24,656
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Through this coincidentia ''oppositorum'' -- bringing together [[mathematics|mathematical theory]] and the intricate weave of the [[James Joyce|Joycean]] text -- [[Lacan]] redefines the [[psychoanalytic]] [[symptom]] in terms of his final [[topology]] of the [[subject]].
=====Development of the Concept of the "Symptom"=====
Such comments anticipate the radical transformation of Lacan's thought implicit in his shift from the [[linguistic]] definition of the [[symptom]] - as a [[signifier]] - to his statement, in the 1974-5 [[seminar]], that "the symptom can only be defined as the way in which each subject enjoys [''jouit''] the unconscious, in so far as the unconscious determines him."<ref>{{L}} 1974-5. ''Le Séminaire. Livre XXII. RSI'', 1974-5, published in ''Ornicar?'', nos. 2-5, 1975.</ref>
=====Symptom as the Particular Modality of the Subject's ''Jouissance''=====
This move from conceiving of the [[symptom]] as a [[message]] which can be deciphered by reference to the [[unconscious]] "structured like a language," to seeing it as the trace of the particular modality of the [[subject]]'s ''[[jouissance]]'', culminates in the introduction of the term ''[[sinthome]]''.
The task of ''[[analysis]]'' thus becomes, in one of [[Lacan]]'s last definitions of the [[end of analysis]], to [[identify]] with the ''[[sinthome]]''.
=====Shift from Linguistics to Topology=====
The theoretical shift from [[linguistics]] to [[topology]] which marks the final period of Lacan's work constitutes the true status of the [[sinthome]] as unanalysable, and amounts to an exegetical problem beyond the familiar one of [[Lacan]]'s dense rhetoric.
This [[knot]] is not offered as a model but as a rigorously non-metaphorical description of a [[topology]] "before which the imagination fails."<ref>{{L}} 195-6. ''[[Seminar XXIII|Le Séminaire. Livre XXIII. Le sinthome, 1975-76]]'', published in ''Ornicar?'', nos 6-11, 1976-7. 9 December 1975.</ref>
Since [[meaning ]] (''sens'') is already figured within the [[knot]], at the intersection of the [[symbolic ]] and the [[imaginary (see Figure 1)]], it follows that the function of the ''[[sinthome ]]'' -- intervening to [[knot ]] together [[real]], [[symbolic ]] and [[imaginary ]] - is inevitably beyond [[meaning]]. =====Writings of James Joyce=====[[Lacan]] had been an enthusiastic reader of [[Joyce]] since his youth.<ref>{{Ec}} p.25; {{S20}} p.37</ref> In the 1975-6 [[seminar]], [[Joyce]]'s [[writing]] is read as an extended ''[[sinthome]]'', a fourth term whose addition to the [[borromean knot]] of ''RSI'' allows the [[subject]] to cohere. Faced in his childhood by the radical non-function / [[absence]] (''carence'') of the [[Name-of-the-Father]], [[Joyce]] managed to avoid [[psychosis]] by deploying his [[art]] as ''suppléance'', as a supplementary cord in the [[subject]]ive [[knot]]. [[Lacan]] focuses on [[Joyce]]'s youthful "epiphanies" (experiences of an almost hallucinatory intensity which were then recorded in enigmatic, fragmentary texts) as instances of "radical foreclosure," in which "the real forecloses meaning."<ref>[[Seminar]] of 16 March 1976</ref> ====="Destructive" Refashioning of Language=====The [[Joycean]] text -- from the epiphany to ''[[James Joyce|Finnegans Wake]]'' -- entailed a special relation to [[language]]; a "destructive" refashioning of it as ''[[sinthome]]'', the invasion of the [[symbolic order]] by the [[subject]]'s private ''[[jouissance]]''. One of [[Lacan]]'s puns, ''[[sinthome|synth-homme]]'', implies this kind of "artificial" self-creation.
====Next Paragraph=Lacan's Engagement with Joyce's Writing=====3. [[Lacan had been an enthusiastic reader of Joyce since his youth (see the references to Joyce in Ec, 25 and S20, 37). In the 1975-6 seminar, Joyce]]'s writing is read as an extended sinthome, a fourth term whose addition to the Borromean knot of RSI allows the subject to cohere. Faced in his childhood by the radical non-function/absence (carence) of the Name-of-the-Father, Joyce managed to avoid psychosis by deploying his art as supplÈance, as a supplementary cord in the subjective knot. Lacan focuses on engagement with [[Joyce]]'s youthful 'epiphanies' (experiences of an almost hallucinatory intensity which were then recorded in enigmaticwriting does not, fragmentary texts) as instances of 'radical foreclosure'he insists, in which 'the real forecloses meaning' (seminar of 16 March 1976)entail "applied psychoanalysis."
====Next Paragraph=Topological Theory=====The Joycean text - from the epiphany to Finnegans Wake - entailed a special relation to language; a 'destructive' refashioning [[Topology|Topological theory]] is not conceived of it as sinthomemerely another kind of representational account, the invasion but as a form of writing, a praxis aiming to figure that which escapes the symbolic order by the subject's private jouissance. One of Lacan's puns, synth-homme, implies this kind of 'artificial' self-creation[[imaginary]].
====Next Paragraph=''Saint Homme''=====Lacan's engagement with Joyce's writing does not, he insists, entail 'applied psychoanalysis'. Topological theory is not conceived of as merely another kind =====New Way of representational account, but as a form of writing, a praxis aiming Using Language to figure that which escapes the imaginary. Organize Enjoyment=====To that extent, rather than a theoretical object or '"case', " [[Joyce ]] becomes an exemplary ''[[sinthome|saint homme ]]'' who, by refusing any [[imaginary ]] solution, was able to invent a new way of using [[language ]] to organise [[enjoyment]].
