Difference between revisions of "End of analysis"
(→Stages) |
|||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| − | + | ==Stages== | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
[[Lacan]] conceives of this end-point in various ways: | [[Lacan]] conceives of this end-point in various ways: | ||
| Line 40: | Line 37: | ||
:3. In 1964 he describes it as the point when the [[analysand]] has "[[traverse]]d the radical [[fantasy]]."<ref>{{S11}} p.273</ref> | :3. In 1964 he describes it as the point when the [[analysand]] has "[[traverse]]d the radical [[fantasy]]."<ref>{{S11}} p.273</ref> | ||
| − | :4. In the last decade of his teaching, he describes the end of analysis as "[[identification]] with the ''[[sinthome]]''", and as "knowing what to do with the | + | :4. In the last decade of his teaching, he describes the end of analysis as "[[identification]] with the ''[[sinthome]]''", and as "knowing what to do with the [[sinthome]]." |
| + | ==Subjective Destitution== | ||
| + | Common to all these formulations is the idea that the [[end of analysis]] involves a change in the [[subjective position]] of the [[analysand]] (the [[analysand]]'s '[[subjective destitution]]'), and a corresponding change in the position of the [[analyst]] (the loss of [[being]] [[Fr]]. ''[[désêtre]]''] of the [[analyst]], the fall of the [[analyst]] from the position of the [[subject-supposed-to-know]]). | ||
| + | At the [[end of analysis]], the [[analyst]] is reduced to a mere [[surplus]], a pure [[objet petit a]], the [[cause of desire|cause of the analysand's desire]]. | ||
| + | ==Analytic Training== | ||
| + | Since [[Lacan]] argues that all psychoanalysts should have experienced the process of [[analytic treatment]] from beginning to end, the [[end of analysis]] is also the passage from [[analysand]] to [[analyst]]. | ||
| + | <blockquote>"The true termination of an analysis" is therefore no more and no less than that which "prepares you to become an analyst."<ref>{{S7}} p.303</ref></blockquote> | ||
| + | ==The Pass== | ||
| + | In 1967, Lacan introduced the procedure of the [[pass]] as a means of testifying to the [[end of analysis]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | By means of this procedure, [[Lacan]] hoped to avoid the dangers of regarding the [[end of analysis]] as a quasi-mystical, ineffable experience. | ||
| − | + | Such a view is antithetical to [[psychoanalysis]], which is all about putting things into words. | |
| − | |||
| − | + | ==Identification with the Analyst== | |
| + | Lacan criticises those [[psychoanalysts]] who have seen the [[end of analysis]] in terms of [[identification]] with the [[analyst]]. | ||
| − | + | In opposition to this view of [[psychoanalysis]], [[Lacan]] states that the "crossing of the plane of identification is possible."<ref>{{S11}} p.273</ref> | |
| − | + | Not only is it possible to go beyond [[identification]], but it is necessary, for otherwise it is not [[psychoanalysis]] but [[suggestion]], which is the antithesis of [[psychoanalysis]]. | |
| − | + | <blockquote>"The fundamental mainspring of the analytic operation is the maintenance of the distance between the I - identification - and the a."<ref>{{S11}} p.273</ref></blockquote> | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | =='Liquidation' of the Transference== | |
| + | Lacan also rejects the idea that the [[end of analysis]] involves the 'liquidation' of the [[transference]].<ref>{{S11}} 267</ref> | ||
| − | + | The idea that the [[transference]] can be 'liquidated' is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the [[transference]], according to which the [[transference]] is viewed as a kind of [[illusion]] which can be transcended. | |
| − | + | Such a view is erroneous because it entirely overlooks the [[symbolic]] nature of the transference; transference is part of the essential [[structure]] of [[speech]]. | |
| − | + | Although [[analytic treatment]] involves the resolution of the particular [[transference]] relationship established with the [[analyst]], [[transference]] itself still subsists after the [[end of analysis]]. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | ==What it is not== | |
| − | + | Other misconceptions of the [[end of analysis]] which [[Lacan]] rejects are: "strengthening the ego", "adaptation to reality" and "happiness". | |
| − | <ref> | + | The [[end of analysis]] is not the disappearance of the [[symptom]], nor the [[cure]] of an underlying disease (e.g. [[neurosis]]), since [[analysis]] is not essentially a therapeutic process but a search for [[truth]], and the [[truth]] is not always beneficial.<ref>{{S17}} p.122</ref> |
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
Revision as of 18:40, 7 August 2006
"end of analysis" (Fr. fin d'analyse)
---
In Analysis Terminable and Interminable, Freud reflects upon whether it is ever possible to discusses the question of whether it is ever possible to conclude an analysis, or whether all analyses are necessarily incomplete.[1]
Lacan's answer to this question is that it is indeed possible to speak of concluding an analysis.
Although not all analyses are carried through to their conclusion, analytic treatment is a logical process which has an end, and Lacan designates this end-point by the term "end of analysis" (Fr. fin d'analyse).
Contents
The Aim of Psychoanalytic Treatment
Given that many analyses are broken off before the end of analysis is reached, the question arises as to whether such analyses can be considered successful or not.
To answer this question it is necessary to distinguish between the end of analysis and the aim of psychoanalytic treatment.
The aim of psychoanalytic treatment is to lead the analysand to articulate the truth about his desire.
Any analysis, however incomplete, may be regarded as successful when it achieves this aim.
The question of the end of analysis is therefore something more than whether a course of analytic treatment has or has not achieved its aim; it is a question of whether or not the treatment has reached its logical end-point.
Stages
Lacan conceives of this end-point in various ways:
- 1. In the early 1950s, the end of analysis is described as "the advent of a true speech and the realisation by the subject of his history."[2]
"The subject ... begins the analysis by speaking about himself without speaking to you, or by speaking to you without speaking about himself. When he can speak to you about himself, the analysis will be over."[3]
- The end of analysis is also described as coming to terms with one's own mortality.[4]
- 2. In 1960, Lacan describes the end of analysis as a state of anxiety and abandonment, and compares it to the helplessness of the human infant.
- 4. In the last decade of his teaching, he describes the end of analysis as "identification with the sinthome", and as "knowing what to do with the sinthome."
Subjective Destitution
Common to all these formulations is the idea that the end of analysis involves a change in the subjective position of the analysand (the analysand's 'subjective destitution'), and a corresponding change in the position of the analyst (the loss of being Fr. désêtre] of the analyst, the fall of the analyst from the position of the subject-supposed-to-know).
At the end of analysis, the analyst is reduced to a mere surplus, a pure objet petit a, the cause of the analysand's desire.
Analytic Training
Since Lacan argues that all psychoanalysts should have experienced the process of analytic treatment from beginning to end, the end of analysis is also the passage from analysand to analyst.
"The true termination of an analysis" is therefore no more and no less than that which "prepares you to become an analyst."[6]
The Pass
In 1967, Lacan introduced the procedure of the pass as a means of testifying to the end of analysis.
By means of this procedure, Lacan hoped to avoid the dangers of regarding the end of analysis as a quasi-mystical, ineffable experience.
Such a view is antithetical to psychoanalysis, which is all about putting things into words.
Identification with the Analyst
Lacan criticises those psychoanalysts who have seen the end of analysis in terms of identification with the analyst.
In opposition to this view of psychoanalysis, Lacan states that the "crossing of the plane of identification is possible."[7]
Not only is it possible to go beyond identification, but it is necessary, for otherwise it is not psychoanalysis but suggestion, which is the antithesis of psychoanalysis.
"The fundamental mainspring of the analytic operation is the maintenance of the distance between the I - identification - and the a."[8]
'Liquidation' of the Transference
Lacan also rejects the idea that the end of analysis involves the 'liquidation' of the transference.[9]
The idea that the transference can be 'liquidated' is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the transference, according to which the transference is viewed as a kind of illusion which can be transcended.
Such a view is erroneous because it entirely overlooks the symbolic nature of the transference; transference is part of the essential structure of speech.
Although analytic treatment involves the resolution of the particular transference relationship established with the analyst, transference itself still subsists after the end of analysis.
What it is not
Other misconceptions of the end of analysis which Lacan rejects are: "strengthening the ego", "adaptation to reality" and "happiness".
The end of analysis is not the disappearance of the symptom, nor the cure of an underlying disease (e.g. neurosis), since analysis is not essentially a therapeutic process but a search for truth, and the truth is not always beneficial.[10]
See Also
References
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. Analysis Terminable and Interminable. 1937. SE XXIII p.211
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.88
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p.373, n. 1
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.104-5
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p.273
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book VII. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959-60. Trans. Dennis Porter. London: Routledge, 1992. p.303
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p.273
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p.273
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. 267
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XVII. L'envers de la psychanalyse, 19669-70. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p.122
