The Signification of the Phallus
| La signification du phallus | |
|---|---|
| French title | La signification du phallus |
| English title | The Signification of the Phallus |
| Year | 1958 |
| Text type | Lecture / theoretical essay |
| Mode of delivery | Oral |
| First presentation | Max Planck Institute, Munich, May 9, 1958 |
| First publication | La Psychanalyse (1958) |
| Collected in | Écrits (1966) |
| Text status | Authorial text |
| Original language | French |
| Psychoanalytic content | |
| Key concepts | Phallus • Signifier • Desire • Castration complex • Other • Lack • Symbolic |
| Themes | Sexual difference; structure of desire; symbolic function of the phallus; language and subjectivity; psychoanalytic ethics |
| Freud references | Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality • The Ego and the Id • Beyond the Pleasure Principle • Civilization and Its Discontents |
| Related seminars | Seminar V • Seminar VI • Seminar XX |
| Theoretical context | |
| Period | Structuralist / linguistic period |
| Register | Symbolic |
“The Signification of the Phallus” is a major theoretical text by the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. Originally presented in 1958 at the Société Française de Psychanalyse and later published in Écrits (1966), the essay marks a decisive articulation of Lacan’s theory of the phallus as a signifier rather than a biological organ. Lacan distinguishes the phallus from the penis, positioning the former within the symbolic register as a fundamental operator in the structuration of subjectivity, sexual difference, and desire.
Introduction
Lacan’s essay intervenes in debates on sexual difference and the symbolic function of castration by redefining the phallus not as an anatomical organ or empirical object, but as a privileged signifier in the unconscious. The text exemplifies his broader “return to Freud,” particularly emphasizing the structural role of language in psychoanalysis.[1] Its conceptual impact has extended beyond psychoanalysis into feminist theory, gender studies, and cultural criticism.
Historical and Institutional Context
Delivered in 1958, La signification du phallus was presented during a period of tension within French psychoanalytic circles, shortly before Lacan's rupture with the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA). The essay reflects his resistance to ego psychology and reasserts the primacy of the symbolic in psychoanalytic theory. It also resonates with material from Lacan’s Seminars V (Formations of the Unconscious) and VI (Desire and its Interpretation), where the phallus is introduced as a structuring absence that conditions the field of desire.[2]
Key Concepts and Definitions
The Phallus as Signifier
Lacan posits the phallus as the signifier of the lack that structures desire. It is not the biological penis but a symbolic function that mediates relations between the subject, the Other, and the field of language. The phallus, as Lacan writes, is “to be distinguished from the penis, the image of which it may convey among other things.”[1]
The phallus signifies what is missing for both sexes — a position of desire rather than possession. It is what must be assumed by the subject in order to speak from a sexually marked position within language. This symbolic function precedes the subject and structures their relationship to both speech and the unconscious.
Castration and Lack
Castration, in Lacanian terms, refers to the subject’s alienation in language and the renunciation of a mythical completeness. It is not the fear of literal loss but the necessary entry into the symbolic order through the acceptance of lack. The phallus functions as a marker of this castration: it stands in for what is absent and unrepresentable, namely, the fullness of being or jouissance.[2]
Sexual Difference and Subject Positions
Lacan differentiates masculine and feminine positions not by anatomical sex but by relation to the phallic signifier. The “masculine” position identifies with the phallus as the signifier of desire, whereas the “feminine” position is defined by being the phallus for the Other. Neither sex possesses the phallus as such; rather, subjects relate to it through symbolic positioning.[3]
This asymmetry, Lacan argues, is necessary for the erotic relation to function. The phallus allows for the play of presence and absence in desire, making it central to sexual identity and fantasy. “Being” and “having” the phallus thus mark two structural positions that articulate sexual difference symbolically, not biologically.
The Phallus and the Function of Speech
As a privileged signifier, the phallus structures not only sexual difference but also the speaking subject's position within discourse. It occupies the space of what is barred or foreclosed in speech — a “hole in the Other” that conditions the possibility of meaning. In this sense, the phallus is “the signifier intended to designate as a whole the effects of the signified.”[1]
Lacan’s linguistic orientation reframes Freud’s Oedipal complex and castration anxiety in semiotic terms, revealing how symbolic structures regulate access to meaning, desire, and identity.
Clinical and Theoretical Implications
Clinically, the theory of the phallus underpins Lacan’s approach to neurosis, perversion, and psychosis. In neurosis, the subject is caught in the oscillation between having and not having the phallus, structured by repression and symbolic law. In perversion, the phallus is fetishized or disavowed. In psychosis, the foreclosure of the Name-of-the-Father (and thus the phallus) results in a failure to inscribe symbolic castration.[1]
The concept also serves to illuminate the dynamics of transference, fantasy, and sexual identity, providing a formal structure through which subjectivity is mediated in analysis.
Reception and Interpretation
Scholars such as Bruce Fink and the contributors to Reading Lacan’s Écrits emphasize the importance of this essay for understanding Lacan’s broader structuralist commitments and his theory of sexual difference.[4][2] Fink, for example, underscores Lacan’s intention to reframe castration as a symbolic operation rather than a developmental trauma.
Feminist critics have both engaged with and critiqued Lacan’s notion of the phallus, particularly for its implications regarding femininity and symbolic exclusion. Thinkers such as Luce Irigaray and Judith Butler have reinterpreted the phallus through deconstructive and gender-critical lenses.
Influence in Psychoanalytic and Cultural Theory
Lacan’s theorization of the phallus has had lasting influence in feminist psychoanalysis, queer theory, and cultural studies. It has informed readings of literary and cinematic texts, analyses of gender performativity, and critiques of patriarchal ideology. The phallus as signifier has become a key figure in discussions of symbolic power, subjectivity, and language across disciplines.
Criticism and Debates
While influential, Lacan’s theory has also drawn critique for its perceived phallocentrism and obscurity. Some feminists argue that the centrality of the phallus reinforces male privilege symbolically. Others contend that Lacan’s insistence on the symbolic nature of the phallus opens space for subversion and resignification.[3]
Moreover, debates persist over the clinical utility of the concept, particularly in relation to nonbinary and trans identities that challenge Lacan’s structural sexuation framework.
Conclusion
“The Signification of the Phallus” remains a cornerstone of Lacanian theory, encapsulating his efforts to reinterpret Freudian concepts within the framework of structural linguistics and symbolic logic. It introduces the phallus as a non-biological operator essential to the formation of subjectivity, desire, and sexual difference. Its theoretical and clinical implications continue to provoke discussion, critique, and reinterpretation across psychoanalytic and interdisciplinary fields.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Bruce Fink, Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English, trans. Bruce Fink (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006), pp. 575–585.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Stijn Vanheule, Derek Hook, and Calum Neill, eds., Reading Lacan's Écrits: From “The Signification of the Phallus” to “Metaphor of the Subject” (London: Routledge, 2018), p. 9.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Derek Hook, “The Signification of the Phallus,” in Reading Lacan’s Écrits, ed. Vanheule, Hook, Neill (London: Routledge, 2018), pp. 33–49.
- ↑ Bruce Fink, Lacan to the Letter: Reading Écrits Closely (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004), pp. 110–131.