24,656
edits
Changes
no edit summary
castration complex (complexe de castration) Freud first described
the castration complex in 1908, arguing that the child, on discovering the
anatomical difference between the sexes (the presence or absence of the
penis), makes the assumption that this difference is due to the female's penis
having been cut off (Freud, 1908c). The castration complex is thus the moment
when one infantile theory (everyone has a penis) is replaced by a new one
(females have been castrated). The consequences of this new infantile theory
are different in the boy and in the girl. The boy fears that his own penis will be cut
off by the father (castration anxiety), while the girl sees herself as already
castrated (by the mother) and attempts to deny this or to compensate for it by
seeking a child as a substitute for the penis (penis envy).
The castration complex affects both sexes because its appearance is closely
linked with the phallic phase, a moment of psychosexual development when
the child, whether boy or girl, knows only one genital organ - the male one.
This phase is also known as the infantile genital organisation because it is the
first moment when the partial drives are unified under the primacy of the
genital organs. It thus anticipates the genital organisation proper which arises
at puberty, when the subject is aware of both the male and the female sexual
organs (see Freud, 1923e).
Freud argued that the castration complex is closely linked to the OEDIPUS
COMPLEX, but that its role in the Oedipus complex is different for the boy and
the girl. In the case of the boy, the castration complex is the point of exit from
the Oedipus complex, its terminal crisis; because of his fear of castration (often
aroused by a threat) the boy renounces his desire for the mother and thus enters
the latency period. In the case of the girl, the castration complex is the point of
entry into the Oedipus complex; it is her resentment of the mother, whom she
blames for depriving her of the penis, that causes her to redirect her libidinal
desires away from the mother and onto the father. Because of this difference,
in the case of the girl the Oedipus complex has no definitive terminal crisis
comparable to the boy's (Freud, 1924d).
Freud came to see the castration complex as a universal phenomenon, one
which is rooted in a basic 'rejection of femininity' (Ablehnung der Weiblich-
keit). It is encountered in every subject, and represents the ultimate limit
beyond which psychoanalytic treatment cannot go (Freud, 1937c).
Lacan, who talks more often about 'castration' than 'the castration com-
plex', does not discuss the castration complex very much in his early work. He
dedicates a few paragraphs to it in his article on the family, where he follows
Freud in stating that castration is first and foremost a fantasy of the mutilation
of the penis. Lacan links this fantasy with a whole series of fantasies of bodily
dismemberment which originate in the image of the fragmented body; this
image is contemporary with the mirror stage (six to eighteen months), and it is
only much later that these fantasies of dismemberment coalesce around the
specific fantasy of castration (Lacan, 1938: 44).
It is not until the mid-1950s that the castration complex comes to play a
prominent role in Lacan's teaching, primarily in the seminar of 1956-7. It is
in this seminar that Lacan identifies castration as one of three forms of 'lack
of object', the others being frustration and privation (see LACK). Unlike
frustration (which is an imaginary lack of a real object) and privation (which
is a real lack of a symbolic object), castration is defined by Lacan as a
symbolic lack of an imaginary object; castration does not bear on the penis
as a real organ, but on the imaginary PHALLus (S4, 219). Lacan's account of
the castration complex is thus raised out of the dimension of simple biology
or anatomy: 'It is insoluble by any reduction to biological givens' (E, 282).
Following Freud, Lacan argues that the castration complex is the pivot on
which the whole Oedipus complex turns (S4, 216). However, whereas Freud
argues that these two complexes are articulated differently in boys and girls,
Lacan argues that the castration complex always denotes the final moment of
the Oedipus complex in both sexes. Lacan divides the Oedipus complex into
three 'times' (Lacan, 1957-8: seminar of 22 January 1958). In the first time,
the child perceives that the mother desires something beyond the child himself
- namely, the imaginary phallus - and then tries to be the phallus for the
mother (see PREOEDIPAL PHASE). In the second time, the imaginary father
intervenes to deprive the mother of her object by promulgating the incest
taboo; properly speaking, this is not castration but privation. Castration is
only realised in the third and final time, which represents the 'dissolution'
of the Oedipus complex. It is then that the real father intervenes by showing
that he really posesses the phallus, in such a way that the child is forced to
abandon his attempts to be the phallus (S4, 208-9, 227).
From this account of the Oedipus complex, it is clear that Lacan uses the
term 'castration' to refer to two different operations:
e Castration of the mother In the first time of the Oedipus complex, 'the
mother is considered, by both sexes, as possessing the phallus, as the phallic
mother' (E, 282). By promulgating the incest taboo in the second time, the
imaginary father is seen to deprive her of this phallus. Lacan argues that
properly speaking, this is not castration but privation. However, Lacan
himself often uses these terms interchangeably, speaking both of the privation
of the mother and of her castration.
e Castration of the subject This is castration proper, in the sense of being
a symbolic act which bears on an imaginary object. Whereas the castration/
privation of the mother which comes about in the second time of the Oedipus
complex negates the verb 'to have' (the mother does not have the phallus), the
castration of the subject in the third time of the Oedipus complex negates the
verb 'to be' (the subject must renounce his attempts to be the phallus for the
mother). In renouncing his attempts to be the object of the mother's desire, the
subject gives up a certain jouissance which is never regained despite all
attempts to do so; 'Castration means that jouissance must be refused so that
it can be reached on the inverted ladder (l'Èchelle renversÈe) of the Law of
desire' (E, 324). This applies equally to boys and girls: this 'relationship to the
phallus . . . is established without regard to the anatomical difference of the
sexes' (E, 282).
On a more fundamental level, the term castration may also refer not to an
'operation' (the result of an intervention by the imaginary or real father) but to
a state of lack which already exists in the mother prior to the subject's birth.
This lack is evident in her own desire, which the subject perceives as a desire
for the imaginary phallus. That is, the subject realises at a very early stage that
the mother is not complete and self-sufficient in herself, nor fully satisfied with
her child (the subject himself), but desires something else. This is the subject's
first perception that the Other is not complete but lacking.
Both forms of castration (of the mother and of the subject) present the
subject with a choice: to accept castration or to deny it. Lacan argues that it
is only by accepting (or 'assuming') castration that the subject can reach a
degree of psychic normality. In other words, the assumption of castration has a
'normalising effect'. This normalising effect is to be understood in terms of
both psychopathology (clinical structures and symptoms) and sexual identity.
e Castration and clinical structures It is the refusal of castration that lies
at the root of all psychopathological structures. However, since it is impossible
to accept castration entirely, a completely 'normal' position is never achieved.
The closest to such a position is the neurotic structure, but even here the
subject still defends himself against the lack in the Other by repressing
awareness of castration. This prevents the neurotic from fully assuming his
desire, since 'it is the assumption of castration that creates the lack upon which
desire is instituted' (Ec, 852). A more radical defence against castration than
repression is disavowal, which is at the root of the perverse structure. The
psychotic takes the most extreme path of all; he completely repudiates
castration, as if it had never existed (Sl, 53). This repudiation of symbolic
castration leads to the return of castration in the real, such as in the form of
hallucinations of dismemberment (as in the case of the Wolf Man; see Sl, 58-
9) or even self-mutilation of the real genital organs.
ï Castration and sexual identity It is only by assuming castration (in both
senses) that the subject can take up a sexual position as a man or a woman (see
SEXUAL DIFFERENCE). The different modalities of refusing castration find expres-
sion in the various forms of perversion.
the castration complex in 1908, arguing that the child, on discovering the
anatomical difference between the sexes (the presence or absence of the
penis), makes the assumption that this difference is due to the female's penis
having been cut off (Freud, 1908c). The castration complex is thus the moment
when one infantile theory (everyone has a penis) is replaced by a new one
(females have been castrated). The consequences of this new infantile theory
are different in the boy and in the girl. The boy fears that his own penis will be cut
off by the father (castration anxiety), while the girl sees herself as already
castrated (by the mother) and attempts to deny this or to compensate for it by
seeking a child as a substitute for the penis (penis envy).
The castration complex affects both sexes because its appearance is closely
linked with the phallic phase, a moment of psychosexual development when
the child, whether boy or girl, knows only one genital organ - the male one.
This phase is also known as the infantile genital organisation because it is the
first moment when the partial drives are unified under the primacy of the
genital organs. It thus anticipates the genital organisation proper which arises
at puberty, when the subject is aware of both the male and the female sexual
organs (see Freud, 1923e).
Freud argued that the castration complex is closely linked to the OEDIPUS
COMPLEX, but that its role in the Oedipus complex is different for the boy and
the girl. In the case of the boy, the castration complex is the point of exit from
the Oedipus complex, its terminal crisis; because of his fear of castration (often
aroused by a threat) the boy renounces his desire for the mother and thus enters
the latency period. In the case of the girl, the castration complex is the point of
entry into the Oedipus complex; it is her resentment of the mother, whom she
blames for depriving her of the penis, that causes her to redirect her libidinal
desires away from the mother and onto the father. Because of this difference,
in the case of the girl the Oedipus complex has no definitive terminal crisis
comparable to the boy's (Freud, 1924d).
Freud came to see the castration complex as a universal phenomenon, one
which is rooted in a basic 'rejection of femininity' (Ablehnung der Weiblich-
keit). It is encountered in every subject, and represents the ultimate limit
beyond which psychoanalytic treatment cannot go (Freud, 1937c).
Lacan, who talks more often about 'castration' than 'the castration com-
plex', does not discuss the castration complex very much in his early work. He
dedicates a few paragraphs to it in his article on the family, where he follows
Freud in stating that castration is first and foremost a fantasy of the mutilation
of the penis. Lacan links this fantasy with a whole series of fantasies of bodily
dismemberment which originate in the image of the fragmented body; this
image is contemporary with the mirror stage (six to eighteen months), and it is
only much later that these fantasies of dismemberment coalesce around the
specific fantasy of castration (Lacan, 1938: 44).
It is not until the mid-1950s that the castration complex comes to play a
prominent role in Lacan's teaching, primarily in the seminar of 1956-7. It is
in this seminar that Lacan identifies castration as one of three forms of 'lack
of object', the others being frustration and privation (see LACK). Unlike
frustration (which is an imaginary lack of a real object) and privation (which
is a real lack of a symbolic object), castration is defined by Lacan as a
symbolic lack of an imaginary object; castration does not bear on the penis
as a real organ, but on the imaginary PHALLus (S4, 219). Lacan's account of
the castration complex is thus raised out of the dimension of simple biology
or anatomy: 'It is insoluble by any reduction to biological givens' (E, 282).
Following Freud, Lacan argues that the castration complex is the pivot on
which the whole Oedipus complex turns (S4, 216). However, whereas Freud
argues that these two complexes are articulated differently in boys and girls,
Lacan argues that the castration complex always denotes the final moment of
the Oedipus complex in both sexes. Lacan divides the Oedipus complex into
three 'times' (Lacan, 1957-8: seminar of 22 January 1958). In the first time,
the child perceives that the mother desires something beyond the child himself
- namely, the imaginary phallus - and then tries to be the phallus for the
mother (see PREOEDIPAL PHASE). In the second time, the imaginary father
intervenes to deprive the mother of her object by promulgating the incest
taboo; properly speaking, this is not castration but privation. Castration is
only realised in the third and final time, which represents the 'dissolution'
of the Oedipus complex. It is then that the real father intervenes by showing
that he really posesses the phallus, in such a way that the child is forced to
abandon his attempts to be the phallus (S4, 208-9, 227).
From this account of the Oedipus complex, it is clear that Lacan uses the
term 'castration' to refer to two different operations:
e Castration of the mother In the first time of the Oedipus complex, 'the
mother is considered, by both sexes, as possessing the phallus, as the phallic
mother' (E, 282). By promulgating the incest taboo in the second time, the
imaginary father is seen to deprive her of this phallus. Lacan argues that
properly speaking, this is not castration but privation. However, Lacan
himself often uses these terms interchangeably, speaking both of the privation
of the mother and of her castration.
e Castration of the subject This is castration proper, in the sense of being
a symbolic act which bears on an imaginary object. Whereas the castration/
privation of the mother which comes about in the second time of the Oedipus
complex negates the verb 'to have' (the mother does not have the phallus), the
castration of the subject in the third time of the Oedipus complex negates the
verb 'to be' (the subject must renounce his attempts to be the phallus for the
mother). In renouncing his attempts to be the object of the mother's desire, the
subject gives up a certain jouissance which is never regained despite all
attempts to do so; 'Castration means that jouissance must be refused so that
it can be reached on the inverted ladder (l'Èchelle renversÈe) of the Law of
desire' (E, 324). This applies equally to boys and girls: this 'relationship to the
phallus . . . is established without regard to the anatomical difference of the
sexes' (E, 282).
On a more fundamental level, the term castration may also refer not to an
'operation' (the result of an intervention by the imaginary or real father) but to
a state of lack which already exists in the mother prior to the subject's birth.
This lack is evident in her own desire, which the subject perceives as a desire
for the imaginary phallus. That is, the subject realises at a very early stage that
the mother is not complete and self-sufficient in herself, nor fully satisfied with
her child (the subject himself), but desires something else. This is the subject's
first perception that the Other is not complete but lacking.
Both forms of castration (of the mother and of the subject) present the
subject with a choice: to accept castration or to deny it. Lacan argues that it
is only by accepting (or 'assuming') castration that the subject can reach a
degree of psychic normality. In other words, the assumption of castration has a
'normalising effect'. This normalising effect is to be understood in terms of
both psychopathology (clinical structures and symptoms) and sexual identity.
e Castration and clinical structures It is the refusal of castration that lies
at the root of all psychopathological structures. However, since it is impossible
to accept castration entirely, a completely 'normal' position is never achieved.
The closest to such a position is the neurotic structure, but even here the
subject still defends himself against the lack in the Other by repressing
awareness of castration. This prevents the neurotic from fully assuming his
desire, since 'it is the assumption of castration that creates the lack upon which
desire is instituted' (Ec, 852). A more radical defence against castration than
repression is disavowal, which is at the root of the perverse structure. The
psychotic takes the most extreme path of all; he completely repudiates
castration, as if it had never existed (Sl, 53). This repudiation of symbolic
castration leads to the return of castration in the real, such as in the form of
hallucinations of dismemberment (as in the case of the Wolf Man; see Sl, 58-
9) or even self-mutilation of the real genital organs.
ï Castration and sexual identity It is only by assuming castration (in both
senses) that the subject can take up a sexual position as a man or a woman (see
SEXUAL DIFFERENCE). The different modalities of refusing castration find expres-
sion in the various forms of perversion.