Jump to content

Lack

From No Subject
(Redirected from Hole)

In psychoanalysis, lack refers to a structural condition constitutive of subjectivity rather than to an empirical absence, deprivation, or unmet biological need. Most systematically elaborated in the work of Jacques Lacan, lack designates the non-coincidence of the subject with itself and the impossibility of any complete or final satisfaction of desire. Rather than being a contingent deficit that might be remedied, lack names a fundamental absence produced by the subject’s insertion into language and the symbolic order.

While themes of absence, loss, and separation are already present in the work of Sigmund Freud, it is in Lacanian theory that lack is formalized as a central structural principle linking desire, language, and subjectivity. In this framework, lack is inseparable from the emergence of the unconscious and from the dynamics of analytic experience.


Translator’s note

The French term manque is generally translated as “lack.” In the specific Lacanian expression manque-à-être, however, Lacan himself proposed the English neologism “want-to-be” in order to distinguish this form of lack from empirical absence or material deprivation. In English-language Lacanian literature, both “lack of being” and “want-to-be” are commonly used to translate this concept.

Conceptual background

Lacanian theory treats lack not as a psychological accident or developmental failure but as a structural effect of the subject’s entry into language. Because no signifier can fully represent the subject, and because the symbolic order itself is incomplete, something is always missing. This missing element is not an object that could be recovered, but a constitutive gap that conditions subjectivity as such.

Lack is therefore not opposed to meaning but is internal to it: meaning is possible only because it is never complete. Desire arises and persists precisely because the symbolic order cannot close upon itself.

Lack and desire

In Lacanian theory, lack is always articulated in relation to desire. Desire does not arise from the absence of a particular object, nor does it aim at eliminating lack. Rather, desire is caused by lack and sustained by it. Lacan explicitly states that desire emerges because the subject is constituted by a gap introduced through language.[1]

This account marks a decisive break from need-based or object-centered models of motivation. Needs can be satisfied, and demands can be articulated in signifiers addressed to the Other, but desire persists as what exceeds both. Lack is thus not a defect to be repaired but the structural condition that sustains the movement of desire itself.

Lack of being (manque-à-être)

Lacan’s earliest explicit formulations of lack, developed in the mid-1950s, describe it primarily as a lack of being. Here, what is lacking is not an object but being itself. Lacan defines desire as “a relation of being to lack,” emphasizing that the lack in question is not a lack of something but a lack that conditions existence as such.[2]

This formulation is further developed in “The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious,” where Lacan describes desire as the metonymy of the manque-à-être.[3] Because the subject is represented in language only by signifiers that refer to other signifiers, it can never be fully present to itself. The lack of being thus names the structural impossibility of a complete, self-identical subject.

Lacan contrasts this lack of being with the lack of having (manque-à-avoir), which belongs to the register of demand and concerns objects that can be possessed, requested, or exchanged. Whereas lack of having concerns what one does or does not have, lack of being concerns what one is—and cannot fully be.[4]

Lack of object

Beginning in The Seminar, Book IV, Lacan reformulates lack in terms of the lack of an object, distinguishing three modalities: frustration, privation, and castration. Although each involves an absent object, they differ according to the register—imaginary, symbolic, or real—in which the lack is situated.[5]

Frustration

Frustration is an imaginary form of lack involving a real object, paradigmatically the breast in early childhood. The agent of frustration is the symbolic mother, insofar as she is experienced as withholding an object capable of satisfying the child’s demand. Frustration is lived affectively and remains tied to the logic of demand and complaint.

Privation

Privation designates a real lack of a symbolic object. In this case, the object is absent not because it has been taken away, but because it was never available. The agent of privation is the imaginary father, and the object concerned is the symbolic phallus. Privation introduces the dimension of an absence that cannot be repaired through substitution.

Castration

Castration is a symbolic lack of an imaginary object and occupies a privileged position in Lacanian theory. It does not refer to a real loss but to the symbolic inscription of lack through the law of the father and the function of the phallus. Castration marks the impossibility of complete jouissance and situates the subject within the symbolic order. For Lacan, castration is the most clinically decisive form of lack and ultimately becomes synonymous with lack itself in analytic discourse.

Lack in the Other and the signifier

In the late 1950s, Lacan reformulates lack in explicitly linguistic terms through the concept of the barred Other (Ⱥ). The Other, understood as the locus of language and law, is itself marked by lack: there is no ultimate signifier capable of guaranteeing meaning or completing the symbolic system. Lacan designates this absence with the formula S(Ⱥ), “the signifier of a lack in the Other.”

No matter how extensive the signifying chain becomes, it always lacks a final signifier capable of closing it. Lacan formalizes this absence as the missing signifier (–1), an absence that is constitutive of the subject’s position in language. The subject emerges precisely where the signifier fails to represent it fully, and this failure is another name for lack.

Clinical and theoretical implications

Lack plays a central role in the structure of neurosis, in the formation of fantasy, and in the analytic experience itself. Neurotic symptoms can be understood as attempts to manage or disavow lack, often by transforming a lack of being into a lack of having. Fantasy functions as a scenario that stages the subject’s relation to lack through the mediation of the object a, which Lacan defines as the cause of desire.

In analytic practice, the aim is not to eliminate lack or to supply what is missing. Rather, analysis brings the subject into a new relation with the lack in the Other, allowing desire to be assumed rather than denied. From this perspective, lack is not a deficit to be repaired but the structural condition that makes desire, speech, and subjectivity possible.

See also

References

  1. ↑ Jacques Lacan, Le Séminaire, Livre VIII: Le transfert (1960–1961), ed. Jacques-Alain Miller (Paris: Seuil, 1991), p. 139.
  2. ↑ Jacques Lacan, The Seminar, Book II: The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis (1954–1955), trans. Sylvana Tomaselli (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 223.
  3. ↑ Jacques Lacan, Écrits, trans. Alan Sheridan (London: Tavistock, 1977), p. 259.
  4. ↑ Jacques Lacan, Écrits (Paris: Seuil, 1966), p. 730.
  5. ↑ Jacques Lacan, Le Séminaire, Livre IV: La relation d’objet (1956–1957), ed. Jacques-Alain Miller (Paris: Seuil, 1994), p. 269.
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/index.php?title=Lack&oldid=64871"