Difference between revisions of "A la mémoire d'Ernest Jones sur sa théorie du symbolisme"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles).)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
1959 (21 pp.)-A LA MEMOIRE D'ERNEST JONES: SUR LA THEOniE DU SYMBOLISME (IN MEMORY OF ERNEST JONES: ON THE THEORY OF SYMBOLlSM)-1960  
 
1959 (21 pp.)-A LA MEMOIRE D'ERNEST JONES: SUR LA THEOniE DU SYMBOLISME (IN MEMORY OF ERNEST JONES: ON THE THEORY OF SYMBOLlSM)-1960  
The decorum of this memorial tones down the attacks against Jones who had been called the "little child of psychoanalysis." After a few personal and historical reminders, Lacan tackles the theoretical divergences. If he pays homage to Jones for choosing Freud against Jung, he also stresses his numer�ous mistakes, especially concerning the function of language. For symbolism one must substitute Symbolic: "As the need is submitted to the demand, it is the concrete incidence of the signifier that, by repressing desire into the po�sition of being misknown [meconnu], gives its order to the unconscious." Many pages address the question of the phallus. The author attacks Jones's articles on sexual difference (1927 and 1932) and his address to the Society of Vienna (1935), in which, joining "Melanie Klein's genetism of fantasies," he would have largely contributed to misleading all psychoanalytic thought in the direction of symbolism. Only Lacan's 1953 Discourse in Rome would have finally broken the malevolent spell. The seminars often present Jones as "the champion of English feminists": he is accused of practicing "figure skating" in order to take the opposite view of Freud's positions on the phallic phase, while claiming to be in perfect agreement. Elsewhere, his Protestantism seems to be responsible for his "misconstructions" [meconnaissances]. In any case, he did not see that "the only notion that allows understanding of the symbolism of the phallus is the specificity of its function as signifier" and "as signifier of lack" (39, 41). However, in the end he is saved in spite of himself. His study on Punchinello truly reveals the winged phallus, the "un�conscious fantasy of male desire's impossibilities, the treasure in which wom�an's infinite impotence [impuissance] is exhausted."
+
The decorum of this memorial tones down the attacks against [[Jones]] who had been called the "little [[child]] of [[psychoanalysis]]." After a few personal and historical reminders, [[Lacan]] tackles the [[theoretical]] divergences. If he pays homage to Jones for choosing [[Freud]] against [[Jung]], he also stresses his numer�ous mistakes, especially concerning the function of [[language]]. For [[symbolism]] one must [[substitute]] [[Symbolic]]: "As the [[need]] is submitted to the [[demand]], it is the [[concrete]] incidence of the [[signifier]] that, by repressing [[desire]] into the po�sition of [[being]] misknown [meconnu], gives its [[order]] to the [[unconscious]]." Many pages address the question of the [[phallus]]. The [[author]] attacks Jones's articles on [[sexual]] [[difference]] (1927 and 1932) and his address to the [[Society]] of [[Vienna]] (1935), in which, joining "Melanie [[Klein]]'s genetism of [[fantasies]]," he would have largely contributed to misleading all [[psychoanalytic]] [[thought]] in the direction of symbolism. Only Lacan's 1953 [[Discourse]] in Rome would have finally broken the malevolent spell. The [[seminars]] often [[present]] Jones as "the champion of [[English]] feminists": he is accused of practicing "[[figure]] skating" in order to take the opposite view of Freud's positions on the [[phallic]] [[phase]], while claiming to be in perfect agreement. Elsewhere, his [[Protestantism]] seems to be [[responsible]] for his "misconstructions" [meconnaissances]. In any [[case]], he did not see that "the only [[notion]] that allows [[understanding]] of the symbolism of the phallus is the specificity of its function as signifier" and "as signifier of [[lack]]" (39, 41). However, in the end he is saved in spite of himself. His study on Punchinello truly reveals the winged phallus, the "un�conscious [[fantasy]] of [[male]] desire's impossibilities, the treasure in which wom�an's infinite [[impotence]] [impuissance] is exhausted."

Revision as of 00:48, 24 May 2019

link


1959 (21 pp.)-A LA MEMOIRE D'ERNEST JONES: SUR LA THEOniE DU SYMBOLISME (IN MEMORY OF ERNEST JONES: ON THE THEORY OF SYMBOLlSM)-1960 The decorum of this memorial tones down the attacks against Jones who had been called the "little child of psychoanalysis." After a few personal and historical reminders, Lacan tackles the theoretical divergences. If he pays homage to Jones for choosing Freud against Jung, he also stresses his numer�ous mistakes, especially concerning the function of language. For symbolism one must substitute Symbolic: "As the need is submitted to the demand, it is the concrete incidence of the signifier that, by repressing desire into the po�sition of being misknown [meconnu], gives its order to the unconscious." Many pages address the question of the phallus. The author attacks Jones's articles on sexual difference (1927 and 1932) and his address to the Society of Vienna (1935), in which, joining "Melanie Klein's genetism of fantasies," he would have largely contributed to misleading all psychoanalytic thought in the direction of symbolism. Only Lacan's 1953 Discourse in Rome would have finally broken the malevolent spell. The seminars often present Jones as "the champion of English feminists": he is accused of practicing "figure skating" in order to take the opposite view of Freud's positions on the phallic phase, while claiming to be in perfect agreement. Elsewhere, his Protestantism seems to be responsible for his "misconstructions" [meconnaissances]. In any case, he did not see that "the only notion that allows understanding of the symbolism of the phallus is the specificity of its function as signifier" and "as signifier of lack" (39, 41). However, in the end he is saved in spite of himself. His study on Punchinello truly reveals the winged phallus, the "un�conscious fantasy of male desire's impossibilities, the treasure in which wom�an's infinite impotence [impuissance] is exhausted."