Dissolution
1
Letter of dissolution
Freudienne school of Paris
I speak without the least hope - to make me hear in particular. I know that I do it - to add to it what that comprises of unconscious. Cest there my advantage over the man who thinks and does not see that initially it speaks. Favour that I must only with my experiment. Because in the interval of the word that it méconnait so that it believes to make thought, the man muddles himself, which does not encourage it. So that the man thinks weak, all the more weak as it mad… to precisely muddle itself. There is a problem of the school. It is not a enigma. Also, I am directed there, not too early. This problem is shown such, to have a solution: it is say it - dissolution.
To hear like Association which, to this school, gives legal statute. That it is enough to one which from goes away so that all are free, it is, in my node borroméen, truth of each one, it is necessary that it is me in my School.
I am solved there for what it would function. If I did not put myself transversely, with wrong way of it for what I founded it. Maybe for a work, I said it - who, in the field that Freud opened, restore the ploughshare slicing of his truth - which brings back the original praxis that it entitled under the name of psychoanalysis in the duty which returns to him in our world - which, by an assiduous criticism, there denounces the deviations and compromisings which deaden its progress by degrading its employment. Objective that I maintenances. This is why I dissolve. And me lime pits not of the aforesaid “members of the School freudienne” - rather thanked I, by them to be taught, from where me, I failed - i.e. am muddled to me. This teaching is invaluable for me. I make it profitable.
In other words, I persevere.
And invites to join derechef those which, this January 1980, want to continue with Lacan.
That the writing of a candidature makes them at once know ego. In the 10 days, to cross short to ambient debility, I will publish adhesions first which I will have approved, like engagement of assiduous criticism of I' EFP nourished what as regards “deviations and compromisings”.
Showing in act which it theirs is not done that my School would be Institution, effect of consolidated group, at the expense of the effect of awaited speech of the experiment, when it is freudienne. One knows what it of has cost, that Freud allowed that the psychoanalytical group overrides the speech, becomes Eglise.
The international one, since it is its name, is reduced to the symptom which it is of what Freud expected. But it is not it which makes weight. It is I' Eglise, the true one, which supports the Marxism of what it gives again to him new blood… of a renewed direction. Why not the psychoanalysis, when it transfers with the direction? I do not say that for a vain mockery. The stability of the religion comes from what the direction is always a monk. From where my obstinacy in my way of mathèmes - which does not prevent anything, but testifies to what it would be necessary for, the analyst, to put it at the step of its function.
If I father-severe, it is that the made experiment calls against-experiment which compensates.
I do not need many people. And there is world which I do not need.
I let them in plan so that they show me what they can do, except me encumber, and turn out of water a teaching where all is weighed. Will those which I will admit with me do better? At least will be able they to be prevailed of what I leave them the chance.
The Directory of the EFP, such as I composed it, will dispatch what is woven businesses known as current, until an Extraordinary meeting, to be the last, convened at the appropriate time in accordance with the law, proceeds to the devolution of her goods, that the treasurers, Rene BaiIly and Solange Faladé will have estimated.
Guitrancourt, this January 5, 1980
2
Dissolution
Seminar of January 15, 1980
- the text of this seminar was published in the newspaper Le Monde, on January 26, 1980
- letter with the newspaper the dated January 24, 1980 World
- Seminar of January 15, 1980I give to the World the text of this letter with my seminar of the 15, if he wants to publish it well whole. So that it is known that no one near me did not learn anything, to put forward itself some. Yes, the psychoanalyst detests his act. It is so much so that it denies it, and denies, and disavows - and than it curses that which points out it to him, Lacan Jacques, it not to name, even clamp haro on Jacques Alain Miller, odious to show it with-less-a to read it. Without more regards than it is necessary for the established analysts. Does my master key seize them too late, that I do not have of it anything which is worth? Or this is to have entrusted of it the responsibility to which testifies not to have seen anything the structure which justifies it? That the psychoanalysts do not cry that of which I reduce them. The experiment, I do not leave it in plan. The act, I give them chance to face there.
What it shows me, it is that there is truth to answer of faintness only particular to each one of those which I call parlêtres.
There is no there common dead end, because nothing makes it possible to suppose - that all confluence.
The use of the one which we do not find that in meaning the unit of reality melts by no means. Except providing us the image of the sand grain. One can only say, even to make heap, it does all. One needs an axiom for it, that is to say a position to say it tel.
That it can be counted, like says it Archimedes, is there only sign of reality, not of an unspecified universe.
---
I do not have any more a School. I raised it point of support (always Archimedes) which I took of the sand grain of my stating.
Now I have a heap - a heap of people who want that I take them. I will not make a whole of it.
No the whole.
I do not need many people, have I says, and it is true - but what good is the statement, if there are many people which need me?
At least, which believes it (to need me). Who believes it enough for me the written statement.
And why wouldn't I believe it not, me too? Since I amount with the number of the easily deceived ones, as each one knows.
I do not await anything the people and something of operation. Therefore, it is necessary well that I innovate, since this School, I loupée it, to have failed to produce Analysts of icelle (A.E) who are with the height.
To which elected officials of my jury of approval I will have advised to vote for itself if of adventure it were there, under passer by, now presented?
Also not does not hasten me to remake school.
Who is who, not does not prejudge, but give me from there to the experiment to make, freudienne if it may be.
The such appointment celebrates in love ones at the time of a ball to the Opera. Horror when they let slip their mask: it was not him, it either besides.
Illustration of my failure in this Hétérité - forgive-me of Ubris - which disappointed me enough so that I am delivered statement of it that there is no sexual relation.
Contrary to what is said, of pleasure phallic, “” woman, if I dare statement since it does not exist, is not private.
It does not have it less than the man to what its instrument (organon) clings. If little that itself is equipped with it (bus let us recognize that it is thin), it does not obtain of it less the effect of what in limit the other edge of this pleasure, namely the unconscious irreducible one.
It is even in that that “the” women, who, they, exist, are the best psychoanalysts - worst on the occasion.
It be with condition to not himself daze of a nature antiphallique, of which it there have not trace in the unconscious, that they can hear what of this unconscious hold not to himself say, but reach with what himself of work out, like their get the pleasure properly phallic.
One day besides to which I aspire, the misunderstanding will impress me as well to come from you as I will be pathetic at the point not to hold more there.
If it happens that I from go away, you say that is in order to be Autre finally.
One can be satisfied to be Autre like everyone, after a life passed to want to be it in spite of the Law.
Le Monde January 26, 1980<a></a><a></a>
