Changes

The [[International Psycho-Analytical Association]] ([[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]]) was founded by [[Freud]] in 1910 as an umbrella group for the various [[schools|psychoanalytic societies]] that were springing up around the [[world ]] at that [[time]]. The first headquarters were in [[{{G}}|Zurich]], and later moved to [[{{G}}|London]], but the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|Association]] has been dominated by its [[{{G}}|American]] members ever since the [[{{Y}}|1930s]], when most of the [[{{G}}|Viennese]] [[analyst]]s emigrated to the [[{{G}}|United States]].

After resigning from the [[IPA]]-affiliated [[Société Psychanalytique de Paris]] ([[SPP]]) in 1953, to join the newly founded [[Société Française de Psychanalyse]] ([[SFP]]), [[Lacan]] was informed by [[letter ]] that this also meant that he was no longer a member of the [[IPA]].

From that [[moment ]] on until his [[death]], [[Lacan]] and the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] were at loggerheads. During the [[SFP]]'s subsequent campaign for [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] member­ship (which [[Lacan]] seems to have supported) [[Lacan]] was regarded by the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] as the principal obstacle blocking negotiations. The main bone of contention was [[Lacan]]'s use of [[treatment|sessions of variable duration]], which he continued to practise despite repeated [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] admonitions.

In [[{{Y}}|1963]] [[Lacan]] was expelled from the [[IPA]]. Eventually, in 1963, the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] agreed to grant membership to the [[SFP]] on condition that [[Lacan]] be stripped of his status as a [[training|training analyst]]. Many of the leading [[analysts ]] in the [[SFP]] agreed, but to many [[others ]] (including [[Lacan]]) this was unacceptable. [[Lacan]] resigned from the [[SFP]] and, followed by a [[number ]] of [[other ]] analysts and [[trainees]], founded his own [[school]] in 1964. From this point on, [[Lacan]] became much more vocal in his criticism of the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]], accusing it of [[being ]] a kind of [[religion|church]] and comparing his own fate to [[Spinoza]]'s "[[International Psycho-Analytical Association|excommunication]]" from the synagogue.<ref>{{S11}} p. 3-4</ref>

[[Lacan]] criticized both the [[structure|institutional structure]] and the dominant [[theoretical ]] tendencies of the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]].

As regards the [[structure|institutional structure]], he accused its bureaucratic procedures of producing [[nothing ]] but mediocrities, and mocked its stuffy hierarchies.<ref>{{Ec}} p. 474-86</ref>

[[Lacan]] argued that [[Freud]] had organised the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] in such a way because this was the only way of assuring that his theories, misunderstood by all his first followers, would remain intact for someone else ([[Lacan]]) to disinter and resuscitate later on. The [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]], in other [[words]], was like a tomb whose only function was to preserve [[Freud]]'s [[doctrine ]] despite the [[ignorance ]] of the members of the [[association]], the implication being that once [[Lacan]] had breathed new [[life ]] into the doctrine, the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] no longer had any valid function at all.<ref>{{L}} "[[Situation de la psychanalyse et formation du psychanalyste en 1956]]." 1956a. ''[[Écrits]]''. [[Paris]]: Seuil, 1966: 459-91.</ref>

Even more important than this were [[Lacan]]'s criticisms of the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] [[training|training programme]], which he accused of ignoring [[Freud]]'s emphasis on the [[need ]] for instruction in [[literary ]] and [[cultural ]] studies,<ref>{{Ec}} p. 473</ref>, and for reducing the [[training|training analysis]] to a mere [[ritual]].

The [[school|specific organisational structures]] on which [[Lacan]] organized his own [[school]], such as the [[cartel]] and the [[pass]], were aimed at ensuring that this [[school]] did not [[repeat ]] these errors of the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]].

On a theoretical level, [[Lacan]] levelled various criticisms at all the main theoretical tendencies in the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]], including [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]] and [[[object]]-relations [[theory]]]], but his most sustained and profound criticisms were reserved for the [[school]] of [[ego-psychology]] which had achieved a dominant [[position ]] in the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] by the 1950s.

He accused the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] of having betrayed [[Freud]]'s most fundamental insights, renaming it the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|SAMCDA]] (''société d'as­sistance mutuelle contre le [[discours ]] [[analytique]]'', or [[society ]] for mutual assis­tance against [[analytic ]] [[discourse]]<ref>{{L}} ''[[Télévision]]''. Paris: Seuil, 1973 [''[[Television: A Challenge to the Psychoanalytic Establishment]]''. Ed. [[Joan Copjec]]. New York: Norton, 1990]. p. 27</ref>), and attributed this [[betrayal ]] largely to the fact that the [[International Psycho-Analytical Association|IPA]] was dominated by the USA.