Changes

Psychoanalysis originates with the work of Freud and remains rooted in his theories to this day, but every generation of [[analysts ]] that came after Freud has sought to update and correct those theories, and to resolve the contradictions that he [[left ]] behind. Lacan argued that through this [[process ]] of continual revision psychoanalysis had lost [[sight ]] of its original aims; that it had become [[conservative ]] and reactionary. By playing down the more uncomfortable and disturbing aspects of the [[theory]], especially the underlying [[presence ]] of [[repressed]], [[unconscious]], [[desire ]] in our [[mental ]] lives, psychoanalysis had made itself respectable but it had lost its radical edge. In the early 1950s, therefore, Lacan famously declared the [[necessity ]] of a 'return to Freud', that is to say, a return to the [[texts ]] of Freud himself and to a close [[reading ]] and [[understanding ]] of those texts. For the next 26 years he would engage in this [[project ]] of close reading, and in the process would reconstitute the theory of psychoanalysis.

The [[whole ]] of [[Lacan]]'s work can only be [[understood ]] within the context of the [[intellectual ]] and [[theoretical ]] legacy of [[Sigmund Freud]] (1856-1939), the founder [[father]] of [[psychoanalysis]].

[[Lacan]] first trained as a [[psychoanalyst]] within the [[International Psychoanalytical Association]] ([[IPA]]), the organization founded by [[Freud]] which presented itself as the sole legitimate heir to the ''[[Freudian ]] legacy''.

After [[being ]] expelled from the [[IPA]] in 1953, [[Lacan]] developed his polemic further, arguing that [[Freud]]'s radical insights had been universally betrayed by the [[school|three major schools]] of [[psychoanalysis]] within the [[IPA]]: [[ego-psychology]], [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]], and [[object-relations theory]].

To remedy this [[situation]], [[Lacan]] proposed to lead a "[[return to Freud]]", both in the [[sense ]] of a renewed attention to the ''actual texts'' of [[Freud]] himself, and a '''return''' to the ''[[essence]]'' of [[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|work]] which had been betrayed by the [[IPA]].

Reading [[Freud]] in the original [[German ]] allowed [[Lacan]] to discover elements which had been obscured by poor [[translation ]] and ignored by [[other ]] commentators.

Thus much of [[Lacan]]'s work is taken up with detailed textual commentaries on specific works by [[Freud]], and by numerous references to the work of other analysts whose [[ideas ]] [[Lacan]] refutes.

To [[understand ]] [[Lacan]]'s work, therefore, it is necessary both to have a detailed understanding of [[Freud]]'s ideas and also a grasp of the way these ideas were developed and modified by the other analysts (the 'post-Freudians') whom Lacan criticizes.

<Blockquote>What such a return [to Freud] involves for me is not a [[return of the repressed]], but rather taking the antithesis constituted by the [[phase ]] in the [[history ]] of the [[psychoanalytic ]] movement since the [[death ]] of Freud, showing what psychoanalysis is not, and seeking with you the means of revitalizing that which has continued to sustain it, even in deviation...<ref>{{E}} p. 116</ref></Blockquote>

However, [[Lacan]]'s work itself puts in question the [[narrative ]] of a '''return''' to ''orthodoxy'' implicit in the expression "[[return to Freud]]," for [[Lacan]]'s way of reading [[Freud]] and his style of presentation are so original that they seem to belie his modest claims to be a mere commentator.

Furthermore, while it is [[true ]] that [[Lacan]] returns to specific aspects of the [[Freud]]ian [[conceptual ]] legacy, privileging [[Lacan]] is no more "faithful" to [[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|work]] than the post-Freudians whom he criticizes for having betrayed [[Freud]]'s [[message]]; like [[them]], [[Lacan]] selects and develops certain themes in [[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|work]] and neglects or [[interpretation|reinterprets]] [[others]].

'''[[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]]''' might therefore be described as a "[[Freud|post-Freudian]]" [[form ]] of [[psychoanalysis]], along with '''[[ego-psychology]]''', '''[[Kleinian psychoanalysis]]''' and ''[[object-relations theory]]'''.

[[Lacan]] argues that there is a deeper [[logic ]] at work in [[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|texts]], a logic which endows those [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|texts]] with a consistency despite the [[apparent ]] contradictions.

[[Lacan]] claims that his [[interpretation|reading]] of [[Freud]], and his alone, brings out this logic, and shows us that "the different [[stages ]] and changes in direction" in [[Freud]]'s [[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|work]] "are governed by Freud's inflexibly effective concern to maintain it in its primary rigour."<ref>{{E}} p. 116</ref>

In other [[words]], while [[Lacan]]'s reading of [[Freud]] may be as [[partial ]] as any other in the sense that it privileges [[particular ]] aspects of [[Freud]]'s work, that is not, in [[Lacan]]'s view, justification for regarding all [[interpretations ]] of [[Freud]] as equally valid.

Thus [[Lacan]]'s declarations of loyalty and accusations of '''[[betrayal]]''' cannot be seen as a mere rhetorical strategy.

Certainly, they do have a rhetorico-[[political ]] function, in that presenting himself as "more [[Freud]]ian" than anyone else allowed [[Lacan]] to challenge the effective monopoly on the ''[[Freud]]ian legacy'' that the [[IPA]] still enjoyed in the 1950s.

However, [[Lacan]]'s statements are also an [[explicit ]] [[claim ]] to have teased out a coherent logic if [[Freud]]'s writings that no one else had perceived before.