Changes

The formations [[formation]]s of the [[unconscious ]] are those circumstances in which the laws [[law]]s of the [[unconscious ]] are most discernible: the [[joke]], the [[dream]], the [[symptom]], the [[lapsus ]] ([[parapraxis]]). [[Freud ]] referred to the fundamental mechanisms involved in the formations [[formation]]s of the [[unconscious ]] as [[condensation ]] and [[displacement]], which [[Lacan ]] redefines as [[metaphor ]] and [[metonymy]]. With the former, the play of signifiers [[signifier]]s creates sense in nonsense in relation to [[truth]]. The latter reveals the [[lack ]] of a [word]], "an item of waste sent like a ball between [[code ]] and [[message]]." In this [[lack ]] [[substitute words ]] [[word]]s appear and function like "the [[metonymic ]] ruins of the [[object]]."<br>At the junction between psychoanalysis and linguistics, Lacan wants to formalize the primordial laws of the unconscious that Freud had uncovered. His project is to define a topology of the levels of functioning of the signifier in the subject by elaborating the graphs that, under the generic name of Graph of Desire, will be at the core of "The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious" written in 1960 and published in 1966 in <i>Écrits</i>. Here the key concept is that of desire, and Lacan's dialectic of desire is quite distinct from Hegel's. The Graph of Desire will serve as a topology of the different steps constitutive of the subject. "It is precisely because desire is articulated that it is not articulable" in a signifying chain. Slavoj Zizek commenting on this formulation argues that subject is not substance, "it has not substantial positive being in itself, being caught between 'not yet' and 'no longer'. The subject never is, it will have been - either it is not yet here or it is no longer here, since there is only a trace of its absence."<br>

At the junction between [[psychoanalysis]] and [[linguistics]], [[Lacan]] wants to [[formalize]] the primordial [[law]]s of the [[unconscious]] that [[Freud]] had uncovered. His project is to define a [[topology]] of the levels of functioning of the signifier in the subject by elaborating the [[graph]]s that, under the generic name of [[Graph of Desire]], will be at the core of "[[The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious]]" written in 1960 and published in 1966 in <i>[[Écrits]]</i>. Here the key concept is that of [[desire]], and [[Lacan]]'s [[dialectic]] of [[desire]] is quite distinct from [[Hegel]]'s. The Graph of Desire will serve as a [[topology]] of the different steps constitutive of the [[subject]]. "It is precisely because desire is articulated that it is not articulable" in a [[signifying chain]]. [[Slavoj Zizek]] commenting on this formulation argues that [[subject]] is not substance, "it has not substantial positive being in itself, being caught between 'not yet' and 'no longer'. The [[subject ]] never is, it will have been - either it is not yet here or it is no longer here, since there is only a trace of its absence." The [[subject]] is dependent on the recognition of the [[Other ]] who embodies "the legitimacy of the code," he alone can ratify a word as a [[joke]], as stupidity or as madness. With the [[Other]], [[Lacan ]] moves on to the [[analysis ]] of the [[Oedipus complex]]. Three stages [[structure ]] the constitution of the [[subject]]. First, the paternal metaphor acts intrinsically on account of the primacy given to the [[phallus ]] by [[culture]]. Then, the father intervenes as the one who deprives the [[mother]]: to her he addresses the [[message ]] "You will not reintegrate your product" - the [[child ]] as [[phallic ]] [[object]]. The [[child ]] receives "a [[message ]] on the [[message]]," in the form of "You will not sleep with your mother" that liberates and deprives him of the object of his [[desire]]. From the alternative "To be or not to be the [[phallus]]," he can move to the alternative "To have it or not to have it." The third moment - the exit out of the [[Oedipus complex ]] - requires the intervention of the permissive and generous father who, preferred over the [[mother]], gives birth to the idea of the [[ego]]. It is in this context that the problems of becoming boy or girl - of the inverted [[Oedipus complex ]] are raised.<br> [[Lacan ]] plays with the term "[[insistence]]" in order to recall repetition, the characteristic of the [[signifying chain ]] in the [[unconscious]]. "The unconscious is neither primordial nor instinctual; what it knows about the elementary is but the elements of the signifier." In a previous writing, "[[The Agency of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason since Freud]]," he defines the unconscious as a memory that can be compared to that of modern thinking-machines where the chain that insists on reproducing itself in the [[transference ]] can be found, and which is the [[chain ]] of [[dead ]] [[desire]].<br> In "[[The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious]]," written in 1960, [[Lacan ]] states that "it is not the law that bars the [[subject]]'s access to <i>[[jouissance]]</i> but [[pleasure]]." In 1966 he will add a final sentence: "[[Castration ]] means that <i>[[jouissance]]</i> must be refused, so that it can be reached on the inverted ladder (<i>échelle inversée</i>) of the [[Law ]] of [[desire]]."

The alternative seems ineluctable: either the [[Mother ]] or the [[Father]]. To choose the [[Mother ]] means to be condemned to the dependency of [[demand]], while the [[Father ]] constitutes the access to [[desire]], hence to salvation. If the [[Father ]] must be preferred to the [[Mother]], if the [[Father ]] is the origin and the representative of [[culture ]] (and of the [[Law]]), it is because he possesses the [[phallus ]] that he can give or refuse. The absolute primacy of the [[phallus ]] - the single emblem of Man - has become a real doctrinal (perhaps dogmatic) basis of Lacanian theory: "The [[phallus ]] is the [[signifier ]] of signifiers[[signifier]]s, the privileged signifier of that mark in which the role of the logos is joined with the advent of [[desire]]," its function "touches on its most profound rapport: that in which the Ancients embodied the <i>Nous</i>, the Mind, and the <i>Logos</i>, discourse, reason." Why such a privilege? "This [[signifier ]] is chosen as the most tangible element in the real of sexual copulation; it is the most symbolic in the literal sense," since "it is equivalent to the logical copula." Moreover, "by virtue of its turgidity, it epitomizes the image of the vital flow as it is transmitted in generation." [[Freud ]] says, there is only one libido, masculine in nature. Later, [[Lacan ]] will assert that "[[there is no such thing as sexual rapport]]," <i>[[il n'y a pas de rapport sexuel]]</i>, in the sense of proportion or relation: one sex counts for both sexes. Thus the [[phallus ]] can only appear as veiled.