Changes

[[Lacan]]'s frequent references to the "[[letter]]" must be seen within the context of [[Saussure]]'s [[discussion ]] of [[language]]. In his ''[[Saussure|Course in General Linguistics]]'', [[Saussure]] privileges [[speech|spoken]] [[language]] above [[writing|written]] [[language]], on the grounds that the former appears before the latter both in the [[time|history]] of [[human|humanity]] and in the [[life ]] of the [[individual]]. [[Writing]] is conceived of as a mere secondhand [[representation ]] of [[speech|spoken]] [[language]], and the [[signifier]] is conceived of as purely an acoustic [[image ]] and not as a graphic one.<ref>[[Saussure|Saussure, Ferdinand de]]. ''[[Saussure|Course in General Linguistics]]'', 1916. Ed. Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, trans. Wade Baskin, Glasgow: Collins Fontana.</ref>

When [[Lacan]] takes up [[Saussure]]'s [[work ]] in the 1950s, he adapts it freely to his own purposes. He thus conceives of the [[letter]], not as a mere graphic representation of a sound, but as the [[materialism|material basis]] of [[language]] itself.<blockquote>"By ''letter'' I designate that [[material ]] support that [[concrete ]] discourse borrows from language."<ref>{{E}} p. 147</ref></blockquote>

The [[letter]] is thus connected with the [[real]], a [[materialism|material substrate]] that underpins the [[symbolic order]]. The [[concept ]] of [[materialism|materiality]] implies, for [[Lacan]], both the indivisibility and the [[idea ]] of locality; the [[letter]] is therefore "the essentially localized [[structure ]] of the signifier."<ref>{{E}} p. 153</ref>

As an element of the [[real]], the [[letter]] is [[meaning]]less in itself. [[Lacan]] illustrates this by referring to ancient [[Egyptian hieroglyphics]], which were indecipherable to Europeans for so long. Until Champollion was able to decipher [[them ]] on the basis of the Rosetta Stone, no one knew how to [[understand ]] these enigmatic inscriptions, but it was nevertheless clear that they were organized into a signifying [[system]].<ref>{{S1}} p. 244-5; {{E}} p. 160</ref> In the same way, the [[signifier]] persists as a [[meaning]]less [[letter]] which makes the destiny of the [[subject]] and which he must decipher.

A [[good ]] example of this is the [[case ]] of the [[Wolf Man]], in which [[Freud]] noted that the [[meaning]]less [[letter]] V reappeared under many guides in the [[Wolf Man]]'s life.<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|From the History of an Infantile Neurosis]]," 1918b [1914]. [[SE]] XVII, 3.</ref> As the example of the [[Wolf Man]] demonstrates, the [[letter]] is essentially that which [[return]]s and [[repetition|repeats]] itself; it constantly insists in inscribing itself in the [[subject]]'s life.

[[Lacan]] illustrates this [[repetition]] by reference to [[Edgar Allan Poe]]'s story ''[[The Purloined Letter]]''.<ref>Poe, Edgar Allan. 1844. "The [[Purloined Letter]]," in ''Great Tales and Poems of Edgar Allan Poe'', New York: Pocket [[Library]], 1951.</ref> Playing on the [[double]]-meaning of the term "[[letter]]", [[Lacan]] presents [[Poe]]'s account of a written document (a [[letter]]) which passes through various hands as a [[metaphor]] for the [[signifier]] which circulates between various [[subject]]s, assigning a peculiar [[position ]] to whoever is possessed by it.<ref>{{L}} 1955a. "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Le séminaire sur 'La lettre volée']]", in [[Jacques Lacan]], ''[[Écrits]]'', [[Paris]]: Seuil, 1966, pp. 11-61 ["[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Seminar on 'The Purloined Letter']]", trans. Jeffrey Mehlman, ''Yale [[French ]] Studies'', 48 (1972): 38-72.</ref> It is in this paper that [[Lacan]] proposes that "a letter always arrives at its destination."<ref>{{Ec}} p.41</ref>

It is because of the [[role ]] of the [[letter]] in the [[unconscious]] that the [[analyst]] must focus not on the [[meaning]] or the [[signification]] of the [[analysand]]'s [[discourse]], but purely on its [[formal ]] properties; the [[analyst]] must read the [[analysand]]'s [[speech]] as if it were a [[text]], "taking it literally" (''prendre à la lettre'').

There is thus a close connection between the [[letter]] and [[writing]], a connection which [[Lacan]] explores in his [[seminar]] of 1972-3.<ref>{{S20}} pp. 29-38</ref> Although both the [[letter]] and [[writing]] are located in the [[order]] of the [[real]], and hence partake of a [[meaning]]less quality, [[Lacan]] argues that the [[letter]] is that which one reads, as opposed to [[writing]], which is not to be read.<ref>{{S20}} p. 29</ref> [[Writing]] is also connected with the idea of [[formalization]] and the [[matheme]]s; [[Lacan]] thus speaks of his [[algebra]]ic [[symbol]]s as "[[letter]]s."<ref>{{S20}} p. 30</ref> [[Lacan]]'s concept of the [[letter]] is the subject of a critique by [[Jacques Derrida]]<ref>[[Jacques Derrida|Derrida, Jacques]] 1975. "Le facteur de la vérité," in ''The Post Card: From [[Socrates ]] to Freud and Beyond'', trans. Alan Bass, Chicago and [[London]]: [[University ]] of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 413-96.</ref> and by two of [[Derrida]]'s followers.<ref>Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe, and Nancy, Jean-Luc. 1973. ''Le Titre de la lettre'', Paris: Galilée.</ref>. [[Lacan]] refers to the latter work in his 1972-3 [[seminar]].<ref>{{S20}} p. 62-6.</ref>