24,656
edits
Changes
Metaphor
,→Algebraic Formula
[[Metaphor]] thus corresponds to [[Saussure]]'s paradigmatic relations (which hold ''in absentia'') and [[metonymy]] to [[syntagmatic]] relationships (which hold ''in praesentia'').<ref>Jakobson, Roman. (1956) "Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. ''Selected Writings'', vol. II, ''[[Word]] and Language'', The [[Hague]]: Mouton, 1971, pp. 239-59.</ref>
=====Influence=====[[Lacan]], like many [[other]] [[French]] intellectuals of the [[time]] (such as [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]] and [[Roland Barthes]]), was quick to take up [[Jakobson]]'s [[interpretation|reintepretation]] of [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]]. In the very same year that [[Jakobson]]'s seminal article was published, [[Lacan]] refers to it in his [[seminar]] and begins to incorporate the opposition into his [[linguistic]] rereading of [[Freud]].<ref>{{S3}} p. 218-20, 222-30</ref> A year later he dedicates a [[Categorywhole]] paper to a more detailed [[analysis]] of the opposition.<ref>{{L}} ''[[Seminar V|Le Séminaire. Livre V. Les formations de l'inconscient, 1957-58]]'', unpublished.</ref> =====Substitution=====Following [[Jakobson]]'s [[identification]] of [[metaphor]] with the substitutive axis of [[language]], [[Lacan]] defines [[metaphor]] as the substitution of one [[signifier]] for another, and provides the first [[formula]] of [[metaphor]].<ref>{{E}} p.164</ref> =====Algebraic Formula=====[[Image:SymbolicLacan-firstmetaphor.jpg|center|200px|First formula of metaphor]] This formula is to be read as follows. On the lefthand side of the equation, [[Categoryoutside]] the brackets, [[Lacan]] writes '''<i>f</i>''' '''S''', the signifying function, which is to say the effect of [[signification]]. [[Inside]] the brackets, he writes '''S'/S''', which means "the substitution of one signifier for another." On the righthand side of the equation there is '''S''', the [[signifier]], and '''<i>s</i>''', the [[signified]]. Between these two [[symbol]]s there is the [[symbol]] (+) which represents the crossing of the [[bar]] ('''-''') of the [[Saussure]]an [[sign|algorithm]], and which represents "the emergence of signification." The [[sign]] = is to be read: "is congruent with." Thus the whole formula reads:Termsthe signifying function of the substitution of one [[signifier]] for another is congruent with the crossing of the [[bar]]. [[CategoryImage:ConceptsLacan-secondmetaphor.jpg|center|200px|Second formula of metaphor]] =====Signification=====The [[idea]] behind this rather obscure formulation is that there is an inherent [[resistance]] to [[signification]] in [[language]] (a [[resistance]] which is [[symbolize]]d by the [[bar]] in the [[Saussure]]an [[sign|algorithm]]). [[Meaning]] does not simply appear spontaneously, but is the product of a specific operation which crosses over the [[bar]]. The formula is meant to illustrate [[Lacan]]'s [[thesis]] that this operation, the production of [[meaning]], which [[Lacan]] calls "[[signification]]", is only made possible by [[metaphor]]. [[Metaphor]]is thus the passage of the [[signifier]] into the [[signified]], the creation of a new [[signified]]. =====Second Formula=====[[CategoryLacan]] presents another formula for [[metaphor]] in a paper written a few months later.<ref>{{E}} p. 200</ref> [[Lacan]]'s own explanation of this second formula is as follows:Psychoanalysis <blockquote>The [[capital]] Ss are [[signifiers]], x the unknown signification and s the signified induced by the metaphor, which consists in substitution in the signifying [[chain]] of S for S'. The elision of S', represented here by the bar through it, is the condition of the success of the metaphor.<ref>{{E}} p.200</ref></blockquote> =====Contexts=====[[Lacan]] puts his [[concept]] of [[metaphor]] to use in a variety of contexts. =====Oedipus Complex=====[[Lacan]] analyzes the [[Oedipus complex]] in terms of a [[metaphor]] because it invovles the crucial concept of substitution; in this [[case]], the substitution of the [[Name-of-the-Father]] for the [[desire]] of the [[mother]]. This fundamental [[metaphor]], which founds the possibility of all ther [[metaphor]], is designated by [[Lacan]] as the [[paternal metaphor]]. =====Repression and Neurotic Symptoms=====[[Lacan]] argues that [[repression]] ([[secondary repression]]) has the [[structure]] of a [[metaphor]]. The "[[Categorymetonymic]] [[object]]" (the [[signifier]] which is elided, S' in the previous formula) is repressed, but returns in the [[surplus]] meaning (+) produced in the [[metaphor]]. The [[return]] of the [[repressed]] (the [[symptom]]) therefore also has the [[structure]] of a [[metaphor]]; indeed; [[Lacan]] asserts that "[[The Symptom|the symptom]] ''is'' a metaphor."<ref>{{E}} p.175</ref> =====Condensation=====[[Lacan]] also follows [[Jakobson]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] distinction to the fundamental mechanisms of the [[dream]] work described by [[Freud]]. However, he differs from [[Jakobson]] over the precise [[nature]] of this parallel. Whereas for [[Jakobson]], [[metonymy]] is linked to both [[displacement]] and [[condensation]], [[metaphor]] to [[identification]] and [[symbolism]], [[Lacan]] [[links]] [[metaphor]] to [[condensation]] and [[metonymy]] to [[displacement]]. [[Lacan]] then argues that just as [[displacement]] is logically prior to [[condensation]], so [[metonymy]] is the condition for [[metaphor]]. =====The Anal Drive=====In his paper, "[[Sigmund Freud:Jacques Bibliography|On transformations of instinct as exemplified in anal eroticism]]"', [[Freud]] shows how [[anal eroticism]] is closely connected with the possibility of substitution. [[Lacan]]takes this as grounds for linking [[anal eroticism]] to [[metaphor]]. <blockquote>"The [[anal]] level is the locus of metaphor - one object for another, gives the faeces in [[place]] of the [[phallus]]."<ref>{{S11}} p. 104</ref></blockquote> =====Identification=====[[Metaphor]] is also the [[structure]] of [[identification]], since the latter consists in substituting oneself for another.<ref>{{S3}} p. 218</ref> =====Love=====[[Love]] is [[structure]]d like a [[metaphor]] since it involves the operation of substitution. <blockquote>"It is insofar as the function of the ''érastès'', of the lover, who is the [[subject]] of [[lack]], comes in the place of, substitutes himself for, the function of ''érômènos'', the loved object, that the signification of love is produced."<ref>{{S8}} p. 53</ref></blockquote> ==See Also=={{See}}{{Also}} ==References==<references/> {{OK}} __NOTOC__ {{Encore}} pp. 112, 120, 127, 128