Discourse

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Revision as of 06:03, 26 April 2006 by Riot Hero (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

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



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 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 which undermines all attempts at domination and mastery. (For further

information on the four discourses, see Bracher et al., 1994.)