Difference between revisions of "Foreclosure"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles).)
 
(10 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{Topp}}[[forclusion]]{{Bottom}}
  
f0reclOSure (forelusion)                    From his doctoral dissertation in 1932 on,
+
==Jacques Lacan==
 +
From his [[doctoral dissertation]] in 1932 on,<ref>{{1932}}</ref> one of the central quests which animates [[Lacan]]'s [[work]] is that of [[identifying]] a specific [[psychical]] cause for [[psychosis]].  In the course of addressing this problem, two themes are constant.
  
  one of the central quests which animates Lacan's work is that of identifying
+
==The Exclusion of the Father==
 +
As early as 1938 [[Lacan]] relates the origin of [[psychosis]] to an [[exclusion]] of the [[father]] from the [[family]] [[structure]], with the consequent reduction of the latter to [[mother]]-[[child]] [[dual|relation]]s.<ref>{{1938}} p. 49</ref>  Later on in his [[Works of Jacques Lacan|work]], when [[Lacan]] distinguishes between the [[real]], [[imaginary]] and [[symbolic]] [[father]], he specifies that it is the [[absence]] of the [[symbolic]] [[father]] which is linked to [[psychosis]].
  
  a specific psychical    cause for PSYCHOSIs. In the   course of addressing this
+
==The Freudian concept of ''Verwerfung''==
 +
[[Freud]] uses the term ''[[foreclosure|Verwerfung]]''<ref>Translated as "[[foreclosure|repudiation]]" in the [[Standard Edition]]</ref> in a [[number]] of disparate ways, but [[Lacan]] focuses on one in [[particular]]: namely, the [[sense]] of a specific [[defence mechanism]] which is distinct from [[repression]] (''[[repression|Verdrängung]]''), in which "the ego rejects the incompatible [[idea]] together with its [[affect]] and behaves as if the idea had never occurred to the ego at all."<ref>{{F}} "[[Work of Sigmund Freud|The Neuro-Psychoses of Defence]]", 1894a: [[SE]] III, 58</ref>  In 1954, basing himself on a [[reading]] of the "[[Wolf Man]]" [[case]] [[history]],<ref>{{F}} "[[Work of Sigmund Freud|From the History of an Infantile Neurosis]]," 1918b: [[SE]] XVII, 79-80</ref> [[Lacan]] [[identifies]] ''[[foreclosure|Verwerfung]]'' as the specific [[mechanism]] of [[psychosis]], in which an element is rejected [[outside]] the [[symbolic order]] just as if it had never [[existence|existed]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 386-7; {{S1}} p. 57-9</ref> 
  
problem, two themes are constant.
+
At this [[time]] [[Lacan]] proposes various ways of translating the term ''[[Foreclosure|Verwerfung]]'' into [[French]], rendering it as ''rejet'', ''refus'' and ''retranchement''.<ref>{{S1}} p. 43; {{Ec}} p. 386</ref> It is not until 1956 that [[Lacan]] proposes the term ''[[foreclosure|forclusion]]'' (a term in use in the French [[legal]] [[system]]; in [[English]], "[[foreclosure]]") as the best way of translating ''[[foreclosure|Verwerfung]]'' into [[French]].<ref>{{S3}} p. 321</ref>  It is this term that [[Lacan]] continues to use for the rest of his work.
  
 +
==Name-of-the-Father==
 +
In 1954, when [[Lacan]] first turns to the [[Freud]]ian [[concept]] of ''[[foreclosure|Verwerfung]]'' in his [[search]] for a specific [[defence|mechanism]] for [[psychosis]], it is not clear exactly what is repudiated; it can be [[castration]] that is repudiated, or [[speech]] itself, or "the [[genital]] plane".<ref>{{S1}} p. 53, 58</ref>  [[Lacan]] finds a solution to the problem at the end of 1957, when he proposes the idea that it is the [[Name-of-the-Father]] -- a [[fundamental signifier]] -- that is the [[object]] of [[foreclosure]].<ref>{{E}} p. 217</ref> In this way [[Lacan]] is able to combine in one [[formula]] both of the themes that had previously dominated his [[thinking]] on the [[causality]] of [[psychosis]] -- the [[absence]] of the [[father]] and the concept of ''[[foreclosure|Verwerfung]]''. This formula remains at the heart of [[Lacan]]'s thinking on [[psychosis]] throughout the rest of his [[Work of Jacques Lacan|work]].
  
 +
===Psychotic Structure===
 +
When the [[Name-of-the-Father]] is [[foreclosed]] for a particular [[subject]], it leaves a [[hole]] in the [[symbolic order]] which can never be filled; the [[subject]] can then be said to have a [[psychotic]] [[structure]], even if he shows none of the classical [[sign]]s of [[psychosis]]. Sooner or later, when the foreclosed [[Name-of-the-Father]] reappears in the [[real]], the [[subject]] is unable to assimilate it, and the result of this "collision with the inassimilable signifier" is the "entry into psychosis" proper, characterised typically by the onset of [[hallucinations]] and/or [[delusions]].<ref>{{S3}} p. 321</ref>
  
 +
===Repression, Negation, Projection===
 +
[[Foreclosure]] is to be distinguished from [[other]] operations such as [[repression]], [[negation]], and [[projection]].  [[Foreclosure]] differs from [[repression]] in that the [[foreclosed]] [[signifier|element]] is not buried in the [[unconscious]] but expelled from the [[unconscious]].  [[Repression]] is the operation which constitutes [[neurosis]], whereas [[foreclosure]] is the operation which constitutes [[psychosis]].
  
 +
==See Also==
 +
{{See}}
 +
* [[Absence]]
 +
* [[Castration]]
 +
* [[Cause]]
 +
* [[Defence]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Delusion]]
 +
* [[Dual relation]]
 +
* [[Existence]]
 +
* [[Negation]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Projection]]
 +
* [[Repression]]
 +
* [[Signifier]]
 +
* [[Speech]]
 +
||
 +
* [[Structure]]
 +
* [[Subject]]
 +
* [[Symbolic]]
 +
* [[Psychosis]]
 +
{{Also}}
  
  e    The exclusion of the FATHER  As early as 1938 Lacan relates the origin of
+
==References==
 
+
<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
psychosis to an exclusion of the father from the family structure, with the
+
<references/>
 
+
</div>
consequent reduction of the latter to mother-child relations (Lacan, 1938: 49).
 
 
 
  Later on in his work, when Lacan distinguishes between the real, imaginary
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    and symbolic father, he specifies that it is the absence of the symbolic father
 
 
 
    which is linked to psychosis.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    .    The Freudian concept of Verwerfung          Freud uses the term Verwerfung
 
 
 
    (translated as 'repudiation' in the Standard Edition) in a number of disparate
 
 
 
    ways (see Laplanche and Pontalis, 1967: 166), but Lacan focuses on one in
 
 
 
    particular: namely, the sense of a specific defence mechanism which is distinct
 
 
 
    from repression (Verdr‰ngung), in which 'the ego rejects the incompatible
 
 
 
    idea together with its affect and behaves as if the idea had never occurred to
 
 
 
    the ego at all' (Freud, 1894a: SE III, 58). In 1954, basing himself on a reading
 
 
 
    of the 'Wolf Man' case history (see Freud, 1918b: SE XVII, 79-80), Lacan
 
 
 
    identifies Verwerfung as the specific mechanism of psychosis, in which an
 
 
 
    element is rejected outside the symbolic order just as if it had never existed
 
 
 
    (Ec, 386-7; Sl, 57-9). At this time Lacan proposes various ways of translating
 
 
 
    the term Verwerfung into French, rendering it as rejet, refus (Sl, 43) and
 
 
 
    retranchement (Ec, 386). It is not until 1956 that Lacan proposes the term
 
 
 
forclusion (a term in use in the French legal system; in English, 'foreclosure )
 
 
 
    as the best way of translating Verwerfung into French (S3, 321). It is this term
 
 
 
    that Lacan continues to use for the rest of his work.
 
 
 
        In 1954, when Lacan first turns to the Freudian concept of Verwerfung in his
 
 
 
    search for a specific mechanism for psychosis, it is not clear exactly what is
 
 
 
    repudiated; it can be castration that is repudiated, or speech itself (Sl, 53), or
 
 
 
    'the genital plane' (Sl, 58). Lacan finds a solution to the problem at the end of
 
 
 
    1957, when he proposes the idea that it is the NAME-OF-THE-FATHER (a funda-
 
 
 
    mental signifier) that is the object of foreclosure (E, 217). In this way Lacan is
 
 
 
    able to combine in      one formula both of the themes that had previously
 
 
 
    dominated his thinking on the causality of psychosis (the absence of the father
 
 
 
    and the concept of Verwerfung). This formula remains at the heart of Lacan's
 
 
 
    thinking on psychosis throughout the rest of his work.
 
 
 
        When the Name-of-the-Father is foreclosed for a particular subject, it leaves
 
 
 
    a hole in the symbolic order which can never be filled; the subject can then be
 
 
 
    said to have a psychotic structure, even if he shows none of the classical signs
 
 
 
    of psychosis. Sooner or later, when the foreclosed Name-of-the-Father re-
 
 
 
    appears in the real, the subject is unable to assimilate it, and the result of
 
 
 
    this 'collision with the inassimilable signifier' (S3, 321) is the 'entry into
 
 
 
    psychosis' proper, characterised typically by the onset of            HALLUCINATIONS
 
 
 
    and/or DELUSIONS.
 
 
 
        Foreclosure is to be distinguished from other operations such aS REPRESSION,
 
 
 
    NEGATION, and PROJECTION.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
===Repression===    
 
 
 
Foreclosure differs from repression in that the foreclosed
 
 
 
    element is not buried in the unconscious but expelled from the unconscious.
 
 
 
    Repression is the operation which constitutes neurosis, whereas foreclosure is
 
 
 
    the operation which constitutes psychosis.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
 
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
 
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
 
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
Line 129: Line 56:
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 
[[Category:Terms]]
 
[[Category:Terms]]
 +
 +
__NOTOC__

Latest revision as of 03:37, 24 May 2019

French: [[forclusion]]

Jacques Lacan

From his doctoral dissertation in 1932 on,[1] one of the central quests which animates Lacan's work is that of identifying a specific psychical cause for psychosis. In the course of addressing this problem, two themes are constant.

The Exclusion of the Father

As early as 1938 Lacan relates the origin of psychosis to an exclusion of the father from the family structure, with the consequent reduction of the latter to mother-child relations.[2] Later on in his work, when Lacan distinguishes between the real, imaginary and symbolic father, he specifies that it is the absence of the symbolic father which is linked to psychosis.

The Freudian concept of Verwerfung

Freud uses the term Verwerfung[3] in a number of disparate ways, but Lacan focuses on one in particular: namely, the sense of a specific defence mechanism which is distinct from repression (Verdrängung), in which "the ego rejects the incompatible idea together with its affect and behaves as if the idea had never occurred to the ego at all."[4] In 1954, basing himself on a reading of the "Wolf Man" case history,[5] Lacan identifies Verwerfung as the specific mechanism of psychosis, in which an element is rejected outside the symbolic order just as if it had never existed.[6]

At this time Lacan proposes various ways of translating the term Verwerfung into French, rendering it as rejet, refus and retranchement.[7] It is not until 1956 that Lacan proposes the term forclusion (a term in use in the French legal system; in English, "foreclosure") as the best way of translating Verwerfung into French.[8] It is this term that Lacan continues to use for the rest of his work.

Name-of-the-Father

In 1954, when Lacan first turns to the Freudian concept of Verwerfung in his search for a specific mechanism for psychosis, it is not clear exactly what is repudiated; it can be castration that is repudiated, or speech itself, or "the genital plane".[9] Lacan finds a solution to the problem at the end of 1957, when he proposes the idea that it is the Name-of-the-Father -- a fundamental signifier -- that is the object of foreclosure.[10] In this way Lacan is able to combine in one formula both of the themes that had previously dominated his thinking on the causality of psychosis -- the absence of the father and the concept of Verwerfung. This formula remains at the heart of Lacan's thinking on psychosis throughout the rest of his work.

Psychotic Structure

When the Name-of-the-Father is foreclosed for a particular subject, it leaves a hole in the symbolic order which can never be filled; the subject can then be said to have a psychotic structure, even if he shows none of the classical signs of psychosis. Sooner or later, when the foreclosed Name-of-the-Father reappears in the real, the subject is unable to assimilate it, and the result of this "collision with the inassimilable signifier" is the "entry into psychosis" proper, characterised typically by the onset of hallucinations and/or delusions.[11]

Repression, Negation, Projection

Foreclosure is to be distinguished from other operations such as repression, negation, and projection. Foreclosure differs from repression in that the foreclosed element is not buried in the unconscious but expelled from the unconscious. Repression is the operation which constitutes neurosis, whereas foreclosure is the operation which constitutes psychosis.

See Also

References

  1. Lacan, Jacques. De la psychose paranoiaque dans ses rapports avec la personalité, Paris: Navarin, 1975. [1932].
  2. Lacan, Jacques. Les complexes familiaux dans la formation de l'individu. Essai d'analyse d'une fonction en psychologie, Paris: Navarin, 1984 [1938]. p. 49
  3. Translated as "repudiation" in the Standard Edition
  4. Freud, Sigmund. "The Neuro-Psychoses of Defence", 1894a: SE III, 58
  5. Freud, Sigmund. "From the History of an Infantile Neurosis," 1918b: SE XVII, 79-80
  6. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 386-7; Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p. 57-9
  7. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p. 43; Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 386
  8. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 321
  9. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p. 53, 58
  10. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 217
  11. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 321