in fact would happen if one refused this step and if one replaced four of these angles by the series E. That is. or 1 then 2. The ambiguity is always there. and that in consequence. and it is evidently not the same if there is first 2 then 1.0? One would have different. English in the original. 269 . and each would be coupled with two others. . completely exact. tent that the symbol conceals thisamapppars what I call the law. purloined.It was said to me that there was no clear and distinct definition of a symbol here. all that I had represented and said was only a sort of opacification of the mechanism.. and that is where the trouble that occurs in some minds begins. That is what lets one see The interest of choosing ambiguous symbols which join the angle a 4 5 English in the original. it is because I had no other aim than to remind you of the context into which the stolen. would go beyond what is given at the outset. extremely complicated sequences. . in a certain way. since there is a temporal succession. 1 1. I think I must explain myself.. the further we go in the construction. In so far as the symbol is minus.5 letter had been introduced. from the dissymmetry. Admit for a moment that this is the minimal ste•. which stems from the simple indication of oddity. since one would have to deal with eight terms. It is a matter of knowing what the clarity in question means. according to an order which would be far from being immediately evident. If I did not demonstrate that in the article.

if at Time 1 and Time 2 you may have any of these symbols. from the moment_ that one simply counts --. vykose_every conception rests upon the persistence_or_the_effacing-a-an-impx. Time 3 is ruled by a dichotomy which excludes the possibility that from a or 5 in Time 1.ession. although in fact it has different functions. in fact. or even less. you can obtain y or 8 in Time 3. so that you could glimpse how the signifier is truly the organizer of something irkeren.y_froixivitaLmemory. wlEtiscastured in the order of memory is structured in a way.with another angle that we have also called a. and that with y or 13 in the first. I indicated in my text certain consequences which have the interest of revealing other phrases having the same form. 270 . [Format formula. p. From the moment that we introduce the signifier into the real. with properties and laws of syntax which can be deduced from this extremely simple formula. I tried to choose them so that they would be metaphorical.ne_conceive a theory of memory founded on the theme of the vital property pure and simple. 234] y 1 . In grouping them this way.Lin. you can obtain a or 13 in the third. you see the emergence of the extremely simple law that I expressed for you by one of the schemas in the text. o._ human memory. is fundamentally structured in a different vsr.that is fundamentally_different_from everything that can occur to make. The latter. and it is introduced there from the moment that one simply begins to speak. in as much as it always implies in its weave some_ elements of the signifier. 3 Time 1 Time 2 705 Time 3 THE MECHANISM OF DISTRIBUTION This schema allows us to say that.

I bring in a fourth. I had it checked by a mathematician. after Time 3. there is spelling [orthographe]. a project that has been determined upon. I shall illustrate metaphorically.that it is a matter of simple definitions and of the premises 271 . You would be wrong to think it. I shall start with the same hypothesis. And that is why I would like you to keep in mind for a moment the notion that this quite simply means that from the moment that there is writing [graphic]. in the function that we could give to what I shall on this occasion call theimpossible signifier.distinct from current usage -. the put mortuum of the sir±ifier. the slightest element of incertitude or of fragility has been introduced. these are not things on which I have been reflecting since yesterday. but which takes nothing away from my earlier demonstration. which can serve to give an image of what precisely will occur in an immediate future. I want to point out that the question does not lie there. with the universal incompetence that characterizes me. That certain signifying elements should be rendered impossible by that fact alone. certain eliminations will result at the second and third stages. Take Time 4 as a point of arrival. Do not believe that because these details have been added. T c h a l l illiietrai-o that fnr - VIM 1 nnw in anni-hor wau which will norhanc J- seem more probing to you. from the moment when it becomes the future perfect with regard to an aim. Any one of the four symbols is possible at this place.That is what I am trying to illustrate metaphorically. I interrupted my development there. You know quite well that I have not fabricated all that as a sort of mathematical excursion. First. If at this point you choose one of the four symbols. and laws so easy to consider in a differentiated way as the terms of the different angles in the parallelepiped construction that I have given you. Then. in the sense -. and when. when I speak to you of the future perfect. since Time 4 has the same function as a Time 2. But as some may still want to argue in the name of some sort of false evidence which might emerge from the fact that every sort of mystery does not disappear just because laws can be discerned.

Only. the odd with two light feet at the beginning and the odd with two light feet at the end. At this stage. especially that particularly striking intuitive element which is founded on scansion.which follow. for example a. since because you started with a. you can have a. I shall tell you why it seems to me interesting to limit the creation of the first signifier to this stlictelemeAt. I shall go back to my chart. 13. But what must you have at Time 3 in order to have 13 in Time 5? At Time 3 you must have a. nor anything else from that line. We have in fact all the possible symbols. y. Here. there can in no case be y.I want to have a series which has a at the first time and p at the fifth --. which already implies a sort of corporal engagement. a. Poetry begins there. 8 can be written. we are simply bringing in the idea of symmetry or asymmetry. the letter 13 for example. in the third stage. if you take as point of departure another letter. the slightest examination of the situation shows you that if you choose as point of arrival in the fifth stage any letter whatever. but I shall stay with this one. If I start again with the odd suite without distinguishing from the beginning. you soon see that. as I could just as well have done since someone said to me. 8. is determined in a way that is univocal. I could show you other characteristics that are equally striking. that is a or 13. we are not even entering into poetry. the median letter. in that hope that it will succeed in arousing in your 272 . 13. and if you say -. y. and I invite you to consider what happens at Time 6. the anapest and the dactyl. and from which certain intuitive elements are eliminated. you can at Time 3 have only what occurs above the line of dichotomy. At the fourth time. and we have them at two levels. the one which occurs at Time 3. it is that the whole interest of the question consists in starting with definitions that in fact are rudimentary. It results that when you intend to make a series in which there are two determined letters distributed across five times. You see the excess of possibilities that we have.

it is then certain that the symbolic order. That entails a series of ___ philosophical and mathematical speculations to whose proof I did not deem it necessary to submit you by commenting on this work. That is what this speculation on a. contrary to what Mr.u_thaLfrom. y. independent of all experience.at. the possibility of checking for errors.minds the dimension that I am trying to evoke. The latter believed he had to make detours which are considerable — the closer a thing is to simplicity. 'ri solaras it ia_cli ict from the real. but that theducemerges_with_the_signifieran a way that is I internal. the least occurrence of writing makes spelling arise at the same time.ctits mjsinalii. only one letter is possible.That is why this example was constructed J. Jung might believe.. no deduction from experience can make us accede to the number three. Fi. and introduces an original dimension into it We other analysts. Still. 8 is intended to demonstrate.. that is arithmetic.. 13.. At the center.t_shaves_yo. whether there is a fault -.__g a mathematician of this century who was devoted to the foundations of that science. that is to say. the more difficult it is to grasp -. enters into the real like a ploughshare. and the term which occurs two places later.the raust_elementary appearance ctf the_signifier_the_ia_w_ariscs. These things seem to entail great resistance for some minds. to read Mr. in order to demonstrate that there is no possible deduction of the number three stares g from exmiencg_aloae. and this by referring to the term which occurs two places earlier.. . It in fact results from this property that if you take any term whatever in the chain._Th4i§what is at cause in this instance. In other terms. this was an easier path than counseling you. for example. It nonetheless remains that that is very important for us. in a simple way that causes no trouble to the eye. must take_acc_ou. 273 . for if. in so far - as we operate in the register of language. you can immediately verify.this is a verification that a typographer can make --._Independently of everyleal element: That does not at_all mean that chzace_is commanded. it seemed to me that in order to make you sense a certain dimension.but which are still convincing. in appearance the simplest of all.

The animals there seemed to be at complete liberty. This observation came to me one day when I found myself in a remarkable zoo situated sixty kilometers north of London. and it is just to the degree that man does all the same know how to count. with the help of little rope ladders and other gadgets. and I shall turn to something else.. it is simply that the lion does not know how to count to three. but is only articulated. since the number three is never completely integrated for them. I deliver that for your meditation.. from what we know. which is apparent.are_before_whatis_our principal object in anal sis nab.that_we. And I asked myself why this good entente among these animals when. In other terms. all having the air of a good entente and the most pacific humor. that of the imaginary. If it were not so difficult to succeed in articulating the number three. One could even go further. that conflict exists. at least. It does not seem to me that I made too great a leap in my mind when I said to myself -. it is because men do not know how to count much better than the lion. 274 . val_at-stake-each-time. It is precisely a matter of perceiving that from the moment that 6 English in the original. I shall tell you an idea that came to me quite intuitively. I should normally have seen an outbreak among them of the most manifest signs of rivalry or conflict. there would not be this gap6 between the Oedipal_ancLthe_pre. Jy i# of interhuman conflict.I am afraid of tiring you. Understand that it is because the lion cannot count to three that the lionesses do not feel the slightest sentiment of jealousy. I contemplated a lion surrounded by three magnificent lionesses. The fundamentally dual animal relation continues no less to prevail in a certain zone. the bars having been lodged in the ground in ditches that were invisible. that in the last analysis what we call conflict is produced. we must never neglect the introduction_of the signifier in understanding the uplea. but which was rather less certain as an affirmation. and say that in the end.Oh well.Qedipal-that we are trying to cross these days as well as we can.

one tries to cross it. 0-leis always obliecgitouse gadgets. There is no sort of truly experiential crossing of the_gap between the two and the three. It is very precisely this point that we have reached with little Hans. 275 .

hpArically_ when the child said to his mother --itynEAave a peepee maker. I believe. there arrives to the general surprise what we can call without dramatizing it too much. the mother. in which he is even capable of taking the greatest pleasure. have gone to the text and have been able see that this is really where one begins.To follow the trajectory that we are metaphorically making through the observation of Little Hans. and fortunate way. from so simple a 276 . clear. which is that of the mother. Freud underlines. But. and everything seems to go perfectly well. whose presence was already announced in the text meta. namely. A certain number of you. which is not there..2 We left Little Hans at the moment when he was about to tackle the pass that we call the castration complex. which is also his. or of the big horse or the little horse. At the outset. a little difficulty -. which is everywhere and which is nowhere. and for whichoiecannot see that it is anything for him other than a very pretty object in a game of hide-and-seek. thanks to this liberalism. The fact that the imageoLthe horse appears on the horizon already indicates that the child is preparing to enter the phobia. That is where Hans has arrived. indeed this educative laxity which appears rather characteristic of the pedagogy which seems to be discernible in the early days of psychoanalysis. The child develops in most open. we must understand how. This child. This phallus is the essential element in the relation of teslild_ to what is for him what Freud at this moment calls the other person. it is very evident that he is not yet there. you must have a very bigpesiiee_piaLc e r like a horse. that this is uniquely what it is about. At a particular moment. for he plays with the Wiwimacher which is here.the phobia. after these very pretty antecedents. the child shows great fright before a Erivileggiphject which happens to be the horse. or Papa's. no doubt for are leatsfrom_the outset a problematic of the imaginary _phallus.

and tArifin the:. These are two very differentiated modes of relation. the ladies of his world. that is. note that Tjttle_Elans_manifests_on_ the im4ginary_plane the most strictly typical attituclene could expert of whatin call in our rude language virile aggression. that he tells them that he has been to the zoo and seen a lion equipped with a big pee-pee maker. very cultivated. hugs. already very fine. which is even differentiated into two modes — there are the little girls whom he squeezes. there is a courtship at play. In order to have an idea of the harmony that prevailed before the phobia. the child passes into a phobia. It is with the greatest liberty that he interrogates his father and mother about the presence or the absence of the pee-pee maker.hidden object. and there are others with whom he treats from a distance. so clearly worked out.he does not act in the same way with the little girls whom he considers as cultivated ladies. well ordained. and in the end so fortunate. of a certain number of people in his entourage. or 277 . some of his games show very well. That the child takes great pleasure from exhibiting himself. and indeed the caresses.relation. The help that his mother or father give him in taking it out is underlined. In his relations with little girls. aggresses. more or less present.c lartrilno-r1 Fn chnrf 1-1-toro is all fl-to appearance of a particularly happy beginning of transference. liffio r6licrilfgare of 1-1. Where _is_ the unconscious? Where is the repression? There does not seem to be any. which are not entirely noted at the beginning of the observation. The essentially smbolic cha_rachepee z pse maker is apparent when he goes to exhibit_itjn the dark — he shows it. with which he finds the joy of captivating the attention. but asa_. and whom he allows to look at it. The pee-pee maker plays a role which tends to be present for all sorts of reasons. Lithe per Distanz. the little girls whose help he asks.He also tistswean element in his relations with the objects of his interest. and plays the greatest role in the institution of his organs as an element of interest. but which we see appear in the aftermath. This last term is used by Freud himself to qualify the differentiation that Little Hans makes among his objects -. I would say almost very civilized.

at Gmunden. and which is already diesign_a_the underlying structure that I have given you as that of the relation of the child torithe_Aother. can only satisfy you. whatever the real i 278 . and says that he dreamt that he was with the little girl. as you know.a development rendered easy. This reply is only conceivable in the imaginary dialectic which I have shown as being the starting ground of mother-child relations.-as-with_the mother.- whi t e is toto say that with her one can be absolutelyallaloris antnotba_ve. one of the little friends whom he sees during the summer at a vacation spot in Austria. but this retort has its importance. his little sister having been born_ - three months earlier. Freud says clearly. not skimming the text as I have done until now. Nevertheless.thet -. as he father retells the dream to his mother in his presence. There is no doubt_that_the_chihi Bans talsessix months to get used to the presence of the little sister. it is because I have begun with the fact that.through which we can conceive the onset of the crisis because of the coming into play of the real penis. Hans makes a very pretty correction -. one gets rid of that by saying that those are only a child's stories. all alone with 1/113fiesil„ganzetzLer Mariedl.Not only with Maned!. This occurs in fact when Hans is three years and nine months old. I think I am not forcing the text in underlining a detail for you which has never been commented upon. they tell us. If the real intrusion_ of the other child in the child's relation with the mother is certainly well made to precipitate such a critical moment. Th_echitcLareams_that he is with Mariedl. I shall not stop there. This evident remark. which forbids no mode of expression between the mother and child.for the feminine object under the form of the mo. it remains nonetheless that if I do not hesitate to accentuate this all alone with. by the open relation of dialogue. And then what happens? Let us take up the problem again. and he tells his dream. which is of the most classic sort. this intruder. Then. but following the observation step by step in order to make a critique of it. Like so many other elements that teem in observations. Not onl I I • I . everything has a signification. such kdecisiveanictety.

that the apparently dual relation of the child and the mother can have is in effect concernin .situation. the child is tever alone vith the mother.

thatsignifies. and will never have. this mother who is so good. this person who is so liberal in matters 280 . and that we shall only succeed in unveiling at the end. is one that you already know enough from the observation to be able at least to ask. etonyiny. In effect. with more or less discernment. It is no_tagusslionata real substitution it is __a question_oftitiation. even if it concerns a point that is veiled at the beginning. sehr besorgte.it is easy to say.and many another as well. He will not take it in the even manner that you might imagine.. finds a way to change her culottes in front of her child. the vivid impression that the function of substitution can make on the mind means nothing. with regarcIto tbis_pballus that is the object of her desire. and who is pretty. which is more. or if he is the metonymy of her desire for the phallus. to her bed indicates that theshildAs_an&&p. but try substituting a pebble for a piece of bread when you put it in the trunk of an elephant. who is so solicitous about the child.miloficnowingbatit_sw lfslowitalthefmclisin2fw -7 Ioifies. which articulate a maiorstiyisionthesignifying_app.-c. If there is one thing that is well designed to illustrate what I tell you of the essential dimension of what is behind the veil.One really must apply this distinction. Ike_ first question is -metaphor or metonymy? It is not at all the same thing if the child is for example therrletaphpr2fhi r. What is the situation in this case? Everything in the mother's behavior with Little Hans whom she trails about with her everywhere from the w. In sum.. even if it is only by placing some question marks there. She shows it very well. it is a matter of the child is for the mother. It refers to those two terms that I used in the past.V This question. Substitution -.sad for her is . whom Freud adores. the.tnsac for her.metaphor and m. Does one not already see here that the. That is in any case a dimension that is very special. which she does not have. it is really the observation of Little Hans -. metonymy of the phallus? Yet that does not mean that sh it h consideration for the phallus of the child.toach toawtyreali whatsoever by the subject namely -. Hans's mother.

butclithe. And that is where the drama is established. thus the best that he can do as he i that is.Das ein Schweinerei ist. contrary itimplixubat he is metonymic as a totality. to pass to the middle track. she is seized with a livid fear -. The best that the child can do in this situation. But from them ent_thaihe_also_exists_as. capture. we can understand nothing of the observation of the Wolfrnan. Thus. to say that the child is taken as a metonymy of the mother's desire for the phallus does not mearitliatitisasap_hallo that he is metonymic. 1Le has not much choice. where he is trap in *magtriar. That is what she throws at him.when it is a matter of getting down to facts and putting a finger on the little tip of the object which the child takes out and asks her to touch.1. One must try to polish the observation of Little Hans so that it gleams. and to take account little by little. The original position of the child with regard to the mother being given.appear at_themoment when the real . as you see. in this snare into which_liejsintroduceddruarderAa_become-tha Qtjgct_gthis mother. _ a n d _ a s s i d _ e o f the imaginary field where.jt is then that he:cqillimagine-hirnsettas fundamental! other than w •. if one may express it thus. but it is not a question. what can he do? He is th_eretole_aaob*lof_pleasure.). Na1.of education -.liaas.b_acause_of thepiace_that 1te_ocs. of what he truly is. All would go very well for him if it were a matter of his Wiwimacher.and becomes an object of salisfactianaor . gf that is himself as a 2thole_36th e difference begins very seriously_ta. He is thus in a position in yhichhejs_fundamentally imagined.110 Wiwimacher comuinto play. but an anxiety over what? We have traces of it in a dream from which he awakens sobbing because 11. • 0 . with a lively tonus.-what-one-c from the fact thathe_caaimeasurele difference that there is between what he is loved_ for and what he can give. is to go beyond. At that mo_nierit.'• $ - 281 . one might say.' r e d .upiedinit. andiaa4zutely_passilf e_ tate_lf we do not see that it is here that a primordial passivization enters. He is imagined. the mother could find something to satisfy_herFreud underlines that first in anxiety arises.

At another moment.}We can - complete this term with a thousand other details. I would like you from here on to note that the difference between anxiety and phobia is absolutely aalpable. but how would that take us any further? Why so singular a representation? And what role does it play? Anothe tra ) consists in saying that there is a finality. If you have read the observation. 3 One can. and that the feeling of anxiety is to be distinguished from the phobia. What is the phobia in this instance? What is the particular structure of Little Hans's phobia? That is what will perhaps give us some notions about the general structure of a phobia. Little Hans articulates it in a thousand ways. you know that the horse which is brown. white.the element of reposeatation_here. black. It is when he is separated from his mother.these colors are not without a certain interest -- 282 . for itisvery difficult to know if theshild is afraid. But what is a phobia? That is not so easy to grasp.olaia consists.. Why have preconceived ideas of finality in this instance? We are going to try to understand in what the function of the_pb. green -.__thatthe_p_holzia_ must serve for something„Why must it serve for something? Are there not also things which serve for nothing? Why decide in advance by saying that the phobia serves for something? Perhaps it serves exactly for nothing? All would have gone very well if it had not been there. it is a question of separation. I would be glad to.1=ery case. I do not know if the phobia is so_ representative as all that.his mother is going to go away. he says to his father - If you went away --. of course.. Freud underlines that the anxieties appear first. We shall try to close in on it. but there remains a resicluewa2songL. make a joyous leap and say that pjaphiais.Lilar. Whatever it may be. and when he is with someone else that his anxietismatar.

let's not talk about it any more. he says. and_which is I do not know what sort of black spot that he has in front of him. it is really this element that is out of focus. -. and that is the Er_ °found that the crisis opens. And the father asks the child -.e almost irreclucible.? out of th. If a realist novel. it is against a background. which makes of him an animal from prehistoric times. which is in the end what appears to us as most clear in the phenomenon of the horse's head. --And does the horse that you see there have the spot? -. that thegrotuid_disappears_hene_ath Meet. pmt _completely / One thing is certain.e_g_a4►e. radical difference between the two feelings. it is because For a possible identification of this painting. tired out. Metonymy is a procedure in the realist novel.Yes. the feeling of fear and the feeling of anxiety which appears when the child senses himself sud_denly as something_thatsan be._and not particularlysepresentative. but which is at the same time nothin& i anclwfiishis_called_a_metortym_y. no. one fine day.Not at all. 7 283 . I am speaking here of a term which we have studied.i -maximum. but I repeat. is which is in fron_of the horse's mokth. can interest us. says the child. And then.presents an enigma which remains unresolved until the end of the observation. it is not because of the titillatingly real menu that it delivers. can no longer be an g. whose mystery cannot but call to mind the horse beyond Venus and Vulcan in Titian's painting. that one there has it. infra. is nothing. What is certain. the lijksis_ter. in front of his forehead. Thus a phobia is not so grnple.No. If there is one thing that gives the sentiment of that negative hallucinatory element about which someone spoke recently during the course of one of those theoretical forays which occur regularly in analysis. is that one does not know what this black thing. which is always in the end only an accumulation of clichés. says the child. If its clichés interest us. see t h e A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s . Is it the harness? -No. The child then realizes that he can no_longer in any wayfulfill his function._sinceitsomprises elements which ar.Is it the bit that he has in his mouth? -._prepares_the_question-tethe. which_is. Certainly.much_more._ more_ than that something which appears to be something.

who. carry_is fear. Fear always. Theyaim.. Angstpferde. What happens from the moment that the phobia comes into play in his existence? One thing is certain. that the horses will fall. 284 . That is why. It could even be that they retain in themselves a trace of anxiety.I do not say the function of the phobia.these horses can bite. before seeing if phobia is a morbid entity or a syndrome. is perhaps not unrelated to that. and it is that berure the horses of anxiety. it is not anxiety that he feels. The element that is out of focus. concerns something that can be articulated. they can fall. from his metonymical function. far beyond all the details. Anxiet -. the world seems to him punctuated by a whole series of dangerous points.. but what they. refer to one of its most typical. and despite the Amp thatthe_word introduces. something real -. when questions about the function of the phobia arise. If we must absolutely try to indicate in what direction -. widespread. counsels a contrast and a reference to other cases. Phobia is not at all anxiety.i which - surely in itself has a value. Our dear Little Hans thus sees himself all of a sudden precipitated. To say it in a way that is more alive than theoretical.. an air.say.here I am onl re• eating Freud. he imagines himself asnothinEgsa. forms. precipitable. the more the novel aims beyond.is something that is without an abject Th__e_borses_comefrom anxiety. let us. namely gorap_lLiobia. But in the lived experience.eYetything.precisely_ at what t eems to be mastsontrar .thatisiacking. there is something that draws us. [ngant]. two thin_g&hstells us — that the horses will bite. named. and vvhiciipresentsid punctuated with signs of alarm which define a field a domain. but fear. what there is in Little Harts is fear. so that from the beginning of the phobia's emergence. as if the horses covered over something that appeared from underneath and gave light from behind. who spelled it out perfectly -. this black which begins to float.beyond that_th_ey_also_airnat something_other. or at least. the blackspot. Fear of what? Not fear of the horse. points of alarmms which restructure it. all the shimmering of stones. The child is afraid that something jeal will happen. The more it is metonymic. namely. but the fear of horses. they have still many other properties as well. In keeping with the indication of Freud.

There would be much to learn here. we have transformed anxiety into fear. Vorbau. I simply want not to go too quickly. -. and perhaps later I shall say a few words on the subject.It is the term expressly used by Freud -phobia is constructed Were the point of anxiety. a guardhouse. a series of thresholds which begin to structure the world.. there are cultivated fields. and others that are virgin. it introduces a structure into the it places precisely _in the foreground the function of an interior and an exterior. Here too. We wanted simply to underline today the fact that we can absolutely not make of fear a primitive element in the construction of the ego. who makes it the basis of his whole doctrine.is decisive. No doubt that is very fine. but its sense. there is a threshold. usually. which is articulated and shows us its function. One contents oneself with little. and I ask you not to stop there. UT until then. and there. the child was in sum in the interior of the mother.he_inaugurates a new order of interior and exterior. he has just been_ rejected.Schiitzbau. one does not construct villages in just any way. Something already begins to appear. and there is also what can present itself as an image of what guards the threshold -. or imagines himselLrejectecl. there are limits which signify fundamental things concerning the landmarks used by these people who are still more or less close to the moment of disengaging from nature. But that is not certain either. and within that. an edifice which is in front. and fear is apparently more reassuring than anxiety. In primitive civilizations. he is caught in anxiety. someone 285 .because one must not rush. contrary to what is articulated in the strictest fashion by someone whom I shall not name. concerning the way in which spaces are constructed in a village. There would be much to be learned here from a study of certain elements which are contributed by ethnography. with the aid of the luobia.

. with regard to which it 8 English in the original. Fear cannot in any_case be considered as a primitive element . having led you to the precise point where the question of phobia arises. i I shall stop today at this Vorbau of my discourse. in the structure of neurosis. That is what phobia allows us to spell out. the Parisian. which is by nature without object namely. _a final element. 286 . In neurotic confJict fear intervenes as an element which protects L in advance. and against something completely other.who happens to occupy a position of leadership 8 in a certain school called with more or less just title.

20 March 1957 287 .must reply -.I ask you to take the word in its most profound sense. We shall try the next time to see where the continuation of these things can lead.

21 November 1956 I I THE THREE FORMS OF LACK OF THE OBJECT What is an obsessional? The imaginary triad. Winnicott's transitional object. It is by way of a return to experience that we shall be able to re-situate the term "object relation" and restore its true value. Then. I have done some reading on your behalf. The genital 62):ect. Mr.Iocall it by its name. and more particularly.What relation is there between the general usage of the word fetish and the precise employ of the term to designate a sexual perversion? That is how we shall introduce the topic of our next meeting. I have read what psychoanalysts have written on the subject that will be our own this year. that is. Phallicism and the imaginary. the genital object. the object. Reality and Wirklichkeit. is woman. This week. which will deal with phobia and the fetish. why not call it by its name? 18 .

19 .I do not even say by the analytic experience.said Renan. if he had lived in our time. which does not mean that this suffices to define it. is perfectly contradicted by the experience -. That brings us back to our questions about the object. It is in fact striking to see to what extraordinary difficulties the minds of different analysts have been submitted in the aftermath of Freud's so abrupt and astonishing statements. Human stupidity gives an idea of the infinite. 1 I remind you that the common forgetting of the notion of the object is not at all so accentuated in outline if one follows the way that Freudian experience and doctrine situate and define this object. as well as in New Lectures on Psychoanalysis.. lesson 31.what I shall say today will probably not go beyond that.. you will find it in Civilization and its Discontents. What did Freud.there would be no analysis at all. but just by the common experience of the relations between man and woman.So it was by a certain number of readings on female sexuality that I was gratified. Well. always all alone.register. Do not suppose that I am assimilating them to stupidity. If harmony in this matter were not something prolnatic.. he would have added -. That would make it easier for you to understand what I shall be led to say on the subject. The positive statement that it does not work is in Freud. but they are of an order capable of giving an idea of the infinite. It is this. bring to this subject? -. No. It would seem more important that it be you who should do this reading than I.and the theoretical divigations of psychoanalysts. Nothing is more precise than Freud's formulations on this point -. a gap. by its nature compl. The idea of a harmonious object.ting. And then. the subject-object relation. -. these readings are very instructive from still other points of view.irt_this. somethdoes not work. principally this one.there_is.

covering the real. is that of an imaginaryrecian2sity. an anxiety-provolingreali. theoltectitself caught in a quest. is the basis of It is evidently to this last point that the practice of object relations in modern analytic experience is most attached. that in every__ relation of the_sub. .the object..e_ct_appears„no lout el against a .on_tole_afraid_ ofit.tary_object ends. the place of the related term is simultaneously 9scppiesayjhe subj even relation to it. which is _opposed in the most categorical way to the idea of an autonomous subject.ect with the object.the background of. whichmust be distinguished Finally. Thus identification kb. if one may say so. since I can identify with you. background of anxiety. The object is always an object found again. ThathAs_b_e_erurLog especially.. I already underlined the last time the idea of the bject hallucinated . as most of those who are here believe. In the final count. Since you can identify with me. he is an actor who plays his role and guaranties a certain number of acts as if he were dead. pleasure. the third theme in which the object appears if we follow it in Freud.against .ty. It is a jeation_DEredL. Obsessional neurosis is..j. thereis_ the idea of the object reduced in the final account to the real.lear from that of anxiety. The play to which he delivers himself is a way of sheltering himself from death. . s. It is a living game 20 .. egootJLr 2 r_lalyit.. in which the idea of asomplemen. but against the background of common reality. illustrated in_practice_with obsessional neurosis.Such a partiality in the management of the object . What is an obsessional? In sum.. on an ideal planeahgprogress of an analysis comes dowatoidentification_with the.The object_appears at first in a quest for the lost object. is the object as it arises from the exercise of what Freud calls theprimary system of. namely. and the term of the analytic_questis to perceive_thatthere 1sxjoLea. with as a result what I shall call an imperialism of identification. Completely_opposedto that in analytic practice... relation can condition an ex reme deviatim.. In the same way. This obj. a structuring notion which can be expressed somewhat like this. it is surely of us two the one whose ego is best adapted to reality who is the better model. This .

in the end? We know that it is he himself. killed his desire in advance. One must catch a glimpse of that. since itarticiateLin an illusory game. a game of game. You will see where that leads. thaLis_wily dmost_nothing_that. ble_undex_gmasit that the game is not being_played at the place_where beds. It is clear that. tience the notion of the object. he does as an alibi. We shall try to give this notion of the object a uniform usage. mortified it.ap_Re. because the subject has. She significant object for _ : this subject.niq has_ veritable does not mean that he knows the place from which he sets it all Who is it who leads the game. and. To reinforce our comparison. One sees him in a sort of exhibition in which he tries to show just how far he can go in the exercise. including its illusory characteristics -. who is only his alter ego. The notion of the object here is infinitely complex. he exercises a domination which conditions all of his approaches to others. with the aid of the notion of the object relation as it is elaborated by the author in question. It is a notion which I shall not say is fleeting. but which appears as extremely difficult to close in upon. which consists in going as close as possible to death while being out of range of all the blows. the very possibility of the game and the pleasure that he takes residing in that.He himself is only there as a spectator. one might .which consists in showing that he is invulnerable. let us 21 . which will allow us to find our bearings in our vocabulary. in some way. and thatis yvhat is unconscious in_hinlWhat he does. He has. a game of. but we can make a thousand errors if we do not know where this game is played. To this end.t6ckery. the small other. and deserves to be accentuated at every moment if we want at least to know of what object we are speaking. which has all the characteristics of a game. The game unfolds before an Other who watches the_play.b. Itwould_b_tyrongtp believe_thatthis object could be sketched in term of the dual relation. the notion of the object is not immediately given. the double of himself. say.that is to say just how far the other can go. On the other hand he does not know what place he occupies. in this very complex situation.

or in the background. each of you eat your baton. in alternation.. As black as it seemed.ancittautcome of this iAgion_to the_objectis. according to him. the subject gives them because of his aggressivity. but this notion only puts its paradoxes that much more into relief. of mass. practice.. and that way you will have it in the right place. represents the progress of the analysis. 22 . whereas. I ask you to take the case of the obsessional in the author to whom I am referring. is the1 s2foundly oral character of thejmaginary . Monsieur Loyal arrives and says -. a series of slaps. in such a way that the whole accomplishment of the dual relation. of ritual. Why? Not only does experience not follow the ideal notion that we might have of its accomplishment. to the extent that one approaches it.Let's see. by a certain N* who was a sort of genius. in which Auguste and Chocolat are administering each other. -. one way of resolving the situation and giving it an outcome. In taking_ the dual relation as_real. At that. you will have interiorized it. That is the step that I am trying to have you take today._makes_that privileged imaginaryobject which is called the_ phallus_surge up into the foreground.the fantasy of phallic incorporation. then.if one has not seen it. elraion. perhaps one cannot understand what the object strictly speaking means. One can accompany it with a little song that is truly imperishable. in effect..cannot escape the laws of the imaginary. at which one could assist. this sort of office. all of this is unreasonable. on the contrary. What appeared in outline. That is. Those who did not know him at the time when he played in a Paris cabaret can have no idea of the unholy character that he could give to the exhibition of a clown with a simple hat. You will see that the management of the object relation consists in this case in doing something which would be the analog of what would happen if you were watching a circus act.say that it is a matter of demonstrating-what-the_subjedhas articulated for tbisOther_spectator that he is without knowing it_and at whose _place he puts us to the extent that the transference advances. You have left the arena for fear of receiving these blows. and to read what.

traces and reflections of the initial position. in effect. with all that it has of the problematic. because that would be to take a step that we have not yet taken together. 29] Mother Child THE IMAGINARY TRIAD The imaginary relation. and even to exercise. . what we can call th. p.the mother child relation. I do not say as a mediating element. but also as an introduction to what I intended to propose to you this year concerning the object relation..The notion of the objectselatioras impossible to understand. and one discovers in everything that follows this genesis. to reduce it in the end to being only the development of the mother-child relation. whatever it may be. and I shall try to make you see. But. One tries. at the center of the concept of object relations. It is our inaugural schema. in the course - 23 .phallicism of the analytic experience. [ Diagram. This relation surely is well designed to give the idea that it is a matter of a real relation. is modeled upon a certain relation that is effectively fundamental -. to bring in this imaginary element without there appearing as a key point. and this is. in concluding the analysis of the signifier to which the exploration of psychosis led us.. That is what is put into the foreground by the schema which I gave you at the end of last year. the point towards which the whole theory of the analytic situation is currently directed._a_thirct. but 4§ . it is impossible.e. if one does not introduce the phallus as an element. even for those authors who make it the foundation of the whole analytic genesis. That is demonstrated as much by experience as by the evolution of analytic theory.

as if it were the central theme. 24 . the impasses that result from every attempt to reduce this imaginary phallicism to any real given whatsoever.game of the obsessional. one can in the end only refer to the real. real. that is to says in making him situate the analysis. By way of giving you a last detail. that the sentiment of love might be at the source of an aggressive reaction. When the analyst. in what I just called a reciprocal relation. that does not seem to me compatible with what the whole world knows. and that it is not at all to be excluded. by its nature. j. making. and expressesit only by showing a slight annoyance provoked by the technical rigidity.es as evidence of the subject's misconstruction (miconnaissancel of the situation the fact_that he never wants to express his aggressivity. a form of question. That shows you in what a reduction of the field such a conception of the object relation ends. and putting a final touch on my description of the manner in which the dual relation is handled in a certain orientation and theorization of analytic experience. when one seeks the origin of the whole analytic dialectic in the absence of the trinity of the terms symbolic. namely. entering_ into the imaginary . in thp dual relation. Is it evident that annoyance is characteristic of the aggressive relation? One knows very well that aggression can be provoked by every other sentiment. in a way that is significant.iro_n_y_is_aboYe_alLa way of questioning.giv. that far from being an aggressive reaction.. In effect. The author adds. I shall again refer to the first article in the collective work of which I have spoken. for example. it is structurally secondary with regard to the element of the question. aggressive. that in the end everyone knows that annoyance and irony belong to the class of aggressive manifestations. As for saying that a reaction like that of irony is. him Xeccignix ejtis aggressivity. _ists on. imaginary. the tgxt.of this lecture. The author thus admits that he insists on perpetually leading the subject back to the theme of aggressivity. and I resolve never to speak of it again starting from this moment. If there is an aggressive element.

Were it only for that. One cannot saLthat the phallus is not a prevailing object in the mioanalytc dialectic.Helene Deutsch. which is the phallus.. because it is a truly salient point of analytic experience. what was at stake was in fact a matter of distinguishing the penis as a real organ with functions definable by certain real coordinates... Without even going to the heart of the problematic of phallicism which I am introducing today.leaLthe. what does that represent for you straight off? Is the object real or not? Is what is towld in_the.We are thus led to the fundamental question with which we must begin because to it we must return. it would be worth the trouble of our asking ourselves what the notion of the object means.and also by the most immediate intuition.that remainsnone.theleas_what you see coming up in every line of what. and real -. The whole ambiguily of the question comerning„the_object and its management in analysis comes down to_thiazz jp_the.. When.objectyeal or not? 2 We reach this question both by way of the vocabulary elaborated for our use here -. 25 .symbolic. Melanie Klein. from * phallus in its imaginary function. .. When someone speaks to you of the object relation in terms of access to _the-reaLas_the access that mustbe_obt4ined At_the_encLoLanalysis. imaginary. one can see. as well as the whole dialectic of an analysis. Though it was neverjormulated that the isolation_of this object was only_conceiyab Le_onthe _imaginary pla.. an immense debate which occupied the whole analytic community was ordained around the notion of phallicism and the question of the phallic phase. turns around a major object.ne. We shall see in greater detail that one must not confound the phallus with the penis. around the years 1920-1930.. an object of which the individual has an idea as such. and it is the question with which we shall end.object? That is worth the trouble of asking. Freud wrote at a certain date and in what one or another author replied -. that the whole dialectic of individual development.

if we look closely at how it is used. we need not be astonished at that. to show how much psychoanalysts remain prisoners of categories that are really foreign to everything to which their practice should. But even before going into that. I shall only make some reflections in passing here. have introduced them. as soon as we tackle it. When one speaks o one may intend several things.Ernest Jones. he is going to talk about that famous real. whose conditions are highly artificial. in particular. I think.categor_y_oLthelmaginary. but it is possible that we can all arrive at certain distinctions or dissociations essential to the management of the term real. I would say. for. or reality. let us ask what is_meant by the reciprocal position of the object and the real. which has until now remained in the shadows. which goes back to the 18th century. . to the attempt by La Mettrie and by Holbach to develop the man-machine. for the real is at the boundary of our experience.when the very 26 . how can this perspective have the least interest for an analyst?-. In fact. will not hesitate to breathe a little sigh of relief -. That is the concept implied by the German term Wirklichkeit. The concept of phallicism in . But what do we mean when we invoke the real? It is scarcely probable that we should all have the same notion at the outset. It is the whole of the meslaanism. we can only refer to the real in theorizing. of Wirkung.itself implies the _distinction ofthe.Finally. It is a question first of the whole of what effectively happens. with ease. which has the advantage of distinguishing in reality a function which the French language does not easily allow us to isolate. Still. There is more than one way of tackling the question. It is what implies in and of itself every possibility' of effect. it seems to me. we see very well that alt _real has more than one meaning Some of you. contrary to what we are told when the situation is presented as being absolutely simple. as to the very notion of reality. This position with regard to the real is very well explained by thessregn of ouLemerience. If it is conceivable for a mind in the mechanico-dynamic tradition. that everything occurring in mental life must be referred to something which is proposed as material.

it is the machine that is at cause in the accumulation of any energy whatever. Let me make a simple comparison in order to demonstrate it. in a way that is completely gratuitous. If he follows Freud. To say that the energy was already there in a virtual state in the current of the river does not advance us at all. spoke of what happened in this machine in terms of the moment when the land was still virgin and when the waters of the Rhine flowed in abundance. that they have their own order. only begins to interest us from the moment that it is accumulated. But. It is a little as if someone in charge of a hydro-electric factory in the middle of the current of a large river. and it is only accumulated at the moment when machines come into action. if he understands what directs the whole spirit of the system. and see what function it has. exercises such a fascination on the medical mind that one imagines one has said something when one says. only one must go to the place where he said it. the Rhine for example. in the end. place an organic reality at the source of everything that works in analysis. in this instance electric power. Everything must be referred. the perspective that he must take of it is an energetic perspective. Matter. It means. we are only dealing with superficial mechanisms. a principal matter that is at the origin of all that occurs. that we too. which pushes them endlessly to take up this refrain in their texts the way one knocks on wood -. What is accumulated in the machine has above all the strictest ratio with the machine. like other physicians.principle of the exercise of his function plays in a succession of effects for which it is accepted by hypothesis. strictly speaking. There is a sort of absurdity in that for an analyst. that primitive Staff. if he is analyst.In the end. which can later be distributed and put at the service of consumers. Freud said that as well. to things we shall perhaps one day know. in this instance. nothing. because the energy. No doubt they are animated by a propulsion which 27 . in as much as he accepts the order of efficacy in which he functions. He gave this reality a completely different weight The reference by analysts to an organic basis corresponds to nothing other than a sort of need for reassurance.

. To see the distance between 28 . orthe impulse. which allowed the introduction of the terms primary system and secondary system into the order of the psychic mechanism. to confuse with a notion of mana something belonging to a very different order that we call energy. theiNganization„the_structuration of elements.lhat are gQInposed and built. There is another use made of the notion_oireality in analysis. I can truly qualify such a reference in this instance as superstitious. or the drive.JArhatis. appears. because the pleasure principle does not exercise itself in a way that is less real than the reality principle.that could only come to the mind of someone completely mad. The need that we have to confound the Stoff. the dialectic. with what is really at plate en the exercise of analytic realitytrepresents nothingother than a misconstruction ofilieymbolic Wirklichkeit. The use of the term reality here is completely other. Realityisfin fact. to preserve the tleed-Otspgaking of an ultiragtsgAlity as. as the progress of analysis advances.e a completelLdifferent energetic weight. to want with all one's might to find in something which was there from all eternity the permanence of what is accumulated at the end as the element of Wirkung. and which has nothing to do with the preceding notion. There is a contrast that is rather striking. but in a way that is very fugitive.if. or the flux.ve. also brought_into_playin_thesluaLpsinciple. This is a matter of something completely different. I shall show you that there is no longer any meaning of this sort where Freud apparently made much of it.4stA. which is much more important. of a possible Wirklichkeit -. but to think that the current of the river is the primitive order of the energy. or tbe_grimitive matter.it—were elsewhere than in this exercise itsglf. the eleasure principle and the realimplinciple.. more problematic. The conflict.comes from the current of the river. It is a sort of sequel to the postulate known as organicist. which can have literally no meaning in the analytic perspective.up4i. This usage that was shown to be so fruitful at the beginning. I even think that analysis is made in order to demonstrate it.. It is a misconstruction of the vetyre s tityjn_which we move.

the mother must operate so as always to be there at the moment when she 'is needed.. Well. and that we consider it absolutely decisive in the child's apptelleasion of reall% Thatis _to say. frustration. that. the relation to the maternal breaste_while we haveidentified the reality principle with the fact that the child must learn to do withoxtit. . that happens from time to time. Is this child blessed? Is he a genius? Is he a jolly fellow? Is he a savage? No one will ever know. no jart 1 2 E n g l i s h in the original. t r a n s i t i o n d ' o b j e t on p h i n o m e n e t r a n s i t i o n n e l . for things to go well. 36/. . namely. to the child who says that the king is totally nude.let us think of it as transitionofobject or transitional phenomenon.. Mr. thedialecticaL and impersonal opposition of the two principles the reAlity_principle_and. No doubt these subjects are very ideal. for. Winnicott in a little article in which he speaks of what he calls the transitional object' -. and we make all that goes badly derive from a primordial anomaly. no doubt this is rather a sort of figuration. in the ideaLmotherfinfantralAtion.. and the point at which we have now arrived bly. one must almost refer. that is. Winnicott has us note that in sum.der for the child not to_be_tzaurnalized.a certain sliding.for it is important that everything go well.the first use made of the opposition between the two principles. ■ 2 9 . but that is what we have come to. which happens from time to time. That is what happened to Mr. . He is surely someone who was rather a liberator. a term which becomes a key in our dialectic.the pleasure principle. pleasure prizgiple_with-a-certairt_objectselation..e_ha_vP identified-the. WinnicQtt simply notes that we are always highly interested in the function of the mother. There is thus at the beginning. precisely by coming at the moment of the child's delirious hallucination and providing the real object which satisfies him. Winnicott very rightly notes under what conditions everything goes well -. 2 Mr. we have substituted actors. and realize that everything that they had said up until then explained nothing. iiam. that is. One sees analysts come back to a sort of primitive intuition. or an imaginary puppet show.

Winnicott simply has us note in the first place that within such a dialectic.i0 two_reaLactors the mother and the chgcl. Although Mr. we see the appearance of objects that Winnicott calls transitional objects because we cannot tell on what side they bgloRgin the teduggcl.carnate_dialectic_oLhaucination atict. is unthinkable in such a dialectic.. the reality does not coincide with the hallucination rising from desire.ro_f_satithstiOn—bunda_On—the. full of detours and confusions. If everything goes well. We cannot ask whether they more subjective than objective.e_encounte. the child has thus no way of .b. This difference can be installed only through a disillusionment. since he makes them with everything that falls into his hands. which intervene in the development of the field of human desire. coutd. through a certain inaugural tension.. Secondly.an_object which corresponds strictly to the primordial desire. .primary_system . instrumental as well as fantasmatic..the ap2rehensiort_of the real which fills him and satisfies him.. even in the very young child. for they are of another nature.distinguishing what heiongstQ.the_Disie.the r2a121)jest.. r . . from time to time..go further than the notion of. the difference that there is between reality and illusion. completely. . . All of the child's objects of play are transitional objects.and. it is a fact of experience that. anct_tb. In their work.. The child has no need for one to give him toys in the strict sense of the word. and at the same time to perceive. which arises in principle from the_prirriary_ustem according to the notion that we have of it. Thus the mother must progressively make the child learn to suffer frustrations. we shall quite simply call them . .hallucination-of.. we see that it is nevertheless to these objects that authors are 30 . wilenaiLe_incarnatesji. when.-the-maternal_ breast. The extreme diversity of objects. which is certainly very hesitant. itis„inconceivabkillat anything at all should be elaborated that „.of distinctioaketween_the . Winnicott does not take the step of naming them thus.allgcirtation linked in principle to the functioning of_the.. rwith the real object thgtis in question.andin. These are transitional objects.

What we speak about much more is frustration. They are led to seek as well as they can the common points between the child's object and the. We speak of it less and less. although it is called transitional here. This is not a negative. but the very spring of the subject's relation tafilewodd. without asking themselves_ about the distance that there._in our concrete-experience_salytic theory„atalLw_e_bea_ble to_do. We think that we are still speaking about it as they spoke of it in Freud's time. They see in the child the ever so slightly privileged handling of some slender object. They are thence led almost to confound these two types. is that one of the most essential springs of the_analytic experience is the notion of lack of the object. or more precisely. 31 .withaut_a_notion of object lack as being central.that will occupy the foreground of objectal demands with the major satisfaction that it can have for a subject.fetish. constitute an intermediate period. the analysis of neurosis.a forgetting which necessitates those forms of substitutlion which I emphasize with regard to Winnicott's article —. That is totally erroneous.l_s_ development. the corner of a sheet. began with the notion of castration. : 3 NeRer. namely. which appears during a period that.led when they try to explain the origin of a fact like the existence of the sexual fetish.trAght_be_hetweerroti?ation 9ftheletish-object and the first_apparition of the object_ as imaginary What is forgotten in such a dialectic -. From its origin. And that has been so since the beginning. some part of reality accidentally placed within his reach. does not. we shall . a notion so paradoxical that one can say that it has still not been completely worked out.of object. and we are wrong. analysis. his sexual satisfaction. There is still a third term of which we are beginning to speak. however. a handkerchief stolen from the mother. but rather a permanent periodin_the_child.

The center of the notion of frustration. it is in as much as phallicism. frustration is the domain of exigencies that are unleashed_andthout law. I shall point some things out simply to try to make you first understand what there is here. and that is the notion of _privation. since Jones introduces the notion of privation with it.er_arlythirtg_but_an. It is a_lesion. demand forhe_phallus. isg)r. whose essential nature. possibility of satisfaction oracsuisition. Let us start with the term whose usage is most familiar. namely_ the. After these two remarks. . operates. the major_point of the whole imaginary play in the conflictual _ 1.As.is-not-where-the phallic„ demand. as. as we are used to seeing it at work when we follow the way that we make it come into play in our dialectic.. Now. FrustrationdLby. and says that the two are experienced in the same way in the psychic system._bessence.17. but that is desired without refere.nt.see how necessary it was to introduce this notion. in fact. It is situated on the imaginary plane. __Freud says. That is something very risky._a damage whith. It is clear that_if we must refer to privation. in so far as it is something completely different from theimaginarat..■ 1■•■•••'. that a being defined as a totality should sense himself deprived of something that by. is an imaginary wrong. 4 The idea that we have o frustration if we simply refer to the use of the word when we speak. is that of azinL.. by what route and by what imperative. They have to be distinguished. ssence Ithe domain of a clam] It concerns something that is desired but not owned. has been much more ._ Those three things_ar_e_nat_at_alLequivale. 32 Wesen. We shall thuprivationdr_Litsm_ture as a_lack is essentially. imaginary injury. definition. It appears extremely problematic. What difference is there between a frustration and a privation? Let us _ start with that. it will perhaps be easier for us to perceive what goes on in castration. he does not have. a_real lack. Itisa hole. the notion of rustration. one can only speak • only of privation with respect to the real.••.. abandoned than it has been developed.-•■•••■•• f progress that the analysis of the subject describes.nce_to_any. in so far as it is one of the categories of lack.

for it is certainly marvelous that we dream only of not speaking about it.. — it is completely clear that this is not. There.a_questan_of. and real hole.Lobject.There is_a point in common between the imaginary_ 33 .aimordia)..itis_co_asithltedtatie_syrnholic.k. It is only in the law of Manou that it is said that he who has slept with his mother must cut off his genitals. is the meaning of what was first stated by Freud. which have nothing to do with our experience. in our analytic elpetlence. we shall have to ask the question -- what is the object that is lacking in these three cases? It is at the level of castratica_that_thisja_most clear. I say lack of the object and not object. De object is imaginary. It is by a sort of mortal leap into experience that Freud placed so paradoxical a notion as that of castration at the center of the decisive.the..that is what allows us to situate those three elements thatikeshallsalLthe. go straight towards the west until death overtake him. imaginary harm.cteht„ that something g which the law sanctions and which gives it its support and its inverse. observed such things only in excessively rare cases.. No doubt that will appear to certain people as not going without some reserve. major crisis which is the Oedipus complex. What is lacking... and holding them in his hand.L&stration vas introduced by Freud in a way that was absolutely l coordinatedvdth the_notion. Castration can only be classed in the category of the symbolic debt. and which seem to merit explanations that remain elsewhere in a very different order than that of the structuring and normalizing mechanisms ordinarily put into play in our experience.. castration irt_sol is as.rea. or absence -. which is punishment. because to situate ourselves with regard to the object.o1. with what there is of a fundamental law in the prohibition of incest and in the structure of the Oedipus complex. The castration in_ question is always that of an imaginary object. if we think about it now. law.categories of the lack of the obisst. until the new order. They are right in so far as one must hold strictly to the central notion that it _is. .three terms of reference for the lack of the object. formative. We can only marvel at it after the fact. We have. for this to i be valuable. Symbolic debt.g.

on the other hand.. for example.character_otthelukin_frustrAtion ancl_the irnaginary_character of the ohject_in_castra. which hasiacilitated_our belief that frustration can take us more simply to thellearioLthe. The object of frustration.. They tell you that it is missing from its place. and it is in principle invisible.object of castration is an imaginary okiegt. the subject elect in our dialectic of frustration. what.tion. is very much.. It is in as much as we defi at it must be there..think of what happens when you ask for a book in the library. other than a gynitglicobject.notat all necessaryforthe lack and the object. DajACt. That is completely clear -. That means that the librarian lives entirely in a symbolic world. not be in a place where precisely it is not? From the point of view of the real. and even a third term_that we shall call the agent.. a real object. That may seem a bit abstract._and_thaLls_what_rnust_make4z$ ask.how can something not be in its place. it can be just beside it. that an object is lacking from its place.. in its nature. That will help us ourselves to understand this evidence whose terms demand a bit more metaphysical management than we are used to when we speak of those criteria of reality of which we were speaking just before -.Auch. Everything that is real is always and obligatorily in its place. it nevertheless remains that our bodies will still be in their places after the explosion of an atomic bomb. You can convulse the real as much as you want. the. in their places as morsels.ancLnothing_else. it still remains that in principle it is missing from its place. The real has for its characteristic the fact that it sticks to the soles of one's shoes. that means absolutely nothing.probleillautAls.the fact that castration is an imaginary lack of the object. this phallus which one haLtaken so long toidentify as. even when one disturbs it. The absence of something in the real is purely symbolic. to be on the same pla_neof these_categories.the object of privation is never anything. There is no better reference than this -. however imagLnarythe frustration_may bedt_is always a real object which is troubling the clad. but you will see how useful it will be to us later in detecting the sleight of hand thanks to which one gives solutions 34 . When we speak ofrivatp jorItitisa matter of a symbolic_fahject.

but I do not have the time to do that. or real? And what is the agent in castration? Is it symbolic. that of the agent. But is this agent symbolic. desperate efforts to break with what seems intolerable. which is the completely different evolution of what one calls sexuality in man and in woman -. The agent also plays its role in the lack of the object. I shall. I simply want to complete the chart. the child. it would still not be satisfying at this point. that of the first question concerning the relation between the object and the real. and the phallus. One makes. But. We have remained in the categories of the imaginary and the real. as I pointed out just before? These are questions that at least deserve to be asked. whereas the went is the manifestation of_another-order here. you will see. leave them open. at the end of this session. we have the pre-eminent notion that it is the mother who lays the role of the agent. because the notion of the agent goes beyond the framework to which we are limited today. With regard to frustration. I simply want to add a notion that will also have its bearing later. or even be unequivocally deduced. imaginary. imaginary. 28 November 1956 35 .which are not solutions to problems which are false. or real? What is the agent in privation? Does it truly have any sort of real existence. You nevertheless see that the qualification of the agent on these three planes is a question that is manifestly suggested to us by the beginning of the construction of the phallus. there is perhaps from the beginning something which allows us to conceive in a way that is very simple and clear why the evolution in the two sexes is very different. I am making a jump here which requires that I come back to the imaginary triad of the mother. If the answer could perhaps be sketched here.and that in order to bring the two terms back to a single principle.

teaching.III THE SIGNIFIER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT The image of the body and its signifier. The factory of the id. Its imaginary discordance. the signified and death. If I had had to speak of it. it was so as to try to define the stages of development. Last night you heard a lecture by Mme Dolto on the image of the body. Circumstances had it that I could say nothing other than all the good that I thought of it. This very simple 36 .. I would say -something that you know sufficiently well and which is eminently evident -. it would have been to situate that work with regard to what we are doing here. the notion of the object is important in that respect. which is. and that is something I am reluctant to do in a context of scientific work. in sum. The transmission of the object by signifier. So I am not displeased not to have had to do so:. and in fact. which is of a completely different nature.thenageof the body is not an obitgl. It remains nevertheless only is the image of the rd_leyes even become an object. so as to situate it with regard to this seminar. If we spoke last night of the object.. If we begin now with the image of the body as it was presented to us last night. The signifier.

or fantasmatic genesis one attempts. the lion not being an object encountered in their experience with excessive frequency. and in any case. as one can try anything. it still remains quite mysterious that at certain epochs of their lives. will allow you to situate the status of the image of the body_exa. male or female. we barely rind gaiters. It is difficult to conjure up from that the form of a primitive given which would be for example inscribed in the image of the body. which I said I would take as a center -.remark. there is a residue. Now.we start off with it so little that it is precisely what we are questioning. it is surely not by making them vanish that one progresses. Far from it. which have so astonishing a role there that one. or that we should start off with it -. children. acrobatics. opposition to other imaginary forrnatiansWe have to deal in effect in analytic experience with objects about which we can raise the question of their imaginary nature. but there still remains some residue.phobia and the fetish. To fix an idea of it. believe they need to be afraid of lions. 37 . One can try. but that this is the central question that we ask. The principal one is the shoe. Why? Apart from shoes. as an introduction to the clinical level which is of interest now in the notion of the object. which was made by no one except in an indirect fashion. You would be wrong to think that these objects have already revealed their secrets. you have been able to observe that the number of sexual fetishes is extremely limited. contortion. That does not mean that we should hold to the hypothesis of the imaginary object. I do not say that they are of an imaginary nature. I have already taken two examples. socks. Similarly. and other things -all worn close to the skin.ctLy_in. No matter what exercise. the residues in scientific explanations are always what it is most fruitful to consider.can ask how it is that we do not give that more attention. How was it possible to be a fetishist in the time of Catullus? There too. This possibly imaginary object as it is given to us in actual fact in analytic experience is already known to you. brassieres.

Mme Dolto. r 1 Since it is a question here of teaching. directly and indirectly. i t i s a s a s i g n i f i e r t h a t it represents something. genesis. This is particularly evident from the fact that no --Itis_always in rel a ti nn-to-another-a-these • . in this instance. the theme is fascinating. I said that psychoanalysts had a concept of reality so mythical that it is close to what has hindered the progress of psychiatry for decades.whetheiyiear imaginary objects. But what is most striking is the use that is made -. and from which one might have thought that psychoanalysis had been delivered. • images_that_each_takes_on_a_crystallizing.arieraing-valua -that4t-penetrates the subiectin_question. 411 . At first sight it concerns. I shall begin by underlining that I have been able to verify. this image. Insasd_signifier-that t h e i m a g L s a i l i 2 d i a l o g u e .These are the_objects about which we shall ask. This hindrance is to go seekingregity in somethingore 38 . and which can be understood only after that. organize. and the length of the discussion. To see the interest aroused in the audience. that some of the things which I said the last time when I spoke of the concept of reality were not understood. these objects. as was said. is. and since nothing is more important than our misunderstandings.that is. from an ectopia with regard to a certain typical relation? Do these objects simply arise from the typical succession of what one calls stages? - Whatever the case. are highly embarrassing to us.and whose efficacy one does not for an instant doubt -. the young child. with which you had to deal last night. constructions which order.by the operator. Mme Dolto uses this object. articulate. There is certainly a fact there that can only be situated by starting with the notions of signified and signifier. We are thus led back once a ain to the notion of the signifier.\ that . as a signifier. a certain lived experience. or supposed object. How to conceive their kinetic value in the economy of the libido? Does it belong to the order of what emerges from a. if they are objects.

third perspective under which _the_theme of the real can appear. This objection calls for several remarks. before the different accidents that could arise.What are you looking for there? Remember that for the engineer. system. but this energy is nothing other than the transformation of the potential energy which is given in advance by the site where we have installed the factory. the waterfall. there was something. It is certainly a legitimate way to consider reality. And you think of 39 . including the suspension of the factory's activity. You speak of the energy accumulated in the factory. the waterfall is everything. For example. before I comes to be. which is precisely the emphasis placed on_w_hat_i_s_there_hefore. On the other. it is enough for the engineer to measure the height of the sheet of water with regard to the level to which it will fall. there is a whole world. in the case of the factory. I did not have the time to introduce the . in speaking to you of reality. To calculate it. and I situated it for you with the example of the factory. what was there before was the energy. and I said that it was as if. and that is even what is most solid in the mirage which supports the objection that was made to me. in this instance. On this point someone came and said to me -. one thought that one could reason valuably by referring to the primitive matter that comes into play to make it work. The energy bezina_to_corne_ into account only at the moment when you measure it. I never said anything else.material character_ To make myself understood. It is simply a matter of knowing what this id is. in thi_Linata uce_the_psychic_system. Everything is already given in the potential energy. We are constantly dealing with it. I gave the example of the hydroelectric factory. First. The power of the factory is already determined by anterior conditions. there was the id.hand. But between the energy and the natural reality. Someone said to me that. its enlargement or its repair. I began by defining it as Wirkiichkeit • hy_the_effidency_aLthe. I am not at all denying that there may be something that was there before. I wanted to s make the mythic character of a certain conception of reality precise. to latch onto what is there before the exercise of a symbolic functioning.

whether it be in streams or in droplets. can still potentially carry a certain value of reserve energy. in a way that is s nifying.what work is it necessary to expend to obtain an available recompense of efficiency? This energy. as measurable. designed to allow a certain play of thought. But that is not the question. The important thing is the comparison that I made with the psychic system. and which consists in a simple question of principle. simply.--as goiNign . There is no absolute energy in a natural reservoir. There is energy in the reservoir in relation to a lower level into which the liquid will flow when you add an outlet to the reservoir. for example. and inthisjnatance. it is of interest to no one. an outlet is not enough to allow you to calculate the energy -. . the existence of a common measure. among which in effect there enters that of the energy which you will have at your disposal. an equivalence. in a certain privileged fashion. Any difference of level that is there in the flow of the water. between manifestation - 40 . and to put it plainly._ans:Lstia way that is virtual.Freud was brought by the energetic concept to forge a notion that we must use in analysis in a way that is comparable to that of energy. like that of energy.it is in relation to the lower level of water that the energy can be calculated. The question is that certain natural conditions must be realized in order for there to be the least interest in calculating the energy. is entirely abstract.11ows onetop_Qsit. It is because of them that you are obliged to make numerous calculations. It is still necessary for the materials which will come into play in the use of the machine to be already present in nature. It sitn21y3. is always measured between two established points. In other terms.measuring it only at the moment when factories function.CA 1einstallsa_factary_only where certain privileged thingLareprestatiamature_as_usable. on the track of a system taken to be signi in That is not at all to be contested. It is a notion which. the concept of energy is effectively constructed upon the need of a productive civilization wanting to take its bearings in its accounts -. But in itself alone. One must alread. Let us see now how that is sketched.

whether there are many.lyme_s. passive position. strictly speaking. One marvels that Freud... as may in fact very possibly be the case. which will give them for example a ms111.a. It is a question of the notion of libido.parasiw_dcal as the term may seem.21 islieor_passime_-- but Freud tells us.neutiralized.s.. always present in a form that is efficacious and active as aspect which rather relates it to the masculineositiorp_oes a_s_far_as_p_ositingtha _ortly-the-masculine_forra_oLthelibidais_within-our-reach. which in effect is one of the essential springs of Freudian thought for organizing what is at stake in all sexual behavior.. 41 .e_yestio the passive position. whether there is one for femininity and one for masculinity. should have spoken for the first time. y. There is no marvel in it. longing. There_ is nothing that is less tied to a material support than the concept of libido_i_n_analysis. The libido is what links the behavior of beings amongst themselves. does not have any sort of importance. or whether there is one and only one. for an activity is necessary in ordeslo_adoake. this libid. whether they are interchangeable. which is properly speaking the imaginary level. .instance. or two or three for each._analytic experience makes it necessary_for us to beliey_e_thaLtheteis_ on. Thus Freud comes to indicate that the libido is thus. for. if I mai say s2. in the Three Essays. The reference to a chemical support is. in 1905. of the psychic support of the libido in terms such that the later diffusion of the concept of a sexual hormone scarcely require a modification of this passage.. which is produced at a particular level.Thus Freud immediately situates the_ libicALorLLEINIe which is.. How paradoxical all that would be were it simply a question of a concept there only to allow us to incarnate a liaison of a certain type. without any importance regarding the libido.which qualitatively appear to be extrernelyslifferent.. Freud says as much-whether there is one.ale-and_unique_libido. in any case. where the behavior of one living being in the presence of another living being attaches itself to him by links of desire.

Now.. by the intermediary of the message of the Other. The factory is not constructed by the operation of the Holy Spirit. that of ther. one can say this 42 . with this difference. Though all this energy was there before.. It is precisely in order to remind you of the presence of the Holy Spirit. of becoming I. opposed? If one stays solely with what defines them from the outside.it-is_this. 2 Let us take that up on another level. If analy_sis_has_gi-ven_us_a_nything. you are wrong. That is equally true for what the machine produces. still. it is constructed by the operation of the Holy Spirit. That is still the best definition. the instincts the libido. thinks that perhaps the genie of the current plays games inside and transforms the water into light or force. that I am developing this theory of the signifier and the signified for you. as the sipifiesda_agartizesluktfi. seeing it.naLa_brute_reality.g_theEs as an agency which has the greatest relation to the drives. what is the Es? To what does the introduction of the concept of the factory allow us to compare it? Well. no one can deny that there is a sensible difference. and not simply a hydromechanical factory. notLsirnhinm g that was there before. articulated. By what right are the systems. once the factory has been constructed.lity_principle and the pleasure princi le. That is even the main interest in the fact that it is a question of a hydroelectric factory. the als. which is absolutely essential to the progress of our understanding of analysis. All the force already there can be transformed.. but in the real. as it would appear to someone who knew absolutely nothing of how it worked. An untutored person who knows nothing about it. More precisely. The Es is what in the subject is capable. that it is not only transformed. precisely to the factory. and if you doubt it. not simply in the landscape. primary and secondary. for example. but can also be accumulated. The Es is_a_l_r_eac4Lorganizecl.We are accustomed to considerin.

system is governed by the pleasure principle. though they Appear contradictory. nothing in these definitions gives the sense of what emerges of a conflictual and dialectical character in the use of these two terms in practice. which is in some way. has an ambiguous sense in German.. its own paradox. if Freud introduced the concept of the libido.e law of the return to. the gateofreposelDut also the erection of desire. p. that is. but never forgotten in practice.namely thetwo__levets-of-speech-expressedin the notions_of_the_signifier_andL_the_aignified. in a sort of parallel superposition with the course irbf the signified. for example. while_ what_oc. Now. What occur appears without a doubt as it is shown to yo. Just as in the Rleasure principle_ there_ is-on-one side a-return_to-rest-r-but-on_the_ather.c. in its concrete use. are none the less effectively tied in experience.sa a paradox is to be found with regard to reality. the flux of drives in a subject. external reality.d_it. You never use either one of these systems without providing it with a particular index. as one says. it is really becausepleasure in the concrete sense.it is both pleasure and desire. The para_ o)ctLoahe_pleasure_griacipis is this.. [ Schema.rest to the tendency to a return to repose. 47] signifier signified 43 . I have already situated the course of the signifier or of concrete 4 -1f:liscourse. desire.. to which you are given daily. tied10_1h. Nevertheless.the detour from reality. that is to ssaby the drive to return to rest. but also gating_araun. and he said it formally. often neatly avoided.. These two terms. Lust. for each.uxsin the reality system is defined by_what forces the subject to conduct a detour in. which he underlines -. in which and as which the continuity of lived experience is presented. two terms hich link_theaLancLallow them to function-dialectically -.what occursin. I No_ie.against which one is bruised.u..the_prirnary.much -. That appears much more clearly i_Lwednirisinto correlgion with the_ existence of the two_ptincipies. and between subjects..so-there_is_nat_onLy_reality.

since we encounter it only in the late texts of a certain philosophical experience. probably mythic. qualifying it with exiErlsy. The HolESpirit is the entry of the signifier inyjihe-world. 1 English in the original. This schema implies that what is a signifier of one thing can become at any ingant the signifier of something else. not only of speech.into_the_demanst. the libido of the subject.e_nrindesirersornething-whighniAmg in any_.y. and of the signifier _te_siO_. It is a matter of that_liznitoLthe signified whid___Lis_nescer attained. unless one admits the essential possibility of a perpetual goL.Kwnasiced by the impj_int of the signifier-The-signifier-isintroduced-MIQmatural .. is . The intervention of the signifier poses a problem which led me to remind you just before of the existence of the Holy Spirit. and what it is in the thought and the teaching of Freud. 44 .cele per exprsssit. The relations of man with the signifier as a whole are very precisely tied to this possili of suppression. _permits him to glimpse death as the_absolute. or even.rsaper-to thegpifier. which is never attained at all.. but of the phenomena present in analysis.fied. byan livin being.. inias:)Leflection on his lid which_ . Thus ori m en_a_a_y that desikesorcieng to the signified.That isierycerlain13LwhatEreuklnouglat_us under the_term_oLthe deatainsti_nct.. We saw last year what it was for us. the drive. or of language. the putting into parenthesis of all that is lived.sm.althalagiLappetitea_ssuch is not marked with the laws. movementinto_desim. except in exceptional cases.thesignified under the signifier. and that all that is present in desire..LsUerratowhich the English lan jagtresorts as to a primitive expr e ssionsfte.always marked by the imprint of_a_signifigr --_which-doeslude_thatinaomething else in tj-1941i. Nothing in analytic experience can be explained except by this fundamental schema.p. existen. impassables_ondition_of his . 1010.SCHEMA OF PARALLELS This representation is all the more valuable in that nothing can be conceived. It is nevertheless something which is virtually .

the libidinal flux.. The_ertoratt-with4he-idea-that llierea-re-thread _ancLneedle. it can only be because of some secondary disorder. p. such that if some difficulty shows up. It is already there.. that is of life. some process of defense.s i g n i f i ed SCHEMA OF PARALLELS (2) r i$ts..We shall put what is at the basis of the existence of the signifier. •• • • II • r•al .. some purely 45 . of what is lived of the flux of L emotions.a.. This is death in so far as it is the su_ppoitthe... iI The Es at stake in arAlysis is a si 1. which has posed an insoluble problem for all analysts since they first came into the light of day.the__ - girl and the bound between one and the other a pre-established_ primitive harmony.. of its presence in the world.. into our schema. r that is not understoo.. an byQathesis to_vsthicl:Lthos_e__ whom I shall not hesitate on this occasion to call weak minds always return..... 48] death ... it is not I do not know what primitive and confused property coming from I do not now what pre-established harmony. what is designated by the Es? We ask the question -. and I shall tell you later how he approaches the early development of woman and her famous castration complex.signifier .tlyD [Schema.. base....... Jones..yes.... In the first row among them is a Mr... the operation of the Holy Spiri.. as the efficacious surface of the signifier in which the latter in some waLreflects what one could call the last word of the signified.......and we shall resolve it. In order to understand anything at all of what we are doing in analysis. we must reply -. Is this sipitkiLlyhich_hasits_ommlaws.... whether or not thev_are _recognizable in a given phenomenon..

there is only_one_primitive representation of Ihe_state. namely. that the child's sexual theories. for instance. one is aoin. it is not this time in the name of a fundamental energetic equality which is only there for the convenience of thought. the phallic phase. which occurs before the complete development of the Oedipus. it is the male genital apparatus. are tied to the first maturity of the genital stage. exception made of its complement. It is in no way a matter of a meeting to which the only obstacles are accidents that can arise along the route. which will make their imprint on the development of a subject. One can go looking for natural references to this idea discovered in analysis. When one imagines that the unconscious means that what is in one subject is made to divine what should respond to him in another. I am not validating what Freud said. but because_on_the imaginary plane. I am indicating that this is his point of departure when he reconstructs development. There is a 46 . If this phase is called phallic.of the genital stage — the h %JR as such. To this conception. The erected image of the phallus is what is funclamental_here_ rLonye„11 h e '. which is that it is a real pity that nothing in the development of the child.g notning outer than to suppose a primitive harmony. Freud's very simple remark in the Three Essays stands opposed.accidental and contingent event. the sacks. and particularly in his relation to sexual images. namely. and on all that the relation between the sexes will be for him. and that is what everything that precedes the Three Essays on Sexuality did. shows that the rails of a free access of man to woman and vice versa have already been constructed.. The phallus is not the male genital apparatus as a whole. on all his history. re is no choice apart from a virile image or castration. What I am putting at the principle of analytic experience here is the concept that there is a signifier already installed and structured. What Freud says is precisely the contrary. But analysis underlines precisely that experience makes us discover a host of accidents which are far from being so natural as all that. it is not because there is only one libido.

and that it is introduced into the world against a background which is more or less known or misconstrued. and also to the use of the signifier -.Concepts of this sort have nothing to do with any sort of living exercise. The scandal of this fact — that is where the analytic position rests. For asiong. its contradictions. and which is structured according to the mode of a signifying articulation marking all that acts upon this subject with its imprints. and it is all the same curious that Freud should have been led by analytic experience to be able to do nothing other than to characterize it by saying that thesipitier functions on the ground of a certain experience of death. Because of this.functioningior as long as you can remember. for the living exercise consists precisely in making one's own way in existence exactly like all those who have preceded us in the same true to type lineage. In fact. we know that there is already in nature something that is his Es. which has been. which is completely veiled to the signified. The experience in question has nothing to do with any sort of lived - experience. The death instinct is nothing else. This factory is language. Literally. the existence in nature of the hydroelectric factory made by the operation of the Holy Spirit is the very contrary of the concept of nature. and it is even less natural than images. the psychic system of subjects has been orgarlio. a_s there have been stoifiers that function.2112fit something so natural as all that. It is not you who have made it.I am speaking of the histor_y_of_humanity_as_a_whole. you cannot remember beyond it -. in fact. I have placed on the schema this reality behind it.the possibility that nothing of what is in the signified exists. When we approach a subject.factory ready made. by_the very_play_of these signifiers._that_you lookinfor igritIeclepth2. than there to make us perceive that life is improbable 4nd completely caducous. The existence of the signifier_is not linked to_anytl Ang_other than the fact for it is a fact that _discourse exists. and it functions. Behind the signifier.s. and its profound difference from natural coaptations. I thought it necessary to recall these positions which seem to me fundamental. the E. If our commentary on Beyond the Pleasure Principle two years 47 .

motivated by certairupara. If I made you play the game of odds and evens recently when we spoke of the death instinct..11ic term. the body Just as there are already in nature certain reservoirs. its first_arma. if one may say so. which is on the plane of analytic experience. it was to remind you that there are laws behind which stand the laws of the signifier. It is a matter of things which are un•ras abl..which is characterized by being-articulated accarg ithgtologicaLlaw§. than a reconstruction. strictly speaking. mortal. A stone elevated to a vertical position is one of its examples.which_are_given in experience as accidents of the body..doxes of the experience.ago could show anything.. precisely by that of this inexplicable phenomenon _that the subject is led to behave in a way that is essentially signifying. if I have taught you to write series of plus and minus signs grouped in twos or threes in a temporal sequence.b_gt cot_liplgely transformed by the fact that they are neans that they have intraducecLintrt-the-plaee-Gf-the-signifier-as-such. but whichatetaken.exp_eriPnrP. and. tpLesent_from-every-beginnibut impossible not to .ag. :: - Let us return now to the point where we left things the last time. n in the_siolfied there Ara.12er of eleraents.• II • • I L n• whic 1 • • h. the pure and simple erection.. in repeating indefinitely something that is for_laix_n.ain in the signifier. 3 48 .signifiethorrows a whole seriEsoielemerdsl aterm thatisTrofoundly engaged in the signified Hamel . It is thus that a certain number of elements all linked to corporal stature. and not simply to the lived experience of the body.up.g. it was that what is at stake is nothing other. Inyersely_dn_theraythat death is reflected in the background of the 'ecLsathe...certairi nunJ. the notion of the human body in so far as it is erect is another. constitute the first elements. which give it.houcamed_from.

But if the Traumdeutung. Everything that concerns the pregerd_tal_d_eyelop_ment_ofiheitbido is conceivable only after the appearance of the theory_ of rtarsissism . once we have a concept of an Ich-libido as a reservoir of the libido which constitutes objects.we can only get a little glimpse of it over the walls. Certainly. and he adds.and once the sexual theories of the child have been isolated. the one which is dynamically creative. In analytic experience. if you read the first edition of the Three Essays. That is the first of the important things for you to keep in mind in studying this text. which consist. i 49 . you will not come back to it -. of man's relation to the image. That goes for the theory of the libido itself. Freud tells us. is a Wiederfindung. That is their essential defect. But if these do not entirely reach a conclusion. In sum. is that of lack.The central relation to the object. which introduced the idea of a libidinal common measure. The chapter entitled The Theory of the Libido concerns the concept of narcissism as such. with the additions made principally in 1915. it is without any of its original equilibrium being changed. several years after the Einfiihrung des Narzissmus. their progress in the research on the pregenital relation as such is still only explained by the importance of the sexual theories. in the fact that the child has no notion either of the vagina nor of sperm. Freud says explicitly. with regard to this reservoir -. nor of generation.for you will recognize none of the themes that are familiar to you in the book that you usually read. for example. is enriched by this. with their major misunderstandings. One must not read the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality as if it were a work written in one spurt. We can account for the origin of the very idea of the theory of the libido. this is the notion of narcissistic tension. Freud tells us. and modifications of the text are extremely frequent. there is no work of Freud's that has not been subject to revision. All have notes added later. On the other hand. The promotion of the notion of the phallic phase will come to an end only after the last edition of the Three Essays. This crucial moment of genitality in development remains outside the limits of the Three Essays. and . all Findung of the object. in the article of 1923 on Infantile Genital Organization.

at certain selected junctures and at certain times of this evolution. irreversible. and will remain marked by the first aspect of the object. that the strictly imaginary functions are revealed. in a particular analytic orientation. been able to recognize an organizing value in fantasies. so that the object will always be only an object found again. in the refound object.at the same time. a dialectic of the symbolic and the real. that has not been susceptible to change. only occurs beginning with the article on narcissism. the imaginary layer is then introduced. that of a central reserve from which every relation to objects is established. _ remembered ina way. essentially. is . which is. As the Three Essays in their first and original version show. that is to say. is only formulated with respect to the 50 . In other words. in our vocabulary. It is in this framework. This object then enters into discord and plays a disturbing role in every later object relation of the subject. only an image that he bears within himself. since become so prevalent. in so far as being fundamentally imaginary. which is precisely the mother. unbeknownst to the subject. That is the notion with which the first Freudian dialectic of the theory of sexuality is introduced. is articulated with the theory of sexuality only in 1915. the latency period. zviedergefunden. the development of infantile sexuality is characterized by being staged over two periods. a conservation of the object in memory. finally. that is. Into a dialectic which is first. fundamentally conflictual. The introduction of the imaginary. Everything arising from the pregenital relation is taken into this parenthesis. That is the final word in the theory of narcissism. in the course of. a signifying transmission. one of the essential articulations is the subject's fascination by the image. which is always. and by the very fact of its refinding there is always a lack of accord in the object that is refound with regard to the object that is sought. the first object. a natural accord between object and subject. of the latent memory traversing this period. Thus there is always an essential division. Because of the latency period. This fundamental experience _supposes that there is. If we have since. says Freud. it is in as much as we have not supposed a pre-established harmony.

. and thaLleh_yeat :11.ater. How is one to organize this experience? As I told you the last time.. The pregenital relation can only be understood by starting with the signifying articulation of the Oedipus. it is around the notion of the lack of the object. from the origin. the pregenital relation was used to designate the memory of experiences which are preparatory to the Oedipal experience. it appears disturbing. in which. which appears above all. it is a matter of a critical development.e sexuality. These are objects that have already been worked over by the signifier. 51 . in a certain number of vital relations. an effective action. The term pre-Oedipal was introduced_with_regarcLto.. I have shown you the three levels of this lack that it is essential to situate each time that there is a crisis. I have you note.fekninin. the objects. an encounter. are already taken for something other than what they are. pre-Oedipal... On the contrary. when we encounter it. and plunges the entire analytic audience into perplexity. which is always in itself a critical . so much so that it is in relation to the Oedipus that there was situated a dialectic called. effectively exercised or lived. but is then affirmed in a way that is so categorical that from then on. with the character of being paradoxical. oral and anal. and that the imaginary organization is structured. and not. of different periods. In 1920. with regard to the search for the object. which organize them. at that time. That is precisely what we designate by the various concepts of incorporation. The signifier takes its material somewhere in the signified. The images and the fantasies that form the signifying material of the pregenital relation themselves come from an experience made of the contact between signifier and signified. but which are only articulated in the latter. pregenital. It is only later that this past is grasped. and permit their articulation.phallic phase in 1920. and which appear submitted to operations from which it is impossible to extract the signifying structure. It is more opposed to than in accord with the idea of a regular harmonious development. dominate them. as one calls them.

which was nevertheless Freud's original discovery. We shall be able to appreciate whether it is truly possible for the author to articulate what is essential in this observation by starting with the concept of frustration as it is currently conceived.search. a privileged imaginary creation. which can even be progressive in certain cases. namely. who records with all the appearance of an exemplary fidelity. is essentially different for the three. frustration. I shall simply underline what these three terms mean. privation. in the symbolic chain. that of the stage which the subject has reached at the moment of the appearance of the said privation.castration. why not? — but can a phenomenon like that of phobia be understood by its sole situation in a certain chronological order? Are things not better explained if one refers to the three terms that I have enumerated? That is what we shall see. The latter saw a phobia develop during a short period of time in one of the children confided to the care of Anna Freud's Hampstead Nursery. then disappears. as related to the privation of a privileged object. as a debt. which contains a lecture by a student of Anna Freud. Annaliese Schnurmann. and we shall see what we can understand in it. which prevails for a certain time. We shall also try to see what is understood by its reporter. What she collects is sufficient to give us an idea of a temporal succession during the course of which a phobia appears. which does not exclude the use of pre-established categories. and neglect the concept of castration. there is a fundamental lack that is situated. These levels are the following -. What they are as lack. Thus I shall start the next time with an example that I took at random from volume 3-4 of The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. the central structure of each. In castration. 52 . In the lessons that will follow. we shall place ourselves at the exact point where modern theory and current practice are installed. Analysts today in fact reorganize analytic experience by beginning with the level of frustration. one among a thousand others. along with the Oedipus. We shall read this observation. Effect more or less regressive. and which has a whole series of effects on the behavior of the subject. published in 1949.

he must conceive the real as bein: other than it t at is he mus already have syml_zolized_it.Irt frustration. This framework. The reference to privation as it is put forth here consists in olic before -. One gives oneself up to such an exercise because there is in fact every appearance that psychoanalysis makes it possible. which escapes him in its beginning as in its end -.--For thesubjestto accede to privation. We cannot pose the problem of the object relation correctly unless we begin with a certain framework that must be considered as fundamental to understanding.with regard to the symbolic chain. One thus sees the subject secrete from himself successive relations in the name of I do not know what preestablished maturation.before we can say things that are reasonable. It is thus opposed to the genesis of the psychic system which is usually_givert posing to us. the lac the. Iha imprivation. whereas it is a manifestation of the error into which one has wandered. This lack of the object must be the human conceived at its different stages in the subject -. the lack of the sibiesttwaric thestructure as well_ aa_. that does not mean that it iLitthe_sulaject. everything happens as in an idealistic dream -.imaginaryplaneLas an imaginar_y iniury-. the beginning of objectal organization. with objects which will end by being the objects of the human world that is our own. the thread of his web. He is there to envelop himself in the silk of his cocoon. Somatognosia. In the psychogenesis currently given to us in analysis. for 53 . in this experience.42rimatim.in_factinstallecl-in-a-tived experience that is unthinkable for him -. the lack is in the real. shows this very well.. one thinks one is dealing only with a difficulty in language.at the lexelof frustration_ where 's_.but we must also consider this lack in the real._thelack is purely and simply in the real.. is that in world. the image of the body as a signifier. one wants to retain only the aspects that tend in this direction. or the first of these frameworks.113. a real limit or gap.each subject is like a spider and must draw from himself. while each time that one gets enmeshed. But that is because. and his whole conception of the world must be drawn from himself and from his images.

trodurpc t h e symbolic order.__which ate child symbolizes or realizes. When We spoke yesterday evening of the image of the body with regard to the ( child.and_tletho-in. Jones roceecalcep_givationthe_equiAtalent-of-f-r-ustra-tion— Erivation is in the real. the child and the phallus. is it. the only children of eitherseeggme_phobic_are_thoseiezhasemoth some trouble in the ob'ect relation t ins her to her • r own the mother's -. and that is how Mr. if it is_even_accessible_to_the child. what saturates and satisfies her in him. These days everyone uses it. the demand for the ph.. It is striking that no one spoke last night of a major passage in what Mme Dolto brought us. at what moment is the child capable of perceiving that what his mother desires in him. 54 . for all that.oflheLmposite sex.. ittule_or_less.. There is always in the mother. and that is why I have posited the trio of_th_e mother. if it is effectively the child.s._ t he child. according to her.For the stiiegLiQap. by a projection? Is that not to suppose that every relation 2 .ailu. or indeed.a ----. That an idea which surely makes something other than the relation of the child and the mother intervene. entirely outside the sub. p_rivation._110w is he subject - led 19 symbolize it? How is frustration introduced iatiLthe symbolic order? That is the question we are asking and we shall see that the subject is neither isolated nor indep.endent.wherLwespealc here of privation. apart from the child.2 Privation is the center of reference that we need. thus that the mother sees her chilci?_Thatis.ressentie. knows nothing about this. is his phallic image for her. Similarly. the trick being simply at a certain moment. _the mother? What possibility does the child have of assfclingto this relationaLelement? Is it on the order of a direct effusion. p&hencl.this 'image of the body.. who has his relation with the mother. there was one thing that must have been apparent to you -.• --question that was not asked at all. it is not a matter of a privation that is fully conscious. he must first symbolize the real. which is that.

Is this an imaginary element which is reflected in the symbolic? Or is it on t h e mbolicalement which appears in the itmginaryl These arethe crucial v is around methe_q_uestion that is so essential i _tilae_Aesrelopmear_of4hojaia. that the child onl edes ■ it aft ymbolizatombuttlig_iiicertain cases. I shall tell you again that we must question fetishism with the triple schema of the mother. and the phallus. the child. he arrives at the irriazimary_iniurydrisome_way_that is direct not irfu I • I f the mother with r jap-i-auphallus. male or female. The_factthaLfar_the_m_o_thetilae_claild is far from being only the child. however. there were anyone else who could see them too? That. That is within the reach of experience. 57] Phallus fetishism lJ Child SCHEMA OF FETISHISM Mother Why does the child come more or less to occupy the position of the mother with remAJELthephallus?. and one or another analyst. and it will surely take us far. or introduced into it. for example. male as well as female. of her school. p. It is another question than that of phobia. apart from herself.between subjects is of the same order as the relation of Mme Dolto with her subject? I am astonished that no one asked her if. and as a way of already lighting my lantern. where anomalies may present themselves 55 . in certain very particular forms of dependence. is the point that is important. is induced. since he is also the phallu_i'rmagliscordance l which raises the question of knowing how the child. So as not to leave you completely famished. Certain elements which can be disengaged show. [Schema.Qr on the contrary. who sees all these images of the body.

when no path of another nature is open for the solution of the problem. At the moment when it is called to rescue.e)(trernel distant from the e 5 December 19bh 5b .with all the appearance of the normal. It constitutes another mode of solution to the difficult problem introduced by the relations of the child and the mother. tIL. We shall come back to that. phobia constitutes a call to_ses_cue. I already showed you last year -. to maintain the essential solidarity menaced by the gap_ introduced by the apparition _o_f_th phallus between the mother and child. the motherlaahatextent does he put something_of himself there? Is the relation mother-phallus given to the child in a way that is spontaneous and direct? Does ev_erything_happen simply because he looks at his mother and perceives that it is a phallus that_sl Le_siesireaLltaoes not seem_aa. It concerns this encircling_tie._ Starting from a particular critical moment.for there to be three terms iri_this_tr these must be an enclosed s • ace all • • f-t _ which is - called the father. the element wh i c h i n t p hobia has a character that is veritably mXthical._an_ p ReaLtcLa_aing ul syrnb_Qn __ In what does its singularity consist? Let us say that it is in always r appearing s e:gAremel. the position of the phalluswith regard to the mothet? Why is he led there? What L5 at play is the link_ib.at the child establishes between the phalluLand. imaginary.sym12cLgiIgis. Phobia when it develo s is nolgAll_oft does not t:gatup_on__ the link cited above. phobia belongs rather to that order. Well.

57 .

Iv THE DIALECTIC OF FRUSTRATION Frustration is the true center of the mother-child relation. A return to the Fort-Da. The child and the phallic image. The mother. 59] AGENT LACK OF OBJECT OBJECT Castration Symbolic Debt imaginary Frustration Imaginary Injury. real Privation Real Hole symbolic 58 . The phobia of the little English girl. p. [Format chart. from the symbolic to the real.

The object is literally tied to it only_by conditions that are particular to it. is Freud's sentence -.Here is the chart at which we have arrived. The notion that there is no pre established harmony between the objet_ct_ and the drive is thus articulated. the aim of the drive is to arrive at i tS_ QWEI appeasement. for example --. To let you measure the distance between this notion and what Freud himself articulated with the greatest rigor. which allows us to articulate with precision the problem of the object as it is posed in analysis. namely. but something which is subordinated to it solely by its aptness for atmeasznK it. its paradoxes. But it is precisely that it'introduced along with this notion. regarding the affective relations of man. Analysis began with a notion which I shall call scandalous. Even those who are most ill-informed note that Freud's work contains many things concerning the object -. It is what is most variable in the instinct. nobody dreams of taking offense at that any longer. but that the notion itself of the object relation is in no way underlined. extracted from his article on The Instincts and their Vicissitudes. It is singular that since then. Here. one gets out of it as one can. not the object objection. we have glided towards a harmonious notion of the object. or cultivated. or placed in the foreground of the question. It - 59 . the confusion that analysts have experienced. In short. and much more than it. that the approach to the sexual object presents an essential difficulty which is of an internal order. It is a question of satisfaction in so far as. It is not so much that it gave a value to the role of sexuality and that it played a part in the fact that this has become a common topos -. not at all something that was attached to it at the origin.the choice of the object. I believe I have already several times underlined what in analysis provoked so much scandal at the outset.in both cases. The lack of rigor in this matter. have resulted in a curious sliding. One could also say the possibility of appeasing it. I have chosen one of the most significant citations concerning the object. asgordingtothe pleasure principle.The object of the drive is that through which the instinct can attain its goal.

in highlighting the notion that the object is_always. from the outset. If I have written symbolic debt on the table. and privation. inadequate. as well as by this simple remark -. it even partially gyades a conceptual _grasp. 1 I have reminded you of what is present from the outset in the givens -castration. We have already succeeded. it is a citation. and that on the other. frustration. But it is one citation among others that go in the same direction. Those are three terms whose differences it is fruitful to note. and towards that end. itjs because the Oedipus complex already implies in 60 . Besides. castration was linked to the central position_given to the Oedipus complex as the articulatingelement _essential _to_thewh. which implies a long coherence.in_Er-etd.is not a doctrine. namely.iierrt a_primal--F-indan4ansi - tlaustheffiederfinchalgthe_refindingjs_never satisfying. the notion of frustration is marginal. the subject can in no case be isolated. to see by what detours Freud leads us to make us understand its effective agency. as I have underlined many times. with what is still fundamentally F_o_u_ststhought. We are now led to examine the fundamental notions more closely. the notion of frustration. and in particular to scrutinize the one that is placed at the center of current analytic theory. The connection between castration and the symbolic order is given evidence by all our earlier reflections. from which. What isfaii•afai about? Castration is essentially tied to the s mlkordmIsfituted. which are themselves further developed in Freud. where.only-art_objestiostad agairt. The question now is to articulate the conception of the object which is at play here. thanks to several points. we have seen from other characteristics that the object is on one hand.oleevoiutiQn_of sexuality. To what extent has this notion become necessary? To what extent does it need to be rectified? It is our task to do a critique which will make it usable. and compatible with the basis of analytic doctrine.

itself from the beginning. deriving from prez9edipa1 experience. there is introduced into the conditioning. of gratification. which has nothing in itself to introduce either a misalignment or a disorder into your understanding. it is an imaginary Al jjec__the phallus.. which .. The important thing is to understand what frustration means. in a direction that can be atypical or heterotypical.. and fundamentally.-will give the slope along which the Oedipal conflict will come to be inflected in a way that is more or less decided._=i. which is the notion of desire.is_the-object at cause. in effect. Thus. when it is placed in the foreground of analytic theory. It models_the expel jgrice of the subject. The notion of frustration. I will continue.. or that is put_into play_ thsylrtholic debt instituted by castration? As I indicated the last time. Here.the_a_ccentianthe_maticlia are not departin ig_michfrom the_notion. and whose more or 6I . the notion of the law which absolutely cannot be eliminated from it. Frustration. At leastthat is what Freud states here and I will set off from that today. a base. What. that Freud puts at_the_ceat_es01 analytic conflict.n4.. and what it concerns.t occupies the central position on this chart. adequate. fixations. a whole cortege of notions which one translates into a language of quantitative metaphors -. the development of the subject. and even demonstrated. at each stage of the development of the young subject.. by this considered remark. It is tied to the investigation of traumas. of a certain sum of good deeds which are adapted. how it was introduced. in order to try to push the dialectic of frustration a bit further. I think. with the notion of frustration. and prepares certain inflections in him. What is the mode of relation to the obj_ct at play in frustration? It clearly introduces the question of the real. The fact that castration is at the level of the symbolic debt is sufficiently justified. That does not imply that it is external to the Oedipus complex in a sense it provides a prepared turf. By pi. impressions.one speaks of satisfaction. refers to the first age of life. which all of our earlier reflections support. and a foundation.

Freud having spoken of l 62 . is then considered as an essential element. one has been able to articulate the relations of the oral stage and the anal stage. we have here the imaginary anatomy of the development of the subject. lived by the stili)"ectataperiodof development t which his relation to a real je c t is centered usually on the so-called primitive imago of the maternal ast. It is enough to refer to the texts to see the threshold that has been crossed in the analytic investigation of the child by the sole fact of this displacement of interest in the analytic literature. or on the contrary. at least for those of you who are familiar enough with the three notions on the chart to be able to recognize them easily. -.and to show that they are all marked by an elertoLambivalence. by means of the analytic experience. those that allow the description of the different instinctual stages. in relation to which will be formed what I just a while ago called its first slope. There we are taken to the heart of the question -. That will be easy for you to measure. on the whole. whose absence. and always participates in a dual situation without an Qeneral assumption of his position being possible. whichinakes_the-very-pesition-oi the sub'ect • arti • ••• • • • f the other. This interest in real conditions which bursts out in a given piece of current analytic literature is. inscribing the first fixations. analytic theorists have found themselves in a discussion which teems with misunderstandings. absent from the first analytic observations. or at least it is articulated differently on the conceptual level. so th two. let us see where it leads. with their phallic and sadistic subdivisions. Simply limiting ourselves to that. Frustration is thus considered as an ensemble of real impressions. the earliest that the subject has with the real object? On this matter.whatis_the nature of this relation. etc.less complete saturation. We are thus in the presence of a subject who is in a ppsi tion of desire with regard to the breast in so far as it is a real object. The proofs to which this remark awakens us are not lacking. Starting there.Jt is a matter of real conditions which we are supposed to have to detect in the subject's past. In short.

According to them of love in which egoism and the gift are perfectly reconcilable. It ends with an articulate and striking conception that Mr._establishest120ween what the child demands of the mother - ■ " se • I I t tar and what the mother demands ofthex. in as much as a perfect Jeciprocity_is. that where relations are natural. I am thinking of the remark of Alice Balint. in fact. and Mrs. he has the most urgent need? There is a misunderstanding born of a confusion here. This theory would reconcile the notion of auto-eroticism as it is given in Freud with what seems to be imposed by the reality of the object with which the child is confronted at a very primitive stage of his development. and ended in formulations so diverse that I cannot enumerate them before having gone further in the conceptualization of what is at stake. What could be more manifestly external to the subject than that object which is the first nourishment par excellence. the mother always has the infant on her 63 . which we have already discussed. the child is always kept in contact with the mother. Balint call Primary Love. The theory of this socalled perfect and complementary primitive love moreover carries the signature of this discordance in its very wording. that is to say. which has confounded the discussion. in Mother Love and the Love of the Mother. in the land of dreams in the Garden of the Hesperides. Others have objected that it was difficult to relate many details of direct observation of mother-child relations to a notion that seemed founded on the fact that the subject knows only himself. Elsewhere. of which.a lived stage of auto-eroticism. amongst savages. This conception is perfectly contraryioille of clinical ex p.b.i the two poles of need. I will simply remind you of the theory of Alice Balint. for these seem to contradict the statement that there are no effective relations of the subject with an object. We are perpetually dealing with the evocation in the subject of the mark of all that could arise of truly fundamental discordances. some have maintained the notion by interpreting this auto-eroticism as the primitive relation of the infant with the primordial maternal object.

felt by the subject as coming from the outside." "ideal. In its table of contents one finds authors who figured in the volume to which I alluded in my first lecture. The authors ask for a comparison of that with the way that. then the return shocks from these aggressive drives.shameless and completely uncritical -. things are attacked with more nuances. elnThole oak must already be contained in the acorn. They reproach Melanie Klein with having a theory of development which. the progressive We retain the French. would have nothing more to do than to emerge. which reproduces tlaegl." 1 64 . they say.. In this more confidential bulletin. 1 I have taken this example only to introduce what will be the motor element of our critique of frustration. From the beginning there would be primitive aggressive drives --. as if it were from lack of assurance that one showed a bit of shame. if not idgactive. for its condensation of the words "idea.einian_positions_at the Congress of Geneva.back. that of the theoro. There fell into my hands a certain bulletin. for some._throu h their intermediary. would locate everything within the subject in a preformed manner." and "active. Thus one finds in this bulletin an article by MM. the notion of a love so strictly complementary and seemingly destined of itself to find its reciprocal constitutes an evasion so little compatible with a correct theorization.taLtepiesentation-given-by-Kleinian_thectry_is-not-at-a11.of the object relation. that the authors end by admitting that this position is ideal. and the different elements. which is • centered on an optimist view -. 'clue that they macte_oLthe_Kl. that of the Belgian Association of Psychoanalysts. in the theory of biological development. it would only appear the more meritorious. The whole Oedipus complex with its possible development would be already included in the instinctual givens. if anyone learned of it. namely from the inaterArtd. For such a subjec_t. and one let it show only in distant places where surely.va r and that is why it is amusing to see by what bias the theoretical reconstruction that she proposes is attacked. already potentially articulated. It is clear that thefundamen. Pasche and Renard.namely. In fact. nothing would come from the _outside.

and predominant. preformed by_hered_i_ty.the child ishornwith-inheritetLinstincta. They thus arrive at the conclusion which they believe can be drawn from the_Kleinian contribution -.. and which he will then have -not to form. This world which one has onl t IIl NO is established with the aid of a certain imaginary preparation. and even of opposition..12ut_also_ if h the authors AN not r_eally_much closer_ than_ they believe to the position for which they reproach Melanie Klein._they. ready to appear at a specified point. they say. starting withhimself ox-with anything_ else.u.that it is about a notion of a schema._eLy_diffic. in such a way that it would not be astonishing later to see the notion of the internal object prevalent in the foreground.rept. conceived as a preformed schema. but to recognize. But we will have to see in the proof not only if this critique does notgo against all that FreucLitten .linderlinejSY. all_the elements which will permit the subject to adapt himself to a series of stages which are not called ideal only because theyage_precisely_raemories for the 65 . I would simply like to underline the formulation in which the whole paradoxically ends. but which he remembers.11 to . which forms the heart of the article. They believe that they find in Melanie Klein that it is already given in a constellation that is internal at the beginning. This is formulated in the name of criticism.construction of thetotalfi. can only be which the so-called depressive Without taking these criticisms one after another as we would need to in order to appreciate them at their just value. to which the subject is now and henceforth adequate. The authors seem fascinated by the question of how what is contributed from the outside is inscribed in development. nor to_discover through a series of strange and lucky finds. psitionis_iraugurated- i.evsa_y„. For it is really they who indicate that there already exist in the subject. in the face of a world which he does not perceive._whictl. The Platonic character of this formulation cannot escape us. and most of • you will recognize it. in his heredityjn_the state of preformed schemata. y of the mother.

that_we see them rep_LiVectedonto tie ast starting with points that may be verprecocious. is surely something that poses a fertile question. begins to indicate the 4 which we can introduce something new into the confusion regarding the primordial mother-child relation.itatusake_unclerstood. ti.A.. If there is precisely one thing of which Melanie Klein gives us the idea -. have only a retroactive character. These fantasies.Lizes.subject.troactively read in his pastrio irhiglessthanthell for that. while it may better satisfy our idea of natural harmonies. and that it should be articulable very precociously. and there is no question of following her when she says that the Oedipus complex was already there in theAtorms. i All of that. and very precisely phylogenetic memories. It is in the cont tioticLotthe. But that this articulation should be revealed in a certain relation with the child. which will provide IIirriatype and a norm. there is some sort of mirage here. Without doubt. tp_Arelyhypothetical articulation.and is this not just what is criticized by the authors? -it is that the earliest situation iscilaaic„is_s_eritaialy-artarchic. and it is viesisely a matter of knowing how something like an order can be established starting from there. is still not consonant with what experience shows. This theoretical.subjga. Is that what Melanie Klein wanted to_say?It is strictly unthinkable to maintain that it is. it seems to me. But why can these points be so precocious? How_canialaise a subject attte2eldrern y_ad_vanced--age-of-two-and-a_half_years„and like the pythoness before a mantic or divinatory mirror. That there is something the Kleinian conception is not to be doubted. 66 .t is characteristic at the origin is the sound and fury_af_the. puts at the outset a tr 7 There has to be some reason is given which. •— _ of the penis moving amongst the brothers and sisters in that sort of field defined by the interior of the maternal body.

To demonstrate it. althesttheslaancl.. namely what Freud has articulated concerning the original position of the child with regard to games of repetition._the i_gaLobject. only begins to functiondaielatiorao_a_laac. the relation direct. which he grasped so brilliantly in the child's behavior._thereds_theagent effect_the_objea-only_has_ an agency. as Freud has underlined. In this instance.there arejwo sides to frustration at_thel _beginning. only . Ihereds_on.. And in this_ fundamental relation which is the relation to the lack of the object.gamesr-gameLaLthe_seizure-oLan_ object which is perfectly indifferent in itself. It is a ball in this instance. It is the same. A great deal becomes clearer if we approach it in the following way -.. there is room to introduce the notion of the agent. Still. which in no way requires the admission that there is even for him a distinction_between_a_me_and_a_notme. nor any conceivable approach to a relation. the agent isthfinother. It is only as a function of a periodicity in which holes and deficiencies can appear. ther is something other than thesrimitive object. She does not appear as such from the beginning. for example. in the auto-erotic position in Freud's sense of the term„Ln_whickthgreis ns4 Minn of the them speaking. and without any sort of biological value._which is the truesenter when it is a question of situatingthefarly relations of the child.tr One is wrong_ notto_hegin-with_frustration. that the subjarticular mode of relation will be established. but it could also be anything at 67 .oae_hand. it will suffice for me to remind you of what we have already studied during these last years. startin ent_oLthe_first. and we shall find them bracketed until the end. It is certaM__that an object can begin to exercise its influence in the relations of the subject well_b_efoxt it hasbeen_pgrseivLtL: asan object. which allows us to give an essential formulation to the general position of the problem. one must have a just notion of this central concept. The object is_real. but.

thisscansion_af_the calls_far from giving us the whole . 1 - articulated extremely precociously by the child.and the_pair of opposites presenceabsence.'nuspresence and absence. is what the possibility of linking the real relation to a yjubglic relation.ga * distinct vegmamkati the real object relation.for the subject. We can writskM) as the.. us_to_disen. but in the opposition plus and m. which at the origin is the mother.. which is opposed to the chaos of part objects which characterized the preceding stage. which already participates in the order orsy:raptialieity.It thusalay_xs ._s_ymb_a_Qf frustration. symbolic order straight away. with its scansion and the marks or traces that remain of it.and when it is resent. What is introduced here is what naturally tends to disappear at the moment of frustration. We already said that in our studies last year -. the connotatio_a_plus-minus.. this new element is yerypredsely presence-absence. butworiist Jay the subject. she introduces a new element of totality. arranged as such. since there must next be a sequence. elementof a symbolic order. it is t e'ectecl itis_calkdayaysicaiizatism. in order to get it back it again later.all that a small child of six months can throw beyond the pale of his crib./ - Concerning the mother. presence-absence is articulated in the_register_of_thesalt_The maternal object is called precisely when it is absent -. which later will offer the subject precisely_the_pos5ibility_sa_establishing a relation _with a real object. that of the depressive position. which givesus the first. This(ouplig_ofpxesence-absence.us the_beginning. Before showing that in a way that is more clear. The latter is not simply posed as such objectively. I simply want to indicate what is implied by the sole fact that the pair of opposites presence- absence is introduced into the child's experience. Well. we are told that at a certain stage of development. No doubt this element is not sufficient by itself alone to constitute one._liut it shaws. Certainly. The child is thus placed between the notion of an agent._ connotes the first constitution of the agent of frustration. there is already 68 .

of a symb_alic_order. the breast -.how to conceive .Wd as such real. she existed in the structuration as an agent. as to whether the notion of the not69 . absence. That.I leave aside the question.fallsfxorrLher __ Whereas she had been inscribed in the symbolic structuration that made of her an object present-absent in response to the call -.Wei. the fundamental condition. the mother as such. she no longer responds? 1" Let us give the answer ourselves.. objects in the sense that we intend here. th__d_is_tcLsay. what happens? These objects which upunfijlthenhaclbeenpluely92jects_ of satisfaction.she J_Decornes a power. please note. does not respond? If to the call of the subject. become objects_af.let us take it as an example —.._. she exits from the_ structure. gift deriving from this Towex. In short._a_seversal of the object's position is produced. neither more nor less than the mother up until the present.access to. andhe becomes real..what happens if the mnbolic agent. She_. a question of observation. from_themoment_thatthe mother helaines_p_O.. And now they too.u_. The question now is the following -.. can be made to be as enveloping as one wants.virtually the origin. Correlatively. are susceptible of entering into thesonnotation presence-.Phe becomes real. in some way. On the other hand.) Why? Until then. and that it is upon_her_thatthe chilciLs. she no longer responds except when it pleases her.r4tion_of_the_whole_oLreality for what follows. the essential term in the relation of the child to theaeal object.Q1zjecis_clearlydepends. distinct from the real object which is_ the object of satisfactionfor the child. the possibility. As long as it is a question of a real relation. as dependentonithis_reaLohjeA*Ichishenceforth the maternal p_ower_. possessed -.. in the same way.the moment of veering when he primordial relation to the real object opens into a relation that is more complex? What is the turning point at which the_ mother-child relation opens towards elements that will introduge_whatyve_ have called_a dialectic? I think that we can formulate it in a way that is schematic by asking the following question -. When she no longer responds. which is not metaphorical. is also the beginning of_the struct. when. the birth. objects that can be grasped.

It at least has the advantage of introducing some essential distinctions. and which is the mother's power. You will see now where they have already led us. At the moment that I am describing. What caunts. 2 English in the original. and the object symbolic. but are rather the mark of_the value of that power which can not-respond. the mother can give anything at all._-_:_as before. is that of the omnipotence of thought._you will see.is_iezerse_d_= has real. are the deficiencies. and of preparing the way for openings which are not those that one currently takes. And at that moment. To think it is to end in impasses. This investigation may seem a bit theoretical. The object thence has two orders_of satisfying properties. of omnipotence. he has the essential of it. but it also symbolizes a favoral:21Lpower. but that does not mean that the omnipotence in question is his. and the checks that it encounters. it is twice Qui_a_gossiblesabje_ct Of_atjafActipti. That is extremely importante to retain. The omnipotence in question is that of the mother. But is it conceivable that the child has a notion of omnipotence? Perhaps in effect. count for naught in the question. It is erroneous and completely unthinkable that the child could have a notion of his omnipotence. That would be absurd." 70 .2 initially enters through the image of the other or through what is the objets that the child wants to keep around him are no longer so much objects of satisfaction. It is easy to impute it to all that is farthest from us. Not only does nothing in his development indicate that he has. a genetic psychoanalysis. "non-moi. The object is valued as evidence of the gift deriving from the maternal power. according to one formulation. in_ which the mother passes into reality from a symbolization that is completely archaic. )ten the mother becomes real. In other terms. if one recalls that one of the most cumbersome notions of theory since it has become. doubled by the French. but almost everything that interests us in this development and in the accidents that embellish it is there to show us that his so-called omnipotence. theposition. which touch upon the mother's omnipotence. it satisfies a need. it is she who is omniRotenticl Itis_a_clecisive moment. the disappointments.

that is to say. namely. I will keep them on the blackboard as two circles exterior to one another. Nevertheless.the_child. woman-counts the phallus_.Here. men. Freud tells us that in the world of objects.her„need-for the phallus. And even if he has no need. as permitted -.. and whose whole sexual life is yet subordinated to the fact that they really assume its use imaginarily. like_its_pr_esence. Freud. we misconstrue [rneconnaitrej 71 .among. let us consider our mother and child who. For a simple reason -. that in the end. according to Michael and Alice Balint. is the child. and which has in its jsession all that _the_smtiect might need. This object is defineci_as_imaginary—lt is_ in_ no way possible to confound it with the penis in its reality. its erected image.a ppwer. than for those who can assure themselves of having it in reality. 3 Let us now pose the question by starting from a completely different point. and that this has the strictest rapport with her relatlaraa. it seems. frorri_the moment that it depends upon this power. more or less well. says that the. women. then. For us that is a given. just as the Mortimer couple in Jean Cocteau have only a single heart. there is one_whose function is paradoxically decisive. the phallus. suddenly passes to another register.if the_w_ornan satisfaction in the child it is precisely in_as_much as she finds in him / something_that calms. in the presence of _something that_he has realized as . are. What had been situated up until then on the plane of the first connotation presence-absence. for his part.oxitaAg_enc_y in the imaginary. more important even for the members of humanity who lack the real correlate. and b_e_comes something that can refuse itself. they assume it as licit. By not taking that into account. - phallus has so decisive a role thatanostalgiaior it. her essential object lacks. namely.. and aiu_zatait. Starting there. form only a single totality of needs. it becomes symbolic i. It is properlyspeakini(its form.

All sorts of situations that are already structured exist between the mother and the child. as it is produced for the mother. we will say that teslail. to some extentle_d_himself dispossessed_of. at a primordial.th_e_relation. - -- 72 . something. We cannot not introduce that here.that he demands from the mother.the other.irtary. of_themother and child is doubled on one side by the need for a certain imaginary saturation. From the moment when the mother is introduced_into_the real as a pawerJor the child there opens thsp_osibility_of. The child expects something from the mother. . in perceiving that it is not he_slome.at—th_e_p_hallus is for the mother? At what moment can the child.s to the extente of the phallasis notcompletely_absorbed_for_the_mather_by theigigmoLthe child? Where there is a diplopie. that the child can believe that he is loved for himself.an object which as such is intermediary.ci jaken_as_reaL spitholizes thejrnale More precisely the-chackas_real takes. the objectof_the-gift. relations with the child. situation of the relation to wb. by what_there might be of _effective_real. that is more or less symbolized -.b_ut_a-cestaizipaage.o_rshal desired object? Far harmonious._real. in a way that is approximate.and assumein a way.. and on. if we follow Qp-pu(i. definitivelyrnythical. The question is to know at what moment.. Let us say. in the style of the Balints. . . and he also receives something from her.on-for-the-mather-the_syzibolic function of hez.d. So we have the mother and the child in a certain dialectical relation. atwhat mornents_m_thechgclenter into -.eta ina~eed — the three terms are there.instinctuallevd_which remains..not only Freud's teaching. Every sort of variant can be introduced here. Thereis_always for the mothersomelbing that reinainsirred_u_c_ible in what is at stake. . In other words. The question is then — what_happen.the imag. as we will see. and how. but the phenomena that are manifest at every moment in experience. In the end. the child can be introduced directly into the structure of the symbolic-imaginary-real. a _division_oLthe socallecLptim.

begins to function in a position of rivalry.latter _plays her role as symbolic_rnother.this will be for the subject more decisjve„tban everything_else. The last time I introduced the observation of a phobia talittlezirl.other.n. This child was separated_froilkheunothey_notonly because of theavar.wants when the mother is not thete..... and because it is one of Anna Freud's students who made the observation.L1 4.At_ the__moment when the child learns the difference between the sexes. and when she comes. and I shall indicate its interest right away.is_ticselatigi► propeaspeakinginterveries.than. She does everything to do as the little boys do.she comes on tiptoe. mother had lost tLer_husband at the beginning of the war.everything is noted day by day --. is_there.is. and its fecundity. She understands nothing because the theory of Anna Freud is false..phallus_ ipr'41.Ahatis to_say. - 73 ._ himself.There is something here that goes much further. the child jlasigalszbiecshe... The child realize this phallic image on himself. she plays little games of approach -.ces. So all goes very well.Thislittle_girLha.. Irna. and by a good observer. islimjte443. but does not_ entaiLany_consequen. whickikthe. to what degree does this experience fit in with what is given him in the presence of his mother and in her actions? How is the recognition_oLthis_third. one sees her function as symb_otic mother. all sorts of fortunate conditions were present.. but that sheiss_imyly_desiripg.when_the_rhather. She comes to see her daughter. tha_s_he.ginary term..ving.herself_desirousitcd_o_nLy_cd something. perceived thatbays have apee-pee maker. the facts put her into a state of astonishment which produces all the precision of the observation -. and distills her arrival. The littlegirl.1errt Rower -. who is two yeasa_aacUlve raorahLalst hak1g.. the notion that the mother lacks the_phalius.teAtit.essesit. the presencec_ejs regular.b_ut_begause the. The child is observed from one end to the other. as Little Hans exa...ematlierjascribed? Even more. Because it was during the war.. In short.made_the discoiery that boys have a pee-peeinak w ants-to imita. she understands nothing. As a consequence.ind it is there that the rwciss....the..d alsa to manipulate theirs.. A drama is produced around this issue.. In fact...anii..

she is a bit 74 . The first really long and articulate sentence that she pronounces -.The observation is given as being that of a phobia. that is.That we know to the degree that we analyze the child. and the phobia evolves over a certain time. and which bites thesex. seized_by a holy terror. she has to be put into another. A dog is there. Is the phobia a consequence of the discovery of the absence of the penis? Why do we ask the question? Because the dog is clearly a dog_which bites. She wants to get out of her bed. and in fact. anclit wants to bite her. one fine night the little girl_wakes up. in so far as we follow and understand what she says.

Certainly.after all.theirionth_that. the anxieties in their unconstituted state.that is to say.t13.theAahobials_there as the aientthairipAyeswhghaLiritlegarnm9sles%acepted_asabsent.. Mrgorte's) for example. and this is a plain acting 3 o f You also see te_relation-that-is-there_betweealtg symbolization and the object of_the. says very clearly -. because it was bitten off. or again that the images of the dream are only a way for the subject to garb his anxieties. But what I want you to note is that the objgc41. Why the dog? We will talk about that later.of_a_paslaggi9„.. in whose shelter there will come to repose what is fundamental._. which would then be only a sort of apparel and_pfetextcovering somethi ngmatet. But the mechanism of phobia is the mechanism of phobia.pxecedeLthe_ _blossoming of the phobia.provided der in ord ro j_ustify_what is absent as beingabserit. . . Pasche at the end of the article of which I have spoken. There is something justin_tonception--_thatis_ really the mechanism of phobia.of.thesilikl only an imaginary_alibi. is something in decline.E l f behind in her development -. and to understand it as does M. are primordial... taken away? The schema that I have tried to articulate today certainly goes in that_ direction.. One clears this obstacle at every moment.thw? -..phobia... with all of the prohibitions that it implies.is to say that the dog bites the leg of the naughty boy. to the point of saying that it fundamentally explains the death instinct. the intervention of an element which is. in the original. on the other hand. TheinteTftst of the observation is that itjadkateamith_precision the. for example. 75 . namely the misrecognition [meconnaissance I ofthssp_ribolic order. Are we going to make a short-circuit in things and say that in 1921aiLissimply-a. that is to come back again to the same idea. narnFly. mother's absences over ithe_course.matter.. Is that what Iwaritto_tell you.. In other words._ culture. whereas anxieties.ndamental.as I toldyou _just before. as such. to personalize them as one might say. the time needed for the phobia to - 4 3 English. when I bring in this observation Ql_a_phobiaLL\to. the_supexegodsp_erhap&fot. primitive.

break out is much longer. that there had to_be this secongthipture in the alternatingrb. This brother that she acquires all of a sudden and who is about five years older than she.ther._thus_at_a_third. tired. I simply want to point out the question that arises concerning the antecedents of the phobia.m. We will thus discover thanks to the observation that the aphallicism was-not enough.back. the mother ceased corning to visit. Nothing is more significant and paradoxical in the observation. and of the way that therapists have attacked it.= an_d_the_next_ day the dream of the dog breaks forth. and the phobia installs itself. she has been missing. sick. yet there is no phobia. fourmonths roll by between the child's discovery of her aphallicism and the blossoming of the phobia. and have thought that it could be understood._ver_y_ distantdiat the pholliaarises.flo on er either the same presence or the sarne_gaiety. First. There is another point that is no less striking. which I am going to tell you. and she remarries. because she had fallen ill. she_has. The little girl finds that she has a new father and a new brother.y.the child is very sad. We shall speak again of this phobia.olic_rno.sarne-weekly elation of approach and going away thatmake_her_a_sufficient point of nchora•e f• e child And it is at this rnoment. After the phobia.. leaning on a cane. unless it is one other point. but nothing glaperhe comes back. the mother takes the child back. The mother ctb - at first appeared as someone who could be . she must be encouraged. the son of the stepfather.12.but something had to happen during. The child then sees _her_ mother in a weakened form. and this -laelt is inscribed in the child's reaction and behavior -. begins to play all sorts of games with her that are both 76 . she plays again with_the_child„and still nothing happeiliecomesback leaning_on a_cane. and an operation was necessary. From what moment does the phobia become necessary? From the moment when the_mather_lacks_thephallus What thus determines the phobia? What finds an equilibrium in it? Ilr_h_y isit-sufficient? We shall tackle that the next time. that interval._or_the. the Blitz ends._weakened.yllarn_of_the mother's corning=coming. The mother is no longer the .

narnely.e_interg_silhAtile takes in her as being without aS And the psychotherapist is astonished -.disengaging from the mother th_eidea. we are told why -. is pregnant with all sorts of pathological possibilities. 77 . she has never been better. English in the original.pLeleramt. Nevertheless.s.A. thefath.adoring and violent.ormethin. situated beyord_the relations with the mother. In short„AU a substitulejoywhat appears to us to have been saturated by the phobia.vmbolig element.it is that she is clearly preferred to this boy by her mother.g. the child to pass through the grave crisis she entered when faced with the maternal impotence.erdamfficiently present to aducepacisely_kne. In addition.. But does the therapist see as clearly as that? This relation in which she is alreadyth .11 . It is a matter of knowing to what degree she will not later be 4 5 English in the original. a personage who is not only phallic but who also bears a penis. bexpmc. there is not a trace of mental disturbance. She will surely become that_ lirt-phalius5 about which so much is said.e. In effect. who presentifies her lack to her.. the fear of the castratin animal as such.s. and clearly gives himself up to an activity which is entirely linked to th. which is worth more than the brother.that would have been a fine occasion for the phobia to break out again. which is said to have been the essential element of articulation allowing the brother.power o_r_imppleir. He asks her to show herself nude. The child now finds her needrated_by the maternal presence. and in addition by her relation with the brother. We can perceive in another respect that at this momentshedias_becoalrne_tgatire. should this not be the occasion for the little girl to fall ill again? Far from it. and by implication . of which we have not yet spoken. but which isessgatially_liracesi_to_theltmetion_of_phgbia. The presence of the man-brother..of power as such. by that of the father. the fundamental theory on which the whole therapeutics of Anna Freud is founded indicates that it is to the extent that the ego is more or less well informed of reality that discordances are established.

d_heis_s_ufficient. He is sufficierdlor gvaintainingasufficieka distance between the three terms of the relation mother-child-pkallus.Implicated in this imaginary function. But for the moment. We shall thus be introduced to what is most characteristic in the pre-Oedipal object relation. there is no essential need to be filled by_theile_veloprnent of theThallic fantasy. by what identification. namely. by what artifice? That is what we shall begin to attack the next time in taking up this observation again. 1 English in the original. by what way._so that the subject does not have to maintain it by giving of herself. How is this separation maintained. 12 December 1956 V ON ANALYSIS AS BUNDLING AND ITS CONSEQUENCES The drive under the naked eye. by_putting_ there something_of herself. the birth of the object as fetish. 78 . because the father is_there-an.

1 The article of MM. and if the formulation was rather an enfeebling of it by the one who had introduced this concept with regard to obsessional neurosis. The paroxysm of perversion. published in the January-June 1955 number of the Revue francaise de psychanalyse. than in the few words that I can pronounce here. gives you a living example of the dominant conception. Bouvet. while warning you that things will certainly appear to go much further when you read the article itself. The analytic conception of the object relation has already known a certain historical realization. I could see that this formulation. What I am trying to demonstrate takes it in a direction that partly differs. which has been affirmed over the course of years. So I am going to summarize this work.but the sole fact that it is inserted here in a different constellation gives it in every respect a signification that is different. it would be well to punctuate the signification that the object relation takes when it is put at the center of their conception of analysis by the group of those who make more and more of it. and partly remains the same -. My wish has been amply fulfilled by more than one. At the point at which we have arrived. others have made an effort at precision. truly present the concept of the object relation as it is conceptualized in a certain orientation. in some text. Pierre Marty and Michael Fain on L'Importance de la motricitê dans la relation d'objet (The Importance of Motricity in Object Relations). is now gathering pace. The fetishist solution. 79 . Not long ago.The true nature of the anaclitic relation. I wished ironically that someone. The transitory perversion of a phobic patient. In recently rereading certain of their articles. and ends in a conception that is very firmly articulated.

Between this imaginary object and the real object. It is precisely to the degree that. the analyst will be 80 .The relation between the analysand and the analyst is conceived from the outset as being established between a subject. the analyst. in some way. the sitgation as it is basically conceived can only be exteriorized in an erotic aggression. in the subject's different sketches at motor reaction. It is there that the drive. and the external object that is the analyst. the motor manifestation of the drive cannot occur. but it is to be hoped that its erection will surge up. it is precisely here that there is localized in the mind of the analyst what must become manifest. The tension of the analytic situation is conceived on the following basis -. This is normally manifested by motor activity -. is localized. According to the article in question. there exists a certain discordance.between a subject. the only thing in principle that can be established and manifested is what is called the primitive relationship of the drive. The subject being forced to contain his movements by the relation as established in the analytic convention. lying on the couch or not. the analyst is conceived as being real.that is the presupposition for the development of the analytic relation. and become the object of a fantasmatic relation. The couple is supposed in itself alone to be the animating element of the analytic development. at every instant. and an external object. and that we shall see superimposed on the relation with the external object a relation with an internal object. It follows that we shall find the final word of what happens at the level of the drive in small traces carefully observed. it is because it is agreed that it will not become manifest. In the end. because of the rule. the subject in fact has a relation with an internal object. that is to say. If the latter does not manifest itself. but caught in the imaginary mechanisms already instituted within the subject. and experienced as living by the analyst. with regard to which. To express it in our vocabulary. that we shall be allowed to perceive what interferes with the constituent situation. if one can say that. within the analytic convention. the patient. at every moment. which is the person who is present. the drive as it is emerging.

object will have to be. The fantasma tic. had given as the crucial turning of an analysis the moment when his analysand could smell him.ages.is. and in a way that is lived by the subject.. followed by all the others. It is thus that the subject will realize his analyst as a real presence. it was the moment when the patient had perceived the odor of the analyst. has been led to give a certain value to the notion of the neurotic distance that the subject imposes on the object. the active and actual distancemith. then. its position in the foreground. Frorn_theinoment_that-the-latte_r_is conceived as a realposition. reduced to a real distance. it is true during the postulancy of his career. Know that I have not taken an exceptional example here. which is that between the subject and the analyst. is how one arrives at c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g the anal when one believes_that Wis. and will have to model his interventions. inscribed in the situation of a real relation between pessart.5imply restrained. This was not a metaphor. On the other hand. is a mathematical consequence of such a conception of the_analytic relation. according to this conception. one of these authors. gauged. at least in this suspended position it is in. As there is. That. that they are separated in this enclosure by a conventional barrier. it was not a matter of his being able to smell him psychologically. The authors are going very far here.._malized. apart from those who are there. It is clear from the beginning that so exorbitant a conception cannot be pushed to its final consequences.regard_tctilv_analyst it is certain that one of the most direct modes of the relation to the other will be that apprehension from a distance provided by scent. The appearance of this relation of scent. and that something must be realized there. It really seems that one is tending more and more in this milieu to give a pivotal importance to such modes of apprehension. within which little by little a distamuathe.judged. if what I am teaching 81 . Having seen the theoretical formulation._wilich. let us now see its practical consequences. no one else to enter into play in the analytic situation. I have already several times alhided to the fact that one of these authors. but that this has been repeated several times. or internal.

82 . this insufficiency can be of some consequence in the manner of bringing the whole situation to a good term. that is to say. But inversely. In what does_this operation of regulating the distance to the internal object. It is thus that the analytic situation comes to be conceived as a real situation.Why don't you answer me? You will find it in these authors. The only thing that is in no way clarified by such a conception of the analytic situation. but that does not. can be expressed thus -. the situation in which he operates still does not really become what the said conception stipulates. and the pregenital relation becomes more and more the essential of what is explored in analysis. in the imaginary relation. but wh4tiLieall_y_Ls remainsALthe somewhat I am trying to express for you by the schema_ which_shows She intervention and_crossing of the symbolic relation and the imaginary relation. The situation is not annulled however much one misconstrues it. in which an operation of oduction oltheimaginary to the real is accomplished. Within the framework of this operation there unfold a certain number of phenomena which will allow us to situate the different stages in which the subject remained more or less stuck. and that shows the insufficiency of this conception very well. One will draw it askew because of the way in which one conceives it. is a motor manifestation. mean that one can do without it. even if the practitioner shares such a conception. One does not know it. and it is not negligible since everything is there. Nothing is said about the function of language and speech in this position. however. We shall also see the special value that is given to a single impulsive verbalization. to cries towards the analyst of the sort -. A verbalization has importance for them only in so far as it is impulsive.one does not know why one is there talking. or fixed. It is not enough to conceive it as such for it to be as one conceives. one serving as the NW of the other. One thus accomplishes what one calls the exhaustion of his various essentially imaginary positions. end? Our schema allows us to conceiveJt. to which all of technique is submitted.you is true. punctuated in the most precise way.

and precisely in cases of obsessional neurosis..not _smply the other who is there but is the place of speech.1 .ickwith regard to the other.aginary relation. this beyond.impossilDility of thesymbolic which c21Witutes. not ceaselessly. Let us not say any more than that. the subject-in_whizm yaunspeechls_constituted because he can not only receive it. There is already_structuredihLhespfalcing_ relation. The order with regard to the image in effect serves him in both understanding.. our interest. if we do i ( . indeekofokatack Of course._The Otheris. the subject has already.) d S ! . i r v v i o n e s 'ci -arttheobject. bears uniquely on the imaginary relation which is there in a transverse position with regard to the advent of speech. in every neurosis. if we only interest ourselves in what those who hold this conception call the distance from 64‘e-utter. the relation of the subjectio the_ Other is produced. subjects have already come to us who have passed by this style of understanding and proof. percei.and yet it is the whole analytic doctrine that is there in its potential state --. which is_ not yet one.—hutcan_alsoresp_ont_is_on this line that_ ty_erything_tlaatis of the tr4nafereatiasuskr is qgablisheckthe imaginary gluing there precisely the role of filter. 83 kavr-6. Yes. must be established. if we neglect the link between the imaginary relation and the symbolic.ur. On the line S-A.The line a-a' conerns_th_e_im.ne. which links the_subject as more or Lessdiscordant„dividecl cven to fragmentation.. this great Other beyond the other whom you ipLeh_fnciiLmaginarily. [entendre] and not understanding what there is to understand in the place of speech. If our effort.asis. if we forget that there __is_something which must allow the subject to achieve himself. one might say. brought to light. his own ruling order. to the narcissistic ___is_thatathe small other. since it. concerning the unconscious symbolic relation -. What is absolutely certain in a certain number of cases. this supposed Other who is the subject as such. and the . if everything is misconstrued in the relation between the imaginary_ten§ion and what must be realized.Y_e_it.thiuk of e.andinordertoannihilatei dorNccoate_ j that we already have the results. to realize himself both as history and as intention.

. by the dimension of the Oedipus.the_entire demelopment of the_analytic_situation_a pursuitof the reduction of this famous distance which i5 said to be characteristic of_the_object relation in_obsessional neurosis. and interests us only in as much as it is then taken up again in the quartet which is constituted by the eiIty_oplay of the paternal function. the_precipitationof a homosexual attachment for ark_ohject which was in some way paradoxical. we shall obtain what one could call paradoxical reactions of perversion. The phenomenon can show a quite durable persistence. which remained there like an asti_lact. but that what interests the motterb_an_interest more or less strongly 7 ascentuatecLaccording_to_the case.asao the coming_iritoplaymholic---Felation. which scarcely existed in analytic literature before this technical mode was put into the foreground. .is thatla_making. The_trianglejs in itself preAedig4. That is the point at which we had arrived the last time.This_is_prad.that she herself lacks this_ohject.cgd_whealg recognizes -.. introduced. Lthe phallus . We have already observed phenomena that are completely out of the ordinary..u. NAI that 4%a* is +red-astonishing if we refer to the imaginary triad.not only that he isnot. I am thinking..we have left open the question of how -. -2 At the point to which I had pushed things the last time.1. of the explosion. you saw the beginning of a linof_research that concerned the imaginary triad mothercl. he must perceive in secpaLl place that the mother is truly lit_vAysit. It is only isolated by abstraction. 84 .the sole object for his mother. a sort of glaze or crystallizahonstfanimage_araund_the_olilectamhirh were _lezithin_thesubjeds reach. which occurs only with the fourth luaction.lili:J m phallus.Startiug with thia recognition.. beginning with what we could call the fundamental disappointment of the slikl. for example. that of the father.

the dog. that is to saylteleonthe_p_larke_afa sort of pact. because the events occur at the border of the Oedipal relation. with the surging up of that fantasmatic being. at least for a provisional period.e-threeimaginary_obje_ctsis_b.child__Qf the_p_hallus that she • lacks. girl or boy. punctuated by an alternating identification in the relations that somethin is established whiclumilLallaw_the subject to sepower conferred. It is a highly favorable case for studying phobia. ilyentifiggtioniyhich is at the_b_asisaLtlae_normative Oectipalyelation is established.also_lacks the phallus.mbythernother as thy. of right to thg_phallus. concerning the formulations that one finds written by Freud to introduce the distinction between the .boundary of the symbolic and the real.. What happens in the normal Oedipal_situation? It is by the intermediary_of_a certain rivalry between the subject and the father. There follows an appeal made by the chilito_a_term_which_coldd sustain _this unsustainabLe.taphallk potencyThat occurs differently according to the position.lutiorilim_ to need it. which intervenes here as properly speaking responsible for the whole_situation.relaton. For tElcir it is completely clear. within certain limits. precisely those which introduce him to AlLayLnko.symbol other_lack of th_eol_2jeclof her imaginaryappetitee_phallus. he must firsthave been menaced by the agency of castration.x. then. - 85 . the one who bites. • who castrates. symbolically limable. This solution is always invoked.by_the.I showed it to you by alluding to the case of a transitory phobia in a very young child. The normal issue of this situation is that the child symbolically that he needs.okel there is one solution_possible.that the ii. When the hamessing_oLtb. There is at first a double imgiaTxclisappoliataLent discovery. I will introduce a lateral remark here. I told you the other day that the child 44s real is tak. . later perception the mother this Inother_who_is at_the_ . which is originally the paternal agencyJtis on the symbolic plane. Licselation. whether the situation be normal or abnormal.. thanks towilich_the whole situation is thinkable. Thus the blossoming of the phobia.

ence on the fnother„and the object of narcissistic love. or . is really poorly made. the narcissist suddenly appears in a light that is surprising. an element of activity_seems inherent in the very particular behavior aLthe_marcissist. one sees perfectly well that it is a matter of_a_ne_ect for support._ Freud distinguishes two types of love object. That is 'ust the contrary of the need to love in which Freud garbs him. which is modeled on the narcissistic image of the subject. and some have gone so far as to make a defensive reaction of this leaning against. we call the oblative. He is very curiously led to speak of the anaclitic relation as a need to be loved which is much greater than the need to love. which asks only an opening on the side of a relation of dependence. and very paradoxically. which we have tried to elaborate here by showing its roots in the specular relation to the other. the object of anaclitic love. that is when it persists in the adult. in the formulation of opposition that Freud gives for these two modes of relation. which bears the mark of an eagly_depend. up until a certain point. Where the anaclitic relation is interesting. The word anaclitic. making of him in some way the natural locus for what. If one pushes further. it is always conceived as a pure and simple survival. In fact. though we owe it to Freud.anaclitic relation and the narcissistic relation. indeed. Inversely. That also lends itself to all sorts of misunderstandings. In the types of Libidinal relation in_the adolescent. which can only be disconcerting. for it does not truly have in Greek the meaning that Freud gives it. In effect. and which he gives him as an attribute.it is a relation of leaning against. paradoxical. once again in a misconstruction of the position of intersubjective elements that the paradoxical perspectives have their origin. and also their justification. one will see that there are singular coat:aglictions. anaclitic ancLnarcissistic. It is. They are extremely singular. which is indicated by the German word Anlehnung -. if one reads Freud. he always misconstrues the other. 8b . in another vocabulary. The latter appears active in as much as.

him and as being a legitimate exercise for him.which is the phallic object. The relation of de endence is established 41_4. because in rinciplele is the sole deplasitoryofthis object which is the object of the mother's desire. object that is refound.•scencting_ the relation of frustration or of object lack in the relation of castration. from a certain perspective.s much. That is what makes the essence_of the anaclitic relation.s. calls this neither more nor less than the erotic position.and knows himself to_ be_ indispensable 12rieEstof_theer_o_ticlife-af._ identifying with thg_. the subject knows_thathel indispensable to her.. and marked by the relation to the early mother who is in principle his object in_the normal Oedipal position -.ulajects who participate in this libidinal version is entirely conditioned byllieneAd. This parenthesis is intended to show you the usefulness of putting the dialectic of the three first objects into play. of the Other.namely. of what one calls an infantile position. This terimintroduces the symbolic relation.. in his article on libidinal types.0. with the fourth term.prolongation..the_obje_ctal partner. the maternal woman. successor of the early maternatob...it is in so far as the male subject inthe symbolic relation. is invested with the phallus as such. womanJt is in so far as the woman depends on him. One misconstrues its essence in not perceiving this -. in so far_as she needs to find in him her object. which he becornea„ himself. on the phallus of which he is thenceforth the master. namely the father..thgr. which embraces them all and links them in the symbolic relation.ject_with.4egard to...__the representation. It is as a function of such an achievement of the Oedipal position that the subject is in a position which we can qualify. once experienced and assumed. the depository„that_the position becomes anaclitic. and with it the pos. _•. which is _something completely different„for it 87 . that it is he and he alone who satisfies her. as belonging to . that he becomes the bearer of the object of desire for the object which succeeds the maternal object.. in contrast to the narcissistic relation. Freud.and this since the origin of Freud's communication -. the indispensable_oblect.0. sibility of tran.. as optimal with regard to the object that is refound. which shows very well that it is the most open position. the .

cernent. There is lor_example.the child will make theatalEc choice in_her place . a coherence is lacking.with_ gatd_ his. L s s . Let us come back to our subject. 88 .. which are not typical..adner. 11 ` [ Schema.... a_ dialectic which_confers_on_this lack_the dimg.the_anaclitic relation It can happen.. 85] SCHEMA OF FETISHISM (2) 2 English in the original. that of_ incest..introduces this object lack in a dialectic in which one takes_and_ime.modes. and will realize for her the assumption of her longing? towards the.rnaternal_p. or destruction of links. in short.-becomes the rule and the measure in. a. a law. p..nsiQD Of pact.the child's identificationiarith. Starting a. To re-establish it..msdhAr.. .. phallic object. or non-link. in fact.ith_regardio_a third objectabsphallic 22jegtj_n_rhich is boikwhat the woman lacks and what_the child _has 41s:covered as lacking in the rn911: '.prohibition and particularly. Dis-accord. there are other modes..v. and ask ourselves what happens if because of a default in the symbolic relation the imaginary relation .the.. one institutes and one invests..than_thewsymbolic_There areirnaginary..gime_S.. that an accident of development or a historic incident damages the linksailiemother-child_relatism_v.

There is a way that is more direct. The Freudian anaclitic theory formulates this transincliviclualidirnensim as such. Already on the imaginary plane. and from all of the animal relations that are possible on the imaginary plane. he can be at peace. But it realizes it only in moments like those that are always produced in paroxysms of perversion.12plically ordained.This schema is nothing other than that of the fetishist perversion. That way at least.• In fetishism.a beyond.is realized. assured of not having any 3 We are retaining the French expression passage a l'acte as a formal t e rm wi t h n o t e ch n i ca l E n g l i s h eq u i v a l en t . but the sp.reciselythat this unity can only be realized in moments th_at are pot syn1. the subject himself says that in the end he finds his object. and access. It o c c u r s i n F r en c h t ex t s frequently coupled with the English term acting out. Such a unit_yjs_realizegl at certain_moments in perversion. the lack of the object properly _constitutes the human _path. one example of a solution. which is how the paroxysm of perversion always presents itself. Perversion in effect has the property of realizing a mo_cle_ofaccessio_that beyond of the image of the other which characterizes_ the human dimension. This imaginary access to the lack of the object is accomplished within certain specific. is a constituent part of this unity. in so far as it can be put into question. all the more satisfying because it is inanimate.cific_of_per-versionis_p. extra-historical conditions. a s be i n g w i t hou t a t ec h n i c a l eq u i v a l en t i n F r en c h . in which each is torn from himself and for an instant that is more or less fragile and transitory. his exclusive object. indeed even virtual. It is. that of the realization of man's relation to his existence. During this passage a l'acte. something. 89 .e... That is already enough to make of him something different from the animal. if you will. Other solutions exist for access to the lack of the object.3 a shift into action.ta. moments of syncope within the history_ofthesubject. and calls Eros the union of two indi3Liduals. One observes a convergence or a rise towards the moment which can be very significantly qualified as a passage & l'acte. which French authors give in E ng l i s h . which is fusion.

offers the formula that it seems that one is in the presence of a subject who would like. And in fact. without her knowing at the moment very well why. That tor i s. we_mustalso expect to see from -time to time in the fetishist the appearance of a position. This perpetual play. and he is_ alternatively at one and __. and will_consicterhimself„to_b_e_a destructive object for her.. if it is with the object that he momentarily identifies. namely the mother. An object deprived of every subjective. for it was like a fly in the soup. for this p_osition_as_s_uch. To love a slipper is really to have the object of one's desires within reach. his primitive object. this profound double vision.thesubject. privileged. since they are mirror relations. but she suddenly had the feeling that that was it -.. the something_which_ symbolizes.is neverthere„where jw is for Au ood reason that he has left his place.s satisfyla . indeed trans-subjective property is more secure. marks the entire fetishist manifestation. ..disappointments. There is stabilization only in so far as one grasps this unique.theotheilposition. 90 . is always what is ew.e&. That is effectively what we shall see occur during the course of an analysis of a fetishist. and one finds it realized effectively.. to show you his own image in two opposing mirrors This formula came out of her just like that. one could perhaps say.. the_ph414. As for realizing the condition of lack as such.S. That is so evident that one phyllisGretaasse who seriously tried to go deeply into the foundation of the fetishist relation. namely._ . The specific of imaginary relations being. not of identification with themother.butof identification with the oject. a brief instant the fascinating illumination of the object which was the maternal object should satisfy the subject does not suffice to establish the erotic balance of the whole._. he has passed into the_ specular l ( relation of the mother with the phallus. the fetishist solution is ' incontestably one of the most conceivable. with extreme rapidity.that they are always perfectly_ recipkocal. and at the same time impermanentaymboi wbichis the_precise object of fetishism. intersubjective. he will then lose.

What could pass for a happy fantasy of 4 4 Fonction et champ de la parole et du langage en psychanalyse (1953). which still exists in the sort of cultural islands where old customs persist. and it is also encountered in the south of Germany. 3 0 . may offer that he share her bed. plane of relations that we can conceive as by nature essentially perverse what the results. at least transitory. so that all the conditions for approach are there.in certain conditions. if not identical. Published in Ecrits. I made an allusion to the use of this type of object relation in analysis I compared it then to a sort of bundling pushed to its supreme limit as a psychological trial. one allows that. in a certain management of the analytic relation. Stendhal talks of it as a particularity of Swiss fantasies. as a manifestation of hospitality. That is what we are going to see now. Hence. when one centers it entirely on the object relation by bringing in only the imaginary and the real. and when one rules the whole accommodation of the imaginary relation on a pretended real of the analyst's presence.lcullig is a conception of amorous relations.Thus it is on an analogous. except the last. p p . generally the daughter. the word bu n dlin g the girl is frequently enveloped in a sheet. someone of the household. having to do with a partner who approaches the group in a way that is privileged. which consists in this -. i n E c r i t s: A S el ect i o n . a patterns of relations between male and female. 237-322. • pp. This little passage may have passed unnoticed. But.1 1 3 . . 5 English in the original. but I enlighten the reader by a note which specifies that bundling is a very precise practice. 3 In my Rome Report. show. Translated as The Function and Field of S p e ech and La ngua ge in P s y c h o a n a l y s i s . on condition that no contact take place. a technique. a geography which is not indifferent.

k... in a whole_traditiort that one could call teligious_or_even symbolic.it might be amusing -.. on which someone has done some rather advanced studies. These practices 92 . What is aimed for and_effectiyely attaid15.. the analytic situation has paradoxically come to be conceived and formalized this way.merits a certain attention. more or less distant. butwe cardincl asoordinated„ancLdeliberate_formulationaLit.realizati oof been propounded several times in the history of humanity in a way that is completely conscious. and which has very precisely preserved the local customs related to a religious group.apprgiaCh. if one may put it so. one finds points of emergence of these techniques and these traditions explicitly formulated in other cultural climates.mores in which we may perhaps regret not participating -.a.. the Amish sect. implies a_very_rigculaks tectukcal elaboratim_of the—amcgous..o.... a sort of more or less restrained. Everything that we know of the_pacticg_of courtly love and of the sphere in which it was localized in the Middle Ages. We frequently find these paradoxes in the uses and customs of certain cultural islands. and its psychological consequences.ttain_.. impulse [élan] towards the one who is behind her back.forcecL that seventeen or eighteen years after the death of Freud. which included long restrained stays in the presence_ottheioxed_objectalmingattlat realization of tha_t_beyonci_which is_sought properly_erolic. In the article of Fain and Marty. No doubt all of that springs today from remains that are not understood.with.L. that the practice of analysis has been reduced in a certain conception of it.g. there is a report of a session in which all of the movements of the patient are noted to the extent that she manifests something which might be oriented towards the analyst. it proves that I have forced nothing in saying that it is to this end. as for example in that Protestant sect of Dutch origin. To. The text is quite striking.4_ deliberate use of the imaginary relation as such is made.ut any doubt a beyond of the physiological short-circuit. for there is nothin. for this sort of research into the.. Once one has the key. and as it has appeared since I wrote my report.

self in a posture that is extremely bent over. - eing_tracked and suffocated in the d a r i s _ b _ y man_in armor. as one puts it.phobogenic ob*tcloes Dot seem to be externalat first sightals. or. and he always_ p_resentshim. in order to know where we stand. who was provided him b_y his mother. however.6 which will destroy all those tiny phobic objects i . Let us now take the case which is described in the little bulletin cited the . The subjectis_remeal .after a certain time. That is worth signaling out as a point of reference. one obtains the emergence of the image of a man in armor. Ruth Lebovici. whose activity had been rather reduced. It is a perfectlyro nizab obic object a marvelously illustrated substitute for an entirely deficient paternal image -. from the pen of someone who has taken a rank in the analytic community. has arrived at an almost completeinactivity. We have here. This phobic subject. in that we see the appearance at one moment of a repetitive drearxx whiclijs the model of an exteriosyd _In this particular case. Almost everything in his relations with a professional milieu has become impossible for him. which reports the sincere questions of the members of a certain group concerning object relations. and begins to tackle the question with him. patterns. prow icied with a particularly aggressive instrument which is nothing other than a tube of fly tox. despite the paradoxical fact that the. His mostmanifest_sympILLm is the fear of being too tall. they are noinare perverse than any other regulation of_arnorous_ approach in a_definite sphere of mores. and that of phobia does not pose any difficulty.may seem perverse in the eyes of the naive. ti 6 English in the original. He is in this constellation when the analyst takes him on. The diagnosis is finely made. the object is only discovered at a second try. and this fear is not for naught in the general equilibrium of this phobic structure. In reality. 93 . but is not without _a_mistress. older than he by fifteen years. the observation of what she justly calls a pholaisaLib'est. insects. last time. He leads a reduced life in the shelter of the family milieu.

Why the_phAllie mnther_when it is trulLa man in armor with_aLl_of_his heraldic character? During this whole observation. the man in armor.. What has happened ?_ Having finall gotten aslimpse of the phobic object. according to the author herself. the interest of the observation lies in that. In fact. The fact that she raises the question about this moment proves that she is conscious that the question is there._seen hy_a_aKomaniabs. Lacan uses the archaic spelling of a word that is already in archaic or literary use. to rejoice.the_effectiye realization of this position -. immediately aterwar2:ks agery . the questions that the author raises are reported with a fidelity that I believe is incontestable. masturbating_ or not_watchirig a woman urinatingjinallyjn_athircistage. they are well underlined. It is little to say that the author is not at peace. she interpreted it as being the phallic mother. rejoicing. and they j then engaged in nothing less than a period of three years__ iructhich_the subject first developed stages of a perverse fantasy which_consisted of imagining himself urMating. next door while he himself wasi his own cell.has appeared in very precise circumstances in which she has her part. with_the_subject. The author wonders in particular about the following point -- Have I made an interpretation that was not right? That proves already that she is conscious the question is there."to rejoice my soul " 94 .-c.eared.this position. highly excited comes to solicit him to have amorous relations with • her There was then a _ reversal-of . s'ebaudir.the subject discovered in a cinema a little_ space providentially provided with windows thanks to which_he could effectively observe women in the w. since. She has perfectly perceived that the reaction which she calls perverse -.it is a label -." as in.se reactionapp. 7 S'esbaudissant. and in every case. It is thus not a forcing on my part to introduce the question of the perverse reaction.The analyst who has charge of the subject published the observation under the title Perversion sexuelle transitoire au cours d'un traitement psychanalytique (A Transitory Sexual Perversion during Psychoanalytic Treatment).7 or masturbating.

for the masculine personage is only indicated by associations..No doubt you prefer to interest yourself in watching a woman urinate than to make the effort to go after another woman who might please you. in the end. The analyst intervenes in the following way -. he says he is hindered by the presence of another feminine subject who also played a role in his history. one absolutely cannot doubt it. and whom he had seen urinate in front of him at a much later period of his childhood. but the analyst thinks of thus reintroducing the truth. But the author gives us the key to this idea that the phallic mother is also there. past the age of thirteen.her_own_counterztransferentigt. much more prohibiting than the mother had ever been. that is. but who is married. finding himself with a person of his past towards whom he declares he has amorous impulses. the subject reports a_thearn. imaginary relation develops not without the aid of the analytic false move.The author herself wonders about the determining value of her mode of interpretation in the precipitation of what at first had the air of_a fantasmatic crystallization of an element _that was_eyidentlya component part of the subject_and. let us see what is there on the analyst's side. - First. One must admit that to have the alleged husband of the mother intervene in order to reintroduce the Oedipus complex has all the character of a provocation. above all if one knows that it is the husband of the analyst who sent the patient to her. I mean the Oedipus complex. and observes that she herself has been. Since the . Everything makes it appear that the entity of the phallicmother_is produced here because of what the author calls. In following the analysis closely. position.which is not the phallic mother. but the mother in her relation with 11 ie_pballus. in which. Ititalsrecisely_this_moment-that-the-turnis_proge_ 95 . The interpretation is without a doubt a bit forced. when she asks about the general conduct of the treatment. .

then makes this remark -. in response to a demand by the subject to slow down the rhythm of the sessions. He says it.My God. ends by developing his fantasies within the treatment itself. There is in fact something that is at the boundary of the real situation. which the latter notes. as if we were witnessing the constitution_of . is very precisely that the subject stops at a certain level of his investigation and his observation of the woman. The analyst. but the aphallic. 9b .You are manifesting your passive positions now. This position little by little leads the subject to say to himself -.You are amusing yourself now. and finds in the real the perfect place. the analyst replies -.progressive turtling in the fantasy of_observationiror. as if that were not enough. which is. which proves that there is something more. At that moment.. anyone might wonder about the degree of mastery in an intervention like that one. Later. he says.Have I done well in saying that? In fact. observeLto that_altim_self . and speaks for example of his fear of urinating on the couch. because you know very well that you will in no way obtain that. with regard to whether she has_or does not have the organ in question. such as spying the legs of the analyst. by the way. The subject. th.al it is just after this intervention which brings things to a head. What in fact is at the source of the institution of the fetishist position. not the non-yhallic mother. the fantasy crystallizes completely. . she asks herself anxiously -. This somewhat brutal reminder of the conventions of the situation_is entirely in accord with_the idea of the analytic position a. scaring yourself with something that you know very well will never happen. ro. who begins to find that this is getting a bit on her nerves.s Secondly. this can only be resolved if I go to bed with my analyst. who understands a certain number of things in his relation of impossibility with regard to attaining the feminine object. etc. - 8 Italics in the original._ohserving.ri the sense of beim. He begins to have those reactions that indicate a certain narrowing of the distance to the real object. the set up of _. with a certain satisfaction.it the subject passes definitively to the act. the chosen place.

the timiLLattemptatan_access to castration. In giving you a resume of this observation. or they are too small and they squeeze his feet. considTh hat_thisis_the moment when the distance from_the ie_41. That is what things came to. Everything is there. The last session is avoided. he had lived like an automaton. for each detail is rich in what it teaches. taken as a real object. and he loses his balance.is 97 . but now everything is changed. Ti_le_schcalled right distance from the real object -.is given as acquired..all throughout the observation it is indicated that this is the point in which every neurotic relation errs -. it is surely not without interest. it is considered that the phobia has been cured. and whom he can very well observe not as a phallic mother. but as a mother who ikaphallic: He suspends his erotic activity at that for a certain time. and that they are L perhaps not in the end the most desirable effects. One would need to examine it carefully.so great a satisfaction that he declares that up until the moment of this discovery.it is like a sign of recognition among initiates -. he no longer thinks of anything other than the size of his shoes. having found here. the same that he had at the beginning. After that it is judged that this is sufficient. the subject returns to his mistress. this notion taken as a reference cannot be without effects. I wanted simply to put you within an ace of the fact that _the concept of the distance from the object-analyst. I am not telling you how the treatment ends. why not consider that as the end of the analytic work? From the experimental point of view. theiransformation of . so that the turning. and reaches its height at the moment when the subject in the presence of his analyst perceives the smell of urine. the subject also makes some varicosity operate.the little urinal in the_Chatups Elysees. and a certain liberty that can derive from it. who is fifteen years older than he. from whom he is separated by a wall. This time he is truly at the right real distance from the object.gbject -. and as he no longer speaks of his great height. the phobia is complptp After all. They are much too large. Unfortunately.

much phenomena. This is not.this fact coincicieth the apogee of the perversion. in this case. are still susceptible to rupture or to dissolution. 19 December 1956 re: 98 . While they may . Ofsourse.and the author does not dissimulate it --. be permanent or extremely durable. which occurs on the day after he visits the particularly propitious place that the real had offered him at the right moment. after a certain time the subject gets himself caught by a female usher. when orie has finally been regulated to the right distance by the right paths. sometimes quite abruptly. ayerversion-. Yes. Thus. it is rather an artifact. the real always offers all that one needs at the right moment.finally accommodated to its just extent. strictly speaking.

PERVERSE PATHS OF DESIRE 99 .

when I reminded you that 100 .VI THE PRIMACY OF THE PHALLUS AND THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL Freud. The lies of the unconscious. by contingency. The problem is that of the perversion. the girl._the_ most problematic that there is from the perspective aipsycl Loahalysis. The beyond of the object. The problem is not so much one of knowing how we encounter the feminine object in analysis. That gives us matter enough for edification -the subject of this encounter is not natural. in quotation marks. and the phallus. The signifier Niederkommt. But it is certain that we could not possibly examine object relations this year without encountering the feminine object. Today we are going to take a leap into a problem that normally we should have encountered much further on in our discussion if we had been proceeding step by step. Why have I proceeded thus? Partly. The service of The Lady. in the first part of this seminar. - . namely that of feminine_ homosexuality. I demonstrated that sufficiently last trimester.

Only. what her path is from her first approaches to the natural and primordial object of desire.position-is-highly_unnaturaLsince it is a position. which places her from the start in a position characterized by the ambiguity between natural relations and symbolic relations. which has no interest in being qualified as such other than because it is a subject who takes it. it will be a compromise between what there is_to. at. attain and what cannot be attained. The problem now is what the feminine object thinks about it. reference_on the symb. We must on this point make an exhaustive study of a certain number of texts. . . in as much as .Abis. second remove. the feminine subject is always called upon to inscribe herself in a sort of refinding. tlow does the ferninine_object enw_intp_thi she must make a choice.Larri trying to demonstrate. for what is by Freud.in_that_the_stibject hersel_f_issaught iniliesymbolic_chain.a. -. with 1923.olic_plane. Feminine homosexuality is encountered each time that the discussion bears upon the stages that the woman must traverse in order to accomplish her symbolic completion. namely. as. about which analytic experience teaches us that no matter where it falls.. This_path is_even less natural than for_ the masculine dialectic? It is not for nothing that today I am calling the woman object.biological does not cease to find.What_a_t_the_autset_i&natural_or. It is really there that there is question of the woman as subject. the date of his article on Infantile Genital Organization. starting. This ambiguity is precisely where. because she must at some moment of this dialectic enter into the function of the object._where_it is a matter of subjective assumplion. 1 Feminine homosexuality has been given a particularly exemplary value in psychoanalysis for what it has been able to reveal of the stages of the woman's path and of the arrests that can mark her destiny. the maternal breast. the analytic dimension resides.from the moment of her encounter by man.

that is founded upon an error i Miulirige_n. can scarcely be contested. by authors who entered the action later. ignorance of the very existence of the feminine organ. moreover with the greatest confusion. 102 . concentx4ted_Qn the clitoris. These absolutely enormous statements demand some exegesis to be understood. Hence the debate as to whether the predominance of the phallic phase in the_girl must be attributed to existence of the clitoris. A very great number of facts lead us to admit that at least in the girl. which is accomplished with the entry into the latency period._ancLthis_error_is_ltself_founded_orLarkignotalic.=_itisnot a matter of misconstruction [mecontpTissance]. The possession or the non_p_ossession of the phallus is the principal differential element.if not of the real role of the male in the act of procreation.let us make this termsynommoo_foralLeLogenous_ experience. We hardly_fincLourselves_here. ignorance of the fecundating role of the male's semen -. and not being provided with it is considered as equivalent to being castrated. The word literally means "badly given. indeed even a precocious vaginal masturbation. L 1 M a l d o n n e . at least of the existence of the feminine organ. that there are emotions. That is at least found in a certain number of cases.= is_ at the_beginning exclusively.In this text Freud poses the primacy of phallic assumption as a principle. There is not at this point any realization of male and female. 'I will be precise . It is attained by both sexes.Q.. there is awareness of that which is provided with the phallic attribute and that which is not provided with it.for one and the other sex.lefOre a. The phallic phase.on the other hand. but of(reat ignorance) 0n one hand. Genital organization gives the formula for it." The term is used in . "Error" is the accepted figurative sense. card games to mean a bad deal or a false hand. That there is in the early experience of the little girl something that corresponds to a localization of the vagina. is a typical phase for the boy as for the girl. whether the libido-. An objection has often been raised. a lived presence is effectively revealed -. the terminal stage of the first epoch of infantile sexuality.d_e_scription to be taken at the level of real experience.

is marked with uncertainty. confused allow us to raise all sorts of objections. indeed with that portion of uncertainty which is so characteristic in his presentation of this discovery. whose necessity derives from a certain number of theoretical premises. as Kateraissrney.and is only diffused at the end of a long and painful displacement. too many facts which are. Freud writes something even more astounding about feminine sexuality. and the reference that is made to it remains very prudent. and which constitutes a veritable jungle growth of approximations. The paradoxical affirmation of phallicism is the very pivot on which theoretical interpretation must be developed. Eight years later. which contains a harvest of speculations. an extremely active discussion had arisen among his students. and in others. moreover. If one situates it thus. which takes his statement of 1923 further. in so far as it is distinguished by 103 . whose trace one finds in Karen Homey. The last fact to which the author refers. in Jones. except on the ground of a denial of the existence of the vagina. If we go into the details. there could not be a prevalence in the girl of the organ which does not properly belong to her. it seemed to me extremely difficult to give an account of it without falsifying it. In the interval. After having had to devote myself to that during this vacation. in part expressed by the author herself. which imply that all meconriaissance supposes in the unconscious a certain knowledge of the coaptation of the two sexes and that in consequence. It is a fixed point. it is still affirmed as primordial. has done. Her objections are determined by realist premises. Freud's affirmation is founded on his experience. which tend towards a misunderstanding of Freud's affirmation. even reserved. which requires a whole long detour.. we shall see that it is only a reconstruction. It is what we shall try to do. for which one would then have to account. in 1931. the primordial experience of the vaginal organ. It is surely not in these terms that Freud's affirmation must be understood. Though it is advanced with prudence by him. for example. From these hypotheses it is accepted a priori that one will try to retrace the genesis of the term phallic with regard to the girl.

the profoundly unmastered character of the categories that are put into play. could be retained from the mass of facts.tered the Oedipus complex. desire a child from_the_father_a. not to give a truly just perspective of what is at stake. which is given as being always essentially unconscious. To show in this regard that the privation of the chili desired from the father can come into play with a pressing incidence. a reference which is always there to accompany our theoretical exploration of the object relation. she got up every morning and asked if the little child from her father had arrived. Following some enlightenment that had been given to her. being in analysis. To give an account of this debate and be understood. and thus. one of the authors cites as an example the case of a little girl. her.at the morunt... how analytic practice itself is inflexibly engaged in a deviation that cannot be mastered. identification with_theiatberdio_take up the feminine position again. And it was with rage and tears that she asked this every morning.. who. This problem is really correlative with the second aim of our work this year.. and can precipitate the movement of the Oedipus. the littlegirileginsto_. All of the writers admit that at the turning_pointin. and if it would come today or tomorrow. it seemed to me this morning that one exemplary image.in making beer turn back_from the paradoxical path bywhighffilgest.. and mastering it is already to change its axis and nature completely.of entering the Oedipus complex.s a substitute for the missin_phallus and that the disappointment of not receiving it plays an essential role . which is to show. by that fact. was found according to him to have. We can put a hand on the way in which a certain mode of understanding and attacking frustrations leads the analyst. one cannot proceed otherwise than by mastering it. namely. more light than another might on what was happening in her unconscious. gleaned from one of these articles. in parallel with the theoretical examination of object relations. To return to the precise instance that concerns us today. This detail seems to me exemplary of what is at stake in this deviation in analytic practice. in realitylto a style of intervention whose effects are not i 104 . to a certain degree. eKoiution.

enters into the play of a series of symbolic resonances_ concerning_what the subject has experienced in the past -.on_the_rondition that the child. To bring in an element that is not inscribed in the symbolic structuration of the subject.ata contemporary_stage. It only has a ftmction. Its realization byth u ect ie_sAsl2yclefin4tiprl. It can onl_y_be_brought in_later. _in_so_far as thesubject has to deal with it. as an atticulatio_n_of what has happened. but are manifestly opposed to what is at stake in the process of analytic interpretation. by speech. whether it be the late arrival of a child_forsomeon.is alread_y_to sanction an organization.only1:ioubtful. everything that relates to the prevalence_or_predominance_of the phallus at a particular stage in the child's evolution only has its _incide_nce after the fact The phallus can only be brought into play in so far as it is necessary.for us. is of importance or interest only in so far as it opens into one or the other of the -- 105 .inary_substitution for what is at that moment lived by the subject in a totally different way. ) a substitute for _that_missing_phallus which plays an essential role in the evolution of the littlegirl cannot be legitimately brought into play just at any time and anyhow. with what that carries of the . because it is._analysts._and tointroduce a sort of legitimacy. In short. eNpgrigna_ Frustration can only be legitimately introduce_d_as_ such in interpretation if it has effectively_passed to theleveLof_the-unconscious.at a given_naoment_tcumbolize somee_v_ent. . or_exen._frustration_is_only_an evanescent moment.possessive or destructive reactions at the moment of the phallic crisis. to precipitate. the_ stage to which it corresponds.ewhoisinacloserelationwiththechild. extraordinarily unstable.. as it is lived at the outset. The notion we might have that a child given by the father appears at a given moment of evolution'as an imaginary objeci. and_on a purely theoretical plane. It is literally . when for the subjectherself the question of_her_own_motherhood_ and possession of a child is raised.excluded. Frustration. At_thebeginning. as the correct theory tells us.truly problematic g. ___?___consecrate frustration_aS___Rtcl 11and to install it_at_the_center_of_. a certain relation of imag. on the symbolic plane.orevenmore.

This little girl. because the idea of privation is in no way conceivable on the plane--of _the real. I showed you in what sense the phobia was a necessaryli placement.athe_t_value. - The psychotherapist's intervention consists in saying to the child -.. It is also what consecrates the existence of privation. In fact.that all girls are like that._two_plane3 that I have distinguished -. but it is not. A privation can only be effectively conceived for a being who articulates something on the symbolic plane._ This intervention nevertheless remains debatable. psychotherapeutic interventions. and where its spring la_rio_t_in the fact that she did not have the phallusit in thelict_thather mother could not giv!ittaher anvfrirnore. you recall. but she does not know that this is the_rule.—which transcends taa installs it in z thatgi 0. which surged up in connection with the experience_that_she had had of being„ effectively deprived of somethingonditions different from the_ situation in which the child in this morning's exampkwas caug. The_phobia begins again. that _is to say.castration or privation.and she is right -. and is stronger and will only be reduced_when the child has been reintegrated into a complete family. which is only momentary.111. presented the beginning of a phobia. She is also confronted with an 106 . That might make you think that it is a matter of a reduction to the real. her frustration should on the contrary seem to her even greater than before. The child knows very well that she does not have the phallus. that she could not giyeitbecauseshe did not have it herself. a male who enters into the play of the family whereas ua until then the mother had been a widow. like for example the one that I alluded to rapidly the other day in speaking of the little girl in the care of a student of Anna Freud. alsAnses_the. castration is nothing other than what installs the_necessitv of frustration in itsinasader._That is what the therapist teaches her—Thelatter_thu lack pass onto the symbolic plane of the law. We can understand all that very well in those interventions that are supportive in character. and the psychotherapis_t_cpaestionsits efficacy..since now she is confronted with a step-father. Why? In principle.

substitute_for_the_absence in the _symbolic circuit of every halloform element. literally.what is at_ stake is the instability of the very dialectic_of_frustration. These critical remarks above all bear on the use of the term frustration. What there is behind_the other.the object sh. This initial moment is always evanescent. Frustration is not pxiiation_. it is because. moment. the moment of frustration is an evanescent . If the demand is_satis_fiesl. the object enters inia_what_one_cauld_call the_narcissistic__air . and it is only later that the subject will be able to perceive that the gift is much more complete that it had at first seemed.Lun. namely the whole chain because ofiwhich gift comes. in every case makes the objectir) ish as object.the_abiectpasses_intQ the backgrauncLIL the demand is not satisfied. there is a difference—If theilerna. the subject no longer needs it as a. This use is legitimized in a certain way by the fact that the essential in this dialectic_is the lack of the_object. What in effect justifies the word frustration? There is frustration — the word implies this --no subject enters a in as much as the object is considered to be demanded by_xigh. if it is given as such. The_g. Only.jsstillmot perceived.derling. What is thus at play is less the_object than the_love _of the one who can give this gift_The4biesLof_frustrationis less the object than test. Frustration thus replies very well in appearancelo_a conceptual notion_lita. there is only the confrontation with the other art&the_gift_NALhich_surges_up. the Abject vanishes with equal certainty. the much as it is still at a distance from the symbolic.t. that it concerns the whole human symbolic chain.older_broth_e. At the beginning.an_e In both cases._rather than the object itself.r. At this_moment.ngfsitLita_signification. We find ourselves here at the origin of the dialectic of frustration. If the phobia happens finally to be reduced.Yft? Frustratiorubears_upon_something of which _you Aredepri_vtd by_someonefrom_whom_youjustly_expectwhat you have asked.ncLismot satisfiesi.ift. air of a certain gratuiejTC'omes from_the other. in as only appears at the beginning. In effect. It opens into something which projects us onto snot te___1_21. of the subject's belongings. thatis to say.

takes on meaning.. and disappointments. 108 . and introduce a whole series of impasses. If one misconstrues this condition. It is solely starting with the entry of the subject into an order which exists.prior_to everything that happens to him. But the whole chain of experience can literally be conceived only by first positing the principle that nothing is articulated and built up in experience. articulated. Satisfied_ or not.. or onto the closed and absolutely inextinguishable register which is called narcis_sism. I can make you appreciate the soundness of this reminder -. nothing is installed as a properly analyzable conflict. thanks to which the object is for the subject both something that ishir_uelf a_nd is ncrthirnselLantilly_which he can never be satistieckpreciselyiTithe__ sense that it is himself and not himself at the same time.it should be only a reminder--. with everything that it entails as repercussions. install certain permanent privations as existing and accepted. and having you encounter them in all naïveté._a. disappointments.desire. it is annihilated. events. satisfactions.namely. that confused thing that is there before -. and can be analyzed.which means that it c_an never_really be fulfilled as such. for example.is ordered. recluced to nothing_a_thelctlioNnrkigstagg. The entry_ of frustration into a dialectic which situates it by legplizing_it and which also gives__it a dimension ofrattg necessary to the _ _ establishment of the symbolized order of the real in which the subject will. nowhere better than by taking some of Freud's texts. that everything through which he approaches his experience -.a_legal order.symbolic_order.to_deduce_ev_erything from_ desire considered as a pure element of the individual -. an order of symbolic_debt.. ksymbolic chain. unless it is from the moment when the subject enters _ into an order which is the order_of symbots. and is_soon_protected_pnto_something else either onto the articulation of the symbolic chain of gifts.than thepigneof pumAnd sin Jp_k_de ir and iaeffect implies something that human experience knows well -. satisfactions. various reconstructions of the experience and of the effects linked to the fundamental lack of the object become manifest. . what one calls his lived experience. The error is to want.

the way in which she partially publicizes her affair. puts her in a rather painful relation to her family. but in conducting it as she does. and I would almost say one of the most troubling. That led me to choose for my part to bring you one of Freud's most brilliant texts. and especially her father. A very singular event has occurred she is running after someone older than she by ten years.2 Several people spoke last night of a dubious. If they resolved to do it. It concerns the daughter of a good Viennese family. to send someone to Freud was to take a very great step. Without her making a demonstration of it. We are also told that the mother is not absolutely someone of whom one can be sure. For a good Viennese family in 1920. _ 109 . All sorts of details given by the family indicate that this world could perhaps be qualified as demi-monde according to the classification reigning then in Vienna. awaiting her in the street. intelligent. I would like to recall the essential articulations for you. It is theIlsychogenesis of a Case of Female Homosexuality. To put it plainly. indeed out of style. that she has been neurotic. or at least so serious. are ignorant of nothing. of a very high social class -. which may conceivably appear archaic to you.has become an object of concern to her parents. it is enough so that her parents. a woman of the world. and that she does not really consider this so bad. They even alluded to elements of adventure. Theetkchmentof_the_ynting girl. I am thinking of that tranquil piece of defiance with which she pursues her assiduity towards the woman in question. which everything reveals as events proceed to be trtATassionate. and considered respectable. paradoxically wild side in certain texts of Freud. beautiful. What follows lets us learn that these relations are not external to the inauguration of the situation. the fact that it absolutely enrages a motive for the young girl. or of diplomacy — though one does not see why. it is because the daughter of the house — eighteen years old. not sustaining this passion.

but that it allowed him to see very much further. the way one constructs a villa. That is why it is clinically striking to see such a late flowering of an 110 - . There_was in the childhood of the subject a moment which seems not to have occurred when she was all alone. He then introduces reflections on analysis that are still more extraordinary. he introduces an idea which is not without foundation. nothing is working. he says. when she was able to learn from te_elder of her two brothers the difference whiftEacile o . he points out. which consists in assembling everything that it is possible know. no hysterical symptom was brought into the analysis.someone.. a schematic idea that must incite us to come back to certain early givens rather than to find ourselves more manageable ones. The comparison that he then introduces is not one of the least stupefying -. What is more enormous still is that during all of this time. On the other hand. Freud indicates precisely that this analysis did not reach its term. Nevertheless. he sees very well what has happened. who-did not haveilae__essentially desirable object. and which will not fail to appear outmoded to some. and highlights a certain number of stages. and that is why he is communicating it.before a voyage one assembles the luggage. the young girl had never been neurotic.They come to Freud and ask him to put things in order.the second.the first. This reference from someone who had a phobia of railway trains and of voyages is rather piquant. To explain. and very justly remarks that one does not do an analysis on command. it did not allow him to change much in the destiny of this young girl. he has the sentiment that effectively. Certainly. in which it is a matter of bending the resistances which still hold perfectly even though the subject already knows azood deal.. He very pertinently signals the difficulties presented by a treatment when it is a question of satisfying the demands of the entourage. This idea is that there aretwL)2tajes in an analysis -. nothing in the childhood history is remarkable with regard to pathological consequences. and then one must embark and follow one's way. allic obit.her. although it may appear out of use. which is always complicated enough.

There are in Vienna some little railways that run in a belt. The lady demands to know who this person is — It is papa. indeed was more than cold. Freud tells us. As he finds himself before other people as well. Thus. behave in such a way as to raise hopes of the most favorable development in the orientation of the feminine vocation. If it has come to the point of confiding her to him. and who are. niederkommt. The young girl. the singular position that she occupies with regard to this ever so slightly denigrated woman. used to go walking with the lady almost under the windows of her own house. this sort of maternal love which seemed in advance to make of her a model mother. is suddenly arrested __ansLit is_then that she begins for the adventure in question was not the first -. at thirteen or fourteen. he doesn't seem happy. She had had until then a very reserved attitude with the young girl. Did she not. but one which made everyone think that it was oriented very well. namely. the father comes out and sees them. which leads her to the consultation with Freud. and goes off. we will no longer see each other. in her attitude of gently flirting with danger. it was in effect because a marked event had occurred. he throws them a blazing glance. up until the moment when this attachment appeared.to freauent women whom FreucLdescribes as already mature. but gets out of it. One day. it appears. had not especially desired to have complications. And so the girl throws herself down. that of motherhood? She took care of a little boy belonging to friends of her parents so tenderly that the two families became close. She breaks a few bones.Under these circumstances. 111 . They are not very far from one of the little bridges that cross them. However. The lady then takes the thing very badly. the young girl had had a development that was not only normal. had not at all encouraged her assiduity. She falls.attitude which appears frankly abnormal to all. The passionate attachment that she shows to the latter ends in an explosion. all at once. a sort of maternal substitute. So she tells her -.

How does Freud explain it? By starting with the_normal orientation of the_s_u_l2ject towards the desire_to_hame_ashilci from the_father. even on points which have in some way escaped him. and also the problematic of a declared homosexuality. and gives them the value of an explanatory sanction. It is the particularity of Freud's observations always to leave us extraordinary clarification. the one who really incarnated the dramatic adventure in the course of which the analysis began. this_scheinasloes_not_really bold fo_r_the last person. but it is much more instructive because much more_pxofaunck.effect_a_ieritable_reversaLof_the_subj.. The second also. and who was moved enough by this extraordinary mark of devotion so as to become much more accommodating.namely. but perhaps not entirely as he understands them himself.thAtime_mustsonCeiRe—the_original crisis which madeihe_subject engage precisely the opposite direction. Freud makes some very striking remarks with regard to this relation declared and maintained by the subject. and the catastrophe occurs.he intervened with Dora_at the very time when he misconstruedherhornosexuality. or in her object choice. The first seem very pertinent. It is under this headingzassording_tohira. and for his own defeat.Still. which Freud tries to spell out.. There was in . but she will continue to maintain her ties with the person for whom she is far from having lost her taste. I am alluding here to the observation of Dora.dive position. have to do with what was at stake in the suicide attempt. The subject is intimately tied to the rise of the tension. the significative act by which the crisis is crowned. for example the suicide attempt. both for what occurred before the treatment. until the moment that the conflict bursts out. She will do all that is necessary in order to deceive her family. the orientation of her question_ towards her own sex.. Here one findsa_misconstruction that islo w gous. where Freud saw clearly later -. The subject in effect declares to Freud that for her there is no question of abandoning anything whatever in her pretensions.e. Other remarks that Freud makes without completely exploiting them. which are none the less interesting. It is a question of one of those cases in which the disappointment due to the object of desire is translated by a complete 112 .

ksemadvx. When I essentially make the dialectic of narcissism_the-relation_ego-littieother. she accoLyn lishea_as_ymbolic_act. The suicide attempt_ follows the disappointment produced by the fact eothatti the:biect of her attachment Ziii4fiz tt iii some way that is homologous. consider the phenomenon as reatlierer_. when theoily Jjggillfalls to the bottom of the little bridge..is equivalent to a regression to narcissism.. according to Freud.and she was sufficiently occupied with that for it to mark a date with regard to her past --. really__ has another child from the father. a leveling of the objects that are truly at play. It is the term used in German to say 2 "Dropped. In short. role. combined with a sort of crumt ling of the e ie whole situation on its primitive givens.." ." in the sense that one says that an animal "dropped its young. her mother. What then is the disappointment which operates the reversal? At the moment. It is also the detail that appears exceptional in this observation. when the subject was engaged on the way to taking possession of the imaginary child -. It is now a question of seeing where that is best interpreted. since he supposes that the resentment towards the father continues to play. towards her fifteenth year. It is Tat matter of a counter-aggressive phenomenon of a return onto the subject of aggression towards the father. as Freud_spells out in a note._This_fact has themajor . This link in the situation explains the whole way that the adventure is handled. The girl is clearly agrg essiye towards her father. The patient makes the acquisition of a third_b_rolheL_Thatis _the_key_ point.whnic_h-is-nothing-other than the niederkommen that one is "dropped. We must.the subject identifies with this objgct. but it is implied. It is not banal that the intervention of a little brother brought into the world like that should have as a result so profound a reversal of a subject's sexual orientation."2 being born.reversal of position -. which symbolically satisfies what is at stake by a precipitation.4. The term is not in the text._which. I am doing nothing other than making evident what is implicit in all the ways in which Freud expresses himself. It is thus at this moment that the girl changes position.

114 . and that their transferential significance is there -. In as much. In short.Jn effect. She maintained it all. that anyone who was not Freud would have taken the greatest hope from it. In parallel with the unambiguous declarations that the patient makes of her determination to change nothing in her behavior towards the lady. the anticipation of the arrival of some handsome and satisfying spouse. and who says.ue in_theireatment. one would say today. It was only a matter of showing him that she f . He metaphorically compares the reactions of the young girl with that of a lady to whom one shows various objects.. the fruit of this love. _she has not been only provocative and aggressive with him. f 1 was deceiving_him._as the resistance was not_conquered. the idyllic. It is _the double of_that_ kinclofgame of counter-lure that. -. all that one could say to the patient never went further than interesting her enormously.Thus we are led to the lastalriiga.rr4. He sees alransference in it.kl_m_eaning of the situation. 3 In the second category of the remarks that Freud makes. it is a matter of _ explaining jn_what_way_the-situation_w_as_without_iss.How nice! Freud nevertheless signals that one cannot speak of the absence of all transference. the cruel game thAt. almost forced character of the spouse announced by the dream appears so consonant to their common enterprise.she seproduces_huittndamentalposition with him. she has_not vaunted herself shamelessly. she has made concessions to him. from behind her lorgnette. on the plane of intellectual interest.she played with her father. her dreams announce an astonishing reflowerirjg_of the finest orientation. no less than that of the advent of an object. without her abandoning her most recent positions.she played in response to the disappointment by the father. he says. Freud recognizes that there is something analogous in these dreams. Freud is not deceived. He denotes with very great perspicacity the presence of transference in the patients dreams.

It is also. and immediately enters into a discussion which it is fascinating to find in his pen. L A what can we trust? his disciples will say. escapes him. in order to make him fall from his heights._and that the path isoperk. we are in the order of lies and of__ truth_ Freud sees that very well. He gives them a long explanation in which he shows how that can occur. which is that_there is a Tal transferencg therg.We cannot avoid here coming back to the basic relativity of the _symbolic formation. there is no doubt that there was what we call a counter-transferential action. so that I will find her very pretty. to captivate me. This additional sentence is sufficient for our instruction. The point that is apparent here is that of the intention imputed to the subject. If the typical manifestation of the unconscious can be deceitful. but it still remains that what is put into the foreground by Freud in 1920 is exactly this essential of what is in the unconscious is the relation of the subject to the Other as such.s_directecLagainst him. in order to make him fall from that much higher since he is taken captive in the situation. It was also an attempt to gain my interest and my good disposition. of captiyating_him. Freud. as with 115 . and from which he concludes that it in no way contradicts the theory. he says. Freud retains only-.I believe that the intention of leading me into error was one of the formative elements of this dream. and this relation basically implies the_possibility_of_b_eing_ accomplished through a lie. an attempt to wind me around her finger._ To hear the emphasis of this sentence.for him to interpret the desire of _Instead of takirigthis path let us L put it a bit grossly. and which errs only in being a bit too emphatic. This young girl must be ravishing. he takes the thing_a. The dim is deceptive. That is what Freud expresses in a way that is extremely just. he can hear in advance the objections that will be made to him. in as much as it is the fundamental line of what constitutes the field of the unconscious for us. if.hat. The explanation is ever so slightly tendacious. But sorxlething it seems. If the unconscious also lies to us. when he says -. In analysis. probably in order to disillusion me that much more profoundly.

a matter_obomething. That is_ to_sa_y_thelLeds_e_litiryto =:e himself illusions. In affirming that the worst is promised him. FretIcas_notapletely free in the affair. in fact. batlhis -.which we cannot misconstrue because it is in the text.ng_giris_passion for the erson in question.i rpretation. His counter-transference could have served him in a rta. the specific of homosexual relations is to present all of the variety of common heterosexual relations. . the treatment does not go much further. Freud has sepAted. and gives it body. He operates with the patient exactly as the therapist intervened with the little girl in giving the thing a symbolic stature. He gives body to this desire. what he has realized as the imaginary relation. within: to unite. a plague.lt_was_only. he makes the desire of the young_gid. And that does not fail. Hetlealizathe irnagineLy_play. reCH___. Something much more interesting still is emphasized by Freud without is interpreting it -.'Dora. In putting himself onsuard_ against these illusions. :ghat is what is at the heart of this-slide of analysis into the imaginary.but on condition that it wasmotasounter-transference that is_to_say.n way -. In . It has not escaped him. thaletely different -.enter into the real. and notaniatention. whereas itimas_precisely._as_he senses himself. Freud makes the conflict break out. from the moment that it was installed as doctrine. and in 'aPt.it is the_nature of the you. That comes_ down to cutting short immediately t.hgrgas. young girl that she intends to deceive him as she is accustomed to deceiving her father.. that he not be in it. : . He makes it become real because he is within it. To the extent that is and that he interprets too precociously. which he wishes to avoid. desire. although in truth.A. We see a transparent extreme example here. and perhaps 116 . which has become more than a snare. on_thesonditiort_thathe_not_believe y. that this is not a homosexual others.to_decelYe him. he has already entered the game.of revealing the discourse of lies that was in the :runc cious_Freud tells her that all of it is designed against him. and is interrupted. he senses himself disillusioned. How does he interpret? He says to_the.

but it is of interest only when it is taken on its own terms. By saying that this type of object choice belongs to the type that is manntiche. which has a very particular meaning in the cultural history of Germany -. I17 . but verypreciselyaims at_nonsatisfactipa. one could say. It is a love that does not demand any other satisfaction_tham_t_lie_sake of_ the lady. In short. . posited as service. since we are in the course of interrogating it. not only does without satisfactions. and to the person who is closest. in fact. as reference. As has already been said.it is exaltation that is at the basis of the relation. Why does a true crisis ensue? It is because _a real object then intervenes.some additional variations. and by explaining what he means by that. A child f a t h e r . or couttly_Joye in its most devoted form. .if you are willing to take _the word __syui tom as the equivalent of the word enigma. but as analysis makes clear. i t i s t rue . Do you not then see joined_here_in a sort olknot the three stages of a process which goes ■ from frustration to the symptom? -. Freud underlines admirably and articulates with an extraordinary relief that it is a question here of a platonic love at its most exalted. it is a love which. are subjects who_b. It is exceptional because it is particular. At first we have a reference_ta_theimaginary object. lived in a way that is innocent. It is not_s_implytion_that is suffered. That is to say that it is clarified when the categories of the lack of the object are appropriately brought into function. It is truly a sacred love. Freud adds some words like Schwiimerei. or a need. p re c i se l y _t o so me o n e o t h e r . in itself. as institution. female oituals.It_is_the very order in_ bloom -opstitution of lack in the relation to the object. It is the child that interpretation allows us to conceive of as a child received from_thelather. contrary to what one might believe.. .ave_alsorne moment made_a_very strong paternal fixation. he situates the relation of the young girl to the lady at the highest degree of the Ltrilzolized love relation. No doubt the situation that the case presents is exceptional.

.the fundamental fath. 118 . the father_par excellence. and which carries the attachment of the subject to the supreme degree of his annihilation in the Sexualaberschatzung...bythe. The mechanism of it is explained.giverk. the imaginary substitute. is precisely precisely _that_p _ the child.indamentaLin everything that has to do with love in its perfection...... it is that the paternal presence as such was_aireacly installed for her. normally blossoms in a cultural relation that is highly disappointment at this level.plane oi_flustraLan... And what she lacks in this instance.hey_by the father. what is most important is this -.._I_Usthen_tbat_averitable_reversaLaccur5.at. Such a The love that the young girl love...there..._ Jf that sustained tisriadhe_r_elation among women.the. Lg 1gition—was_alreadyinstttutedon—the_symholic_piane.. But I think it is highly important to perceive that whatisin.the symbolic plane. The._and that it ismaterialized.. Freud seems. desired in the woman who is loved is precisely what slle_la.a. that the subject was satisfiecLby_th... pose the question of_ what in the_ woman_ is loved beyond herself.s.will_al. : .mother.. devotes to the lady aims at_something other than her.is. and it is not for nothing. What is the most important thing that then occurs? Is it the turn that leads her to identify with the fatter? It is understood that this plays its role.fact_thatitis... to resery_e_for njAiculine experience this love which lives purely and simplyirLthe order 1:?f devotion. leads her back_to.. Is it the fact that she becomes herself that latent child which can in effect niederkommen when the crisis reaches its term? Perhaps we could .ketke everyman:who willgive her achad. But that is not what is most important.as. in effect. the issue that the subject finds in this form of love. to which she_return.cks... as for Dora.w. It was.that what is desired is beyond the wunan whois loved..on.. know after how many months that occurred if we had the dates.._the..ys_for.properly speaking.real„.. and no longer in the imaginary. its passage_onto the plane of courtly love. ... which brings into question what is tri_Ily±. her side who has it. the fast that the_objea.presence child.for_an insiant..thefatherwho.. What_is.at child.1zy_achild.

What is sought beyond her_ is_the_centraLobiggt_ of_thwhole libidirlatgcononly tjw phallus.._soughtin thE woman is what she lacks ...1n_the most idealized love.At the extreme-of_love.• fi .whatis. 9 January 1957 jI .

A permutative schema of the case. ( A Child is Being Beaten) m a k e s o f t h e i m p e r s o n a l " o n e " t h e c a l s u b j e c t o f t h e s e n t e n c e . mill of perversion. and jouissance. Someone is Beating a Child i s t h e re nde ring of t he F re nc h t i t l e . The image. and as far as possible. that there can be interest in 0§ °c:hoanalysis in engaging in it. in passing. hit also. It is only by king it further. sketched what one could call its structure. Ein Kind wird en. In fact. We ended our meeting the last time by trying to summarize a case ir female homosexuality presented by Freud. It will be useful to return to this structural analysis. I dealt with its peripeties. at every moment. 120 . love. Frustration.VII SOMEONE IS_ BEATING A CHILD' AND THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL Intersubjectivity and desubjectivization. It is to reply to this lack. The symbolic of the gift. it will not be ill to remind •ou. That there is a lack in psychoanalytic theory is what I seem to see rising 4. t un enfant. that we pursue our efforts here. the : ase would not have much importance beyond the picturesque if we were iair pursuing it on the grounds of a _s_tructuraLanaLysis. T h e F r e n c h t r a n s l a t i o n o f F r e u d ' s t i t l e .

The child surely. in which he would seek above all to welcome speech. but she founded the principles of her analysis of children on remarks like this -. with things still in course of being played out. Another remark of the same nature — as children still have a relation with the objects of their inaugural attachment. nor even really conceived. to the essential function of language in the analytic relation. she says. which provide the technique that is appropriate. has a relation to language different from that of the adult. and a dramatization that is profoundly foreign to the child's actual current family relation develops. what is going on in the child's unconscious has nothing to do with the real parents. Melanie Klein argues to the contrary that nothing is more similar to the analysis of an adult than the analysis of a child. and that even at a very early age. contrary to what Miss Anna Freud declares. the analyst must change his position. and on occasion. Melanie Klein. Mrs. . I would say then that the engagement of the analyst in another relation than the relation of speech. at least. As children are still within the creative situation of neurotic tension. to allow it to flourish. though it is not developed. and must be taken [into analysis] with the help of means of play. there cannot be a transference neurosis. there cannot. and profoundly modify his technique. as though by presentiment. be a transference properly speaking. in the primary relation with the parents. according to her. a subject raised as an only child by an elderly aunt who lives far away from the parents. I sensed it again recently reactivated in my thought upon seeing the proposals of Miss Anna Freud confronted with those of Mrs. Already between the ages of two and a half years and three. No doubt Miss Anna Freud has since then watered down her wine.This lack is sensible everywhere. to give it echo. is still indicated. the situation is completely modified with regard to what one can verify in the real relation. for example. Thus. Here Miss Anna Freud pays homage. The situation does not allow the analyst to offer himself to the child in a position of neutrality or receptivity. since he must intervene entirely on the current plane.there cannot be a transference in the child.

to be found in a pure and simple immediate relation with the real. but has already been inscribed in a symbolization. Must we accept the affirmations of Mrs. in an imaginary global world which gives the idea of the maternal body as container. and we are going to find it again on the precise path down which I shall lead you for the moment.I cite. Melanie Klein? These affirmations rest on her experience.. You see the cauldron of a sorceress or divine. Everything is as though. and even with rival brothers and sisters -. once asked. the more certainly the Oedipus complex was there. which seems to be ever more complete the further one goes back in time. in the depths of which mell. developed and ready to come into actin. What one must reveal in psychoanalysis is not. Melanie Klein deals with. and tending to be structured in a drama which seems preformed.which puts the child into an isolated and dual relation with a single person. If we cannot fail to be struck by the evidence that this entire phantasmagoria is adequate to the unique givens that Mrs. and what this dramatic symbolism can really mean.-one_q. the whole machine at every moment demanding the surge of the most aggressive instincts for its movement. we cannot at the same time not wonder what we have before us. which is that of perversion. 122 . mother.uestion. all the primordial fantasies present from the origin. That merits at least thatirge—aslc. nevertheless reconstituted a whole family drama with a father. This question. springs up everywhere. basically. and this experience is communicated to us in observations which sometimes push things to the point of the strange. the closer we come to the origin.

It does not suffer the fates which tend to reduce the other partial drives. the same abundance. inspired by the whole play through which an analysis of the reduction of defenses is pursued -. try to show that perversion is very far from beingapure element that persists. the same rhythms. But in fact.. Some. 123 .what is at stake in perversion is the eroticizing of the defense.1 What is perversion? Even within a psychoanalytic group. and by the evidence that is truly imposed in analytic practice. In a classical translation of Freud's notion that perversion is the negative of neurosis. I wouldn't mind. to cross the whole dialectic which tends to be established by the Oedipus complex. but who have been instructed by experience. a coloration. This is thought. these analysts want purely and simply to make of perversion an entity in which the drive is not elaborated. however. one hears the most discordant replies to that. who are not for all that either the most perspicacious or the best. a change of quality. somehow unscathed. a libidinal satisfaction? In fact. which is the ideal unifying drive. Whence comes this eroticizing? Where is the invisible power situated which could project what seems to arrive here as a sort of superfluity. Others. but the least one could say is that it is not thought through. the thing is not unthinkable. and that it too is part of what is realized through all the dramatic crises. That makes quite a picture. unifying them in a way that makes them end at last in the genital drive. presenting the same dimensional richness as the latter. fusions and defusions that a neurosis traverses. They try thus to explain that perversion is the negative of neurosis by pushing into the foreground a formulation like this. Perversion is thus a matter of an accident in the evolution of the drives. the same stages. believing that they follow Freud. say that we must come back purely and simply to the idea of the persistence of a fixation on a partial drive. v_ty should if 12eerciticizecl? That is the whole question.

In addition. and somehow in a free state. In addition. he expresses it in a way that is remarkable in its imprecision.In_plain_ view. a resume of a considerable mass of experience. leaving open questions to which he can only reply with great difficulty. indeed that of a categorical perversion. Freud tells us that he is centering his study on six cases. as if it were enough simply to hear that what is_ hidden in the unconscious when we are with a neurotic is. there is his experience of all the other cases of which he has not himself as great an understanding. he 124 . the Contribution Lo the Study_of the_Origin of Sexual Perversions. Let us look at things a little more closely. whatever role and function they may take on in a particular case. four of women. It is characteristic that Freud's attention bears upon a sentence which he takes as his title rather than merely being content with a clinical label. according to which perversionis__the negative of neurosis. by taking a study that should be famous. We shall first try to follow Freud. then we shall finally be able to see what he means when he affirms that perversion is the negative of neurosis. It is really-something else that Freud is suggestiag with the concise formula that we find in him. is not to be taken as one has taken it for a long. which are all of obsessional neurosis. When the subject declares that he is bringing what his fantasy is into the treatment. in perversiort. and two of men. and our analysis must find its true meaning. for he can scarcely say anything further to characterize his fantasy. It is a sentence taken directly from the statements of patients when they address the theme of those fantasies that one could generally qualify as sado-masochistic.One must not suppose that Freud had never considered giving us an idea of that to elaborate. In truth. time. Ein Kind wird gesehlagen. and an attempt to organize it. So there is.we have in Freud himself an example which proves that his formula. we shall attempt to see how he conceives the mechanism of a phenomenon that one can qualify as perverse. I would even further say -. he cannot at first give a satisfactory response. it seems.

. but it_provolces in them_a great sense of aversion„repugnance.. Freud tells us. The progress of analysis shows. In other words. The distance between the fantasmatic or imaginary use of these images and theirspoken formulation is really of a nature to make us prick up our ears. which have had an entirely understandable role at one moment in the subject's evolution.si nify for subjects? Freud tells us what his experience has shown him. to give its true power to what often appears in theory as an ambiguity.. not only is there very. We shall not get to the end of this article today. that this fantasy is substituted. This behavior on the part of the subject is already a gnn l that marks_a limit — it is_nat_the_same_thing to play mentally with the fantasy_ancLto _speak of. There is a rather remarkable fact to emphasize here. guilt. There are three stages.often great difficulty.1 :4 does not do it without showing a sort of aversion. when. in the history of the subject. according to Freud. Whereas the_ masturbatory practices that are more or less associated_ with these fantasies entail no weight of guilt for subjects. and which can be summed up under the heading — subjective structure. on the contrary. we shall try to determine at what level of subjective structure — the phenomenon occurs. for other fantasies. it is a question of formulating_these fantasies. indeed a sort of shame or sense of indecency. in approaching the problem tnrougn me case or me young nomosexuai girl. I shall simply bring out certain elements that directly concern the path on which we had started the last time. What does this fantasy. by a series of transformations. indeed as an impasse or an antimony. which f can be scanned to the extent that this history opens under analytic pressure and allows one to rediscover the origin of the fantasy. in order to let you recognize elements which are absolutely manifest on the sole condition that one has one's eyes open. at least to this dimension in which we are trying to advance. It is the structure of these states that I would suggest to you. . which in its typical formulation is expressed -Someone is beating a child -.

in a way that is inscribed in his current speech and by his present power of symbolization. thete_is the agent of punishment. My father. and that he sees as fallen from the parental preference which is at stake. one can say. to frustrate the child of its parents' affection. . as much by his presence as by the care that is given him.. Thus we rediscover through the progress of the analysis what will present itself as something primitive. This fantasy seems more or less tied in the history of the subject to the introduction of a brother or a sister. that he will limit himself to what happens in women. as the most profound primordial organization. There is the relation of the subject with two others between whom relations are motivated by an _element centered on the subject.My father is beating a child who is the child that I hate. The one who suffers is named as a child bject.. here. a rival who appears at some moment. and there is_ the subject. The subject formulates and organizes a primitive dramatic situation starting from the point we are at in the analysis. The important thing is that we touch. by way of A triple dimension and tension are implied herv. The first fantasy that one can find. there is the one who suffers it.arid the relation to thelather instituted.a question_of But let us leave the explanation of the problem for the future.Freud indicates in the first part of his discussion. The fantasmatic situation has the manifest complexity of including three Tersonage. says Freud. pLirr_cannotbe_unrelated to the fact that it is.atthe outset _upori_a_ .. Without insisting on this point. we shall not omit noting that it is a matter of a girl seen at a certain moment when the Oedipus complex has already been consitutecl. and which we ourselves shall leave aside for today. which we shall not bring into the foreground this time.s_-:_. while he senses himself privileged by the fact that the other falls from this preference.is retroactive.. for reasons that he will explain later. takes the following form -. It is especially a question of the father here. when one analyzes the facts. The preeminence of the figure of the father in a fantasy thatis completely. whom the subject hates. bistoricaLp_erspective_that .

in whose favor the thing occurs.. a reference to the subject.g._the medium. witlaialLthat_it_introduces of a temporal reference and scansion. And there is a reference to a third as subject. a tension. introduced as a motor within the triple situation. is beating my brother or my sister out oar that I do not believe he prefers me. of his desire to be preferred or_ loyecUtia_thus_aquestion of a formation_that is_alreadnatized and reactive. since it is at the expense of this second that what he receives is declared for the one who is the central subject. instance as the instrument of communication between the two subjects. The introduction of the second subject is necessary. reconstructedstage_which is indispensable in understanding the 127 . the privilege of preference. without leaning on it. which explains. Thus there is the idea of fear._the means. which supp_oses. The third who is the subject is presented in the situation as the one under whose eyes this must occur. Why? Because for what must be bridged between one subject and the other. I follow Freud's text. the issue of a complex situation.. that is to say a sort of anticipation. in the sense that it is established by the complete seal of speech. to two characters. A causality. animates and motivates the action bearing on the second personage. particular way. to let him know that something is given to him. in as much as the subject must believe or infer something from a certain behavior which bears upon the second subject. jria very. a temporal dimension.the_triple intersubjereference. but that IfleternaLy. with regard to the first. Let us go on to the seconcLstage. namely the expression of his wish. the spria. We thus find ourselves before a full intersubjective structure. taken as a third. The latter represents. situation set up in the primitiyefariny_in_ itself bears the mark of the intersubjective structure which all full speech constitutes. of precedence.. which is finally a communication about love. or rather which describes it as a . a situation that is reduced. The point is not that the thing has been spoken. he is the instrument. a tension in advance. The latter is taken in this . the one who suffers.accentuating this sense.

nor especially sadistic. was pregnant with every_ possibility. but is not however resolved. It is the classic sada raassishisticAmhiguity. The subject is included with the other in a relation that is dual. One can. It is eitlier_he or the other who is_beaten. but that the egQ1S in-thisinstance strongly_accerltu_ated. It was neither sexual. so fugitive is it. which is also exclusive. The second stage is dual.I am being beaten by my father. Something is indicated by that. the situation. is marked in the second gage. 128 .motivation of what occurs in the history of the subject. see in the very act of being beaten a transposition or the displacement of an element perhaps already marked by eroticism. The very fact that one can speak in this instance of the essence of masochism is indicative. Freud said. the second presents a situation so % The subject is in a reciprocal position with the other. Precipitation_in_ one direction or another.that this raises on the libidinal plane. arrows. which excludes every_ dimension other than that of the relation between the subject and the agent_whols beating could lead to all sorts of interpretations. and the continuation of the discussion shows it. This situation. but remaining__ ambiguous. To resolve it. This fugitive quality is so truly its characteristic that the situation is very quickly precipitated into the third stage. and thus ambiguous. Here it is he. This second stage produces the fantasy -. One finds that either/or which is so fundamental to the dual relation. Whereas the first fantasy covers_ an organization. a structure which gives a direction that one could indicate by a series of ambiguous that one might wonder for a moment to what measure the subject participates in the action of the one who aggresses and beats him. But they themselves will remain marked by the greatest ambiguity. extremely structured as it was. At the preceding stage. one must conclude with Freud that it is linked to the essence masochism. it contained these characteristics in potential. with the whole problematic. Freud says that we are almost always forced to reconstruct this stage.

. but in general the father is not recognizable. and at this level the subject is no longer there except as reduced to the state of a spectator. To see it one needs. what alwm_s_at_th.In the third stage. After the reduction of the first intersubjective situation with its temporal tension. a radical desubjectivization of the whole structure remains. which well shows the essential desubjectivization that is produced in this relation. What is excluded. Freud wanted to respect the formulation of the subject.at the point of the final reduction. isinscribed between_the_twa angles_a.d_of. The fantasmatic production makes it explode. but it is often a question not of one child but of several. in the form of a pure and simpleobser_ver. multiplying it into a thousand copies.ch. Or any other formula that brings out in any way whatever one of the accents of this dramatic relation. the subject is reduced to his most extreme point. Or this -. there is only a substitute. more or less marked by specularity and reciprocity between the ego and the other._. my father is showing me he loves me._namely_unconscio_us_spe_e. as in the first stage. or simply an eye. the paternal function is vaguely found. not always a subject. more or less fantasized. One apparently finds the subject here in a third position. that is to say. In this Someone.My father is beating a child from fear that I believe I am not preferred. — 129 .the_relatis)n. It is also very much this --By beating the child who is the child that I hate. is found here in an element of the clinical picture. and the passage to the second situation. which is dual and reciprocal. but whose evolutions are yet manifest in all of its constituent symptoms. one comes to the desubjectivized situation which is that of the terminal fantasy — namely. which can be only a screen on which the subject is instituted. what is not present in neurosis. which is the fantasy. e_litnit. which one has had to discover through all the_artificea_oLthe_analysis_othansference. How can we translate that into our language. charActerizes e_ver_ys to2to121:) ect. In effect. Someone is beating a child. In addition. But here we find ourselve of an element which_takes_Its_ place on the line S -A. at this precise point in our process? To refer to our schema the imaginary relation. but at least an eye.

but exemplary. history. that is at least his memory. that this is linked by the subject. where unconscious speech is articulated. no higher than the ankle. about the fetish. You notice here a remarkable concordance with the structure of what one could call the screen memory. at the level of perversion. at least in the memories that are still accessible to him. but is so und.. just where one finds the shoe. We have instead a sort of ohjecb. the situation.ctLagthstituteloy_what was not seen but r 130 . What is indicated here of fundamental structuring relation ' fin the history of the subject. or rather to limit ourselves here. to a precise situation -.namely. which is thg_gregpther. most often after a brief analytic effort. and for good reason. the perverse fantasy.. namely. the S in so far as it is speech. but all that is signification is lost. articulated structure.the child stops in his observation. at the hem of his mother's dress. because it retains the who charge -. the place .er_theJorm-Q. at least in certain cases that are particular. not constituted. -. which you are told is to be explained by that beyond which has never been seen.La-Fure-sign Is this anything other than what we encounter in perversion? Think now of what you know. for example.fiation of the signiti_gs_uf .of what in the Ptheri_s_b_garticulated structure in which the_subject_ is engaged.but a char egret revealed. WhaLortecauld-call-sigiailiers in a pure state are maintained without _the intersublatim_ckvoislof their subject. of signifying elements of_thespeech articulatevel_of that trans-object.the penis of the phallic mother. which is in the end engmatic. take the_f_unction. memory. All of the elements are there in the perverse fantasy. if one may put it so.How does this fantasy present itself? It bears in itself the evidence. and that is very much why the latter can. is at once maintained and contained. There is something here like ksymbplic reduction that has progressively_eliminated_the whole subjective structure from the situation leaving only_a*sisiugraat is entirely desubjectivized. It turns out. the intersubjective relation. not assumed by the subject -. It stops in effect at the hem of the dress. has a papeLithatwe can now disengage. Perversion. still very visible. them_o_meat_ when the chaitiof the_memor-y-stops.

that does not say it all — there must also be some impossibility here.which is articulated. but / essential to her symbolic function as phallic mother. and put into _ play again in the dialectic of the_transference. Theimaginarystmerisim thus app. This imaginary relation is on the way to what passes between the subject and the Other._ valueiincluded in what the scene expressed. but as it is.iinaTe71 it is a question of the image in so far as it remains the privileged evidence of something_which.thin the.tItte_the xepLemest and the unconscious. which fixes the course of memory.. With the fantasy we find ourselves before something of the same order. namely. We touch there upon the question of how what one could call the mill _ of perversion is formed.itlivalorization__ot thi.ensioni. without which it would not be repressed. Possible.. and corj8i._ which must again take on its full di . . Think of the way that a cinematic movement which unfolds rapidly might stop suddenly at some point. which remains charged with_all_of_theerotic. This instantaneousness. -. formulated. time_thaLthere is a question of perversion.. the last remaining support. must be articulated. by arresting it at that paint which is called the screen- memory. or more exactlywhat yelonging to the_stAbjgctisiefLto be situated in the Other.analytic dialogue.that the_subject_must receive from the Other in an inizerkd can_also very well remain in the_Othgt. message. that is.earsprevalent each . It is very much because there is this impossibility in ordinary situations that we need all of the artifices of the transference to render passable. acteristic of the reduction of the full signifying scene articulatecLinsubjecLafter-subject_to_omething that is imcm3i)Lli. by virtue of its mature_as-speech. evidence and support.__inthe_unconscious. in so farprecisely as it is repressed. thus inaugurating a relation that is possible but not realized. reduced to the state of the instantaneous. as_being truly_ for the subject something that the mother possesses namely the pliallus„imaginary_no doubt. It is speech which is yew much that of the subject. and of which it is both.zgcLin_the_fantaay. once again L - . freezing all of the characters.

going through the avatars.. 132 . the imagirlaryinterposition a-a' is that in which the subject finds his status.m. and articulated only in. on _ the contrary. in so much as he is engaged on the imaginary rails that form what one calls his libidinal fixations. Freud notes very clearly that the problem of the constitution of every perversion must be tackled by beginning with the perspective of the Oedipus complex. the revolution of the Oedipus. It is stupefying that one should have even thought of understanding Freud's formula that perversion is the negative of neurosis as its somewhat popular translation has it. to the subject. of the subject and the Other. when all is said. 2 We shall now try to inscribe our case from the other day. in so far as the I of the subject comes into being.formulable. Freud. and everything is developed still much further than what I am saying here.which are immediately attractive to him. by and for the process. in this important article. as primitive as we may suppose -. a link. the persistence of an irreducible partial drive. Freudian analysis gives us this indication in the clearest way.axisthe other hand. and articulation of the Oedipus complex. that of the young homosexual girl. In this instance.. an element of something that.. ascertain me-ness with regard to objects.us. the adventure.t take place and be estahlisbestoLthe.is articulable only as a means. indicates sufficiently that any perverse structuration. and at many other points.. understood. Symbolir_signification. can be conceived. Perversion would be a drive_that_has_ not been elatoratedJay—the_OedipaLanthneursgicanechanism. his structure as object_recognized. organization..at least among those that come to our knowledge as analysts -. the-wholeactuaLgerlesis_sahcathita. which correspond to his desire. installed in. _suctil_2Lhirn. the great Other. what must be communicated by the Other. a_pLirsand simple survival. onto our schema of the crossed relation.

arrives at the 133 1 . In this instance. that of maternity. which does not mean that it did not have its premises in very early phenomena. On this base. and leads her to become interested in love objects marked with the sign of fernirtillity. In effect. What is the meaning of what Freud tells us with regard to it? 11. we know when its presence was indicated. desire. to whom strong ties of affection bind her. Let us set off from thcphallic phase of the genital organization. position. a child for whom she cares. with a passion offered without demand. How to conceive this transformation? I have given you the first stage and the result -. We are going to take this up and show its implication in the very terms which served to analyze the position.1 Although we shall not push this exercise to its final term today. Let us begin with a state that is primordial. something then occurs. Let us try to understand the avenues which Freud himself has disengaged. At the moment towards thirteen or fourteen years. and not without cause. then precipitated. this young girl cherishes an object. In short. These are women in a more or less maternal. and we have its springs and its origins.t before the latency period. She thus shows herself in the eyes of all to be particularly well oriented in the direction that that they wish for her. She will finally led toapassion literally qualified as devouring for that person whom we call.between the two something happens. It is a perversion that was formed late. maternalizing. the child subjecLmasculine or fe_minine. with the character of a gift. namely. with a love projecting even beyond any sort of manifestation by the beloved. the typical vocation of woman. une can atstinguisnes i n m e m a j o r phenomena of the installation oktis_perversion)-. the lady. or even hope of return. then established. we can attempt a resume. she treats this lady in a style that is rich with elements which are chivalric and properly masculine. we have there one of the most characteristic forms of the love relation in its most highly cultivated forms.whether we consider it as fundamental or acquired matters little. Freud tells us what. which leads to a sort of about face.

And that in effect engages authors in a series of constructions which only refer the whole symbolic dialectic back to the origin.beings who have the phallus. and which become precisely more and more unthinkable the further one goes back towards the origin. but that is only to push the problem away. and those who do nothaveit. which is the pre.theziftThe symbolic of the gift and genital maturation. Given that. in so far as they effectively come into play in interhuman exchange.this is a fact. linked by a factor which is included in the rgat_human situation namely. that what will render the cooperation between the sexes adequate.smnethingwhich is not there. but the general style can be summed up somewhat like this. it must be that the phallic prevalence is some sort of formation in which the subject finds an advantage. up to and including the choice of object.by which the subject. which one must take as fact -. and they are thence forced to have recourse to extraordinary modes of explanation. however. It is in fact not inconceivable from this perspective. howeier. at the genital level. the full realization of the genital function. that is to say. and that there is in it a process of defense. is introduced into the symbolic_of.the rules instilled by the law as to the exercise of genital functions.phallic phase. which indigates.v. everything is already divined and inscribed in the unconscious drives. It is easier for us than for these authors to admit that in this instance. are. There remains in effect a fantasmatic element. There is.the_pointof realization of thergenital Everything isthere. It is because things take place at this level that the 134 .alence_a_the_phallus. These formulas of Freud suggest a problematic from which authors cannot exit when they want to justify it by motives which could be determined for the subject in the real. meaning_that_there_are_far_the subject two types of beings in the world -. essentially . which are two different things. by nature. namely. and given that the subject already has. I have already told you that I shall keep the latter in parentheses._who are castrated. as everyone knows. structured and organized in a way that is real. the phallus turns put_to_be that imaanacy_element -. preformed.

he must make a gift of what he has. Freud goes much further still. takes on value within the symbolic of the gift. as Freud underlines does not enter_by this route. and you will find indication of that in his Someone is Beating a Child. surely.link_between the symbolic of the gift and genital maturation is so close.. the accidents. formulated in raw terms. tlaastles„rders_the_Oedip. That. on the contrary. the dramatic elements of the Oedipal relation. or individual coherence.and for good reason. Freud insists ? on this -. the latter should be satisfied only 135 . and for_the_chilthwito does - not possess it. What she does_not have. as the boy does with the plus. biological. But for the subject. frustrations at the oral and anal levels tend to occur and come to realize the frustrations. that is to say the female child -.the gilLinso_lar as she does not possess the ph_all_u5Atis in so_lar_as5he. that the fantasy of the phallus. Freud says. all sorts of things can be given in exchange. in so far as it is a question of having or not having the phallus. if one can add a notation.us. Why do s° many pre- genital elements come into play in the Oedipal dialectic? Why_do. For . rest. at _the genital ._when_according to the premises. presence or absence.what does that mean? We are already here at - a level wl =niL&Tia nary element enters into a symbolic dialectic.phalligizes_the situation. Within this symbolic of the gift. what one does nothave. that is. Thus she enters with this minus.omentw_herLon a certain plane_he realizes the symbolic of the gift. so many things. if she enters the Oedipus complex.is_every_bitas_extant_as_the_. It appears.tle phallus does not have the same value for the_one who really_ possesses the phallu_sJ1athto_s_ay_the_male_child. What is at stake. plus or minus. in a syrnbolic_dialec._coniplex The boy. It still remains that there must be something. enters in so far as what she does not have is to be found in the Qe_diptss. coraylex. this has no internal.end of the Oedipus complex at the m.he_exits-by-it_Atihe_. that it is why we see so many equivalents of the phallus in symptoms. is the spring of the girl's entry into the Oedipus complex. The girl. Simply_it_is_marked-b-y--a minus_sign. The female child is introduced into the symbolic_of.tic. and what is at play there is the phallus.

The child can say to himself more easily that what the father gives the mother is his urine. of which of course he has no experience -. homosexual sirl. to provide a plus or a minus sign. The girl cares for a real child.__But in the example that concerns us. difficult to seize. it is a question of a real child. the function and the existence of his urine as an object.) Symuolic Father THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GEL 136 . and difficult of access. according to Freud. Freud goes so far as to say that if the pregenital objects are put into play in the Oedipal dialectic. 124] Imaginary Mother Real Child orF Imaginary Penis ( . It is easier to symbolize that is to say. that of the yo_w_gi. d [Schema. 'the girl's first introduction into the dialectic of the Oedipus complex consists.the objects that arepart of pre-genital relations. for the girl. p. it is in so far as they lend themselves more easily to verbal representation. he says. That remains. because he knows very well the use. that the penis that she desires is the child that she hopes to receive from the father as a substitute.inille_genitaLelaboration? Freud's answer_points towards what is obscure for. despite everything. I I Yes. Are_rnore accessible to verbal representation. which is in the picture. for an object that already has a certain realization in the child's imagination..„the. in this. Worporstellynep.chil&in what occurs at the genital level.

But what is avoided is that these two objects_ are_not of the same nature. it is because with regard to the early mother-child relation. I am doing nothing other than underlining something which is characteristic of the original frustration -. there is a 137 .1_-. and can create in the child that famous depressive position. or the very marked oppositiorLylich. she is constituted.passive aspect of frustration. ambiguous position which is that of an appurtenance to his own bo j If I am underlining it. as subject. it is the bipolarity.that she is already. If she is satisfied in caring for this child. as the imaginary_ mother. one thing on which I have insisted in the preceding lessons. Melanie Klein.that the frustration realized-by-whatever is. there is betwetn the real object in so far as the child can be deprivecLoLit.tha tit is to say. This distinction between the breast and the mother as a total object is made by Mrs. what does this child.elated_to the_rnother is__a frustration_pf love that everything that rnrnes frorn_the_mather_in--response_t_o_thesalLis_si. and following that. in her most : udimentary form_an_object-marked--and_designated with a possibility-of plus or minus in the form of presence or absence -. It remains in effect that the mother.cAss•fthe_object_of_lome_usecLindifferently. you see the terms frustration of tl . and on the other. But if there is . is instituted by the functictrulf a_01. without knowing it. That is one way to see things.eveaobject I introduced by a realized frustrationsly_be an object that the subject takes in the. the mother. the mother in so far as she is instituted as a total object. it is because she thus acquires the imaginary penis f which she is fundamerstratecawhich I notate_b_y_writing_theiMaginary_ penis with a minus sign.namely the mother's breast AzgLpt-Lthe other hand.On the other hand. in so far as she is in a position i of_granting or not granting this real object. as agent. One considers that the child has its first experience of the relation between the pleasure principle and the reality principle in the frustrations which he senses in the mother. something other than_the_objeci_ In other terms. She clearly distinguishes the partial objects. on one hand.gift.r. one puts the whole accent_on„the. that she cares for satisfy in her? The imaginary phallic substitution by which.

The frustration of love and the frustration of jouissance are two distinct things. which allows us to clarify that there is effectively a progression. In other words. and not just any sort of image_either. . though not without the usual confusion that we find in analytic literature. and on the other hand. We cannot found the least genesis of reality on the fact that the child has or does not have the breast._is not pregnant with anything at all. The image must in itself be talcen_as_an original dimension. It is not sly the child is deprived_ of the mother's breast that he creates a fundamental image_of it. as Mr. a beyond. that comes in for the satisfaction of the child's needs.radical difference between. it is not the frustration of jouissance that engenders reality. constitution of any object whatever. The frustration °Clove m itself Is pregnant with all of the intersubjective relations which may later be constituted._hut no sort of. and he continues to cry. Winnicott has very well perceived. Contrary to what is said. on one hand. -. This is very much why Mr. which requires an original explanation. the gift as a_sign aims radically at something other. he is hungry. If he does not have the breast. The frustration of jouissance. what does the frustratiou_of _puissance produce?aproduces at most a newthrustoLdesire. the love of the mother. the object whatever it may be. Winnicott is led to have us note what is really striking in the child's behavior.. It is not the 138 .

1 cauratica. where the images are. Without them. It is not at all an object which would be engendered in any_way whatever by 1 . It is not simply an element polarizing the launching of desire. In sum. . LL 10 0. • t • 1 • • 1 • - • ' - ' • . There is something significative in the plumes or the fins of the adversary which makes it an adversary. ALL LA IA. LAI 6.-1. Certainly the constitutes a world.1C V G1V1-0111G1LL.breast. the problem is not that of knowingtohow great a degree narcissism is elaborated.J11M1.? The phallus is substituted for it and si_Iptrimposed uaon it. • 1• - • . .1 1 .. object of the desires of which he was frustrated at the origin.an imagearound_which subjects can groupthemselves and disband aslaelorag. _1_ •1_11 1 1 -I 1.L - _1 __ 1 1 1 11 LL a• . but the tip of the breast that is essential here.7.1 ALL 01-1 161. going towards something that he desires. That is why Winnicott spends time on those objects which he calls transitional. we would have no evidenceafthe way that the child__ couldconstitute a world by_starting with his frustrations. 139 . LO AL 1. r t •-• es 1: .111. referred to the fundamentaLimagewhich_gimes_hirn_his globiLatatureatis a matter of that form of the whole which he latches-onto. ..• SALA. but accentuated in a way that is observable in the child's behavior.71. the form-of the albeit.i e v e .. he can encounter something b which h_i_bmised or by which he is burned. thenipple.6 Gl0G• 11L1 1..admit the autonomy of the 2 English in the original.11 1 e . LILL 1%A biLALLLOG. in so far as they are constituted as images. This is no doubt also present in man. like the lure that always orients animal behavior. The two have in common the character of being able to arrest us.71. LAO Li Mil. He constitutes a world in as much as.1 P .1G.u. What follows the frustration of the object of jouissance in the child is Inoriginal dimension that is maintained in the subject as an imaginary relation.11.1 - • 11 11 .6./. but one must not sAy_that it is with regard to the.1 CL0 11.. it is on the contrary to recognize what the unction of narcissism is in the constitution of an object_world_as_mch. in orriotzLeog___ n Mg. 10 engendered by frustration leads _us_tz. and one can always locate what individualizes the image in the biological realm.

as an object to which they must adhere. it is really in the midst of all this that life is to be situated. because one is really forced to reach it from the moment that one has taken this path. to which the child holds and to which he is more or less hooked on. In short. Mr. if one wished to -11 m ip o s h e p s v i r a y o f e l t s u n a l b e j a c s . all in the midst of which lives a good English citizen who knows in advance how to behave. and with regard to which one can speak neither of reality nor of unreality. or the tip of a bib. the authenticity or the strong as steel reality of what he promotes as a religious idea or a philosophic illusion. This character is well marked by the fact that no one normally thinks of imposing upon others. This is not observed in all children. this object which is neither real nor unreal. character of demi-existence. no one would dream of saying that you believe as strong as steel.imaginary production in its relation to the image of the body. the instituted world of the British Isles indicates to each that he has the right to be mad. Winnicott clearly sees the ultimate relation between these objects and the fetish. in which things are instituted-with the. It is an ambiguous object. which is between the two. Mr. half unreal. he comes to it as though despite himself. half real. That is how Mr. Mr. It is there that madness would truly begin. It is a matter of a domain that_is between the two. even if it must be regretted that instead of dealing with the problem which provides the introduction of this object into the symbolic order. t h c o u n t e i n s d t a o f t r nomadism of the transitional object. How could we organize the rest if there were not that? 140 . is like your philosophical notions and your religious system. which he is wrong to call a primitive fetish. Winnicott is not wrong. Transitional objects-are those objects. Whatever doctrine you might hold in religious or in philosophic matters. Winnicott spends time on this and says that after all. but in most of them. but which is in fact at the origin. to which we grant neither a full reality nor a fully illusory character. no one would dream of taking it away from you. on the condition of remaining mad separately. Winnicott expresses it. with a great deal of pertinence. for example a little corner of his sheet.

.

Let us come back to the case of our young_girlin19ye.. p. that is. when she tags care of a child. to the second stage of the five situations that we shall not get through today? She is homosexual. subject's adoration. who was at the place of the_. through the subject's identification with the function 142 .schema -..the father. the_ imaginaly_pfnis. it is literally what he does not have. because sheis the oltectelectolall_ the . [Schema. is_in. the symbolic that is. That is translated thus by ott_r_. miinnliches Typus -.symbsalic_fatherpass into the _imaginary.great A in the first stage. of wit90. In a ' there is the lady. If the_ lady is_ loyeckit is in so far precisely as she does not have the symbplic penis. and she loves like a man. At A. what is benc:l ittglomed_subjectia rove at its mostglaborated_point_WhAtirdave is loved is in effect what ja. She. What is needed for her to pass to the third stage.though the translator has translated --feminine. the object of love who is substituted for the child.the y_irile_positice. says Freud. 1281 Child Real Lady 0 Imaginary Father Symbolic Penis THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL (2) &Retrmgation is thus produced whicbmakes. beyond the subject.1Lis_said.the. but she has all that she needs to have it. passes to the level otthe ego. that ter transitional_ object.

and if the imaginary satisfaction _to which the girl gives herself has taken an untenable character. a touch which already shows an accentuation of need in her. that things turn in the direction of a perversion. is given to her own mother. Now for this child that she desired unconsciously. the fatherisnow realized on the plane of the imaginary relation. it_ is. When one says that it is because of some accentuation of the instincts. substitution of_ thes_laild_that_the father will give_her.the_ symbolic penis. the symbolic and the real? You can see that if the situation is revealed for reasons that are highly structured to be a relation of jealousy._this_ symbolic father who was in the unconscious. just by having precisely_thatbeyond. it is in_so. In the present case. already disquieting enough that the child is real. Simultaneously. the girl gave him_a_reAl_substitute. has one really taken a strong start from those three elements which are absolutely essential. One understands after that that the_s_ubject has been frustrated in a very special way. 143 . in effect. which is found at first at the imaginary level._a real which replied to the unconscious situation on the plane of the imaginary. and which we find again in the fourth. which are the imaginary. which gives the situation its drama.fiAlte is_symbolic. in which she found her satisfaction. there is for the girl. as an object of love. and no longer as symbolic father. an imaginary or a real child.of the father. while the father remains unconscious as progenitor. By a sort of interposition. Onlyhere the father really gives a child not_ta_his_daughtm butt° the mother.. is that a real action has been introduced on the plane of the imaginary relation_by the father. or of some primitive drive. on the condition that they are distinguished. much as the real is introduced. when the real child comfrom_the father. the real lady comes to the position on the right. inicdar. and all the more so as the child is real. he enters effectively into play as imaginary father. For the desire of the penis. or of the drives. What occurs between the two? The characteristic of the observation. That is what is characteristic in the observation. which appears in the second stage.

does not have. puts us just at the heart of the love relation and of It is this something that the object does not have. and it is for this reason and not for any other that it will end in a perversion. This need to set love on the axis not of the object but on what the obt does not have. It is there that we shall take things up again the next time. nor what as such it signified. to which necessarily_she_must_give_this something which it at does not have. For if I have accentuated the paradoxes of frustration with regard to the object._She becomes herself the imaginary father. which we left aside just before. begins_tabe articul in an imaginary way. and to see its other face.From there on. in the style of perversion.her_father arid takes his role. She also keeps his penis.and the girl completes it as she can. This relation is marked by the fact that what had been articulatecljn_a_ _ay that was laterktaLtheleKel of the great Other. another imaginary relation is inaugurated. in order to study in depth the dialectic of the gift as it is first experienced by the subject. which makes the tertiary constellation of this subject's history necessary. The_girLideritifies with. 16 January 1957 144 . and becomes attached to an_objeawbich. I have not yet said what the frustration of love offered.

. Potent father.ect_on.latte~ir~ the sense of lack of thesthject.xefl. namely the opposition. and I refer you to the introduction that you will see I have given to my lesson on The Purloined Letter. and the gift. it no longer depe_nds_on- 145 . which is nothing other than an objectively verifiable position of the game's givens.zera_ppsitiono_LtJae. You will easily locate the three temp_gral_mornbjectivityinso far as it is related to frustration. lack. the second number of the review La Psychanalyse. on the c_onditim_of takings e. that is to say in our practice. problem.-the. neurotic metaphor. The seconsimgment is to be found in the fact that the declaration you make in saying by which you put_ i yourself in a condition_of being gratified_or not by the_otheron. contains certain texts which will allow you to find a new attempt at a logic. theinstitutionof the pure symbol plus_or minus. Dora between question and identification. and to find it in a place where it is particularly lively.sc _btit since this other akeady_has the dice in his hands. presence or absence. This fascicule. I am alluding to the famous game of odds and evens.VIII DORA AND THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL The symbolic insistence of the transference.. Love. impotent father.-if4au_firat. Perverse metonymy.

Tl_stitution_of_a_law or of any regularity conceived as possible -. which I shall sum up by taking a first situation chosen arbitrarily as the situation at the start. but ternary.inso_far as it _institutes_the. It is at this_moment_that_whaLis fundamental. without forgetting that by 146 . the object must really enter into this chain.garne.nLcharacter.ta_satisfy.will satisfy_your demand. We do it to facilitate things by coming more quickly to what is abiltually done in the dialectic of frustration. to make a concession to a progressive point of view„ to admit this chronological ordering of terms from the past towards the futture. in other words. which at the same time he tries to steal from him. please note. You can see its absolutely_emarie5cg.hancl. what is at stake? The other is evidently called upon to suggest a regularity at every moment.impos_sible. in the history of our case of feminiine homosexuality. from the point of view of the one who demands. the moment that is consttituted in the following way.situating a dimension that is no longer_dual. a law.steals it at every instant from the other. Thatt is what we had reached the last time.. 1 Wie had arrived at what I called the third moment. Thus you have here the second stage of the dual_relation. it is very evidently because you introduce thellattamension_which_Orssitits_meaning.all the while suggestirigh. If the game has any interest. on which frustration is established. under our jurisaiiction in analytic practice..in the arrie is established.him that what is in_his.that_of_theiaw.he who proposes the hidden Eart of the ame._ It is on this essential dimension that the value of my text rests. In following those three intersubjective muiments we shall try to see how the object is introduced into theaymbolic.literally . lit is already. which gives it its intersubjective meaning. chit tin. For by the sole fact that it comes within our reach. In fact.in_a_form which is always latent to the exexcise_of_the. namely thaltit is necessary to introduce three terms if one is to begin to articulate - somethijpgthat resembles klaw.call_ and its P response.

. is_the_. her relation with the lady.passes_into_the_imana relation.conceiving it in a summary fashion. the lady.one__who unconscious. which wa. the imaginary. namely. But for the moment. intemening-as . By a sort inversion.. The say mower of the father is then unconscious. one ends in impasses which I hope to make you sense the further we advance. as ordained by theory. which is hence posed in the following terms -.the imaginary father.nquotation marks„an irnaginary_relatis. which is to say that he makes of this child. produces the transformation of the whole equation. the symbolic penis. At first we have the position of the young girl when she is still at the stage of puberty..n. That is the third moment. one could say. 1331_ 147 . The first symbolic and imaginary structuration of this position is made in a way that is classic. the relation u f sub'ect with her father. The equivalence penis-imaginary child installs the subject as imaginary r_rioAerwith_regard . which.to_that_beyond which.. It is at this stage that there occurs. Something is realized. p. 1--•. that is without distinguishing the planes of the real._ if you will.father. We find ourselves now at the second moment. that of the first equilibrium.•••••••■•• [Format schema. can no longer be sustained by her in the imaginary position in which she had been installed.s_situated in the symbolic-order. . that is to say as the one who can give the phallus.•.a symbolic function. into a relation that is perverse i. the fatal moment in which the father intervenes in the real by giving a child to the mother. a child that is real. Or. as a consequence.•■•••. The intervention of the real father with regard to the child of which she is thus frustrated. This is after the decline of the Oedi2ussornallnatl. there is a projection of the unconscious formula. we shall try to establish the prindples_of_the_ relations between the object and the constitution of the symbolic chain.-. and the symbolic. with which the subject is in an imaginary relation.

we have the position of the terms at stake. however. Whatever Freud thinks of it. and never just anywhere..Child .... namely that the 148 . useful to note that these terms.. paradoxically. he himself states. if we were to change the position of one of them. He says that the resistances of the patient were insurmountable. How does he materialize these resistances? What examples does he give? What meaning does he give them? He sees them expressed particularly in a dream which..... must really count for something in the rupture of the situation. impose a structure. such as they are. we would have to resituate all the others. His own intervention. since. it is at this moment that the analytic relation is broken off. Let us review what this position is. he crystallizes the position between him and the patient in a way that is not satisfying. after a first application of our formulas.. It is. Let us now try to see what that might mean. and how Freud formulates it.Lady Imaginary father Symbolic penis THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL GIRL (3) Thus. could have given great hope. and over which we can for a moment pause.. that is to say. his presuppositions concerning her position. one is far from being led to put the whole charge to an impasse in the patient's position. What does Freud say at the crucial moment of this observation? Because of the particular conception that he has taken of the position in question. and because of an intervention that he makes in this direction. a position no doubt enigmatic. Its signification is given by the analysis.. his conception.

in the intersubjective game of guessing. That supposes. and the factor of the dual relation. at least society. 62-73. represented here by the family. up to but not quite drawing the final consequences. if not Freud. could best wish as the outcome of the treatment. as in that practice which I alluded to earlier. that one could object --But then. if there were not another desire. The patient has submitted herself to an ideal husband.2 The Traumdeutung introduces a comparison between capitalist and entrepreneur with regard to the relation between unconscious desire and preconscious desire. the unconscious can lie? Freud stops for a long time at this point. Fortified by all that the patient is telling him of her position and her intentions. but the dream would not have enough to set itself up as representing what is called the unconscious. following a report by Lagache on transference. and takes care to reply in a way that is very well articulated. Freud. which we shall get to a little later. both at the same time. Rose as Intervention on the Transference. Thus Freud makes a strong distinction between the_t_woslesires. Report to the Congres dit de langue romane. 215-226. Translated by 3. In short. a fecund marriage. Preconscious desire is the entrepreneur of the dream. conjugo. which is from the level of the_unconscious. the dream manifests a desire that goes in the direction of what. It is in effect a dream about a union. sees in it only a ruse of the patient's. 1951. and which is an unconscious desire. a short intervention summing up the positions through which I think that one must conceptualize the case. which gives the foundation of the dream.situation was becoming normalized. the case of Dora. Freud takes a passage from The Interpretation of Dreams.). Published in Ecrits. Intervention sur le transfert. There is room to make a distinction between_wpatient brings in his dream. pp. p. intended expressly to disappoint him. He also takes it up in another observation. in Mitchell and Rose (eds.' on which I recently gave. discusses it. 2 149 . as Freud notes. more exactly to give him illusions and to disillusion him. far from taking the text of the dream at the letter of the word. and has children by him. which consists in the fact that he Js addressing someone when he recounts the dream in 1 Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria.

150 .the patient herself manages to formulate it -.4 the first as at the third stage. namely lz~ar own message coming from an inverted form under th have a child r_tne.}7.kand_thisdirection is not always necessarily the unconscious orientation. Must what is expressed in the dream b e c o n c e i v e d e e i a p e s _ t l y _ e _ o f _ s i e c i p t i el t h a t i s . what do we see formulated? Without doubt .the game of deception._ Still.thatadreamthat-is-. it is. when it is broughtto_the_signifier.anthissensethatIsay. It is always the Lames ro jtenlp_f the unconscious that declares itself. If transference has a meaning. It is there that the position begins. with the notion of Wiederholungszwang. is. pretending to let herself be treated. a choice to be made. In L e. but what is forrrualatein_the-unc-onscious.aLways-carries_a__certain_directitaw_atdsthe anal. i n its Preconscious intentionalization? It does not seem so. The whole question is to know if one must put the accent on the intentions that Freud says are openly admitted by the patient -. Certainly. or in so far as the Oedipus has not been resolved.it is in a dialectic of deception. the sole fact that it is reproduced.. and in the dream a situation is articulated that fulfills this promise. This is.fiethere are in the transference an imaginary elem_ent ancl_asymbolic element. the promise on which the entry of the girl into the Oedipus complex is founded.whatorigin. for if we look at it closely. because he has not arrived at a pure formulation of what transference is. If Freud hesitates before this content. her fidelity to the lady. and in consequence. by_definition. at the entry into the Oedipus. this insistence proper to the symbolic chain is not assumed by the subject. and that it comes to the third stage as existing and formulatingitself in a dream. if there em e4104 are mywjfsscgLa • II •∎ • is a meaning in what Freud later brought us. it is because it is in so far as there is an insistence proper tothe symbolic chain as such that there is transference. and maintaining her position. on which I have taken care to spend a year to make you see what that might mean.roduce-d_durthecourse(2Lgn_aaalysis.those of playing with her father -. very precisely.

ceiztai_yril . the representation of the transference in thepropeLsgnse. The two cases balance each other admirably. in their total constellation. in the_same_ _w_ay. They_intersect. It is the_ ~ase. But much more because.9 Dora. I would say_that there is no better illustration of Freuclis_fou taulathateip____Trsionisthenegatiyeof_rve_urosis. or the correct method of intervening. _becausethesonfusion between the symbolic_position_and_the-imaginary position ' produced in opposingway.sin the two cases. and by itself alone. He would have needed a notion c7f transference-founded_on a less vacillating_position and he would have had to conceive very preciaelythat transference occurs essentially on the plane of symbolic articulation. is nonetheless. when something takes its meaning intbe_fact_that-the-analystmes the place of_the_. This remark is not valid only for one particular case We also have another case where the problem opsn_s_o_n_the_same plane. they correspond strictly. and this. 2 Let us quickly recall the terms of Dora's case for what they have in comrnon with the constellation that is present in the case of the young homosexual girl.transfe iteige_cit is very precisely in so far as it is a matter of symbolic articulation as such. almost so much that one can be orgAnized with regard to the other as the positive form of a negative. It is there that Freud could have securely placed his confidence and jntprveneri holdly. )___eccept that Freu_dmakes an error that is exactly the contrary. one must develop that. before the subject has assumed it. as one sees here in _something that is a transference dream. Still. even if it seems to be a deceitful dream in that_itis on theimaginary_leveLand in direct relation with the therapist . 151 . he does not draw its strict consequences from it. When we speak of transference.permits one to say that the dream. First. If Freud notes all the same that something was produced that was on the order of transference.

e_elem.y.c. It is all the more striking in that it is againb. as we advance. since it is she who ravishes the father's attentintLirara_the - _daughter. namely that the father had as mistress a certain Frau K.itis_the father who introduces thela. and that she has become unAtle191..o■uces_th.K.. this singular equilibrium had in fact already b_een12roken for_ tweLyeap. no doubt.by alarming her family. minor.wilLbeilae. and this passage in the consultation is an'element which in itself alone.. She is a young hysteric. thecontrast with the preceding situation. _In the case of the young homosexual girl.In the case_o_thstra. while in the first case. The father presents her to Freud as a patient. who.. but still quite marked... although the thing is dissimulated to Freud in the daughter's presentation of the situation.e laciy_that the whole problem turns. We see already. has been ravished from her by this liaison.L. no doubt. Nevertheless. She immediately demonstrates to Freud that she had always been aware of the exi nats_e__QL this liaison. The_lratiagr is abaent from the situation.. denotes a crisis in the social group in which a certain equilibrium had been maintained up until then.in the foreground a father. married to a gentleman named Herr K.u. a daughter. couple formed by the father and daughter. What is striking is that Dora immediately lets Freud know her extremely keen demand for justice concerning the affection of her father. ancLiptc.of_Dor. because of a position which is at first dissimulated to Freud. This couple lived in a sort oictuarte. All of her behavior shows h. it is the daughter who introduces her.. and also another lad. of its permanence and its importance. whom they bring to him because of some symptoms she has had.we_haiesxacity_the_same characters -. L 152 .r_clan. the mother in effect is present.._Era. On the other hancI Ethe_case. sigierminantimihemfo a_tion_oLthe_perverse constellation.cland seems to keep her there. The situation became intolerable following a sort of demonstration or attempt to commit suicide which ended. justice with regard to this relation.a. she says.

up until a critical moment. and that she went. On the other hand. But the 153 . Let us signal out among others the interval of nine months between the hysterical symptom of appendicitis and the fact that makes it take root -the scene by the lake -. and that he should have un attachment to Frau K. e_arnorous relation that linked her to Herr K. the most derisive forerly_speakingclialectical quality.. this position had been sustained in the most efficient fashion by Dora herself. Freud very quickly gives evidence that.Freud then takes a step. by taking care of her children. No doubt Freud lot lat rperceived that if he wentwrong. indeed. as well asof her crisis. protecting the private meetings of the couple of the father and the lady. the first step in Freudian experience. She showed herself more than complacent to this singular position. He leads Dora back to the following question --What you are rising up against as a disorder. she was really its pivot. The case is of a richness such that one can still make discoveries in it. to the extent that one goes farther into the structure of the case. that she was her confidante. it waslaecause. it seems. even substituting on one occasion for the lady in her functions. I can only remind you today of the terms in which the problem is presented all throughout the observation.Df_a resistance in the patient to afiinaitting_th.which Freud believes he discovers because the patient gives it to him in a symbolic fashion. is it not something in which you haveATurseyparticipated? And in fact. one notes that in reality itis_a que5tion_offifteen months_And these fifteen months have a meaning. because the number fifteen appears everywhere in the obsentationand this element is useful in our rstanclingdrithat itis_founded on numbersa purely symbolic value. as Freud suggestecLicther with all of the weight of his insistence and his authority. was the veritabl institution Dross primitive position. but if one looks closely. it appears clear that she had a very special tie with the lady. extremely far with her in confidences. He goes as far as to indicate in a note that without doubt there was an error on his part. and this rapid reminder cannot in any way replace an attentive reading.

Starting with the narcissistic relation as the foundation of the ego. and which would allow one to conceive both the progress of the adventure. egablished_with bim. Verliebtheit. She_is not imp91tarialy_hecause-shedsjnvested with the narcissistic function which is at the basis of all inamoration. I went still a bit further.the hysteric is someone whose object is homosexual -.the ] hysteric. In other terms..important thing is not only that Freud should recognize it after the fact.he remains In_the greatest ambiiglitysgriceming the real object_01. Lb-bad. and the moment at which it is arrested. the point of rupture in the equilibrium? I made. that Dora is .oint constituted-by-the-personality of Herr K. It is also clear that 01 of very great weight. . and_that_something like a libidinal bond i. that she is Herr_K„and that men for her are so many possible crystallizations of her ego. and in so far as she is Herr K. it is by the intermediary of Herr K.Ddrals_desire. you can_yead_that. The situation of the quadrille in effect can only be understood in so far as the ego.. in so far as it is a matrix. which is in some way unresolved. I showed that we had traces of it in the observation. In what terms should we articulate the position of the problem? Here again. 4 prevalent importance_ for_Dora.approaches_this homosexual object by identification with someon( of the other sex. for all through the observation. it is a matter of giving a possible formulation for this ambiguity. is someone important. where.. It was a first approach that was in some way clinical. I went further. at every instant_plays its ro_lia_thelibidirial bond of Dora with Frau K.Frau K. I indicated that the hysteric is someone who loves by procuration. How to conceive one and the other in a way which would justify. of the constitution of the imaginary function which is called the ego. Attached to the person of Frau K. It is clear that HersK„asaphas 1. its crisis. a first approach to this observation. Why? She is imortant only because she is the Qb_jeCt _Of a choice among other objects. and_you__w_ill-find_it_in_a_host_a_. — it is at the imagi_nar_y_p. observations -. five years ago.__-_only the ego — of Dora has made an : identification with a male character. and I said -. 154 . in conformity with the structure of hysteria.

the function of the father might be with regard to the lack of the. Thus we have anoccasiosLIQ demonstrate the value.• • • . The whole observation rests on the central notion . we see one cf its issues. his desire remains. but it is in as much as the gift is a sign of love. the frustration that can be established in the relation of the c ilitto_the_tricither_Thereds_an_ohject_a_w_hich_thechild is frustrated.he II" ■ GS Ives this missin • ob'ect. which is exemplary. and in the observation of Dora. is it ever the obiectthatis___ _given. There is a reason for that -. then. Ille_phallk_deficiency_of the father crosses the whole observation like a_ fundamental note. is it on a single plane that we find it? Is it purel_y_and_s_imply_with ±egard to this lack that the crisis will be developed? Let us observe what is at stake. Let us try now to transcribe that into our present formulation. : of the fatilg_t_tsimpotence.she gives or she does not give. What_is_the_ father's function in _salar_ as he is a donor? This situation rests on the distinction_thatnamakeady made_ regarding primitive frustration. In th ■• Ioesjasatzky_e_g.ains-after_the_fzustration__The mother then intervene_s_art another register . is n. nhiprt through which thk_girLenters into the Oedipus complpc. an appurtenance of the Lsuhjeci.c_ci. can be organized on our fundamental schema. is(ttezha_is_desi .? That is the question. and to situate what. Frustration has a meaning only in as much as the object.ias.em. that is to say someone who has arrived at the level of the Oedipal crisis.it is that her own father. in cpntrast_to_the father of the homosexuaLis_impotent. of what Here.egree by the fact that the object can be given or not? In other terms. in this quartet. and it is around the dreams that the essential of the o turns Frau K. and in a way that is particularly exemplary.No.begpi7st it. as the dreams indicate. But after the frustration.i. and who both was able and unable to get through it. Dora is a hysteric. What isgivirgi ? Is there not another dime_rion_int otrsiluce _inta thesbiectrelation_when_it_is_carried to the synakol. conllibiting_t_ixpcit then again. he does not have 155 .

3eems to be the very formula that would express interest.. what makes the giftistlitat a sub'ect • ives something in a way that is gratuitous behind what he gives is all that he lacks.. moreover.liieypncias. The nothurinciple of the exchange. What intervenes in the love relation.hav_e__LeysLI. It is the same. she is very attached to this father from whom she does not smbolically—remi-ve tbPvirile_gift so attached that her history begins exactly the age of the issue from the Oedipus.atAtions of love for this father who. Or. This formula. As all of sociological reflection affirms. _s given. as it. the gift is Al* something that circulates.gifti_. the_gift that you give is always the gift that you . for nothing . .at_that_rnomentp-marethan_everAecippears as alather wjia is sick and injured. to go still further. something's given for tiothia. no greater sign of love. like every formulation in which the ambiguous nothing intervenes.gd which can beimly_nothing. . for what establishes the relatiQn of love is that the. whatissiemandecl_a.sa_aipatily samPthing_that _ j§ '411. In the gift of Jove.9.In fact. In other words. thanhe_gill of what one does not have.he has for this father is strictly correlative and coextensivh the_ diminution of the latter. the cycle of gifts still comes from somewhere else. with the primitive gift. But note well that the dimension of the gift exists only with the introduction of the law.tabie only__0A a sigja. ''. but it is also the formula of the purest gratuity. Thus we have a very clear distinction. there is no greater gift possible.— 156 . •. But when it is a matter of a gift between two subjects. The love that . it is that the_subiect Sacrifices_.1. if one can say that. struck down in his=_yirttalp_pwns. with a whole series of hysterical accidents_slearly linkecltofe.

there is the notion of I do not know what that is always missing in him. 157 . T h e w h o l e situation is unthinkable outside of this primitive position. there is still something that remains — this being who_is supposed to be whole. given that the father engages before Dora in something else. if it is not that perhaps he does not exist. [Diagram. At the basis of all belief in god as perfectly and totally munificent. S h e l o v e s h i m p r e c i s l o e s _ n o t g i v e h e r . There is no other reason to love God. which Dora even seems to have induced. a gift coming from him would in no way have the value of a sign of love. namely. But if this recognition with regard to a god who might be whole is even thinkable.was practiced effectively at the origin of human exchange. every wealth. p. and which allows one always to suppose that he might not exist.141. it is that at the basis of all belief.the father. Dora Father DORA 1 3 English in tne original. which is maintained until the end. without a doubt lacks the thing_that is principal in being. a qiibject who had the fullness of all that one could have. Dora. existence. Well. Believers imagine that they can love God because God is supposed to contain a total plenitude. What is certain is that Dora is at a moment when loves her father.] Frau K. tolerated.3 Imagine a subject charged with every possible benefit. in the form of potlatch. Frau K. The observation rests on the following _ternary group -. a fullness of being. One must now conceive how it could have been supported.

And it is in so far as it is brought t_Q__the dignity of the object of the gift that it.or_rather_Erau-K.father_loves_. This position is moreover 158 . Dora asks herself -What i_$_gmattlanLAnd it is in as much as Fr au the feminine function as_such. but it is never symbolically_ losated_as something which might_hA_ve_a_meaning. To this end. is not denied by Freud. in as much as she does not know what it is. supposes.alataine.? Frau K._ Dora is situated somewhere between her father and Frau K.. Frau_K.rnust.It is always essentially itself_pro_blematic.thesigestinn. thehalite IszalDsent or present_elsew. and all throughout the observation. appears as something_ that her father can love beyond herself.jn_the_end._d. _which. . on the conditionjLis. that she is for Dora the representation_of_that_into which the latter projects herself as being. What_Dora is Otached to is what is loved bylier father in another. Do_rais_on_the path of_a__ .stand in this situation in which she finds no place to lodge. Dora feels satisfied.here. That is really in fact what is in question during the deployment of all the symptoms. and that is why Dora senses herself interestestin this position. up to and including the essential prohibitions which found the general movement Pf_exchange.be brought to the level_ofthe gift. In so far as her father loves_a_ K. What is loved in a being is beyond what_he is.rnakes_the subject enter into the dialectic of exchange which will normalize all his positions.. from the physiology of the woman.. is that_the femininesubject_can.__caruneither_knaw nox_under. Dora._flesire_aims at the phallub in so faragitinuathe_receiveci_as_a_gift._wilat-he-is-lacking. understood.only_enter_into_the_ dialectic of-the-symbolic order by the_gift_of the phallus. The real need which springs from the female organ as such. but it isne_ver_gis_en_as_e_atering as such in the establishment of the position of desire. thatis. that_the_position_12e_m.in__Frau_K.which is linked to the female organ its place and is satisfiectikterally. Cre212es-hat she. ThaLis____y_ejy_ consonant with_what the whole theory of the phallic object ..The whole situation occurs as if Dora had to ask herself the question -Wha_Lis_iLthatilny.k is within this that the real_ need whose stence Freud never dreamed of denying.--is-what is lov_ed_lnyond_Rora. placed in advance of a certain symbolic crossing.. dual relation with Erau_K.

\ symbolized in a thousand ways.• .alonger v i w o m a n h w w h o m s h e h a s b e f o r e h e r . Thus the impotent father_ substitutes by -- all I the means of the symbolic gift. 12. and . including material gifts. Frau K. that is no longer enough. with a munificence which is bestowed equally upon the mistress and the daughter.ut_in_the_potion that is inverse. thus making the latter participate in the position. that she tries rian • lar ittatiatialate-them intervenes giabacrathetrianglf could effectiielyheslDsed.• .Dora tries to restore access to a °sit' • • . foLwhallecannat__ realize as a virile presence. 159 .II 4110•11 ite direction„Dnean that it is n. Nevertheless. and he in effect makes Dora benefit in passing.

as participating in what is symbolized by the question side of the presence of Frau K. to the Sistine Madonna. Not even when he approaches her in a manner that is intolerable for a hysteric. it has a particularly lively sense. Dora considers Herr K. is the object of adoration for all who surround her. and it is as a participant in this adoration that Dora finally situates herself with regard to her. namely..rder_is_estblished thus -160 . Herr K. p. kis at the moment when he say_s_tsLher Ich habe nichts an meiner Frgy. expressed by a very clear symbolic assaciationof Frau K. in trying_to_reintegrate the masculine element in the-c-ireuit. if we give the term nothing_ its full weight. isthe_rneans_b_y_which she normalizes this position. whose Q.[Diagram. 142] Herr K. When doesshe_strike_him? Not when he courts her nor when he says that he loves her. The German formula is particularly expressive. Dora Father DORA (2) In the interest of her question. Frau K.. Frau K. What he saysin_sum_withdrawalan from_the-circ_uiti as constituted. adoration.

If__Herr ICIs_interested_only in her.. what is beyond. the question Herr K. to be tolerable in his position.. Dora must be loved by him beyond his wife. but for Herr K./ We find the an in a thousand German expressions._Dora. for example in the expression Es fehlt ihm an Geld. but in so far as his wife is something for him.i_n_this instance hat his wife is nothing for him. Frau K. p. wants to say that where_hiswife is concerned therei A 9 rireilit.- •• a What results? aoucannot tolerate his being_ interested in her in so far as he is interestecThe whole situation is broken off with that. That is.Herr K.. 143] Frau K. That is precisely what we discover here. in the beyond of what is lacking. It is an intimacy. Why? 161 . there is nothing. and from there on js_he_can_zio_langer-tolerateit. he sa concerned. . then her father is interested Frau IC. the sam_e_ttang_as that nothilig which has to be beyond.[Diagram. nam0y. he must occupy the function that isexactlydnystin balance. with whom Dora identifies Dora Father remains the other par excellence DORA (3) Dora can well admit that her father loves in her. and by her. This 5am_e_thing_is. an association.

. That is very_ much what happens at this naorne_nt.ved as object of the gift.y_father is sellin_g and simp_ly_to_the-istate of anIcainan. if she has not herself renounced something. which are no doubt subtle and ambiguous. she enters into a typical situation. In fact.prec_isely the_patemal halit. subjectively_speaking.-whichis_thei_ove_of her father.e_had . even if it is in a way that is unstable. or_belipve thatshe. which is the very principle of the institution of exchange and of the law. a perfect orientation. the exchange of ties of alliance consists exactly in this -. which permit Dora to find her place in the circuit. which she might receive from others. Herr K.. As Claude Levi- Strauss explains in Elementary Structures of Kinship.Dora4s. and she thence begins_to demancLher_rigb_ts.I have received a woman and I owe a daughter. There is a rupture vi the links. by itself makes of the woman a pure and simple object of exchange. The situation is disequilibrated. To_the extent that shejasi_ccluded from the first institution of the gift and of the law in the direct relation of the gift of loveshe can live this situation only by feeling reduced an object.liaohject beyond the woman bywhom_sheis_attachecLio _him. in so far as she is maintained in a half-light. but endowed with a direction.'s husband. Dor_athaolutely revolts. that is.she_canconceive_noth4g. been very disRosed until then_toconsiderih_at she receiyeL1 intermediar_y-o-f-anothe-r. and begins to sa w-. is thus revealed as not being part of a circuit in which Dora could either identify with herself. since it is total'y refused to her she demands it exclusivP ly. : 3 152 . It is in effect the clear and perfect statement of the situation.In the eyes of Freud.„From that moment on. it really is a way for the father to repay the complacency of Frau K. She is integrated into it by nothing. Dora sees herself fall to the r(1921aire anl arapleshject. to tolerate in a veiled fashion that the latter should carry on this courtship of Dora to which he has been given for years. This alone. that is fro-: another man. She demands what sb. . In other terms.

letely other. You find there what I have in the past called metonymy.at he does not have. by contrasts and allusions. which is precisely what one wants to make the other hear. do you not see that everything_hap_perjsas if the_girl_wished to show her father wh. What difference emerges from that? In order to go quickly.• . the crushing_ of the adult rival. If it is true that what is maintained in the unconscious of our homosexual girl is the father's_promin. the perversion in this case. is expressed between the lines. as Freud tells us the model of a love that is absolutel disinterested a love for nothiLgl . a counterpart. and in fact. A novel. What the girl demonstrates to her father here is how one can love someone not onl for what but literati .hasno_valuedatdoes not 163 . It is a way of speaking about something else entirely.• • in all its :enerality. by the rigorous progress of the terms at play. what one calls. this relation is fundamental in the whole entry of the child into the Oedipus — that is to say. this In other terms. which is made of a heap of small. it is inconceivable that you will arrive at any notion whatewf of what a perversion miht mean in• Metonymy is the principle of what one could call realism in the realm of Tabulation and of art. for this ny_jivilspenis that she well knowsshewilLnot find in the lady because s he knows very_welLsathereals. who is not._namely Withdieriather.Dora and our homosexual girl are thus implicated in two situations and two orders that are distinct. and to end on something that will make an impression. I shall say something that will be confirmed later. and if in her exalted love for the Jacly. -• •-•• • • . approximately.d_refused her? No doubt e there is in the unconscious of the subject the thought that the father is involved with the mother because he finds more advantages there. she_shoyys. If you do not get to know this fundamental not • m. which consists in making something understood while talking about somethinnp. You will have a child from me. while necessarily implying. sensible details of the real which mean nothiriz.

iLis_in so far as ) 201a_aalc$__Kerself whatitis_ta_be_a_woman thatshe expresses herself as she does.when a film is good. it is because it is metonymic. the real element which tends to be reintroduced into_every_metaphor._hat_they_keep_aLa_distance. in which she finds her place in the form of a question. Dora as subject is placed at ever_y_s_tep under a certain„number_of_signifiers in the chain. or wanted to force. And _iii functionof_the_subiesS5 perversion is a_metony. Herr K._Whato_u loveis precisely_ this.ysjgaifit. but that is to the extent that a perpetuallymoving. because Dora can say nothing of what she is. which is the way in w' Dora is implicated and interested. and she finds a historization for it.which sigaify_nothing other than this question.syrnb_olicalLyor_allegaricallybut _throi. nor what use love serves. ppiacealo not_knaw_what_place to take nor where she is. Literally. Vorhof ._b_y_saying to_Dora.. Thus. Of course. it is in so far as evelything_that their apply_ themselves to showing us has a meaning not_ at all.behavior which indicates a signifier which is further away_in the_signifying_chain. She simply knows that love exists. by her symptoms.and_can be_ unraveled. Bahnhof.piAlce_a_ineaning_beyond_therrLvibrate_harmonically. Is it the same thing Dora who is a neurotic? It is something completely_different.. 164 . This question is centered by the content and articulation of all her dreams -. is her metaphor.mic fielaajOLL. in_that it is linked toit12yanecessax. FreuciwantecLta_iatre into this metaphor. These_ symptoms are signifying eteme_nts. It is the same for the cinema -. Friedhof. signified_runs beneath them. but this somethire remained in a metaphorical state. She finds in the situation a sort_of_perpetuatmetaphor. the theme which arises from the nude shoulders of the women counts for something else. In short. It is to the extent chat it is metaphorical that Dora's neurosis takes on meRning. something tended to be normalized in the situation by the entry of Herr K. nor what use she serves. at the beginning of War and Peace. In the case of Dora. we will find that in perversion_we_have to do with a signifying.the jewel box.If we refer to the schema. If the great novelists are supportable.

We find there the equivalence of a sort of copulation which is translated into the order of the symbolic in a purely metaphorical fashion.suddenly. n iederkom m t. th loss of the c■l2ject.ed to her falls.av_-. in relation to the man with whom she can unite or not unite.e privation.The _proof is that sort of pregnancy which Dora produced after thesrisis of the rupture with Herr K.' ment she attempts t of a • efinitime- suicide. It is in fact a strange significative miscarriage.. It was in fact a matter of fifteen months. the birth that is also found at the end of the observation of the homosexual irl. but she hac1fcn1s1. As Freud underlines. has no loner even a r a gi 111. before she co vg_■r. Freud says._snc6v1 the imaginary relation with the lad _ay-to-maintain desire through •• longer bear anything.• efus. It is significant that Dora sees in it the last resonance of that link by which she remains tied to Herr K. which is beyond the normal term for a pregnancy. acknowledging in ettect mat tnere was something like a pregnancy. the e s r=1 h e r e is only a metaphopi to join in the law of symbolic exchanges. and which Freud perceived with that prodigious intuitive sense of meanings that he had. she throws herself from a little railway bridge. The mug& girl is thus deprived of her last resources. because llora says it herself. In contrast. which occurs at the term of nine months. Until then.• • II woman who is with her in saying to her that she no ledger wishes to see her. The • hallus whi h i • . And also is r of a sort of s mbolic giming-birth—Yagfingatieze-the rinstorriciside of which I was speaking.• . and this nothing_in which she was instituted in order to show her father how one can love. Once again. The_object is definitively lost. Thealf_a_here_has_the_staIue_of-a-d_gliaitist. If Freud can interpret the act of throwing herself from a railway bridge at a critical and terminal moment . That occurs at the moment when the real fatheines_canca-agai4+-to show his irritation and his vexation an interven the S . she rustibaribeenthat_ogglit to have been giverdaer„ the paternal phallus. A: 41.

Ley. and at the same time aegroying herself in a last sioificativeact of the object it is founded J. THE FETISH OBJECT 166 . a gatkaiaciparticularly_atrong love_for_the-father.e of the word niederkommt. onthe_extsleac. makingherself into this child that she has not had. namely. and which is the one and only sprig of her whole_p_eryersion. in which t young-hornosexual girl--expresses yshat is at stake. the term of suicide.of her relations with the lady and the father as a demonstrative way of . This word metonymically indicates the final term. in conformity with what Freucl_has_many_times affirmed concerning the patho enesis off a certain type offemale homosexuality_.

167 .

permits us to cast new light on a perversion which has taken an exemplary role in analytic theory. I shall today propose to you what can be deduced with regard to a problem that materializes the question of the object in a way that is particularly sharp — namely. which are particularly well expressed by those paradoxical affirmations -.what is loved in the object is what it lacks -. This fundamental schema which implies in symbolic exchanges whatever the ag_oLitsfimctioningthepermanence_af_the constitutive character of a beyond of the object. You will again see the fundamental schemas that I have tried to bring you recently. 168 .IX THE FUNCTION OF THE VEIL The symbolic phallus. and lets us establish differently what I might call its fundamental equations. The alternation of perverse identifications. How to realize the lack. The screen memory.one gives only what one does not have. Pursuing our reflections on the object. The structure of reactionary exhibitionism. the fetish and fetishism. an arrest at the image.

it leads to all sorts of impasses. and Freud has spoken of it too. for the fundamental suppositions that it implies when one reads it naïvely for the first time. which habitually sustains all sorts of speculations as to the future. This precision scarcely seems to have been exploited in its structural basis. For someone who does not use our keys. once again. Only. and as I have been able to ascertain by an ample reading of everything that has been written about fetishism. I underline this vacillating point where we must stop a moment in - order to perceive what is ordinarily avoided. 169 . the penis. it is simply an affair of misconstruction of the real matter of the phallus which the w_am.the paragraph on fetishism in the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality and the article entitled Fetishism. that is. and which she must have for reasons belon • in: to t ild's dubi s us relation to realit That is the common path.arte-Bees-rtet--hame.It is thus a question of fetishism. Cie development and the crises of fetishism. 1 The question of fetishism is broached by Freud in two fundamental texts which range between 1904 and 1927. these two are the most precious -. for a lot has been said about the fetish since people first began talking about analysis. and if others take up the question again later. tlaemdsin_question_is sa in so far as she does I . but that we shall no doubt be disappointed by what he will tell us. Freud says straightaway in this article that the fejish is thesyml)1 of something. This something is. To spell it out. Freud underlines that this is not just any penis. immediately afterwards.

Qn.. In effect. in one part of what I am going to present. for there is nothing as delicate. and it is in this that the man is caught.this is_the symholiclunction of_the. we recognize k n m .n. in order to reappear at another. a structural cycle of imaginary menaces is established That is the meaning of the castration complex. which means that having appeared at one point.wicual - r as it is there or is not there. The phallus is always mryrelation - 11 - 170 . it circulates leaving behind it the sign of its absence. and I shall ask you to follow me.. not only hours. the phallus in question. to be treated effectively. hidden by the more or less fearful fantasies in the man's relation to prohibitions which may concern the use of the phallus -.I am going to try. It is made to have this sort of funclamentaLalternation. In still other terms. In other words. p_hallus.a.aebg_real. In order to avoid the wandering into which authors have been led over the years if they avoided this point. here as always._5_ CI0 Bu tl Lephallus symbolically is to p_articipatejnithy_y_irtue_ofits. one might say. indeed as painstaking.its to be present. Thei_go_rnan does not have this2111141§. that the symbolic differentiation between th sexes is established. =gibing that can be transmitted in the symbolic exchange IS jbAl is as much absence as_greactice. the more or less decanted result of my reading.aAjs thus in som_e_way to have it. but indeed a detailed history.it is notat_albutitestion of a real phallusin_sofaras. and to give its just position to what is at stake. it exists or doesnoLexisi 'is_a_ . H ■ • uch as . it disappears. It is in as much asit. not to go too far into what is really the forest of the analytic literature. there is a subject here which.anothe-r-use. Rut_there_is_Alsa. the differential nerve is the following -. one side. qu • sti in an exchange as absence absence functioning as such. which is. would demand. ediatembolic objet. In fact. at the point whence it came. as situating the precise point where a subject matter eludes us because the author is avoiding a crucial point in a discrimination. Thus I shall give you.is_there_ards_not_there.

_in as much as she is caught in the intersubjective relation. by which they introduce a natural fecundi v into the patrocent icsenealogysterile in itself. an interhuman I"• " 1 ' • relation assumed. his symbolic penis..plays an essential function in theirlgLsentry_1=.phallus. - 171 .that the girl ea -I • t Alex. disciplined. beyond her. symbolisgy._ h has it on the s mb . that she does not hays the phallus.ofequivalence_mr_i_th the phallus. indeed.1 inferiority that she may feel on the imaig=_Elkacjar_w_hat_she has of a reaLpacticipatio14-in-the_ph anus. That is what Freud means when he writes that it is by the intermediary of what he calls the idea of castration — and which is precisely this. marks the elementary structures of kinship. chosen precisely because it is symbolic and It is a fact.between man and woman. . marked. which I placeder day on theAchema_of Young homosexual git l.0y_e) We see here what justifies. It can on occasion become the object of an imAginary nostajgia for the woman. typified._ the symbolic exchange. that she enters into that ordered ansisymholized-telation which SI twe . in that she has only kvery little_ But this phallus which she may experience as insufficient Iscat the only one that_enters into function foraer„since. but that she does not haysiLsycally„thiis she is -. structurally speaking. that is also to sa in so far as she enters into the symbolic dialectic& having or not having th_____phallus. which exists here as absence III II SO'•"1111-111 . It is in as much as the girl does nothaxethis. It is in as much as they are tied to .They i t e r b . stricken with prohibitions. and in exchange for which they give the child which takes on an ersatz_funstion for them. there is for the man this Ao-say the symbolic phallus. hallus which she does not have phallus. in the schematization of Levi-Strauss. VVoraesi are exchange&between lines founded on thtlTiale line of descent. by the fundamental structure of the law of incest. while it is 0-11 by this route that_the_13. that of the phalluswhich_they_receiye. the androcentrism • which. a function of substitution. women are exchanged like objects between male lines. ordered.

e_ancl_their value. on the injaginary_plane_11. Here we come back to concrete psychological experience. never the girl. that there is no position that is more that of the captor. but_ an object_that_h_as suffered _a_symboli_c_y_ato_riza ti on in the_m_oat raclic_al way. which. 2 172 . as it is given to us.this_uniquesentral objectsharac.. that they there assurii_etheir plac. Everything in&ates. of the two sexes it would rather be in the one which is really_deprived of the phaltus_thatietishism_sho. What does the fundamental theme that the woman gives herself express if you look at it closely? -. that they are1-LLe_re_ installed. or indeed more devouring. that the woman herself. she receives much more than_she_ghtes. If everything were on the plane of deficient . But that is_not _a.terize. or even of imaginary inferiority.311_ object. itself most openly. that is to say. for the symbolic phallus. really. that she must give something in exchange for what she receives. Fetishism is extremely rare in women. Freud tells us._thatisseyersed into its contrary affirmation. p h a lu s _ w h i c h a b p r y Let us try first to see how this singular relation of the subject to an object which is not an object can be engendered. which represents the phallus as absent. it is in SO far as it mu b licall namel ..if not tbe_affirmatiatuCtkezift. Pius we have the fetish.cLby_the_fuLthatit is_preciseluiQt.1W they enter intothe_chain_of_symbolic_exchange. is paradoxical. it is the yagnan who receives. and analytic experience stresses this. it is always the boy who is the fetishist. the symbolic phallus How can one not see that this sort of initial reversal is necessary if we are to understand things which would_ otherwise be_pmadoidcal? For example.t all_the case. on this occasion. in the proper and individualized sense in which it is n ig o r e s p o n d i n c a r n a t e di na no b j e c t _ _ w h i c h w ec a nc o n s i d e r sc s y m h o l k w a y _ _ t o _ t h e _ . You find that expressed in a thousand ways once you have seen it. it is by the intermediary of_th. In the act of love.er_elation to the phallus/J.

In reality. but of a perversion. imithietishism.m1 d o u b t h u t as the property of being there symbolically. One can even say that .The fetish. On the veil. The curtain is. but it must. but surely pertains to the sentiment that he has of a certain fundamental illusion in all of the relations woven from his desire. let us pause for a moment at that point of interposition which has it that what is loved in the object of love is something which beyond.scanethingisnatbning. the idol of absence. this relation of interposition. The curtain takes on its value. atis__ al . but from the point of view of analysis. one must look at it quite closely in order to confirm it in structure. is a symbol. that is no doubt not without reason. analysis tells us.it_is-a_not_a_queurosis. many authors show some hesitation here. This. What can materialize for us. most clearly. absence is pairAggj This is nothing other than the function of the curtain. with the presence of the curtain. That is how things are classified nosologically speaking. is still what best allows us to give an image of the fundamental situation in love. precisely because of the electively symbolic character of the crucial fantasy. Having started from the top with structure. and go so far as to place fetishism on the boundary between the perversions and the neuroses. the curtain in front of something. whatever it may be. makes an idol of his sense of that nothing which is beyond the object of love. The veil.the veil. the curtain.Lasence is projected and supposed. Because it's a s_y_rifbol. But if. for reasons of clinical resemblance which no doubt have a certain value. In this regard. what is beyond as lack tends to be realized as image. 173 .and its consistency. 1. It is really there that man incarnates. If the veil of Maya is the metaphor most commonly used to express the relation of man to all that captivates him.• •• -•-•*• ■ • if it is not this.is_almost placed fr m the be in on the same facaingas_em:y other_aeumtic symptom. that is not self-evident. one could say. be this nothing. which is truly one of • the most fundamental images of the human relation to the world -. not only can it. its being.it.1_YvlanredsOthemiclia.

[Schema.] Subject Object Nothing Curtain SCHEMA OF THE VEIL 174 . at whatever moment we might consider it. 156. p.You must keep this fundamental schema in mind if you want to situate correctly the elements which come into play in the establishment of the fetishist relation.

and is ceaselessly manifested in the symptoms This ambiguity which proves to be lived. an illusion sustained and cherished as such. The ambigLIity of the relation to the fetish is constant. Freud.or the phallus in so far as it is lacking ja woman. das Zeichen des Triumphes. and can also as such be the support of love. is at the same time lived in a fragile equilibrium which is at every moment at the mercy of the curtain's fallingpr of its being raised This is the relation at stake in the relation of the fetishist to his object. as though he were speaking of a decor. But he also says very clearly that it is a matter king this com relation stand d upright aufrecht zu halten. at once so imagistic and so precise. and the object.s_in_ this creation of a substitute.In. But from_the moment that the curtain is in place. That theietish is there means precisely that she has not lost the phallus. The language of Freud. provides terms which have their full value here. The horror of castration. • sears • 11 • • ■ t what draws it. itself appears in so far a valorizpel as 11111SO The famous splitting' of the ego when the fetish is at issue is explained by saying that the castration of the woman is both affirmed and denied by it. certain wa • . the_sign_ofiLtriumiah. but ache same stroke one can make . but thisish Lso far as it is preciselynot the oink to which des. Often. - . that is. he say_s. to it Ptich is a Denkmal. it is there. will speak of what 1 English in the original.the object is beyana. on it can be painted something that says -.. 175 .Here are the subject. the object. but in fact.• • castrate her. and that beyon_d_whigh_is_nothing. . at the approach of the typical phenomenon of the fetish.Jia. set in behind ► ■ ► ■ . The object can then take the place of the lack. speaks of Verleugnung with regard to the fundamental position of denial in the relation to the fetish.ire is attachd. when we follow his text. The wordln2/2* does not enter in here. or whichisyet the smly:xA. authors.

and also of allusion.2 Freud makes us take one step further here.the subject uses to herald his relation with the sex." Le sexe also designates the sexual organ of either men or women. like t he English. and absence-presence. rjL. a pandemonium of all the drives. The structure is here. established as imaginary capture and place of desire. one enters immediately into a chaos. Before going further and tackling the exigency which causes the subject to need a veil.a_thehisigtyalxhichtheimageiso_rresied. ha s a ra n g e o f si g n i fi c a t i o n s. one presses ahead too quickly. In other words. which crowd in to explain why the subject may be more or less distant from the object. I spoke to you last time. in dealing with perverse structure. In the clearest way. In an absolute sense. Why does that occur? Why is it necessary? We will come to that.yt the f h s mbolic . a relation to a beyond which is fundamental in every establishment of the symbolic relation. Le sexe. isigefisilLyiaarrasyssLfrom the histnrical dimension. of metonymy. in the function of the veil. and of the relation between the lines. it is a • uestion of th intermediary_position of the obje._ I remember having in the past used the comparison of a film that is suddenly frozen. we are going to see another way in which there is an institution of a symbolic relation in the imaginary. T he Fr ench wo rd. If one first goes to the why.41 I 4 •I What sDnstitutes a■ the veil. just before the moment when what is sought in the mother._ The rememoration of thellistoryis_giTgecl suspended at the moment just before. Let us stay for the moment with the structure.mel the phallus which be seen as presence-absence. in the relation of the beyond and the veil. 2 176 . in conflict with it. short of using the word tr. "the sex. women are called. that is to say. which are higher forms of metonymy. and feel arrested or menaced by it. It is the mamerii. On the veil can be imaged. It is a matter here of a descent onto the imaginary plane of the ternary rhythm subject-object-beyond. Freud does not say anything other. As always. simply.

the Deckerinnerung._d_esite which is attached to I SI • metaphoric b ail • • I I IP It is a point in the chain of_the_hissory_gt which the history is arrested. - constitute this beyond? Why is the veil more precious to a man than the reality? Why does the order of this illusory relation become an essential tuent • II raisec afetislisna.is_a_bre k. wesee_thetelation to the object of love.. Once again. as Freud as se e J0111 $ 6 We are s ■ eakin of re • ressi • n 1• •I • Ifonec •s • s I•plienomeran-3Achicla.. and in which it simultaneously indicates the continuation of its movement beyond the veil. The_scren-memory is linked to the histarV by a whole chainJt.10. 177 . CQ • • • $ 4 eject' Thatis. Ln ol •- Is a 111 .. the chain indicates its continuation henceforth veilecLits. you will see that this way of articulating things gives full weight to the expressions that he uses in the clearest way. and a_ Rol image.c.. Why? Why must the subject . It ig 11. and the relation of frustration istinguisheit.is_ interrupted.Thes_e are two different relations._ . ' hain and it is t h he . it is that this imageiasmly_the_holindary pointhebyggn the history in so far as it continues. breaking there. In . and the_mament at whichit. is not simply an instantaneous moment it is an interruption of the histcli_y „amomentitis arrested and fixed.Jay_its_nature_continues.ere that there begins the beyond which the subject constitutes.. '.ark.. for in a certain way the fetish is an image._11 is throu:h_a rnPtaphor--that-lo-ve_is_transfemed. ssreen-memory.bass for imaginary.1 • •0 1 1 If you read Freud's text attentively. absent continu I clearly says. It is th • :111 1 1.I am speaking of the_rememoration of the history because thertis_ao c2t1 termearomcangkLe1211m creen-mema which is so - fundamental in Freudian phenomenology and conceptualization.

178 .e.o. ein Glanz auf die Nase.. and much more. What are the causes for the establishment of the structure of fetishism? On that subject. and projected into a point on the veil. of course. The German expression only transposed the English expression which came from his earliest years. always looked for a little gleam on the nose. up to and including the fact that Freud gives as the first example of an analysis of a fetishist that marvelous story of a pun. a symbol. That does not mean anything other than a glance at the nose. is the _historical chain. which nose itself was. a sentence in a forgotten language. What you see coming into play here. A man who had passed his early childhood in England and who came to Germany to become a fetishist.le_senteac. you can already see all sorts of things becoming clearer. the grammarians certify nothing. which he had seen before.Before going further. which can even con'tainawh.

how the child's entry into the relation to the symbolic object comes about. On the other hand.which for her is imaginary. that it appears most certain__ that the phallic mother is the central element. We are on the way to seeing how and at what moment this comes into play for the child.eal child the s mbolic I_ mother. that is to say. This is a schema to be handled with caution. it is in prezPeclipaltelations. In order to stay with what we ourselves have brought to light. particularly in their most aggressive moment. questions of order and of succession. Melanie Klein. For a long time. we shall leave aside for the moment what one or another author can bring in with regard to it. and nowhere else. whereas it in fact corresponds to sexeral planes. the child is not able to appropriate the relation of imaginary ownership which creates a profound division in the mother with regard to him. in fact. the decisive spring. How to join the two things? Authors do it with more or less ease.3 Authors have been highly embarrassed for some time. by introducing the presence of the paternal penis through a retroactive projection. in so far as the phallus is its major currency. chronological questions. The latter structures the first stages of the oral drives. We shall try this year to elucidate that question. One thus has an easy access to material which allows the interpretation of what is at stake. thanks to the system of Mrs. in effect. There are temporal. t of hi I with the-fund-am • . let us start off at . and her own phallus. that the members of the English school are able to have here. and it comes i i • function at successive stages in the history. we cannot lose contact with the notion that the genesis of fetishism is essentially articulated with the castration complex. by reactivating the Oedipus complex in the earliest relations with objects in so far as they are introjectable. Melanie Klein's system. which we shall try to 179 . As I have not yet launched into an exhaustive critique of the meaning of Mrs. Simply observe the ease -moderate. On one hand. for it is concentrated on one same plane.

This was alsoglimpse_cLbyFieud. weakens. Dugmore Hunter. is summarizesdefense. many of the experiences which analysis brings to light show an observation of the 180 . a relation of illusion. one sees very clearly elements that I have already spelled out today. the recourse to the fetish founders. the observations of Sylvia Payne. for whatever reason. which one perceives when one analyzes. we find ternation of iderfiti icationsinAbgAmorous relations with ..eniapihejmagingr_ phallus of r the primordxperiences-of-the_oral. XX 2. of Mrs. Gillespie notes that the line between the two is extraordinarily fine. I say gravitates because it is well understood that the subject retains a certain freedom of movement. with the particularly satisfying function of an inert object. and Mr. XXXV 3.and. What do the observations show us when we examine them closely? They show us phenomena that appear in correlation with that singular symptom which places the subject in an elective relation with a fetish. and that Binet had already noted. The amorous comportment.T. and as such preferred. of Mr. the_eroticrelation_oLthesubject. and is articulated in our schema. but analysis is necessary to get a bit closer to what happens each time that. rather than simply making a clinical description. as the history of psychoanalysis teaches us to do. All of that can be seen in an observation. or at her corset.a n a 1 stag e _c_enteredsn_the_ 4ggressiAty_of_the_sactistiG-theor-y-Gf-c-oItus -. around which his erotic life gravitates.ohject which organiz entification - c dasirlistie. is exhausted. fully at the mercy of the subject to manipulate in his erotic relations. the fascinating object inscribed on the veil. Freud tells us that fetishism is a defense against homosexuality. in the International Journal. In short. for example that striking point of the screen-memory which fixes the arrest at the hem of the mother's dress. or simply fails. or studies that have appeared in the Psycho Analytic Study of the Child.approach from the point of view of pathology.the cl " I 4. Greenacre. Gillespie. of Mr. or again the essentially ambiguous relation that the subject has with the fetish. lived as such. and more simply.. in fact. You can check that by reading. In taking an observation.

indeed. ofa funciamentaLincompleteness„which delivers him u • to the ima • inar r 1 • • s 1 m . Authors very frequently note the sometimes repeated absence of the father in the subject's history. that of a forced immobilization. that is to say. which makes of him a pure object for the woman. destroy. One can say that... 1 181 . with the ima: nar • hallus. for war.e. he introduces the symbolic distance necessary for the_subjEct_to Rerceixua—the-4rigaraicig. aggressive. The observations are extremely rich and fruitful when they show. The child is delivered up to the bipolar oscillation of the relation between two irreconcilable objects which in any case ends in an _ that indeed murderous. as one says. Even. sometimes singulatly_repraciured in fantasies. the deficiency. which is precisely the modern way..he leaves on a voyage. lLths introduction of the father aSallaj. the limit. and try to attain some order. and which on this point is not without similarity to my own path. in a certain fashion. Following an extravagant medical . which she can devour. etc.lytheimaginamp_tallus. take on their first shape. and at Inversely identification of the subject This oscillation between the two poles oftheprimitive imaginary relation confronts the child in a manner that one can call brutal.. This is sometimes manifested in a binding of the subject that has actually taken place. in an insufficient symbolization of the ternary relation. possession.e.'primitive scene perceived as cruel. the thousand forms that there can be.the New twol_nan. violent. of which there is a very fine example in the observation by Sylvia Payne. in any case. it is here that the analyst intervenes in order to make the subject perceive. That is what one finds at the base of amorous relations each time they arise in the life of the subject.• • il arti■ of identification ith..Ct. for example. murderous. In one way of understanding analysis.S. or with the plact_taken.. of the father as a presence -..more_nates 142arhozlartype of subjective posing. in the actuality of the subject's early life...atPr oLarcier_anslaegilimate . the aiternation of these positions as well as their signification. before the __ establishment of the relation in its Oedipal legaliVALratig.

or again. Payne speaks should be attached to a raincoat would appear to be of the same nature as if he were attached to shoes.in_the_pasitiseil between_the_sulliect t h e o b j e c t . His relation to his parents was assumed by him with the sort of rage and choler that you can imagine. Much more instructive than such an example of the vitiation of the primary relation. with no attempt at muscular reaction coming from him. a child had been prevented from walking up until the age of two years. is certainly not for naught in the prevalence given to the visual relation in the constitution of the primitive relation with the maternal object. with other sorts of more or less enveloping fetish garments.One must also. These objects are themselves. Whatever the case concerning the structure itself of the relations which are confided in certain centers where the observation is taken analytically. cannot but conceal some last mystery. which has its special capacities for isolation. certain authors have insisted on the fact that the phobia of some mothers who keep the child at a distance from their contact a little as if it were a source of infection. Fetishism is in effect a class that nosologically includes all sorts of phenomena whose affinity or kinship with fetishism is indicated to us in some way by our intuition. is the_pa jolmical relation that appears as the inverse. Structurally speaking.prescription. encountered very frequently.. more easily than other things. I t i s ot the same with t h e _ t . which no doubt could be clarified psychologically by the sensory quality which the touch of rubber has in itself. or the complement. That was not without some consequence. Perhaps there is something here that can. however. be taken as a double for the skin. That a subject like the one of whom Mrs. the raincoat itself accommodates relations and indicates a position that is a bit different from those entailed by a shoe or a corset. dirssgy. allow a •lace to the s ■ ecial • uali of ru? This feature. We are not mistaken in thinking that. with secure bands confining him to his bed. The fact that he lived so closely observed in the bedroom of his parents put him in the exemplary position of being completely given up to a purely visual relation. If cases :hisexemplary are rare. of the libidinal tie to the fetish. one sees that the raincoat plays a role 182 .

where th ititrInitraton of the fattier as a real dement makes the terms ch • o.and the symbolic father.Hesituateshimselfnotinfrontsttb.1biect-tries-te-getettt-G That is always observed when mething_real that has been brought into play_places him in an unstable equilibrium. comes to be taken in a ina relation while the j_jb'ect takes a homosexual position which is ripmnnstrative with regard to the father.. Another typical relation. identified with the feminine serge envelopes himself. sometimes especially exemplary. in which a crystallization is_producecLor a_r_e_versal_a_his_positiori. is that of the explosions of exhibitionism in certain truly reactionary cases.Itisrathersomethingbehind thesubjectcentershimself. with a forcing of the real. b t is a • rotectio t is a u • I • . in so far as he has tried to accede to a full relation under conditions of artificial realization. The envelopment does not belong to the order of the veil.e_y_eiLhu_t_ behinclate rnothebadhering to a position of identification in which the latter needs to be praWecttreay envelopment. On occ ation with feti - Atte--51. Thisis_w_hat_gixes_us the transition between cases of fetishism and cases of transvestism.w h t i whichisnotexactlythatoftheveil. and indeed. express what was symbolically latent 183 . We also have some very fine cases in which one sees the subject. That is yery manifestly illustrated by the schema of the Freudian_case_ of female homosexuality. • which the subject !).•_e • laces so that what wa - ■ in the • .

learned that he was to become a father. for example. It is a question. Schmideberg. so that no one can catch him with his hand in the sack. Melitta Schmideberg presents.xlmbltionista observations which are very — on several occasions in observations of fetishism. who was doing his best faced with the horrible situation. Mrs. but in the hour that-follows. We have an example of this with the subject who for the first time attempts a real relation with a woman. Mrs. which by arousing jealous outrage. One fine day this man. Schmideberg avoids the major point of 3 English in the original. His exhibitionism is only the-expriission. 184 . which consists of showing his sex as an international train is passing. finds all sorts of analogies with the fact that the father of the boy had already been ever so slightly a victim for his wife. - underpinnings he had not himself full I I I I. a veritable household a la Dubout. of delinquent a cts which are equivalents of fetishism.3 that is to say on the imaginary_ plane. in which he played the role of the ubuesque victim. He succeeds more or less well thanks to the help of the woman. who seems a bit too Anna-Freudian here. one senses clearly. put his spouse a little bit at his mercy. He rushed into a public garden and began showing his organ to a group of young girls. ortlprojection on_to the imaginary plane of something_wilosesynabolig. The subject has here been forced to • IV +I1• I. when all has been said. he givea_himself up to a_most singular and very highly calculated exhibitionism. and when nothing up to the present had let one foresee the possibility in him of such symptoms. That explains nothing. and that he had succeeded in disengaging himself from the situation by getting caught one day with a maid. that was implicit in his position. a man who had married a woman almost two times taller than he. but who engages in this position of experience by going in there to show_what he can do. 1 1 • he has just committed was. the butt and scapegoat.in the situation by anacting out. only that of trying to - show to show that he was capable of having a normal relation like anyone elserr] We find this sort of reactionarye.

ipitatimDf36thatilatthelasi s_otthesymbolic relation. what_then remained to him of the use of his phall x. for Jit_is_nota matter of perversion at all.4 There is no need to marvel at it. 185 .narnely. that is. that she has done a short analysis. She leaves aside the fact that it is by an act of exhibitionism that the subject became manifest on this occasion. and she has not at all done an analysis.the thing. 30 January 1957 4 English in the original. She believes that she has analyzed a perversion. tenCls_to_s_ause_tlie. There is no other way to explain this act than by referring to that me1clartismof release by which what comes as a jurp. the - e B t• •" a wa a 1 to assume this atei_p21:Linable eV • n to believe in it this ood man went to the ri:i lace to show the equivalent of the rhild.us in the reaLaynatolicallyinmilable.

On the other hand. Girl = Phallus. I took a step towards the elucidation of fetishism. Showing # exposing to view. Desire interests us to the highest degree for a double reason. It is not a constructed desire. The object and the ideal in Freud. The last time. Frustration of love and satisfaction of need. which is a particularly fundamental example of the dynamics of desire. just as we have to deal with an object in all of its paradoxes. but a desire with all its paradoxes. On one hand.X IDENTIFICATION WITH THE PHALLUS Transvestism and the use of clothing. it is clear that Freudian 186 . we have to deal with desire in our practice.

where what is aimed in one direction equals what is aimed in precisely the contrary direction -. there were added a lack and a beyond. analysts habitually call.v.thinking began with these paradoxes. from time to time. ambivalence. where desire is concerned. I showed you the apparition of a position that was in some sense complementary. in order to get out of the embarrassment. Here there appears what will become h fi uration of . with their perpetual ambivalence and confusion. some echoes of the way that you receive the bit of novelty that I bring each time.ject. it tiegan with. the curtain. sub'ecttl.erse It_is_ wattle veil that the fetish comes to figure_g_reciselv what is lacking_ 12syNdAbigct. In particular.perverse desire.. where the yes is equivalent to a no.. who were already quite satisfied with the theory of love as I had presented it. when we have to deal with the most naively intuitive theories to which psychoanalysis has recourse today. the place where imaginary projection occurs. with all that. 1 At the very end of what I said the last time about fetishism. That had already furnished some with the occasion for a meditation which seemed sufficiently enlightening. 187 . nameltl eyea. at least I hope. I brought in an additional complication the last time with a term situated in front of _the_0143'ect. in which love isaundecae_. But this little step that I took surprised some.in short. which can be the support offered to something which tikesprecisely AlLssalgLAsjidser.__ _iecd:. This schematization is intended to install the successive planes which should allow you to find your bearings a bit better in certain cases. I have. It would really be a pity to forget this in our attempt at unification or reduction. - th le lack the fetish. unfortunately. though they had some trouble in perceiving that to the subject-object relation.

..-there. There t SO 01" 11 hat it is the correlative of the activity pf seeing. If the immediate.1. of course.. I. Clothing is not only made to hide what one has. we did not need to wait for Freud in order to broach the psychology of clothing.in_so_faranwemer veils the_lack. 01 •every_use_dcluthing.-is_so I I ' I of_transmestism._ Transvestism takes us very far into the question. which is expressed in la guage by the presence of the. transvestisme. •u•le bas -d on ••• There is in scoptophilia a supplementary . the object.tbat_foxm of the verb which exists in other 188 .ftueeial in evLtance 1. the question must be complicated be it ever so little in the eyes of the analyst. in the case of the imaginary dialectic. is the function of transvestism. current. Both functions are_ essential. in the seriap_l_ada precisely what one does not have..transvestite identifies with the phallicmather. in as much as showing_himself is the correlative pole for the activity o f s e e i n g _ .oLthephallus. veil with that abject in which something is lacking. - one always implies as following of itself that the act of showing oneself iS absolutely voyeurism. opposite pole of fetishism.. namely thig_presence and the Inversely. I t i s n o t a q u e a t i c t a _ s i m p l y o f t h e s u b j . P.reflexime..The latter also appears in the phases of the structure of fetishism. _dimension of involvement. essentially and alway_s„afik&ng. but also othiclinggg. indeed in the fetishist's attempts to rejoin that object from which he is separated by something whose function and mechanism. Authors have seen it clearly and said it in their language -. common understanding of the function of clothing is to hide the pudenda.11am I h ws himself. he himself does not understand.. in tx. This GI ■I ca the s mmetrica].cticlentifies_hith whatilkeh d the .Ii_gr_nassive use that is madepithssioptapj_c_r_elahaniili . Moreover. In. It is a simple application. coLlleakjact. It would be sufficient if someone among the authors who speak of the phallic mother were willing to see the meaning of what he is saying. corresponding.the. It is not a matter._of_ 01 •- • " It is not. of what is too often forgotten.

which is not without relation. who are very bad theoreticians under their apparent clarity.Lexhibitionist relation. z Authors like Fenichel._vsalurrie-X-VIII. one can say that. have perceived it very well. Thus. Around scoptophilia or transvestism. One is thus wrong to tie all of that into what is massively called the scoptophilic relation. which has to do with what he calls the equation Girl = Phallus. for example. while informing myself about a whole vast and insipid literature in order to take account of the point to which analysts have penetrated in a real articulation of these facts. Although one sees a flagrant lack of orientation manifested here which makes us continually wish for a logic that were exempt from it. That in sum is the phylum of the proposal -everything is tied to the fact that the_childis_given to the mother as a substitute. by a sort of flair that the analyst fortunately takes from his experience. but who are not for all that without analytic experience. are grouped slender stems of fact which are distinguished from one another in phenomenology. in a whole range of activities confounded under the heading of the voyeuris..langua es and which is called the in'• dl• voice. but in which the author more or less obscurely senses a kinship. or even equivalentalLus. with the well-known series of equations feces=child=penis. that the child can be taken as the equivalent of the phallus in the unconscious of the subject. n° 3 1949. 189 . starting with a branch of fundamental imaginary relations. By combining both of these dimensions. particularly the feminine subject. as he himself notes. If the effort at theorization in some of his articles ends in a desperate check. are grouped around a chosen theme of the analytic articulation. Here that would be to give oneself to be seen iozxoose oneself to view. you sometimes find some very pretty clinical pearls there. it emerges from the facts encountered in analysis and brought together by the author. I was interested recently by an article of hich appeared in the Psychaandytic—sakarteriy. hat the_subjec_t gives to be seen in showing himself is somethingotheriJaart what he shows. and even the presentiment of a whole order of facts which. an association.

Some are willing to speak of a Mignon type. under more or less illustrious headings. which does not leave one very surprised. which is distinct . we cannot but see that the grouping of these facts under the equivalence thus instituted goes well beyond a simple theoretical exegesis. which we can group according to the authors. or desires.olutely not in the same relation to the object when he brings. When I spoke of the child.ailing_ attachment for one typeofsubje_cLgiyes evidence ofa function that one could call mythic. In the four orders of relations that I have just sketched.taken in one a. and live the sexual relatign irt_kmay that requires that she herself bring_theThallus to her masculine partner. himselfbearingdhe phallus as what he lacks.. when she embraces her partner. finally. who_is_named Harfner. same equation.Many and various facts are gathered into the same parenthesis. imaginarily speaking. that in certain cases. Might he_the_object_of.ncl_the_. the subject isahs.v. He serves in : 190 . It starts with traits that are well known in the fetishist_or quasi-fetishist specifics of certain perversions.a_pre.5 . towards which the whole seems to point 1314_._whos_e_bisexual pgaitignis underlined by the author himself. Once our attention has been drawn to these headings. whereas this article is especially concerned with the girl. and_who.to strike us and to hold our interest. curling up into a ball in a certain part of the latter's body. glelaohemian Mignon. That is sometimes seen even in the details of her preferred position in the act of love.liveswith a sortof enormous brutal.1. these are facts belonging to extre different orders. tlieJnasculine subject can also give himself to the woman as being what he lacks. it was not particularly about the feminine child. It must be added. or gives. This sort of fact cannot fail.both from perverse illusions and from a w 1:toksetary_constmctions. That-the little gir.. and manifestly super paternal pxotector.can conceive herself 4.. The analytic givens also indicate that the girl. or even substitLites himself for it.Ahe child -. j The facts brought into relietand_gathered here are. which indicate that the girl can be considered as the equivalent of the phallus of the subject.an equivalent of thep_hak is can manifest this in her behavior. You all know Goethe's_ creation. indeed in a general way.

anciQathe other side. 191 . the last resort of omnipotence is referred beyond. the structure of omnipotence is not. Goethe says somewhere of this couple -. That is what makes the interest of what todays LecalltheMigype. in the object. But behind this omnipotence. contrary to what one_rnight believe. namely_to where. As have already said. that !without which it is deprived of efficiCirlthat_yvhich is lacking in power itself. that trr is. in the subject. littleness. but she is at the same time of great necessity for him. We find coupled there power incarnate in its massive brutal stale.\1 is the Other who is all-powerful.. which is reproduced in . This is what. witho4t_whom he _cdn_cia_tiothiug.to_say in thelolmitive Other. literature in a very great number of examples.sum as a superior servant. this lack which makes her_powerless. something does not exist.. of whom she has the greatest need.maximum. That is the final point in_which we find the famous magic that analytic them always attributes in such a confused way to the idea of omnipotence. It is there that the subject stresses the secret and the true spring of omnipotence. in the object from ' which he expects omnipotence. From the moment that the subject perceives. and which is in the end the secret of its true powers This something is nothing other than a lack. fragility. and Mignon. there is the ultimate lack_ on whicliher._to the i'. but in the_mother.. is nothing but_asymbolism of lack. power depends.Harfner.

then a ravishing young girl. unless it is for the reader. 192 . Another novel. rerseasing until the end to intermingle in a perfe_ctambiguity.it is about a giLlwhoisa boy.Three years ago. and who plays a role functionally. which does not fail to give an accent to everything around it. in a cavern where the author delivers himself up to an invocation of the devil. who. This beloved personage. becomes a ravishing young man._a_s it_is fitting< the„subjectreturns to the castle of his mother. Biondetta. clearly transvestite.it is that this_sarne being is supposed to transform himself. once the pact is concluded. of dangerous irreality.What do you want? Che vuoi? This fundamental interrogation gives us the most striking . accomplishes the magkaJ satisfaction of all that he can wish.analogous to what I have just 1 The Devil in Love. . does not fail to appear.rnost profound divination of the imaginary dynamic that I am tryi_ng to develop_ before you especially today. Fragoletta. nothing is finally brought into the light. The whole meanwhile bathes in an atmosphere of fantasy. The situation is resolved at the end by a sudden rupture of this always more accelerated and mad course. I remembered it as a major illustration of what is at issue. The story begins in Naples. up until the end. He shows himself in the form of a formidable camel's head furnished with especially large ears. of permanent menace. presents a curious character. I was on the point of announcing a lecture on Le Diable amoureuxt by Cazotte. for a while becomes for the narrator the surprising source of every felicity. by Latouche. who has a significant name. the two nt2. about whom. There are few testaments so exemplify oft he. after the appropriate formalities. But the interest does not lie there -. and by the catastrophic dissipation of the mirage at the moment when. of this magic being beyonciathe_obj_ectto which a whole series of idealizing fantasies can be attached. and he says to the author in the most cavernous voice there could be -. into a little dog_ that by a transition which surprises no one.illustration of the function_of the superego. one which accerivates the meaning.

refinements there. then disappearing again. from which. two terms that he specifiesay identification and the choice of the object. WI. There are already hints of it in The Interpretation of Dreams. namely. the word_ fetish is born. which shows very well the equivalence between a certain feminine ob'ect of . And now we are finally led to ask thetcuestimatyliatisobjAcent. There are details.. These care)exemplary_in_e. 2 • *AY..the positions to distinguish when we analyze desire. both going back to factiso in Portuguese.1:: " 1 described as the Mignon type. beyonglAlle rmather.tion. factitious.in perverse baths of desire.. the notion of identification.its Qrsielign We have there-one more function which clarifies the relation_of falling in love as it can be established. emerging at every moment.subs_titgeifor one 193 .tb.ng_us _on. in some way. as happens very often in Freud.1110 phallus that she lacks. and that is the value of his work. historically. rival.nlighteni. indeed. The whole ends in a dual in the course of which the hero of the novel kills Fragoletta who appears to him as a boy without his recognizing her. and which is none other than the word Lictice. This ambiguous feminine being_incarnates. : lyst_terms_appinber of cases to_actas. that I leave to you. The t . which includes a chapter. the author's greatest perplexity. This is the same other whoisAtissue whenHarrapt1411$Lele brother of_Oph. What we have seen at work here is a fetishized or fee character — it is the same word. Freud avows his difficulty. ■nbelea The notion of identificationlis present in Freud's work from the beginning -.latent.incarnates it all the better in nolpossessin it herselLbeing_ rather engaged l representa. This chapter has the specific of showing us. his powerlessness to exit from the dilemma posed by the pprpetual_ambiguity_that appears_between. Its major explanation is attained in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. perpsltally brought_into_ause by this very critique.eliA. expressly consecrated to identification.

and take up point by point the way that he himself articulates the question..another. always faithful to a Wirklichkeit. •■•rw 7 . as Freud says. that the two poles active and passive are present in every kind of identification. When one asks more. whatever it may be. however. it is impossible not to see. without asking any more about it. so that we really must come back to Freud..At the same time as this identification with the father. with the most disconcertia&power of metamorphosis. perhaps also a little bit earlier -which is translated as a little bit later --. and to use both one and the other in a strictly equivalent way. When one looks more closely. and he himself perceives. and here is an example of the bad French translations of Freud's texts. it is not the same to be on the side of the object or on the side of thssi. for. We read in the German text -. which follows the chapter on identification.That an object becomesthe object of choice is not the same thing as its becoming_ . in 1937 -.kject.Les Deux Especes de mechanismes d' identification —. begins with a sentence that immediately brings into the atmosphere something purely different from what we are in the habit of reading -.Linguistic usage remains. some effective reality. Chapter VIII of Group Psychology and theArialysisof the Ego. even in its caprices. for everything appears resolved for him by the distinction between active identification and passive identification. by speaking of the father as the example by which we enter most naturally into this phenomenon. which is really the most numbing thing that one can imagine. one produces an article like that of Gustav-Hans Gruber in Imago.CN This fact is formidably instructive in itself. a clear need to maintain the distinction between the two. We arrive at the second paragraph. whether it is a question of observation or of theorization. thaittle. I would like to point out in passing that Freud began to deal with identification in the preceding chapter. It is no less instructive to see the disconcerting facility with which everyone seems to accept. iles_uppsrtof the subject's identification. so that the transition itself cannot be graspedckJhere is.bay kgins 194 .

enfeoffment.whereas it is only necessary to read .eeds_to_be articulated in away that itself. in that it implies a choice of objeg._. j 195 . which is easy_ to describe. let us say that this object is a sort of other ego in the subiecIlis„ a question then of knowing how to articulate thsdifference between identification and Verliebtheit in its ..n. highest.1.. FlOrigkeit.Anowajinder. and that I have chosen as the most condensed and the most appropriate for showing you Freud's perplexities.libidinal desires towards his mother. with this translation. identification is a most primitive.the name. -. It is about the state of being_ in love anclitmelation with identification. If one follows Freud's text. We find another example in the passage that I want to reach this morning.katachoice„oLobjgCLIY.till.and one can wonder.fundamental function.1ich_s.. is assimilated to the latter -. if the identification with the father should not be preliminary.ofjergination. most .17122learstgase _jheegajsenriched__ Aythe_clitalities of the abject..juilesLmimifestations.avetry_proNematic for Freudian analysis linlssitprcgsvndly_laaamissism. In order to go as far as one can go in the ' direction that Freud articulates perfectly. We read in the French translation -.

which is -. This_Qbject_for whose benefit. the su bstituted object is found to be endowed with every quality by the ego. it is a matter neither of enrichment nor of impRerishment. in which one does not see that being effaced before it translates something so articulate. for even the state _ introjealon otif_lubject into the ego. effaced before it. In the second case it is impoperished.13'ec. and at its expense. Itis_a_question. From the economic s pointgf view . what the subject introjects and by which he is enriched. being in love can be conceived as an • The following distinction bears perhaps upon the most essential points -. after the model of the object that has disappeared.._beilig sivo. In fact. what Aakes-frorn-hinv-something.he is_irripoyerishedds. That is the approach that Freud takes to this problem. Bestandteil. 196 . he advances. nicht bestehen. the object is volatilized and disappears in order to reappear in the ego.himself. from the economic p__oLint iew.in order to say that this description makes oppositions appear that.his_most congituent element.to the benefits:4 tfloyed_L. That is not at all what Freud says.of-the-relation_ between introjection and identification..and impoyerishes him.what Ferenczi2 has said..object that he has put_injkie place_of. He pursues it by turning back -. Freud stops here at hglapppsition between. on one hand. 2 Th u s in the or igina l.In the case of identification.ticinmith regard to the oblect of his investment. Freud had earlier paused for a long time over what happens in the state_of heillginiove.the vezr same that he puts in the place of his most important constituent element. he retraces his steps -. and on the other hand._whererthe subject is dispossessed more and PlorP_Of all that is of. and noticing that all is not complete. entirely_ to the object.of. That is entirely erased in the French sentence.. as they translate it in French.for he does not neaten up his movements. which undergoes a partial transformation. which is introject. do not exist.)12Lect. He is filled with humility and falls into a complete si11.himsglf.. in reality. In the other case.

One cannot say that this is Freud's testamentary text. But this distinction in its turn raises a new reflection: is it really_sedais that identification supposes the abandon of the investment of the_dject? Cary _one_not_ also have _an identification with an object that is kept? And before entering into this particularly thorny discussion.or abandoned. 197 .. and which is namely that the object mapeput at the place_ of the Ich or of the Ich-Ideal. after having undergone a partial transformation along the lines of the object of the model that has disappeared? It would be better to refer to the German text Perhaps another distinction is the essential one. Why should the object become volatile and disappear in order to reappear in the ego.-_. affie_f2thzsgs.That is what the French text says.it-is-then-rezerWed anew_injhe ego. This is a text whose project leaves us highly embarrassed. it dssLacridisappear.-. as Freud explains it. The very place to be given to the object in these different moments of departure and return.. uberbesetzt._ rests upon the_fundamentaL -- molion.thAtjaLAEliebtheit --the object is preserved.Log this is a reference to_that fundamental notion e have fcluncLester_sin. in the case of ident t hqsbeen.. transigrrned partially according to the model olie lost _abject. from these movements forwards and backwards. erhalten geblieben.. The_ formation of the object.. It is thus not a question of an object which becomes volatile. because..ancLthe_ego_is.. precisely.arfflaiush itis overinvested.ce_the_b_egiaping. of the ego or of the ideal of the ego.aLthe_ohject-lost.patenth. even if it is one of those in which he reaches the height of his theoretical elaboration. and it is that alone that I wished to highlight. Nothing veLy_skar results. it seems.. that there is another alternative in which the essence of this state of things can be conceived. anditremains almosi entire in astAteatinmsLogatim„ At least the interrogation has the merit of being made. is marked by an ambiguilywhich Freud makes . we must also stop a moment at the consideration which we are presenting. or which disappears. on behalf of and at the expense of the ego.c. according to whether it is constituted as the object of identification or as the object of amorous capture..

elal2Q_LatiorisiLthe_relations between frustration and the constittAtion_of thectject. How to conceive this correlation. So the object is perpetually in a sort of movement that makes it pass from the outside to the inside. for example. impossible. perxerse.s_sijgcs.sfay . One speaks of the introjection of objects. which is very far from being a Freudian abuse. One commonly allows t oneself to slide into articulations given in the Kleinian epoch. in order then to be pushed from the inside back into the outside.ky example. 3 It is a matter first of conceiving. That leaves introjection and projection in a perfect symmetry.taphor. which are correlative t a turnin oin in the' • ' ' • • Nittjonof te object 1aiitti_which. the evocation of the oral drive atthis precise moment? Its conceptualization is les.to be__pre. It is against this abuse. in ti1i.. One speaks of introjection and incorporation without differenti ating_thern.s usage. to the famous constitution of primitive objects. In the cure of a fetishist.... One refers.ose or .Let us now try to take up the problem again by begiwing_witti_the bearings that we have gained fokri_our. seen it appear from the beginning of the piece by Freud that I have just read to you.. which we commonly_establish betinTen identification and introjestign. he fink. considered as simple givens present in that famous primitive world without limit where the subject is thought to make a whole of his own englobement in the maternal body.ccupiect.m. we observe manifest bulimic im • ulses. if we hold to the vague 198 . that what I shall try to articulate for you is constructed. I'am proposing the following — the underlying metaphor:In_ introjectionraline. when it becomes too intolerable in the interior. introiection is held to be a function strictly equivalent and symmetrical to that of projection. which are divided conveniently into good and bad. moreover.o. it is impossible to construct any order at all not only in our thinking but also in our practice and in the clinic.we happen. You have. in our practice and in our way of speaking.

hich. Do you not see that between the_two. bar is fact the are annulled in so far as themt_a& thing. trying to get some perspective concerning his fetish. he is there for that. he regresses. at the very moment when the subject is progressing in the analysis. in this instance the breast or th e oujide_ --.notion that is always at our disposal in these cases -.emation of the. From 199 . one says. When he has it in his mouth and is_satisfied on one hand. love. other than signs of love. On one side.CP. there e presents to the child in the form other_breast. The pseyaleraxalue.. and no one will come and contradict you. because. and as such are only that.. that each time-that thestlys_appsirs in analysis or elsewhere.t4kgrkby the object.drive is - .are s of love. that is to say. and thus an object as much absent as . The satisfaction of need is here_the. this is compensated by the satisfaction of a neeIt is in as much as the mother is theshilitwho calls her... Qn...it is a matter of balan g and compensation? Each time that there is frustration in love. rested.resent. Does not the primitive schema that I have given you of the symbolic structure of love giye_us_s_ornething that clarifies it? Let us start off from the support of the first love relation that of the mother who is the object of the call. that heiachea onto her breast.the other side. (_l_A.7 - addressed towards the real object which is part of the symbolic object. As real object it becomes a part of the symbolic object. and that this breast becomes more significant than anything else. willLregard to the unfoldingslAselationlhat is syrnholically_clefined.Lreal. argthe_ . It is here that there opens up every possible understanding of oral absorption and its so-called regressive mechanism. on the contrary. an excuse for it. You can always say it. that is to say. and satisfied. naturally.the subject is regressing.. Thus. and on the other hand it leaves him nourishel.and_the. I am saying.MeJawild almost say.. there are he gifts. the child{cannot lag_separate di from the mother.. it takes its signification as symbolic.comp. frustration of.. and it begins at thp_same_time_tabe. which can intervene in every love relation. it must be conceived.Djec on its function as part of — em the object_ pilove. as to its _e_coilorrtic :unction.

that is to say.i..fixstoamong ... incorporation gives its model. and which is beyond her and herpowet_of __ love. its mold. cFirst the penis can at a given moment situate itself as object in the lineage and at the place of that object which is the breast or the nipple.at what moment does _the_ subject discover that it is.ry function in as much as it is imaginarily that ij is incorporated. To the extent that oral regression to the primitive object of devoration enters as a compensation in the frustration of love. formation_ of _what.another Rathin the 200 .thezift whichis_notat all the same Again. to that sort of incorporation which is the incorporation of certain words arnong_others.rnagina. The other is the phallus that is lacking in the mother. It is about the phallus in so far as it is lacking that I have been asking this question since I began this year's seminar -. not that it is_ in itself.the gift. has been able to become an element of Ale symbolic object eyer3Lother_object capable_of_ satisfying a real need can come to take its place and. But there is anotiLer waytrrit'vhich - the penis enters into th(knagmTia economy.which isspeech. lacking? When and how does he make this discovery? -. • • Let us call one the penis. that (objectlyvhich is already symbolized.one_ superego.. choosing.them. What the subjectincorporates under the name of the superego is somethingarialogo*Lto the_object_oineed. It may enter not as an object that compensates for the frustration of love.starting with which he will find himself engaged incoming . certain symptoms and certaip. this reaction_of. which isitilLa. It is thus an oral form of . lack_of. functions.e.n. but in so far as it is beyond the object of love. incorporation of the penis which plays a role in the determination_of ..but also perfectlangenalized).the moment a which a_ real need t real object h a satisfies t . its Vorbild. and enter by two paths that are at_firstvery different in the\ imaginar?economy of the subject.. starting from that. whichis_at_ the origin of the early. and is lacking in the latter. but in so far as it is theisubstitute_ for th. the fact of possessing or not possessing a penis can lake adouble meaning. himself be a substitute for it.

not only fulfilling. It is with regard to this image which appears as total. It is in so far as the imaginary enters into play that. is articulated nowhere. the idea (forme] that the object of love is taken. - 201 . crystallized. that the relation to the image of the other occurs. captive. a nostalgia. which is as such the most characteristic form of primitive Freudian identification.emiQD of a possible lack. does not succeed in extinguishing -. which gives the subject the matrix around which wikbe organized for him what I would callhis_lived incompleteness It is precisely the fact that he is in default. by himself bringing it his own lack.namely. around which will be constructed. successive layers of what will constitute the egd. This distinction is capital.and_fro fing begins to be organized between the subject and the other. is not before the sixth month. beyond what he himself constitutes as an object for the mother. necessarily. something may be imaginarily lacking It is in the specular relation that the subject has the experience and the_appreh. as object. as in himself. and which. and allows us today to pose a first plan of what is more or less required for this moment to occur. otherwise called the specular relation. if not in the register of the narcissistic relation. and in so far as_a_tense.sz refinding of the object of love that vanishes. thatpiiithing beyond can exist. The latter is not conceivable. that something is introduced which makes there appear to the subject. but source of jubilation because of the specific relation that man has to his own image. that he realizes that something may be lacking in him. in something which he himself. held. It is in a second phase that Verliebtheit occurs. itsan appear thatin the mother. I remind you that it is at a date that can_be situated. on the foundation of the first two symbolic relations between the object and the child's mother. 02foundlyaggressive to ing. which is a lack : : ' It is only beyond_the narcissistic realization. We have symbolic structuration and a possible introjection. as he who speaks to you here has defined and articulated it. which is related to the very lack in the object of love.

I have had to put the accent on the ideal formation of the ego. as he point of iffiChiiiiht"Of her iirs ettiFfOinto . in so far as it is from this ideal.because experience imposes it upon us.All this. 202 . of the ego that the ego will detach itself.„ the difference that is there. I have led you today up to the presentation of a form that you must keep in mind so that we can take things up again at this point the next time.. What do you find at the end of this chapter? This diagram on which he places the egos of three different subjects. rests on the effect of transmission. which makes us suppose -. what this object_is that.. The specular experience of_the other 45 forming . comes to_put itself in the place of the ego or of the ideaLof-the ego.cm ever_manage to fulfill the lack in the mother. I have not sufficiently articulated . In what I have up until now explained about narcissism. the imaginary. japroposing himself as the object which can fulfill it. It is only after the_seconclphase ofimaginaryspecular identification_with the image of the body. and ego are differentiated. I mean the formation of the ego in so far as it is an ideal formation.. It is a matter of knowing. and look at the diagrams which pass from hand to hand without anyone's ever thinking for a single instant of reproducing them.the. But simply open Freud with his fruitful obscurities. at the point we have reached. as Freud says very well at the end of his article. the lasKof.in Verliebtheit.that no satisfaction byany_real object whatsoever that comes in as a_substitute. in whom the functions called superego.. Besides the relation to the child. The subject thus bears beyond the object of love this lack for which he can be led to substitute himself. ideal of the ego. phallus remains in her. totality conditictn„Jt is in relation to this image that the subject realizes thatinhirnself_too something can be lacking.. What does this form correspond to? What you see being traced here is a new dimension and a new property of what is presented in the completed subject. and because Freud remained completely attached to it up until the last moment of his formulations -. which is at the originalhis_ego and_which will provide its matrix„that the subject can realize what is lacking in the_ mother..

] Ideal of the ego Ego Object External object FREUD'S GRAPHISCHE DARSTELLUNG x It is a question of knowing why subjects commune in the same ideal. the fetish. in its first forms. with the relation of the ideal of the ego. 6 February 1956 203 . Do you not find a striking resemblance there with what I have been explaining to you? With regard to the Ich-Ideal.[Diagram._and in sum. Simply. and the object. what is at issue is not simply an object. and which comes to be reflected. on the first veil. if one looks at the schema. which is behind them all. which no doubt feels something and can be impoverished by it. and which is projected there in the form of the ideal of the ego._purely and simply in the ego. one sees that he has taken care to link these three objects with an external object._ not . in so far as it •• is the object that is lacking. in its first exigencies. 177. p.. Freud explains that there is an identification of the ideal of the ego with objects which are thought to be the same. but in something which is in the very subbasements of the ego. as Freud says. but something that is beyond the object. the phallus. which is to say. I shall begin again next time at the point where I am leaving you.

The substitution of satisfactions. but everything that we have done earlier has prepared for it. and Freudian doctrine.•• XI THE PHALLUS AND THE UNSATIATED MOTHER The gift replies to the call. What I shall try to articulate today will perhaps be a little more algebraic than usual. The mirror. 204 . which in my eyes constitutes nothing less than the sole correct conceptual formulation of the practice that this very doctrine founded. let us accentuate what has been revealed in some of the terms that we have been led to articulate up until now. . Without such a recasting. from jubilation to depression. The erotization of need. what one calls its current tendencies. The role of the imaginary phallus as signifier. Before beginning. I intend to take up again today the terms in which I am trying to formulate the necessary recasting of the notion of frustration. it is possible that the split will not cease to grow greater between the dominant theories in psychoanalysis today.

and indestructible. • This property is strictly speaking inexplicable from the sole perspective of need. Usually. one uses the word without looking any further -. with which Freudian doctrine began. through a good number of examples. namely. as I am trying to demonstrate. we believe that they leave traces. to which certain authors refer it. if things are to be so simple. you will see these impasses always more patent..which_Freud_accentuates_so stronglyfrom the beginning. and whose enigma _the_whole development-of his work is precisely designed to question. but if there is one thing that is evident and confirmed by experience. To the extent that you make a practice of reading psychoanalytic literature with an open eye. All the experience that one has of what happens in an animal economy shows us that. We simply forget that.satigaction of a need. for if analytic experience has brought it into the foreground among the terms in use. Psychoanalysis today puts frustration at the heart of all the faults whose analyzable consequences are marked in the symptoms that come up in our field. We shall first posit that frustration is not the refusal of an object of satisfaction in the pure and simple sense. when one speaks of frustration.we have frustrating experiences.klesire redressed. that inihe unconscious. Though its prevalence does not profoundly modify the economy of our thinking when we are in the presence of neurotic phenomena. I hope with success. I have tried to situate frustration in a tripartite table between castration. Satisfactionineans. and I do not need to insist on that point. Let us say that it is referred in different ways. that cannot be absolutely without reason. We must understand it as a fundamental experience if we are to make valuable use of it.1. it would be useful to explain why the desire which has thus been frustrated should have that ch4Pcteristic. and privation. The frustration of a need entails diverse modifications which are more or less supportable for the organism. it nevertheless leads to impasses. it is that it 205 .

Frustration thus is not the refusal of anobjectof_satisia. Completely at random I will say frustration-depression-contrition -. I am saying that it is not at all satisfactory. It is not to be found in that. I am relatively dispensed. is very far from having the seductive character of immediately comprehensible signification that one supposes. That is so true that one can even sometimes put the Versagung on the opposite side. It is enough to consider it for an instant to see that it is not comprehensible in itself. which is inscribed much more precisely under the concept of_armulation. It is thus a matter of our. but from the earliest 206 . I want to unfold a sequence regarding this.ction. Let us submit ourselves to that path which consists in taking things from the beginning -.caseis a connection imposed between frustration and the permanence of desire indeed. and which holds an eminent place in the choice of words in analytic theory. Either the individual succumbs. such that you can retain its principal articulations in order to see if they are useful. its insistence. a prefix which is essential in German.posing_the questiort_ot the relations between frustration and re ressias never been done in a way that is _satisfactory. except by allusion. if it is given like that. Let us say straightaway that the triad frustrationaggression-. regression. Freud never speaks of frustration. for the word can mean botlOrgrnise)and - rupture of promise. There is no reason not to take any other series whatsoever.I do not say the beginning of development because it does not have the character of a development.I could invent many others. or of a retreat from an engagement.] This is very often the case with words preceded by ver-. ---_ _ _ _in the sense that one speaks of annulling a treaty. He speaks of Versagung. to use the term that I was led to put in the foreground when we spoke of the repetitionsompulsion. from making a proof. or the desire is modified. I am not saying that what has been done is false. because the concept of_ regressionitself has not been elaborated in thisinsiance. Besides.. or it dectines. and as I shall be content to follow them with a series of formulas that have already been worked out here.does not engender the maintenance of desire as such.

. from the order which concerns him as subject. This effort can be made only with the aid of threads as thick as one's arm.est„but That is given in many passages in Freud as the relation at the beginning. we succumb to the need to start with the subject. In saying that. and thus implicates him in that order.relation of the child to its mother. But.not just any frustration. The order of gat!rnity exists as such. What does that mean? It does not mean that the child has done the philosophy of love. There is a desperate attempt. between love and desire. but the frustration which is usable in our dialectic is only thinkable as the. The experience of the child is at each moment taken and retroactively 207 . Certain things happen which are only conceivable if the symbolic order is already present. We can say that at-the-origin. which is profoundly organized symbolically and forms the subjective context in which the child develops his experience. We always encounter an ambiguity here which is born from the fact that we have a science which is a science of theAuttiect. refusal of a gift. in so far as the. the law of intersubjective relations profoundly governs those on whom the individual depends. whether or not the child has experienced infantile terrors. forgetting that the subject as subject cannot be identified with the individual. Even if the subject is detached. as an individual. with all that it implies of elaboration __— not at a first remove but at a second . whether he is conscious of it as an individual or not. individual. We find proofs of it is his behavior. In fact. which is yet tried again and again. for example. frustration -. I am alluding here to what someone named Mallet articulates about primitive phobias. I am saying nothing that is not clearly written in Freud.gift ` the symbol of love. It means that he is Ay in a bath which implies the existence of the symbolic order. and that he \ distinguishes. which only come to have a clear meaning in the intersubjective father-child relation. does not simply imply before one ara.Aj)1. Thg fundmeatal character of the love relation. to have the image of the father rise up from the anxieties of the child in the dark. not a science of the .. this order nonetheless exists.

inverted form.the.--imagine. he must have his sojaa jasiraghim.. It is against a backgroancl of revocation th. I was wrong to stop there.ntered.__Alread.at_the gift Nothing is a gift arises.. The gift arises from a beyond of the object relation.. To call situates him.. If the call is. 208 .a. but remember what I told you when we were dealing with psychosis.Qtt:D.reworked by the intersubjective relation in which he is engaged by a series of starts. and founds the symbolic orclex. since the structure_of speechimpliesin the Other that the subject rggeive_his. an. I shall say more. When it jilliere. they will take hold. which is. Ergu_diarLirnage.own... I have talked about4he gift. into which the subject is introduced as_ primitively as__you may .tosay_thatas_an_ohject_oLsatisfaction.n_by tbe. It is there precisely_to be pushed away as this nothing.and it can only arise from that beyond with a character which constitutes it as properly symbolic.becauseavliaLis called can be pushed away agairt.fundamental. The_calliul_ready_an. The gift replies to the call.at first annulled in Qatar later to reapp_earAspure_presencer-that-thesift is given or not giyerLin reply_to. The call makes itself heard when_the Objectilnot there. This to_speech. it is on this . We have not yet reached that level.bythe act which has _previously awn fulled orrDMICed it. since it supposes behind it the whole order of . already. round. with regard to which satisfaction is situated and takes its meaning. cannot be sustained in isolation. call.Thatis the essential articulation. as is welt 4tIQW.... •. I said that the call was essential to speech.yalthe level of the call. „The gift implies the whole cycle of. tli5notsonstituteci. the object appears essentidly_As being only the sign of the gift. but the call. precisely.itis._ The gift exists only because there is an immense circulation of gifts which covers the whole intersubjective ensemble. ansLas_a sign _ollove. which are starts only because.a.._arLcLis_totally_engaged symbolic game thus has a fundamentally disappointing character.exchange into which the child hass.itis nothing.introcluction in the symbolic order. xchange. in thefirst_atag_e_oLspeech.mesWe unstex.flie little child with hisE.. tam speaking of_ the_ cal because it is there in the foreground.

in this instance. What is maintained in the dream as a desire. playing this game. at ' which he practices. his frustration. The dolorous dialectic of the object.isprecisely his disappointment.in this instance. If you are still capable of doubting that speech plays an essential role here.s oskrThe. I am saying that all satisfactionsallecljApin frustration comes_in against the background of_thefundamentany disappointing character of . They have already --entered the symbolic order so well that they are precisely(forbidiebjects. there is nothing astonishing for us in the fact that it is precisely in sleep that the persistence of desire should manifest itself on the symbolic plane. He stills the game by an oral ca • ture. .1mnental insatiability of this relation in.. that even the desire of the child is never linked to a pure and simple natural satisfaction.-The child crushes the . is the desire of the impossible. in its detached form. for example that of the little Anna Freud.to absence in as much as it constitutes_presence. She says in her dream -.oniy.stlbsti. What puts him_tasleepin_this_satisfaction. I compensation. custard etc.ctiqnheregs.Raspberries. I would underline. 209 whatsprings from the . on the contrary. AlLoLthes_e_objects are transcendent objects for her. the sry nl2c2E.t. thebreast. but with the whole transposition of the symbolic order. The child crushes what is disappointing in the symbolic play in the oral seizure of the real objegt:Dtsatisfaction. the refusal that he has experienced. After that. a satisfaction accorded to something that would be pure vital rhythm. Nothing forces us to believe that little Anna Freud was hUtigry that night. He relation which is fundamentally symbolic. I would have you note that if little Anna Freud had not articulated it in words. is symbolized in that exercise so brilliantly caught by Freud in its pure state. both there and never there.. Look at the so called extremely simple dream of the child.a. certainly expressed without disguise. satisfaction.satisfa. we should never have known anything about it. It is the basis of the relation of the sub'ect to e couple presence-absencento prespace_or Lthe - _ground of absence.I do not mean to say that there is not for the child.

reaLobject.b. as Mme Favez-Boutonier reminds us -. but by the bottle? It is precisely to this objection that what I have just constructed for you replies. but pcisely_ because it has entered into the dialectic of substitution for satisfaction in the demand for love. but it need not be specific. That is how orality becomes what it is. What takes on a symbolic accent and value is the activity.have been able to make to certain analytic remarks. for example.. and sexual libido.child in possession of the object. and ask ourselves -./the mode of apprehension.irimme lately entails a transformation..for example M. on the subject of the erotization of the breast. it is even what entails the destrudo . Which? As I am saying that the real object then takes on the value of a symbol.titated_for--a-symbelie-satisfaction? By the mere fact that it is a substitution.what happens at the moment when the satisfaction of need comes into_play and iss u. Even if it is not the breast of the mother._the. Being an instinctual form of hunger. in the latest issue of Etudes Philosophiques consecrated to the centenary of Freud -. which R.I am willing to understand it all.v1sthe.. but that would be only a pure and simple sleight of hand. it loses for all 210 . it is also very much an eroticized activity. or almost. When th real ob* cUtself becomes a sign thedemonforlove. it suffers a transformation. but replies otherwise than by evasion to the objections that some people who are certainly not excessively fine -.„__that_is t9jayin t e sym o is requat.. but what do they make of the case in which the child is not nourished at his mother's breast. It is libido in the strict sense.s.is it the libido of the conservation of life or sexual libido? Certainly it aims at the conservation of the individual. I could say that it has thus become a symbol. but it is not only that. Freud wondered about the identity of this libido -. From the moment that it enters into . Charles Blondel. it is the bearer of a libido that conserves the body itself.is not in itself indifferent. the cMectic nfirustration. This author says in one of his articles.2 Let us pursue the dialectic of frustration. - All of that is not vain rhetorical articulation.

Nothing -. But that is not all that happens. at the MOMPra-When the symbolic reversal of the substiitRtt.it means to eta nothing. it is a nichts essen. activity is introduced into the real the mother who was until then the . the simple locus in which presence or absence could become manifest. but also of other symptoms. If you do not understand that. Other activities are then also caught up in the libidinal dialectic. namely the mother on whom he depends. subject of the symbolic demand. able to refusejadefinitely. I have thus situated the moment of reversal which introduces us into the symbolic dialectic of oral activity. which raises the question of the unreality of the early relation to the mother. I insist -. What happens in specific is that the child eats nothing. I would have you note in passing that this goes so far that it is possible for the same role to be play_e-d-whe_re_thereis_no matabject at_all It is in fact only a matter of what gives rise toakatistaction_whichsubmitutes for symbolic saturation. you can understand nothing not only of anorexia. This point is ri indispensable for the understanding of anorexia. Wirk!ichkeit. As I have told you.that is precisely something which exists on the symbolic plane.pacomes a real being. it is here. whence arises the erotization of the oral zone. she can literally do all. It is not a nicht essen. he makes her depend on him. which in German identifies efficacy and reality.that the activity has taken on an eroticized function on the plane of cl_e_sire. In effect.whichAs_organized in the symbolic order. Thanks to this nothing. It is not the object which plays the essential role in that. but the fact. I have already said that anorexia is not a no_Leafing_b_utan_eating-nothing.. and you will make the greatest errors.. which is„ somethingta_negation of theactiyit6 He uses tbisatsence savored as such vis-a-vis what be has facing him. — and not with regard to I do not know what hypothesis of a sort of megalomania which projects onto the child what is only in the analyst's mind — thaLthe dimensionofsaanimericeappears for_thelinttime.that none of the value of its place in the sexual dialectic. The 211 . Inversely. That alone can explain the true function of a symptom like that of anorexia [anorexia mentalel. being. and because of it.

and her adversaries have not missed the chance to argue that she was dreaming. but she has always been highly embarrassed in explaining how it was possible. and upon the contrast of his powerlessness.outre. _ henceforth will each in turn draw their5ymbdolic_value...pteaceof_the_reaLbeing.couxse. Clinical experierzeglows_us. since_the moth. I shall add that we may suspect that the cieprPqqive position which then takes its first form. he must still be able to reflect upon himself. she was dreaming. like everything else. Melanie Klein has brilliantly shown. That it is possible. Of course. the child finds himself in the presence of n aternal ornnipotence7- Since I have just made a rapid allusion to‘ he paranoid positicirt as Mrs.all_objects_. Melanie Klein calls it.. In order for a real omnipotence to engender a depressive effect in the subject.n w_laom. since.of the maternal body.to_situate this point at around 212 . We can now glimpse how it is possible that all of the primitive fantasmatic objects are to be found together in the immense container of the maternal body. because that is not given in itself by the sole fact that the mother. come to light as omnipotent.. they were ready to arrive there one day. Mrs. Melanie Klein. a micromaniar which is the contrary of megalomania. They are there in effect. it is not at all astonishing that she should find the objects retroactively reprojected. that this is an essential condition for understanding anything at all of value. I am aot telling you..abaolutely andwith..the. with Mrs. And one could say in a certain sense that.. according to her. tha Itle_mather_contains_everything. But let us take care not to go too quickly. they were there already.into_the_womb. is not without a rapport to the relation to omnipotence. That is another affair. to which I allude only in passing._ I am telling you thatis RrimordialbLall-powerful) that we rhe mother cannot eliminate her from this dialectic. At this point. Simply taking the subject at a slightly more advanced level...essential efficacy appears first as the omnip. because the thing is posAhle onl b a retroActive projections) _the whole ensemble of imaginary objects.giflor noasifIclepends. and she was right to dream.Q. It is a sort of reduction to nothing [ aneantisationl. for example a child at about the age of two.. is real.erconatittnes a virtual field of symbolic annihilation [nearitisaticAJTQm which.

. and_ at which_the phenomenon_of the mirror stageisprodu. You will object that I have taught that at the moment when the subject seizes the totality of his own body in his specular reflection. and the jubilatory character of this encounter is not to be doubted.ced.the sixth month_ as Freud _has noted. it is rather a feeling of triumph that he feels. But it is useful here not to confound the two things. That is a reconstruction. when he completes himself in some way in the other who is whole. which is not without confirmation in experience. and becomes present to himself. 213 .

which will give the relation_of thqchild to his ownego an essential element of splitting. I would nevertheless have you note that experience shows us. When the reflected specular structure of the mirror stage comes into play. One could go a bit quickly and say that the sole power that the subject retains against omnipotence is to say no with regard to action. : English in the original._he must realize thatit does not o12eyhirn. at the mercy of his omnipotence. the experience_of mastery._preciselyby nourishing himself on nothing It is here that he reversesependence. and not without reason._The oqiipotence_ctLthemother is_then reflected only in a clearly depressive positiota. her omnipotence depends upon his desire._whichAppears under the siga_of nothingkis with regard to e object annulled as symbolic{_ that the child puts his dependency in check.' of distinction from himself. When he finds himself in the presence of this totakty_in. but closely linked to him and dependent on him. - This is where what I alluded to just before in talking about anorexia comes in. on one side. In as much as the_fortn_Qf mastery is givento_the subject in the form of a totality_ that is alien to himself. he encounters the reality of the master. 214 .who_depends_uponit.--and-in--the-child!s-sense powerlessness. There is. which will remain until the end. that it is not with regard_ to action and under the form of negativism that resistance against omnipotence in the relation of dependence is elaborated -. it is jubilation. but it is otherwise when. which is not unrelated to the moment towards which I am aiming. From there on. it is at his mercy.There is. at the mercy of the manifestations of his caprice. the encounter with the reality of the master._the forrnof the maternal body. live. once this form has been given to him.it is with regard th_eohject. Thus the moment of his triumph is also the expression of his defeat. making himself by this means master of the avid omnipotence to inake_hirn. and to introduce the dimension of negativism. on the other hand.

except for underlining that one 215 . which is impossible to conceive other than by saying that the symbolic order itself is as such already instituted and present. a structuration that is fundamentally symbolic. if one may say so. it remains that he arrives at something as elaborated as distinguishing between the fact that someone taps him on the back and the fact that someone gives him a correction. from a very early age the child ' distinguishes a punishment from an accidental blow. at least the domestic animal. Still. one shows that one is a little bit aware. which consists. that leads to nothing further.We thus really need to keep in mind that the symbolic order is. In short. in recalling that M. a child does not react in the same way to an accidental hurt and a slap. you have perhaps seen a sort of notebook that came out in December 1956 as the fourth number of the International Journal of Psycho-Analysis. Susan Issacs noted a long time ago. This objection is easy to overturn. But precisely because. Since we are for the moment clarifying the outlines. and it seems that certain people were called upon to reply to the command. I will leave you to meditate on what that implies. Saussure taught that there are a signifier and a signified. in contrast to man. before any beyond of the object. To illustrate it now in psychological terms --but this is a degradation in comparison to the first explanation that I have just given you -. knows. As Mrs.the intentionality of love very precociously constitutes. the layer necessary for the entry into play of the first imaginary relation on which the play of projection and its contrary occurs. Even before speech. It just proves that the animal can arrive at the sketch of a beyond which puts him in a very special relation of identification to the one who is his master. Loewenstein is marked by a prudent distance not devoid of skill. The article by M. but that awareness remains absolutely without connection to our experience. the animal is not inserted by all his being into an order of language. after a citation of several lateral characters in Hamlet. Experience demonstrates it. unless it is that he is a good little dog. You will tell me that it is curious that the animal too. It seems that someone must have said to himself that there was something interesting in language after all.

says the author. The Fort-Da is essential here. that the theory of communication exists. tries to add a bit more. suggests the author. It is false. In what I am in the course of teaching. but the latter already bathes in a milieu of language. From the origin. It is a question of a cry in as much as it calls. equal to its principle. to pose the question of the sign when it is a question of the symbolic system. each time. Perhaps one needs to remember. in the name of the Londoners. There is also a Mr.we are much further along in it. The prototype of the gift is precisely thfgi