24,656
edits
Changes
no edit summary
|}
In <i>[[La relation d'objet]]</i> [[Lacan]] provided a way of understanding the paradoxical function of [[transference]] in the [[analytic]]al c[[urecure]]. In its [[symbolic]] aspect ([[repetition]]) it helps the [[cure]] progress by revealing the [[signifier]]s of the [[subject]]'s history. He argues that in its [[imaginary]] aspect ([[love]] and [[hate]]) it acts as a [[resistance]]. He uses [[Plato]]'s <i>[[The Symposium]]</i> to illustrate the rapport between analysand and analyst: Alcibiades compares Socrates to a box enclosing a precious [[object]], <i>[[agalma]]</i>. Just as Alcibiades attributes a hidden treasure to Socrates, so too the [[patient]] sees his [[object]] of [[desire]] in the [[analyst]]. [[Lacan]] articulates the <i>[[objet a]]</i> with <i>[[agalma]]</i>, the [[object of desire]] we seek in the [[other]].
Before, the emphasis was placed on repetition, now it is placed on [[transference]] [[love]], <i>amour de transfert</i>: both are inseparable, but the perspective changes. To insist on [[repetition]] means to refuse to see in the analytic situation an [[intersubjective]] rapport to be dealt with here and now. What [[speech]] constructed in the past can be deconstructed in the [[cure]] by [[speech]]: the [[cure]] is "pure [[symbolic]] experience." On the individual level, it allows for "the reshaping of the [[imaginary]]," on the theorethical level for an intersubjective logic to be constructed. Thus, [[analysis]] is described as a particular experience of [[desire]], on the side of [[sexuality]]. [[Speech]] has an effect only after [[transference]]. For [[Lacan]] "it is from the position that [[transference]] bestows the [[analyst]] with that he intervenes in [[transference]] itself," and "[[transference]] is interpreted on the basis of and with the aid of [[transference]] itself." In "The direction of the treatment and the principles of its power" (<i>[[Écrits: A Selection]]</i>) [[Lacan]] presented [[countertransference]] as a [[resistance]] of the [[analyst]] and raised the problem of the [[analyst]]'s [[desire]]. Here, subjective disparity becomes the rule establishing dissymmetry between the two protagonists vis-à-vis [[desire]]: what the [[patient]] will discover through the disappointment of [[transference]] [[love]]. Because in the [[cure]] one learns to talk instead of making [[love]], in the end [[desire]], which has been purified, is but the empty place where the barred [[subject]] accesses [[desire]]. We should note that [[training analysis]] does not put the [[analyst]] beyond passion; to believe that it does would mean that all passions stem from the [[unconscious]], a notion that [[Lacan]] rejects. The better analysed the [[analyst]] is, the more likely he is to be in [[love]] with, or be quite repulsed by, the [[analysand]]. In training-analysis there will be a mutation in the economy of [[desire]] in the analyst-to-be: desire will be restructured, so that it will be stronger than passions. [[Lacan]] calls it the [[desire]] proper to the [[analyst]].
