1974-1975 (ABOUT 112 pp.)-SEMINAJRE XXII: R.S.!. (SEMINAR XXII: REAL, SYMBOUC, IMAGINARY)-1975 By the very title of the seminar (Real, Symbolic, Imaginary), priority was given to the Real. The seminar, entirely constructed on the study, the appli�cation, and the interpretation of the Borromean knots, developed the theses of Non-dupes errent (85), L' Eveil du printemps (88), and .pe Conference in . Rome (89). The most important thing was to justify the appeal to topology: the consis- dd. Lalangue is the combination of La (the feminine definite article) and langue (lan�gage as a system and as opposed to the Saussurian parole). ee. Je souis is the combination between Je suis, 1 am, and Jouis. fTOmJouir. 'H 242 DOSS I ER tency of the Real creates the consistency of the Symbolic and the Imaginary. provided one acknowledges first that "any approach of the real is woven for us by the number." Such an imbroglio creates a vortex in which algebra and geometry are each caught in turn. At the same time, Lacan referred to Michel Thome and Pierre Soury, two mathematicians who rectified the propositions of Ellcore (84) and defined new properties of the Borromean knot, and he subjected their reasonings to his own thinking. This time, the Names-oJ-the�Father, under three forms, names the Imaginary, the Symbolic, and the Real, "because it is ill these names that the knot fits." How is it possible to recon�cile this with the function of the objet a, the point of intersection of the three circles (89)7 In actual fact, the Names-of-the-Father are posited at the very origin of the figures; "they are the primary names insofar as they name." The phalIus soon appeared, enabling Lacan to create a definable set, even if it is only a symptom, whereas the woman is an empty set. "The jouissance of the phallus is linked to ex-sistence (ex-sistence]. which is what the Borromean knots should prove." Amidst the crowd of signifiers "copulating among each other" (which is what creates the consistency of the unconscious) there is a "patheme oj the phallus" whose signifier would be the One that divides the subject to the point of creating "pathematical subjects." Sometimes Lacan regained his c1ear-headedness: "I'll leave it up to you to decide if all this sheds light on the practice of analytic discourse!" Caught between a scientific requirement ("there are no moods (etats d' ame], there is speech (il Y a dire] that has to be demonstrated ") and the pleasure to free associate on words and on philosophical, religious, literary. and Lacanian reminiscences, he suddenly wondered: this "freezing of desire," it is para�noia, or isn't it? But he immediately resumed. The theory of the knots, "still in its infancy" (how fortunate for us!), allowed him to assert that speaking beings are mis-situated between two and three dimensions, which would ex�plain the equivocation between "dimension" and" dit-mension, mension du dit" (mention of the said) (82). In this seminar, there are endless plays on words. An example: "Aristotle who argues about the idea of ane (donkey], who argues that the ane is an ane and that there is no capital Ane, he himself allistote." From there it follows that "the Names-of-the-Father" have become the "allolls-of-the-Father." Or else: "Pere-version (Father-version/perver�sion I. an a-peritive version of the jouir. " When he lectured in the United States (93), Lacan stated, "I have tried to condense, to formulate as regards our practice something that would be co�herent. It has led me to wild imaginings that worry me a lot."