Difference between revisions of "Inversion"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Sigmund Freud== | ==Sigmund Freud== | ||
| − | [[Freud]] uses the term "[[inversion]]" to designate [[homosexuality]], the idea being that [[homosexuality]] is the [[inverse]] of [[heterosexuality]]. | + | [[Freud]] uses the term "[[inversion]]" ([[Fr]]. ''[[inversion]]'') to designate [[homosexuality]], the idea being that [[homosexuality]] is the [[inverse]] of [[heterosexuality]]. |
==Jacques Lacan== | ==Jacques Lacan== | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Thus in [[schema L]], the [[imaginary]] is represented as a barrier blockign the [[discourse]] of the [[Other]], causing this [[discourse]] to arrive at the [[subject]] ''in an inverted form''. | Thus in [[schema L]], the [[imaginary]] is represented as a barrier blockign the [[discourse]] of the [[Other]], causing this [[discourse]] to arrive at the [[subject]] ''in an inverted form''. | ||
| − | Hence [[Lacan]]'s definition of [[analytic]] [[communication]] in which the sender receives his own [[message]] in an inverted form. | + | Hence [[Lacan]]'s definition of [[analytic]] [[communication]] in which the sender receives his own [[message]] in an [[inversion|inverted form]]. |
In 1957, both senses of the term are brought together in [[Lacan]]'s discussion of [[Leonardo da Vinci]]. | In 1957, both senses of the term are brought together in [[Lacan]]'s discussion of [[Leonardo da Vinci]]. | ||
| − | Taking up [[Freud]]'s argument about [[Leonardo]]'s [[homosexuality]] | + | Taking up [[Freud]]'s argument about [[Leonardo]]'s [[homosexuality]].<ref>Freud. 1910c.</ref> |
| − | [[Lacan]] goes on to argue that [[Leonardo]]'s [[specular]] [[identification]] was highly unusual in that it resulted in an [[inversion]] of the positions (on [[schema L) of the [[ego]] and the [[little other]].<ref>{{S4}} p.433-4</ref> | + | [[Lacan]] goes on to argue that [[Leonardo]]'s [[specular]] [[identification]] was highly unusual in that it resulted in an [[inversion]] of the positions (on [[schema L]]) of the [[ego]] and the [[little other]].<ref>{{S4}} p.433-4</ref> |
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
| − | * [[ | + | * [[Communication]] |
| − | * [[ | + | * [[Identification]] |
| − | + | * [[Specular image]] | |
| + | * [[Schema L]] | ||
| + | * [[Homosexuality]] | ||
| + | * [[Heterosexuality]] | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 22:01, 30 July 2006
Sigmund Freud
Freud uses the term "inversion" (Fr. inversion) to designate homosexuality, the idea being that homosexuality is the inverse of heterosexuality.
Jacques Lacan
Lacan uses the term in this sense too in his early works.[1]
However, in Lacan's post-war works the term is used in quite a different sense.
Inversion then usually refers to a characteristic of the specular image.
What appears on one side of the real body appears on the other side of the image of the body reflected in the mirror.[2]
By extension, inversion becomes a quality of all imaginary phenomena, such as transitivism.
Thus in schema L, the imaginary is represented as a barrier blockign the discourse of the Other, causing this discourse to arrive at the subject in an inverted form.
Hence Lacan's definition of analytic communication in which the sender receives his own message in an inverted form.
In 1957, both senses of the term are brought together in Lacan's discussion of Leonardo da Vinci.
Taking up Freud's argument about Leonardo's homosexuality.[3]
Lacan goes on to argue that Leonardo's specular identification was highly unusual in that it resulted in an inversion of the positions (on schema L) of the ego and the little other.[4]
See Also
References
- ↑ Lacan. 1938. p.109
- ↑ Lacan. 1951b. p.15
- ↑ Freud. 1910c.
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p.433-4
[[Category:Terms]
