Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Sinthome

1,972 bytes added, 23:14, 20 May 2019
The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (<a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles">https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles</a>).
{{Top}}symptôme|sinthome{{Bottom}}
=====Definition=====
The term [[sinthome]] is, as [[Lacan]] points out, an archaic way of writing what has more recently been spelt [[symptôme]].
sinthome The =====Jacques Lacan==========1975-6 Seminar=====[[Lacan]] introduces the term sinthome in 1975, as the title for the 1975-6 [[seminar]], which isboth a continuing elaboration of his [[topology]], as Lacan points outextending the previous [[seminar]]'s focus on the [[borromean knot]], and an archaic way exploration of the writings of[[James Joyce]].
writing what has more recently been spelt symptÙme. Through this ''coincidentia oppositorum'' -- bringing together [[mathematics|mathematical theory]] and the intricate weave of the [[James Joyce|Joycean]] [[text]] -- [[Lacan introduces ]] redefines the[[psychoanalytic]] [[symptom]] in [[terms]] of his final [[topology]] of the [[subject]].
term =====Development of the Concept of the "Symptom"=====Before the [[appearance]] of [[sinthome]], divergent currents in 1975, as [[Lacan]]'s [[thinking]] lead to different inflections of the title for [[concept]] of the 1975-6 seminar, which is both a continuing[[symptom]].
elaboration of his topology=====Symptom Inscribed in Writing Process=====As early as 1957, extending the previous seminar's focus on [[symptom]] is said to be "inscribed in a writing [[process]],"<ref>{{Ec}} p.445</ref> which already implies a different view to that which regards thesymptom as a ciphered [[message]].
BORROMEAN KNOT=====Symptom as pure ''Jouissance''=====In 1963 [[Lacan]] goes on to [[state]] that the [[symptom]], and an exploration of unlike [[acting out]], does not call for [[interpretation]]; in itself, it is not a call to the writings of James Joyce[[Other]] but a pure ''[[jouissance]]'' addressed to no one.<ref>{{L}} 1962-3. ''[[Seminar X|Le Séminaire. Livre X. L'angoisse]]'', 1962-3, unpublished. Through</ref>
this coincidentia oppositorum =====The Way in Which the Subject Enjoys the Unconscious=====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- bringing together mathematical theory and 5 [[seminar]], that "the symptom can only be defined as the way in which each subject [[enjoys]] [''jouit''] theunconscious, in so far as the unconscious determines him."<ref>{{L}} 1974-5. ''[[Seminar XXII|Le Séminaire. Livre XXII. RSI]]'', 1974-5, published in ''[[Ornicar?]]'', nos. 2-5, 1975.</ref>
intricate weave =====Symptom as the Particular Modality of the Subject's ''Jouissance''=====This move from conceiving of the Joycean text - Lacan redefines [[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 psychoanalyticterm ''[[sinthome]]''.
symptom in terms =====Kernel of his final topology Enjoyment Beyond the Symbolic=====The ''[[sinthome]]'' thus designates a signifying formulation beyond [[analysis]], a kernel of [[enjoyment]] immune to the efficacy of the subject[[symbolic]].
1. Before =====Organization of ''Jouissance''=====Far from calling for some [[analytic]] "[[dissolution]]," the appearance ''[[sinthome]]'' is what "allows one to live" by providing a unique organisation of sinthome, divergent currents in Lacan's thinking'[[jouissance]]''.
lead to different inflections =====Identification with the ''Sinthome''=====The task of ''[[analysis]]'' thus becomes, in one of [[Lacan]]'s last definitions of the concept [[end of analysis]], to [[identify]] with the SYMPTOM''[[sinthome]]''. As early as 1957,
=====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 symptom is said [[sinthome]] as unanalysable, and amounts to be 'inscribed in a writing processan exegetical problem beyond the familiar one of [[Lacan]]' (Ec, 445), whichs dense [[rhetoric]].
already implies =====''Sinthome'' as Fourth Ring in Borromean Knot=====The 1975-6 [[seminar]] extends the [[theory]] of the [[borromean knot]], which in the previous seminar had been proposed as the essential [[structure]] of the [[subject]], by adding the ''[[sinthome]]'' as a different view fourth ring to that which regards the symptom as [[triad]] of the [[real]], the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]], tying together a[[knot]] which constantly threatens to come undone.
ciphered messageThis [[knot]] is not offered as a [[model]] but as a rigorously non-[[metaphorical]] description of a [[topology]] "before which the [[imagination]] fails. In 1963 Lacan goes on to state that the symptom"<ref>{{L}} 195-6. ''[[Seminar XXIII|Le Séminaire. Livre XXIII. Le sinthome, 1975-76]]'', published in ''[[Ornicar]]?'', nos 6-11, unlike1976-7. 9 December 1975.</ref>
acting outSince [[meaning]] (''sens'') is already figured within the [[knot]], does not call for interpretation; in itselfat the intersection of the [[symbolic]] and the [[imaginary]], it follows that the function of the ''[[sinthome]]'' -- intervening to [[knot]] together [[real]], [[symbolic]] and [[imaginary]] - is not a call to the Otherinevitably beyond [[meaning]].
but a pure jouissance addressed to no one (=====Writings of James Joyce=====[[Lacan, 1962-3: seminar ]] had been an enthusiastic reader of 23[[Joyce]] since his youth.<ref>{{Ec}} p.25; {{S20}} p.37</ref>
January 1963; see MillerIn the 1975-6 [[seminar]], 1987: 11)[[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. Such comments anticipate the radical
transformation Faced in his [[childhood]] by the radical non-function / [[absence]] (''carence'') of Lacanthe [[Name-of-the-Father]], [[Joyce]] managed to avoid [[psychosis]] by deploying his [[art]] as 's thought implicit 'suppléance'', as a supplementary cord in his shift from the linguistic[[subject]]ive [[knot]].
definition [[Lacan]] focuses on [[Joyce]]'s youthful "epiphanies" (experiences of the symptom - an almost [[hallucinatory]] intensity which were then recorded in enigmatic, fragmentary [[texts]]) as a signifier - to his statementinstances of "radical [[foreclosure]], " in which "the 1974-5real forecloses meaning."<ref>[[Seminar]] of 16 March 1976</ref>
seminar====="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]]'', that 'the symptom can only be defined as invasion of the [[symbolic order]] by the way in which each[[subject]]'s private ''[[jouissance]]''.
subject enjoys One of [jouit[Lacan] the unconscious]'s puns, in so far as the unconscious determines''[[sinthome|synth-homme]]'', implies this kind of "artificial" [[self]]-creation.
him=====Lacan' (s Engagement with Joyce's Writing=====[[Lacan]]'s engagement with [[Joyce]]'s writing does not, he insists, 1974-5: seminar of 18 February 1975)entail "applied [[psychoanalysis]]."
This move from conceiving =====Topological Theory=====[[Topology|Topological theory]] is not conceived of the symptom as merely [[another]] kind of representational account, but as a [[form]] of writing, a message praxis aiming to [[figure]] that which can beescapes the [[imaginary]].
deciphered =====''Saint Homme''==========New Way of Using Language to Organize Enjoyment=====To that extent, rather than a theoretical [[object]] or "[[case]]," [[Joyce]] becomes an exemplary ''[[sinthome|saint homme]]'' who, by reference refusing any [[imaginary]] solution, was able to the unconscious 'structured like invent a new way of using [[language', ]] toorganise [[enjoyment]].
seeing it as the trace of the particular modality of the subject==See Also=={{See}}* [[Borromean knot]]* [[Interpretation]]* 's jouissance,'[[Jouissance]]''||* [[Message]]* [[Psychosis]]* [[Signifier]]||* [[Subject]]* [[Symptom]]* [[Topology]]{{Also}}
culminates in the introduction of the term sinthome. The sinthome thus==References== designates a signifying formulation beyond analysis, a kernel of enjoyment  immune to the efficacy of the symbolic. Far from calling for some analytic 'dissolution', the sinthome is what 'allows one to live' by providing a unique organisation of jouissance. The task of analysis thus becomes, in one of Lacan's last definitions of the end of analysis, to identify with the sinthome.  2. The theoretical shift from linguistics to topology which marks the final period of Lacan's work constitutes the true status of the sinthome as unanaly- sable, and amounts to an exegetical problem beyond the familiar one of  Lacan's dense rhetoric. The 1975-6 seminar extends the theory of the Borro-  mean knot, which in the previous seminar had been proposed as the essential  structure of the subject, by adding the sinthome as a fourth ring to the triad of  the real, the symbolic and the imaginary, tying together a knot which con- stantly threatens to come undone. This knot is not offered as a model but as a rigorously non<div style="font-metaphorical description of a topology 'before which the imagination fails' (Lacan, 1975-6size: seminar of 9 December 1975). 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.  3. Lacan had been an enthusiastic reader of Joyce since his youth (see the  11px" class="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 supple- mentary cord in the subjective 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 fore- closure', in which 'the real forecloses meaning' (seminar of 16 March 1976). The Joycean text - from the epiphany to Finnegans Wake - entailed a special relation to language; a 'destructive' refashioning of it as sinthome, the invasionof the symbolic order by the subject's private jouissance. One of Lacan's puns, synth-homme, implies this kind of 'artificial' self-creation.  Lacan's engagement with Joyce's writing does not, he insists, entail 'applied psychoanalysis'. Topological theory is not conceived of as merely another kind of representational account, but as a form of writing, a praxis aiming to figure that which escapes the imaginary. To that extent, rather than a theore- tical object or 'case', Joyce becomes an exemplary saint homme who, by refusing any imaginary solution, was able to invent a new way of using language to organise enjoyment.   == References ==small">
<references/>
</div>
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]][[Category:Jacques Lacan]][[Category:Dictionary]][[Category:Treatment]][[Category:Practice]][[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Terms]]
[[Category:ConceptsReal]][[Category:PsychoanalysisOK]] __NOTOC__
Anonymous user
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/Special:MobileDiff/1989...46417"

Navigation menu