Changes

discourse (discours) Whenever Lacan uses the term 'discourse' (rather than, say, 'speech') it is in order to stress the transindividual nature of language, the fact that speech always implies another subject, an interlocu-  tor. Thus the famous Lacanian formula, 'the unconscious is the discourse of  the other' (which first appears in 1953, and later becomes 'the unconscious is  the discourse of the Other') designates the unconscious as the effects on the subject of speech that is addressed to him from elsewhere; by another subject  who has been forgotten, by another psychic locality (the other scene).  In 1969, Lacan begins to use the term 'discourse' in a slightly different way, though one that still carries with it the stress on INTERSUBJECTIVITY. From this point on the term designates 'a social bond, founded in language' (S20, 21).  Lacan identifies four possible types of social bond, four possible articulations  of the symbolic network which regulates intersubjective relations. These 'four  discourses' are the discourse of the master, the discourse of the university, the  discourse of the hysteric, and the discourse of the analyst. Lacan represents  each of the four discourses by an algorithm: each algorithm contains the following four algebraic symbols:  Si = the master signifier  S2 = knowledge (le savoir)  S = the subject  a = surplus enjoyment    What distinguishes the four discourses from one another is the positions of  these four symbols. There are four positions in the algorithms of the four discourses, each of which is designated by a different name. The names of the  four positions are shown in Figure 2; Lacan gives different names to these      the agent the other  truth production 

Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XX. Encore, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller, Paris: Seuil, 1975.     positions at different points in his work, and this figure is taken from the 1972-3 seminar (S20, 21).  Each discourse is defined by writing the four algebraic symbols in a different position. The symbols always remain in the same order, so each discourse is simply the result of rotating the symbols a quarter turn. The top-left position ('the agent') is the dominant position which defines the discourse. In addition to the four symbols, each algorithm also contains an arrow going from the agent to the other. <ref>The four discourses are shown in Figure 3 (taken from Sl7, 31).  In 1971, Lacan proposes that the position of the agent is also the position of the SEMBLANCE. In 1972, Lacan inscribes two arrows in the formulas instead of one; one arrow (which Lacan labels 'impossibility') goes from the agent to the other, and the other arrow (which is labelled 'powerlessness') goes from production to truth (S20, 21).  The discourse of the MASTER iS the basic discourse from which the other three discourses are derived. The dominant position is occupied by the master signifier (Si), which represents the subject (S) for another signifier or, more precisely, for all other signifiers (S2); however, in this signifying operation there is always a surplus, namely, objet petit a. The point is that all attempts at totalisation are doomed to failure. The discourse of the master 'masks the division of the subject' (Sl7, 118). The discourse also illustrates clearly the structure of the dialectic of the master and the slave. The master (S,) is the agent who puts the slave (S2) (O WOrk; the result of this work is a surplus (a) that the master attempts to appropriate.</ref>

Discourse of the master Discourse of the university

  the agent the other  truth production     Figure 2 The structure of the four discourses Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XX. Encore, ed. Jacques-Alain Miller, Paris: Seuil, 1975.     positions at different points in his work, and this figure is taken from the 1972-3 seminar (S20, 21).  Each discourse is defined by writing the four algebraic symbols in a different position. The symbols always remain in the same order, so each discourse is simply the result of rotating the symbols a quarter turn. The top-left position ('the agent') is the dominant position which defines the discourse. In addition to the four symbols, each algorithm also contains an arrow going from the agent to the other. The four discourses are shown in Figure 3 (taken from Sl7, 31).  In 1971, Lacan proposes that the position of the agent is also the position of the SEMBLANCE. In 1972, Lacan inscribes two arrows in the formulas instead of one; one arrow (which Lacan labels 'impossibility') goes from the agent to the other, and the other arrow (which is labelled 'powerlessness') goes from production to truth (S20, 21).  The discourse of the MASTER iS the basic discourse from which the other three discourses are derived. The dominant position is occupied by the master signifier (Si), which represents the subject (S) for another signifier or, more precisely, for all other signifiers (S2); however, in this signifying operation there is always a surplus, namely, objet petit a. The point is that all attempts at totalisation are doomed to failure. The discourse of the master 'masks the division of the subject' (Sl7, 118). The discourse also illustrates clearly the structure of the dialectic of the master and the slave. The master (S,) is the agent who puts the slave (S2) (O WOrk; the result of this work is a surplus (a) that the master attempts to appropriate.    Discourse of the master Discourse of the university  SiaS2 S24a        Discourse of the hysteric Discourse of the analyst  SMS, a->S  a S2 S2 Si   Figure 3 The four discourses  Source: Jacques Lacan, Le SÈminaire. Livre XVIL L'envers de la psychanalyse, ed. Jacques-Alain  Miller, Paris: Seuil, 1975. The discourse of the university is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the master (anticlockwise). The dominant position is occupied by knowl- edge (savoir). This illustrates the fact that behind all attempts to impart an apparently 'neutral' knowledge to the other can always be located an attempt  at mastery (mastery of knowledge, and domination of the other to whom this knowledge is imparted). The discourse of the university represents the hege- mony of knowledge, particularly visible in modernity in the form of the hegemony of science.  The discourse of the hysteric is also produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the master, but in a clockwise direction. It is not simply 'that which is uttered by a hysteric', but a certain kind of social bond in which any subject may be inscribed. The dominant position is occupied by the divided subject, the symptom. This discourse is that which points the way towards knowledge ($17, 23). Psychoanalytic treatment involves 'the structural intro- duction of the discourse of the hysteric by means of artificial conditions'; in other words, the analyst 'hystericises' the patient's discourse (Sl7, 35).  The discourse of the analyst is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the hysteric (in the same way as Freud developed psychoanalysis by giving an interpretative turn to the discourse of his hysterical patients). The position of the agent, which is the position occupied by the analyst in the treatment, is occupied by objet petit a; this illustrates the fact that the analyst must, in the  course of the treatment, become the cause of the analysand's desire (Sl7, 41). The fact that this discourse is the inverse of the discourse of the master emphasises that, for Lacan, psychoanalysis is an essentially subversive prac- tice practice which undermines all attempts at domination and mastery. (<ref>For further information on the four discourses, see Bracher et al., 1994.)</ref>