Difference between revisions of "Real"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Real]] (rÈel)          Lacan's use of the term '[[Real]]' as a substantive dates back to an
 
  
early paper, published in 1936. The term was popular among certain philos-
+
Lacan's use of the term '[[Real]]' (rÈel) as a substantive dates back to an early paper, published in 1936. The term was popular among certain philosophers at the time, and is the focus of a work by Emile Meyerson.<ref> (which Lacan refers to in the 1936 paper; Ec, 86</ref> Meyerson defines the [[Real]] as 'an ontological absolute, a true being-in-itself'.<ref>Meyerson, 1925: 79; quoted in Roustang, 1986: 61</ref>  In speaking of 'the [[Real]]', then, Lacan is following a common practice in one strand of early twentieth-century philosophy. However, while this may be Lacan's starting point, the term undergoes many shifts in meaning and usage throughout his work.
  
ophers at the time, and is the focus of a work by Emile Meyerson (which Lacan
+
At first the [[Real]] is simply opposed to the realm of the image, which seems to locate it in the realm of being, beyond appearances.<ref>Ec, 85</ref>  However, the fact that even at this early point Lacan distinguishes between the [[Real]] and 'the true' indicates that the [[Real]] is already prey to a certain ambiguity.<ref>Ec, 75</ref>
  
refers to in the 1936 paper; Ec, 86). Meyerson defines the [[Real]]                 as 'an
+
After appearing in 1936, the term disappears from Lacan's work until the early 1950s, when Lacan invokes Hegel's view that 'everything which is [[Real]] is rational (and vice versa)' (Ec, 226). It is not until 1953 that Lacan elevates the [[Real]] to the status of a fundamental category of psychoanalytic theory; the [[Real]] is henceforth one of the three [[orders]] according to which all psychoanalytic phenomena may be described, the other two being the [[Symbolic]] order and and the [[Imaginary]] order. The [[Real]] is thus no longer simply opposed to the [[Imaginary]], but is also located beyond the [[Symbolic]]. Unlike the [[Symbolic]], which is constituted in terms of oppositions such as that between presence and absence, 'there is no absence in the [[Real]].'<ref>S2, 313</ref>  Whereas the [[Symbolic]] opposition between presence and absence implies the permanent possibility that something may be missing from the [[Symbolic]] order, the [[Real]] 'is always in its place: it carries it glued to its heel, ignorant of what might exile it from there.'<ref>Ec, 25; see Sll, 49</ref>
  
ontological absolute, a true being-in-itself' (Meyerson, 1925: 79; quoted in
+
Whereas the [[Symbolic]] is a set of differentiated, discrete elements called signifiers, the [[Real]] is, in itself, undifferentiated; 'the [[Real]] is absolutely without fissure.'<ref>S2, 97</ref>  It is the [[Symbolic]] which introduces 'a cut in the [[Real]]' in the process of signification: 'it is the world of words that creates the world of things  - things originally confused in the hic et nunc of the all in the process of coming-into-being.'<ref>E, 65</ref>
  
Roustang, 1986: 61). In speaking of 'the [[Real]]', then, Lacan is following a
+
In these formulations of the period 1953-5, the [[Real]] emerges as that which is outside language and inassimilable to symbolisation. It is 'that which resists symbolization absolutely';<ref>Sl, 66</ref> or, again, the [[Real]] is 'the domain of whatever subsists outside symbolisation.'<ref>Ec, 388</ref> This theme remains a constant throughout the rest of Lacan's work, and leads Lacan to link the [[Real]] with the concept of impossibility. The [[Real]] is 'the impossible'<ref>Sl l, 167</ref> because it is impossible to imagine, impossible to integrate into the [[Symbolic]] order, and impossible to attain in any way. It is this character of impossibility and of resistance to symbolisation which lends the [[Real]] its essentially traumatic quality. Thus in his reading of the case of Little Hans <ref>Freud, 1909b</ref> in the seminar of 1956-7, Lacan distinguishes two [[Real]] elements which intrude and disrupt the child's [[Imaginary]] preoedipal harmony: the [[Real]] penis which begins to make itself felt in infantile masturbation, and the newly born sister.<ref>S4, 308-9</ref>
  
common practice in one strand of early twentieth-century philosophy. How-
+
The [[Real]] also has connotations of matter, implying a material substrate underlying the [[Imaginary]] and the [[Symbolic]] (see [[Materialism]]). The connotations of matter also link the concept of the [[Real]] to the realm of [[biology]] and to the body in its brute physicality (as opposed to the [[Imaginary]] and [[Symbolic]] functions of the body). For example the [[Real]] father is the biological father, and the [[Real]] phallus is the physical penis as opposed to the [[Symbolic]] and [[Imaginary]] functions of this organ.
  
ever, while this may be Lacan's starting point, the term undergoes many shifts
+
Throughout his work, Lacan uses the concept of the [[Real]] to elucidate a number of clinical phenomena:
  
in meaning and usage throughout his work.
+
[[Anxiety]] and trauma   
 +
The [[Real]] is the object of anxiety; it lacks any possible mediation, and is thus 'the essential object which isn't an object any longer, but this something faced with which all words                cease and all categories fail, the object of anxiety par excellence' (S2, 164). It is the missed encounter with this [[Real]] object which presents itself in the form of trauma (Sll, 55). It is the tyche which lies 'beyond the [[[symbolic]]] automaton.'<ref>S11, 53</ref> (see [[chance]]).
  
    At first the [[Real]] is simply opposed to the [[Real]]m of the image, which seems to
 
  
locate it in the [[Real]]m of being, beyond appearances (Ec, 85). However, the fact
+
==Hallucinations==
 +
When something cannot be integrated in the [[Symbolic]] order, as in [[psychosis]], it may return in the [[Real]] in the form of a hallucination.<ref>S3, 321</ref>
 +
The preceding comments trace out some of the main uses to which Lacan puts the category of the [[Real]], but are far from covering all the complexities of this term. In fact, Lacan takes pains to ensure that the [[Real]] remains the most elusive and mysterious of the three orders, by speaking of it less than of the other orders, and by making it the site of a radical indeterminacy. Thus it is never completely clear whether the [[Real]] is external or internal, or whether it is unknowable or amenable to reason.
  
that even at this early point Lacan distinguishes between the [[Real]] and 'the true'
+
==External / internal==
 +
On the one hand, the term 'the [[Real]]' seems to imply a simplistic notion of an objective, external reality, a material substrate which exists in itself, independently of any observer. On the other hand, such a 'naive' view of the [[Real]] is subverted by the fact that the [[Real]] also includes such things as hallucinations and traumatic dreams. The [[Real]] is thus both inside and outside.<ref>S7, 118;  see [[extimacy]]</ref> (extimitÈ). This ambiguity reflects the ambiguity inherent in Freud's own use of the two German terms for reality (Wirklichkeit and Realit‰t) and the distinction Freud draws between material reality and psychical reality.<ref>Freud, 1900a: SE V, 620</ref>
  
indicates that the [[Real]] is already prey to a certain ambiguity (Ec, 75).
+
==Unknowable/rational==
 
+
On the one hand, the [[Real]] cannot be known, since it goes beyond both the [[Imaginary]] and the [[Symbolic]]; it is, like the Kantian thing-in-itself, an unknowable x. On the other hand, Lacan quotes Hegel to the effect that the [[Real]] is rational and the rational is [[Real]], thus implying that it is amenable to calculation and logic.
    After appearing in 1936, the term disappears from Lacan's work until the
 
 
 
early 1950s, when Lacan invokes Hegel's view that 'everything which is [[Real]] is
 
 
 
rational (and vice versa)' (Ec, 226). It is not until 1953 that Lacan elevates the
 
 
 
[[Real]] to the status of a fundamental category of psychoanalytic theory; the [[Real]]
 
 
 
is henceforth one of the three ORDERs according to which all psychoanalytic
 
 
 
phenomena may be described, the other two being the [[Symbolic]] order and and
 
 
 
the [[Imaginary]] order. The [[Real]] is thus            no longer simply opposed to the
 
 
 
[[Imaginary]], but is also located beyond the [[Symbolic]]. Unlike the [[Symbolic]],
 
 
 
which is constituted in terms of oppositions such as that between presence
 
 
 
and absence, 'there is no absence in the [[Real]]' (S2, 313). Whereas the [[Symbolic]]
 
 
 
opposition between presence and absence implies the permanent possibility
 
 
 
that something may be missing from the [[Symbolic]] order, the [[Real]] 'is always in
 
 
 
its place: it carries it glued to its heel, ignorant of what might exile it from
 
 
 
there' (Ec, 25; see Sll, 49).
 
 
 
    Whereas the [[Symbolic]] is a set of differentiated, discrete elements called
 
 
 
signifiers, the [[Real]] is, in itself, undifferentiated; 'the [[Real]] is absolutely without
 
 
 
fissure' (S2, 97). It is the [[Symbolic]] which introduces 'a cut in the [[Real]]' in the
 
 
 
process of signification: 'it is the world of words that creates the world of
 
 
 
things  - things originally confused in the hic et nunc of the all in the process of
 
 
 
coming-into-being' (E, 65).
 
 
 
    In these formulations of the period 1953-5, the [[Real]] emerges as that which is
 
 
 
outside language and inassimilable to symbolisation. It is 'that which resists
 
 
 
symbolization absolutely' (Sl, 66); or, again, the [[Real]] is 'the domain of
 
 
 
whatever subsists outside symbolisation' (Ec, 388). This theme remains              a
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
constant throughout the rest of Lacan's work, and leads Lacan to link the [[Real]]
 
 
 
with the concept of impossibility. The [[Real]] is 'the impossible' (Sl l, 167)
 
 
 
because it is impossible to imagine, impossible to integrate into the [[Symbolic]]
 
 
 
order, and impossible to attain in any way. It is this character of impossibility
 
 
 
and of resistance to symbolisation which lends the [[Real]] its essentially traumatic
 
 
 
quality. Thus in his reading of the case of Little Hans (Freud, 1909b) in the
 
 
 
seminar of 1956-7, Lacan distinguishes two [[Real]] elements which intrude and
 
 
 
disrupt the child's [[Imaginary]] preoedipal harmony: the [[Real]] penis which begins
 
 
 
to make itself felt in infantile masturbation, and the newly born sister (S4,
 
 
 
308-9).
 
 
 
    The [[Real]] also has connotations of matter, implying          a material substrate
 
 
 
underlying the [[Imaginary]] and the [[Symbolic]] (see [[Materialism]]). The connota-
 
 
 
tions of matter also link the concept of the [[Real]] to the [[Real]]m of BIOLOGY and to
 
 
 
the body in its brute physicality (as opposed to the [[Imaginary]] and [[Symbolic]]
 
 
 
functions of the body). For example the [[Real]] father is the biological father, and
 
 
 
the [[Real]] phallus is the physical penis as opposed to the [[Symbolic]] and [[Imaginary]]
 
 
 
functions of this organ.
 
 
 
    Throughout his work, Lacan      uses the concept of the [[Real]] to elucidate a
 
 
 
number of clinical phenomena:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
e    [[Anxiety]] and trauma    The [[Real]] is the object of anxiety; it lacks any
 
 
 
possible mediation, and is thus 'the essential object which isn't                an object
 
 
 
any longer, but this something faced with which all words                cease and all
 
 
 
categories fail, the object of anxiety par excellence' (S2, 164). It is the missed
 
 
 
encounter with this [[Real]] object which presents itself in the form of trauma (Sll,
 
 
 
55). It is the tyche which lies 'beyond the [[[Symbolic]]] automaton' (S11, 53) (see
 
 
 
CHANCE).
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
e      HALLUCINATIONS When something cannot be integrated in the [[Symbolic]]
 
 
 
order, as in [[Psychosis]], it may return in the [[Real]] in the form of a hallucination
 
 
 
(S3, 321).
 
 
 
    The preceding comments trace out some of the main uses to which Lacan
 
 
 
puts the category of the [[Real]], but are far from covering all the complexities of
 
 
 
this term. In fact, Lacan takes pains to ensure that the [[Real]] remains the most
 
 
 
elusive and mysterious of the three orders, by speaking of it less than of the
 
 
 
other orders, and by making it the site of a radical indeterminacy. Thus it is
 
 
 
never completely clear whether the [[Real]] is external or internal, or whether it is
 
 
 
unknowable or amenable to reason.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
e    Externallinternal      On the one hand, the term 'the [[Real]]' seems to imply a
 
 
 
simplistic notion of an objective, external [[Real]]ity, a material substrate which
 
 
 
exists in itself, independently of any observer. On the other hand, such a
 
 
 
'naive' view of the [[Real]] is subverted by the fact that the [[Real]] also includes
 
 
 
such things as hallucinations and traumatic dreams. The [[Real]] is thus both inside
 
 
 
and outside (S7, 118;      see EXTIMACY) (extimitÈ). This ambiguity reflects the
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ambiguity inherent in Freud's own use of the two German terms for [[Real]]ity
 
 
 
(Wirklichkeit and [[Real]]it‰t) and the distinction Freud draws between material
 
 
 
[[Real]]ity and psychical [[Real]]ity (Freud, 1900a: SE V, 620).
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  e    Unknowable/rational       On the one hand, the [[Real]] cannot be known, since
 
 
 
it goes beyond both the [[Imaginary]] and the [[Symbolic]]; it is, like the Kantian
 
 
 
thing-in-itself, an unknowable x. On the other hand, Lacan quotes Hegel to the
 
 
 
effect that the [[Real]] is rational and the rational is [[Real]], thus implying that it is
 
 
 
amenable to calculation and logic.
 
 
 
      It is possible to discern in Lacan's work, from the early 1970s on, an attempt
 
 
 
  to resolve this indeterminacy, by reference to a distinction between the [[Real]]
 
 
 
and '[[Real]]ity' (such as when Lacan defines [[Real]]ity as 'the grimace of the [[Real]]' in
 
 
 
Lacan, 1973a: 17; see also Sl7, 148). In this opposition, the [[Real]] is placed
 
 
 
firmly on the side of the unknowable and unassimilable, while '[[Real]]ity' denotes
 
 
 
subjective representations which      are  a product of [[Symbolic]] and [[Imaginary]]
 
 
 
articulations (Freud's 'psychical [[Real]]ity'). However, after this opposition is
 
 
 
introduced, Lacan does not maintain it in a consistent or systematic way, but
 
 
 
oscillates between moments when the opposition is clearly maintained and
 
 
 
moments when he reverts to his previous custom of using the terms '[[Real]]' and
 
 
 
'[[Real]]ity' interchangeably.
 
  
 +
It is possible to discern in Lacan's work, from the early 1970s on, an attempt to resolve this indeterminacy, by reference to a distinction between the [[Real]] and 'reality' (such as when Lacan defines reality as 'the grimace of the [[Real]]' in Lacan, 1973a: 17; see also Sl7, 148). In this opposition, the [[Real]] is placed firmly on the side of the unknowable and unassimilable, while 'reality' denotes subjective representations which are  a product of [[Symbolic]] and [[Imaginary]] articulations (Freud's 'psychical reality'). However, after this opposition is introduced, Lacan does not maintain it in a consistent or systematic way, but oscillates between moments when the opposition is clearly maintained and moments when he reverts to his previous custom of using the terms '[[Real]]' and 'reality' interchangeably.
  
 
== def ==
 
== def ==

Revision as of 07:23, 2 May 2006

Lacan's use of the term 'Real' (rÈel) as a substantive dates back to an early paper, published in 1936. The term was popular among certain philosophers at the time, and is the focus of a work by Emile Meyerson.[1] Meyerson defines the Real as 'an ontological absolute, a true being-in-itself'.[2] In speaking of 'the Real', then, Lacan is following a common practice in one strand of early twentieth-century philosophy. However, while this may be Lacan's starting point, the term undergoes many shifts in meaning and usage throughout his work.

At first the Real is simply opposed to the realm of the image, which seems to locate it in the realm of being, beyond appearances.[3] However, the fact that even at this early point Lacan distinguishes between the Real and 'the true' indicates that the Real is already prey to a certain ambiguity.[4]

After appearing in 1936, the term disappears from Lacan's work until the early 1950s, when Lacan invokes Hegel's view that 'everything which is Real is rational (and vice versa)' (Ec, 226). It is not until 1953 that Lacan elevates the Real to the status of a fundamental category of psychoanalytic theory; the Real is henceforth one of the three orders according to which all psychoanalytic phenomena may be described, the other two being the Symbolic order and and the Imaginary order. The Real is thus no longer simply opposed to the Imaginary, but is also located beyond the Symbolic. Unlike the Symbolic, which is constituted in terms of oppositions such as that between presence and absence, 'there is no absence in the Real.'[5] Whereas the Symbolic opposition between presence and absence implies the permanent possibility that something may be missing from the Symbolic order, the Real 'is always in its place: it carries it glued to its heel, ignorant of what might exile it from there.'[6]

Whereas the Symbolic is a set of differentiated, discrete elements called signifiers, the Real is, in itself, undifferentiated; 'the Real is absolutely without fissure.'[7] It is the Symbolic which introduces 'a cut in the Real' in the process of signification: 'it is the world of words that creates the world of things - things originally confused in the hic et nunc of the all in the process of coming-into-being.'[8]

In these formulations of the period 1953-5, the Real emerges as that which is outside language and inassimilable to symbolisation. It is 'that which resists symbolization absolutely';[9] or, again, the Real is 'the domain of whatever subsists outside symbolisation.'[10] This theme remains a constant throughout the rest of Lacan's work, and leads Lacan to link the Real with the concept of impossibility. The Real is 'the impossible'[11] because it is impossible to imagine, impossible to integrate into the Symbolic order, and impossible to attain in any way. It is this character of impossibility and of resistance to symbolisation which lends the Real its essentially traumatic quality. Thus in his reading of the case of Little Hans [12] in the seminar of 1956-7, Lacan distinguishes two Real elements which intrude and disrupt the child's Imaginary preoedipal harmony: the Real penis which begins to make itself felt in infantile masturbation, and the newly born sister.[13]

The Real also has connotations of matter, implying a material substrate underlying the Imaginary and the Symbolic (see Materialism). The connotations of matter also link the concept of the Real to the realm of biology and to the body in its brute physicality (as opposed to the Imaginary and Symbolic functions of the body). For example the Real father is the biological father, and the Real phallus is the physical penis as opposed to the Symbolic and Imaginary functions of this organ.

Throughout his work, Lacan uses the concept of the Real to elucidate a number of clinical phenomena:

Anxiety and trauma The Real is the object of anxiety; it lacks any possible mediation, and is thus 'the essential object which isn't an object any longer, but this something faced with which all words cease and all categories fail, the object of anxiety par excellence' (S2, 164). It is the missed encounter with this Real object which presents itself in the form of trauma (Sll, 55). It is the tyche which lies 'beyond the [[[symbolic]]] automaton.'[14] (see chance).


Hallucinations

When something cannot be integrated in the Symbolic order, as in psychosis, it may return in the Real in the form of a hallucination.[15] The preceding comments trace out some of the main uses to which Lacan puts the category of the Real, but are far from covering all the complexities of this term. In fact, Lacan takes pains to ensure that the Real remains the most elusive and mysterious of the three orders, by speaking of it less than of the other orders, and by making it the site of a radical indeterminacy. Thus it is never completely clear whether the Real is external or internal, or whether it is unknowable or amenable to reason.

External / internal

On the one hand, the term 'the Real' seems to imply a simplistic notion of an objective, external reality, a material substrate which exists in itself, independently of any observer. On the other hand, such a 'naive' view of the Real is subverted by the fact that the Real also includes such things as hallucinations and traumatic dreams. The Real is thus both inside and outside.[16] (extimitÈ). This ambiguity reflects the ambiguity inherent in Freud's own use of the two German terms for reality (Wirklichkeit and Realit‰t) and the distinction Freud draws between material reality and psychical reality.[17]

Unknowable/rational

On the one hand, the Real cannot be known, since it goes beyond both the Imaginary and the Symbolic; it is, like the Kantian thing-in-itself, an unknowable x. On the other hand, Lacan quotes Hegel to the effect that the Real is rational and the rational is Real, thus implying that it is amenable to calculation and logic.

It is possible to discern in Lacan's work, from the early 1970s on, an attempt to resolve this indeterminacy, by reference to a distinction between the Real and 'reality' (such as when Lacan defines reality as 'the grimace of the Real' in Lacan, 1973a: 17; see also Sl7, 148). In this opposition, the Real is placed firmly on the side of the unknowable and unassimilable, while 'reality' denotes subjective representations which are a product of Symbolic and Imaginary articulations (Freud's 'psychical reality'). However, after this opposition is introduced, Lacan does not maintain it in a consistent or systematic way, but oscillates between moments when the opposition is clearly maintained and moments when he reverts to his previous custom of using the terms 'Real' and 'reality' interchangeably.

def

The state of nature from which we have been forever severed by our entrance into language. Only as neo-natal children were we close to this state of nature, a state in which there is nothing but need. A baby needs and seeks to satisfy those needs with no sense for any separation between itself and the external world or the world of others. For this reason, Lacan sometimes represents this state of nature as a time of fullness or completeness that is subsequently lost through the entrance into language. The primordial animal need for copulation (for example, when animals are in heat) similarly corresponds to this state of nature. There is a need followed by a search for satisfaction. As far as humans are concerned, however, "the real is impossible," as Lacan was fond of saying. It is impossible in so far as we cannot express it in language because the very entrance into language marks our irrevocable separation from the real. Still, the real continues to exert its influence throughout our adult lives since it is the rock against which all our fantasies and linguistic structures ultimately fail. The real for example continues to erupt whenever we are made to acknowledge the materiality of our existence, an acknowledgement that is usually perceived as traumatic (since it threatens our very "reality"), although it also drives Lacan's sense of jouissance. The Real works in tension with the imaginary order and the symbolic order. See the Lacan module on the structure of the psyche.

def

The Real is a term used by the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan in his theory of psychic structures. For Lacan, the Real is the irreducible surplus of the 'outside world' that resists being turned into language (as the Symbolic) or into spatial representation (as the Imaginary). This the First-Order Real.

In the later Lacan, a Second-Order Real is formulated which is not "outside of" or "underlying" the Symbolic Order but is in fact a structural feature of it -- its lack.

Kid A In Alphabet Land

Kida r.gif

Kid A In Alphabet Land Rousts Another Reprobate Ruffian - The Rotten Real! If It's Over You I Constantly Stumble, It's Only Because I've Already Struck You Down! But You Enjoy These Strokes During Our Encounters, Yes? Touché!

The Intrusion Of The Real Extrudes Reality Into Another Dimension

  1. (which Lacan refers to in the 1936 paper; Ec, 86
  2. Meyerson, 1925: 79; quoted in Roustang, 1986: 61
  3. Ec, 85
  4. Ec, 75
  5. S2, 313
  6. Ec, 25; see Sll, 49
  7. S2, 97
  8. E, 65
  9. Sl, 66
  10. Ec, 388
  11. Sl l, 167
  12. Freud, 1909b
  13. S4, 308-9
  14. S11, 53
  15. S3, 321
  16. S7, 118; see extimacy
  17. Freud, 1900a: SE V, 620