Changes

{{SeminarsNavBar|RightPrevLink=Seminar XVI|RightPrevText=Seminar XVI|RightNextLink=Seminar XVIII|RightNextText=Seminar XVIII}}

|-

| style="width:300px;text-align:left; line-height:2.0em; padding-left:10px;"| ''[[Seminar XVII|L'envers de la psychanalyse]]''<BR><big>[[Seminar XVII|The Reverse of Psychoanalysis]]</big>

|}

S1 refers to "the marked circle of the field of the [[Other]]," it is the [[Master-Signifier]]. S2 is the "battery of [[signifiers]], already there" at the [[place]] where "one wants to determine the status of a discourse as status of [[statement]]," that is knowledge - <i>[[savoir]]</i>. S1 comes into play in a signifying battery conforming the network of knowledge. <font face="LACAN" size="3">S</font> is [[The Subject|the subject]], marked by the unbroken line - <i>[[trait]] [[unaire]]</i> - which represents it and is different from the [[living]] [[individual]] who is not the locus of this subject. Add the <i>[[objet]] a</i>, the [[object]]-waste or the [[loss]] of the object that ocurred when the originary division of [[The Subject|the subject]] took place - the object that is the [[cause]] of desire: the <i>plus-de-[[jouir]]</i>.</font><p>

It is the basic discourse from which the other three derive. The dominant [[position]] is occupied by the [[master signifier]], S1, which represents the [[subject]], S, for all other signifiers: S2. In this signifying operation there is a [[surplus]]: <i>[[objet a]]</i>. All attempts at totalisation are doomed to fail. This [[discourse]] masks the [[division]] of the [[subject]], it illustrates the [[structure]] of the [[dialectic]] of the [[master]] and the [[slave]]. The master, S1, is the [[agent]] who puts the slave, S2, to [[work]]: the result is a surplus, <i>objet a</i>, that the [[master]] struggles to appropriate.

It is caused by a anticlockwise quarter turn of the previous discourse. The dominant position is occupied by knowledge - <i>savoir</i>. An attempt to [[mastery]] can be traced behind the endeavors to impart neutral knowledge: domination of the other to whom knowledge is transmitted. This [[hegemony]] is [[visible]] in [[modernity]] with [[science]].

It is effected by a clockwise quarter turn of the discourse of the master. It is not simply "that which is uttered by the hysteric," but a certain kind of articulation in which any subject may be inscribed. The [[divided]] subject, S, the [[symptom]], is in the pole position. This discourse points toward knowledge. "The cure involves the structural introduction of the discourse of the hysteric by way of artificial [[conditions]]": the analyst hystericizes the [[analysand]]'s discourse.

It is produced by a quarter turn of the discourse of the hysteric in the same way as Freud develops psychoanalysis by giving an interpretative turn to the discourse of his [[hysterical]] [[patients]]. The position of the agent - the analyst - is occipied by <i>objet a</i>: the analyst becomes the cause of the analysand's desire. This discourse [[being]] the reverse of the discourse of the master, does it make psychoanalysis an essentially subversive [[practice]] which undermines attempts at domination and mastery?

There is the story of the three Congolese, analyzed by Lacan after WWII: "Their [[unconscious]] functioned according to the rules of the [[Oedipus]] [[complex]], it was the unconscious that had been sold to [[them]] at the same [[time]] as the laws of colonization, an exotic [[form]] of the discourse of the Master, a [[regression]] before imperialist [[capitalism]]." Are the capitalistic or imperialistic [[discourses]] mentioned only metamorphoses of the discourse of the Master?<br>

As to the <i>envers</i> of psychoanalysis, sometimes it is the discourse of the Master when it functions as a foil. Sometimes it is unconscious discourse as the knowledge located where wrong and [[right]] sides ([[analytic]] discourse) cannot be separated, following the Moebius [[strip]]. "The <i>envers</i> is assonant with truth; one moves to the <i>envers</i>, but the <i>envers</i> does not explain any right side."

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 26 novembre 1969

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1969.11.26.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 17 décembre 1969

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 14 janvier 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.01.14.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 21 janvier 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.01.21.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 11 février 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.02.11.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 18 février 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.02.18.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 11 mars 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.03.11.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 18 mars 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.03.18.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 08 avril 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.04.08.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 15 avril 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.04.15.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 20 mai 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.05.20.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 10 juin 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.06.10.pdf pdf]

|-

| bgcolor="#ffffff" style="padding-left:15px" | 17 juin 1970

| [http://ecole-lacanienne.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1970.06.17.pdf pdf]

|}

French versions of [[Jacques Lacan|Lacan's]] [[Seminars]] Source: http://ecole-lacanienne.net

{{collapse bottom}}}}

}}

<!--

1969-1970