Difference between revisions of "Other"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
(Changes in styling. Made the article easier to navigate through and a tiny bit more concise. Spelling. Fixed double spaces.)
(Changes in styling. Made the article easier to navigate through and a tiny bit more concise. Spelling. Fixed double spaces.)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
==Jacques Lacan==
 
==Jacques Lacan==
[[Freud]] uses the term "[[other]]" to [[speak]] of ''[[Other|der Andere]]'' ("the other person") and ''[[Other|das Andere]]'' ("otherness"). In the 1930s, when [[Lacan]] first begins to use the term, it is not very salient, referring simply to "other [[people]]" and it seems to be a borrowed term from [[Hegel]], to whose [[work]] [[Lacan]] was introduced in a series of lectures given by [[Alexandre Kojève]] in 1933-9.
+
===History===
 +
The "[[other]]" is perhaps the most [[complex]] term in [[Lacan]]'s [[work]].  [[Freud]] uses the term "[[other]]" to [[speak]] of ''[[Other|der Andere]]'' ("the other person") and ''[[Other|das Andere]]'' ("otherness"). When [[Lacan]] first begins to use the term, in the 1930s, it is not very salient, and refers simply to "other [[people]]." [[Lacan]] seems to have borrowed the term from [[Hegel]], to whose work [[Lacan]] was introduced in a series of lectures given by [[Alexandre Kojève]] in 1933-9.
  
==Little and Big==
+
===Little and Big===
In 1955, [[Lacan]] draws a [[distinction]] between the "[[little other]]" and the "[[big Other]]" ("the [[Other]]"), a distinction which remains central throughout the rest of his work.<ref>{{S2}} Chapter 19</ref> Thereafter, in [[Lacan]]ian [[algebra]], the [[big Other]] is designated '''A''' (upper [[case]], for [[French]] ''[[Other|Autre]]'') and the [[little other]] is designated <i>'''a'''</i> (lower case italicized, for [[French]] ''[[Other|autre]]'').  [[Lacan]] asserts that an [[awareness]] of this distinction is fundamental to [[analytic treatment|analytic practice]]: the [[analyst]] must be "thoroughly imbued" with the [[difference]] between '''A''' and <i>'''a'''</i>,<ref>{{E}} p. 140</ref> so that he can situate himself in the place of [[Other]], and not of the [[other]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 454</ref>
+
In 1955, [[Lacan]] draws a [[distinction]] between the "[[little other]]" and the "[[big Other]]" ("the [[Other]]"), a distinction which remains central throughout the rest of his work.<ref>{{S2}} Chapter 19</ref>Thereafter, in [[Lacan]]ian [[algebra]], the [[big Other]] is designated '''A''' (upper [[case]], for [[French]] ''[[Other|Autre]]'') and the [[little other]] is deisgnated <i>'''a'''</i> (lower case italicized, for [[French]] ''[[Other|autre]]'').  [[Lacan]] asserts that an [[awareness]] of this distinction is fundamental to [[analytic treatment|analytic practice]]: the [[analyst]] must be "thoroughly imbued" with the [[difference]] between '''A''' and <i>'''a'''</i>,<ref>{{E}} p. 140</ref>so that he can situate himself in the place of [[Other]], and not of the [[other]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 454</ref>
  
===Little other (autre, "''a''")===
+
===Little===
The [[little other]] is the [[other]] who is not, in fact, [[other]], but a [[reflection]] or [[projection]] of the [[ego]].<ref>This is why the symbol a can [[represent]] the little other and the ego interchangeably in [[schema L]].</ref> It is simultaneously the [[counterpart]] and the [[specular image]], and is inscribed as such in the [[imaginary]] [[order]].
+
The [[little other]] is the [[other]] who is not, in fact, [[other]], but a [[reflection]] or [[projection]] of the [[ego]].<ref>This is why the symbol a can [[represent]] the little other and the ego interchangeably in [[schema L]].</ref>It is simultaneously the [[counterpart]] and the [[specular image]].  The [[little other]] is inscribed in the [[imaginary]] [[order]] as both the [[counterpart]] and the [[specular image]].
  
===Big Other (Autre, "A")===
+
===Big===
The [[big Other]] designates radical [[alterity]], an [[otherness]] which transcends the [[illusory]] [[other|otherness]] of the [[imaginary]] because it cannot be assimilated through [[identification]]. [[Lacan]] equates the [[big Other]] with [[language]] and the [[law]], and hence the [[big Other]] is inscribed in the [[symbolic]] [[order]]. Indeed, the [[big Other]] ''is'' the [[symbolic]] insofar as it is particularized for each [[subject]]. Thus, the [[Other]] is both another [[subject]] in its radical [[alterity]] and unassimilable uniqueness and also the [[symbolic]] [[order]] which mediates the [[relationship]] with that [[subject]].
+
The [[big Other]] designates radical [[alterity]], an [[otherness]] which transcends the [[illusory]] [[other|otherness]] of the [[imaginary]] because it cannot be assimilated through [[identification]]. [[Lacan]] equates the [[big Other]] with [[language]] and the [[law]], and hence the [[big Other]] is inscribed in the [[symbolic]] [[order]]. Indeed, the [[big Other]] ''is'' the [[symbolic]] insofar as it is particularized for each [[subject]]. Thus, the [[Other]] is both another [[subject]] in its radical [[alterity]] and unassimilable uniqueness and also the [[symbolic]] [[order]] which mediates the [[relationship]] with that [[subject]].
  
==Speech==
+
===Speech===
However, the [[meaning]] of "the [[Other]] as another [[subject]]" is strictly secondary to the meaning of "the [[Other]] as [[symbolic]] [[order]]." "The Other must first of all be considered a locus, the locus in which speech is constituted."<ref>{{S3}} p. 274</ref> It is thus only possible to speak of the [[Other]] as a [[subject]] in a secondary [[sense]], in the sense that a [[subject]] may occupy this position and thereby "embody" the [[Other]] for another [[subject]].<ref>{{S8}} p. 202</ref>
+
However, the [[meaning]] of "the [[Other]] as another [[subject]]" is strictly secondary to the meaning of "the [[Other]] as [[symbolic]] [[order]]." "The Other must first of all be considered a locus, the locus in which speech is constituted."<ref>{{S3}} p. 274</ref>It is thus only possible to speak of the [[Other]] as a [[subject]] in a secondary [[sense]], in the sense that a [[subject]] may occupy this position and thereby "embody" the [[Other]] for another [[subject]].<ref>{{S8}} p. 202</ref>
  
 
===Discourse of the Other===
 
===Discourse of the Other===
In arguing that [[speech]] originates not in the [[ego]] or even in the [[subject]] but in the [[Other]], [[Lacan]] is stressing that [[speech]] and [[language]] are beyond [[conscious]] [[control]]; they come from an [[other]] place, [[outside]] [[consciousness]], and hence "the [[unconscious]] is the [[discourse]] of the [[Other]]."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 16</ref> In conceiving of the [[Other]] as a [[place]], [[Lacan]] alludes to [[Freud]]'s [[concept]] of [[psychical locality]], in which the [[unconscious]] is described as "the [[other]] [[scene]]."
+
In arguing that [[speech]] originates not in the [[ego]] or even in the [[subject]] but in the [[Other]], [[Lacan]] is stressing that [[speech]] and [[language]] are beyond [[conscious]] [[control]]; they come from an [[other]] place, [[outside]] [[consciousness]], and hence "the [[unconscious]] is the [[discourse]] of the [[Other]]."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 16</ref>In conceiving of the [[Other]] as a [[place]], [[Lacan]] alludes to [[Freud]]'s [[concept]] of [[psychical locality]], in which the [[unconscious]] is described as "the [[other]] [[scene]]."
  
 
===Lack in the Other===
 
===Lack in the Other===
It is the [[mother]] who first occupies the [[position]] of the [[big Other]] for the [[child]], because it is she who receives the [[child]]'s [[primitive]] cries and [[retroactively]] sanctions [[them]] as a [[particular]] [[message]]. The [[castration complex]] is formed when the [[child]] discovers that this [[Other]] is not [[complete]], that there is a [[lack]] in the [[Other]].  In other [[words]], there is always a [[signifier]] [[missing]] from the treasury of [[signifier]]s constituted by the [[Other]]. The [[mythical]] complete [[Other]] (written '''A''' in [[Lacan]]ian [[algebra]]) does not [[exist]]. In 1957 [[Lacan]] illustrates this incomplete [[Other]] graphically by striking a [[bar]] through the [[symbol]] '''<strike>A</strike>'''.  Hence another [[name]] for the [[castrated]], incomplete [[Other]] is the ''[[barred]] [[Other]]''.
+
It is the [[mother]] who first occupies the [[position]] of the [[big Other]] for the [[child]], because it is she who receives the [[child]]'s [[primitive]] cries and [[retroactively]] sanctions [[them]] as a [[particular]] [[message]]. The [[castration complex]] is formed when the [[child]] discovers that this [[Other]] is not [[complete]], that there is a [[lack]] in the [[Other]].  In other [[words]], there is always a [[signifier]] [[missing]] from the treasury of [[signifier]]s constituted by the [[Other]]. The [[mythical]] complete [[Other]] (written '''A''' in [[Lacan]]ian [[algebra]]) does not [[exist]]. In 1957 [[Lacan]] illustrates this incomplete [[Other]] graphically by striking a [[bar]] through the [[symbol]] '''<strike>A</strike>'''.  Hence another [[name]] for the [[castrated]], incomplete [[Other]] is the ''[[barred]] [[Other]]''.
  
==The Other Sex==
+
===The Other Sex===
The Other is also "the Other sex."<ref>{{S20}} p. 40</ref> The [[Other]] [[sex]] is always [[woman]], for both [[male]] and [[female]] [[subjects]].  
+
The Other is also "the Other sex."<ref>{{S20}} p. 40</ref>The [[Other]] [[sex]] is always [[woman]], for both [[male]] and [[female]] [[subjects]].  
 
<blockquote>"[[Man]] here [[acts]] as the relay whereby the [[woman]] becomes this Other for herself as she is this [[Other]] for him."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 732</ref></blockquote>
 
<blockquote>"[[Man]] here [[acts]] as the relay whereby the [[woman]] becomes this Other for herself as she is this [[Other]] for him."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 732</ref></blockquote>
  

Revision as of 02:48, 15 June 2021

French: [[autre]], Autre

Jacques Lacan

History

The "other" is perhaps the most complex term in Lacan's work. Freud uses the term "other" to speak of der Andere ("the other person") and das Andere ("otherness"). When Lacan first begins to use the term, in the 1930s, it is not very salient, and refers simply to "other people." Lacan seems to have borrowed the term from Hegel, to whose work Lacan was introduced in a series of lectures given by Alexandre Kojève in 1933-9.

Little and Big

In 1955, Lacan draws a distinction between the "little other" and the "big Other" ("the Other"), a distinction which remains central throughout the rest of his work.[1]Thereafter, in Lacanian algebra, the big Other is designated A (upper case, for French Autre) and the little other is deisgnated a (lower case italicized, for French autre). Lacan asserts that an awareness of this distinction is fundamental to analytic practice: the analyst must be "thoroughly imbued" with the difference between A and a,[2]so that he can situate himself in the place of Other, and not of the other.[3]

Little

The little other is the other who is not, in fact, other, but a reflection or projection of the ego.[4]It is simultaneously the counterpart and the specular image. The little other is inscribed in the imaginary order as both the counterpart and the specular image.

Big

The big Other designates radical alterity, an otherness which transcends the illusory otherness of the imaginary because it cannot be assimilated through identification. Lacan equates the big Other with language and the law, and hence the big Other is inscribed in the symbolic order. Indeed, the big Other is the symbolic insofar as it is particularized for each subject. Thus, the Other is both another subject in its radical alterity and unassimilable uniqueness and also the symbolic order which mediates the relationship with that subject.

Speech

However, the meaning of "the Other as another subject" is strictly secondary to the meaning of "the Other as symbolic order." "The Other must first of all be considered a locus, the locus in which speech is constituted."[5]It is thus only possible to speak of the Other as a subject in a secondary sense, in the sense that a subject may occupy this position and thereby "embody" the Other for another subject.[6]

Discourse of the Other

In arguing that speech originates not in the ego or even in the subject but in the Other, Lacan is stressing that speech and language are beyond conscious control; they come from an other place, outside consciousness, and hence "the unconscious is the discourse of the Other."[7]In conceiving of the Other as a place, Lacan alludes to Freud's concept of psychical locality, in which the unconscious is described as "the other scene."

Lack in the Other

It is the mother who first occupies the position of the big Other for the child, because it is she who receives the child's primitive cries and retroactively sanctions them as a particular message. The castration complex is formed when the child discovers that this Other is not complete, that there is a lack in the Other. In other words, there is always a signifier missing from the treasury of signifiers constituted by the Other. The mythical complete Other (written A in Lacanian algebra) does not exist. In 1957 Lacan illustrates this incomplete Other graphically by striking a bar through the symbol A. Hence another name for the castrated, incomplete Other is the barred Other.

The Other Sex

The Other is also "the Other sex."[8]The Other sex is always woman, for both male and female subjects.

"Man here acts as the relay whereby the woman becomes this Other for herself as she is this Other for him."[9]

See Also

References

  1. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. Chapter 19
  2. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 140
  3. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 454
  4. This is why the symbol a can represent the little other and the ego interchangeably in schema L.
  5. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 274
  6. Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre VIII. Le transfert, 1960-61. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 202
  7. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 16
  8. Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre XX. Encore, 1972-73. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1975. p. 40
  9. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 732