Freud and the Sexual:

Essays 2000-2006

Jean Laplanche

Editor and Textual Reviser:

John Fletcher

Translators:
John Fletcher, Jonathan House, Nicholas Ray
 CONTENTS

Al)atowledgernents .............................·--·····-····-·····································vii
Foreword ..................................................._..................·-·····················.. 1
1. Drive and Instinct distinctions, oppositions, supports
and intertWining.s ................................................................................. 5
2. Sexuality and Attachment in Metapsychology ...._...................... Z7

3. Dream and Communkation; should chapter VD

be rewritten? ........................................................................................ 53

4. Countercurrent .................,_............................................................... 83

5. Starting from the Fundamental Anthropological Situation ....... 99

uipyright e 2JJ1J by lnU-mational Psychoanalytic Books
Afl right5 r~ -rvcd. 6. Failures of Translation ..........,.......................................................... 115
Firbt Edition
7. Displ~t and Condensation in Freud.................................. 133

Cov,,, photo by Trish Mayo 8. Se---'ual Crime ..................................................................................... 139

9. Gender, 5€.-x and the Sexual ............................................................. 159

OY✓l(f' imag,.:: Ba«hante, 1894, sculpture.
Frederick WiWam MacMonnics (Am(.-rican, 1863-1937). 10. Three Meaning.5 of the Term 'Unconscious' in the
Marble, 86- J/2 x 31x 33--3/ 4 in. (219,7 ¼ 78.7 x 85,7 cm,) f ra.mework of the General 'Iheory of Seduction........................ 203
Cofk-ction of the flrooklyn Museum,
11. For P5ychoanalysis at the University ........................................... 223
P.lla C. Woodward M,-rnorial Pund, 06.33.
12. lntervc-ntion in a ()cbate ................................................................. '129
ISBN '178-0-615-57137-9
13. Levels of Proof .................................................................................. 235
Library of Congn:s, Control Numlx-r: 2011944629
14. The Three Essays and the Theory of Seduction............................ 249

15. Prc-ud and Philosophy .....................................................................267

16. In Dc.-batc with Frcud .......................................................................275

 17 Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy..................
. ······•..................... 279
18 Incest and Infantile Sexuality....................... .
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
. ·······························•·285
19. Castration and Oedipus as Codes and Narrative Schema To the Fondation Jean lAplanche: Nouveaux Fondements pour la Psych-
s ····· 303 analyse, at the Institut de France, for the support and .financing of the
Bibliography.......................................................
·•··•·•··••·..••••··.................. 311 current translation.

To Presses Universitaires de France, publishers of the French collec-

tion of Jean Laplanche's works which provided the original text for
the current translation: Sexual: IA sexualite elargie au sens freudien: 2000-
2006. Where appropriate the date and venue of the first publication is
given at the beginning of each essay. An early version of the transla-
tion of Essay 10 was published in The Unconscious: Further Reflech"ons,
ed. Jose Carlos Calich and Helmut Hinze (London: International Psy-
choanalytic Association, 2007). The translations of essays 7, 13, 15 and
16 appeared in Sitegeist no 5, Winter 2010.

To Professor Jean Laplanche for his generous participation in the

translation process. On a number of occasions the original text was
revised and the revised text forms the basis of the current translation.

Each essay was worked on by two translators with editorial oversight

and revision. The lead translators for each essay were:
John Hetcher for no. 10;
Jonathan House for nos. 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 9-Appendi.x 1, 13;
Nicholas Ray: Foreword, 1, 2, 6, 8, 9-Appendi.x 2, 11, 12 14 15 16
17, 18, 19. I ✓ I I

I.would also like to thank Dr. Nicholas Ray for his extensive contribu-
tions towards the final harmonization of the translations.

John Fletcher

vii
 che is Professor Emeritus of Psychoanalysis at th So
Jean LapIan . f h CE
. VII) Scientific Director o t e uvres completes de el" r- FOREWORD
1,onne (Pans ' . . rreud
) d author ofHolderlm and the Question ofthe Father (1 961 ) rz. _
(1988-- an . . B D talis) (19 . rie
umguage 07,1Psychoanalysts (with J.-• . ron
I •
67), Life and Donth .
• ..,. zn
psyc1toanalysis (1970), New Foundations for Psychoanalysis (1987), Essays The present volume comprises most of my writings ~m the ~od
on Otherness (1999), the seven volumes of Problematiques (1980-2006) 2000 to 2006. As with the previous volumes, La revolution copermcienne
IA revolution copemicienne inachevee (1992), and Entre seduction et insp;~ inachevee and Entre seduction et inspiration: l'homme, 1 the articles are
not classified according to theme. Some of the texts, such as ''Three
ration: l'hamme (1999).
Meanings of the Term 'Unconscious'" and "Gender, Sex, and the
Sexual", have an innovatory aim with respect to theoretical matters
(i.e. metapsychology). The title of the latter article leads me to justify
Iranslators:
the volume's overall title: what I call the 'sexua/' 2 is everything that
John Fletcher is Associate Professor in the Department of English and emerges from the Freudian theory of an enlarged sexuality, and first
Comparative Literary Studies at the University of Warwick, UK He and foremost what is called 'polymoiphous perverse' infantile sexu-
has edited three previous volumes on the work of Jean Laplanche: ality. Once we have understood the way in which Freud enlarges the
Jean uiplanche: Seduction, Translation and the Drives (with Martin Stan- notion of sexuality- beyond the simple union of the two sexes (to the
ton), F.ssays on Otherness, Jean uzplanche and the Theory of Seduction: extent that the sexual may often be auto-erotic) - we can only smile
Special Laplanche Issue of New Formations, no. 48, Wmter 2002-3. He at the ubiquitous claim that there exists a modem 'sexual freedom',
is the author of a number of essays on the work of Jean Laplanche triumphant at last, and possibly even thanks to Freud himself.
and of Freud and the Scene of Trauma (Fordham University Press On the other hand, one is peiplexed by Foucault's approach;
forthcoming). I
for, having relegated Freudian sexuality to the field of heterosexual
genital union, he revels in the discovery of 'non-sexual' and even anti.-
Jonathan House MD 15 · ch . sexual pleasures which are already amply described by Freud in 1905
Yo k Lecturer . ' ' a psy oanalyst m private practice in New
versri·~, wh hm ~sychiatiy and Psychoanalysis at Columbia Uni-
.,, ere e 15 also Trainin . .
University's Center~ p ch g ~d S~peIVISmg Analyst at the 1 w revolution copernicienne inachevee (Paris: Aubier, 1992); Entre seduction et
or sy Oanalytic Traming and Research. inspiration: /'homme (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1999).
2 [Editor: Lapl:111<:l'e invents. a neologism in French by transforming the German
Nicholas Ray r ,,,.,.____ .
IS.
component adjective Sexual- into a free-standing noun, in pointed contrast with the
'-"\;lurer m Critical
of English at the u • .
and
and Cultural Theory in the School
ruvers1ty of Leeds UK H .
stan~ard F~ch .term s:xuei. {In German Sexual mainly appears as a bound adjectival
Otherness: Saphoc/es Sl.n1,~ ' e IS the author of Tragedy root m combination with a noun, e.g. Sexualtrieb- sexual drive, Sexualtheorie - sexual
' •--=peare, Psychoanalysis (2009). theory). This is an attempt to register terminologically the difference between the
e~ed Freu~an notio~ of sexuality (le sexual) and the common sense or traditional
notion of? geru~l sexuality (le sexuel). This terminological innovation can't really be
captured m English as the German term Sexual coincides exactly with the spellin
of the standard English term 'sexual', rather than contrasting with it as in p ct
The translator.: have chosen to signal Laplanche's neologism by italicizin ::::01 _:

I
Viii pronounced with a long 'a': ahlJ. g

1
 [',,,,ysr) under the heading of infantile and/or
(read the Three c:,;,;,o• • per.
verse sexuality. th sexual is not exactIy what we think. It is rn ~L
In short, e . u~u
d much more repressed, sometimes buried Within
more complex an .
tonnulated fantasies.
barely Although not every text in the present ~ol~e bears UPon
. b using this slightly strange tenn, which IS, nevertheless
this theme, y affum th . ,
cted from Freud, I have sought to e pnmacy within psy. Essays
~ . of a unique and specific 'variety' of sexuality. It is this that
~ th::Seart of the notions of the drive, the unconscious and even
:::~death drive': the sexuality that, in infancy at.l~t~ can transfonn
any region or function of the body, and even actiVIty m general, into
an 'erotogenic zone'.
It would, however, be one-sided to reduce this enlarged sexu-
ality to the polymorphous perverse sexuality of early childhood.
This anarchic sexuality, whose fate is sometimes close to the
'sexual death drive', has another, more stabilising fate, and one to
which Freud attached the name 'renunciation of the drive'. The path
of renunciation is not purely negative. It is the path of binding within
the field of genitality and, more generally, the path of sublimation.
This is what Freud calls 'the Eros of the divine Plato', and it is no less
erotic for all that. We have touched on this theme in an earlier volume,
under the title of "Sublimation and/ or Inspiration".3 It is essential that
this fate, which is by no means always confonnist, not be forgotten.

3"Sublima .
lion and/ or lnspiratio ,,
Fumrations, no. 48, Wmter 2rxo._ _0 •trans.John Fletcher and Luke Thurston, in New
3
2
3
 Drive and Instinct

1
DRIVE AND INSTINCT:
DISTINCTIONS, OPPOSmONS, SUPPORTS
AND INTER1WININGS1

Although this is a presentation for a conference on the theme

of 'homosexuality and adolescence', I am by no means a specialist in
adolescence. What I'm presenting here is a re-examination- which is
no easy task itself- of a certain number of presuppositions. It is thus
a clarification, which, within our discipline, is primarily and of neces-
sity a catharsis - something for which psychoanalysis has a powerful
and continuing need. Stoller, with his great freedom of thought and
in his own occasionally very amusing manner, compares current psy-
choanalytic theory to the Pantheon of imperial Rome where coexisted
the temples of Isis and of Jupiter, a few early Christian churches, the
temples of Mithra, and so on. In psychoanalysis too we add little tem-
ples, private mansions, and supplementary shrines onto the Freudian
forum, without worrying about their coherence. A pinch of the sym-
bolic, a dash of leaning-on, a knob of the negative, a small measure
of seduction, a sprig of transitivity - all without worrying ourselves
about what it is we are building upon or how these cohere with it.

1 FII'St published in Adolescence, 2000, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 649-668.

4
5
 Drive and Instinct
Drive and Instinct
rly take place except on the basis
1 10
1 _ 1noughlifca~o P pet establish relations between What
it is later o . .
Auffassung and Konz.eption; for 'morality' it has both SiHlichkeit and
distinctions, even another. Today's topic reqwres the Moralitiit. These words often have analogous derivations, one from
o f . . . hed trom one
have t,een disttngUJS . Latin or the Romance languages and the other from Germanic roots.
clearest ~le distiJldJOOS- the tenns of Colette Chiland's article German speakers can either choose to use them as pure synonyms or
L- ·'d like to take .up. us "to be clear about the terms we
I srww to inhabit the difference and enlarge it, so as to make out of it a con-
vhere she en)OIJ\S ceptual distinction. But, even if they do occupy or dwell on each word
in AlfoltsCt"Ce \ .th the paper by Jean Bergeret that follows
0
use" and, in hal'Ill ~Y wt homosexuality and homoeroticism.2 very differently, the risk of them collapsing back into one another is
cfjstinctJon between . . always present. This is certainly the case for Trieb and Instinkt, which I
it, to make~ pealed to the gender/sex/sexuality triad,
I IJUghl also have apbe essential today. However, this will have shall henceforth translate as 'drive' and 'instinct' respectively.
. also seems to me to What is the case with Freud? Does he distinguish these two
which . when I can take account of the notion of
. fo another occas1on terms or concepts? He certainly never combines them, he never
to wait r . . Freud's key formula concerning homosexu.
gender; for, bn~~ put,~ (a man)"_ he varies each term except the opposes one to the other, and he never really rompares them. And we
ality - "l (a man ove ' ' '1 (a man)" 3 shall see that the.re are ambiguities in Freud apropos of Tritb, apropos
hich • to say the gender of ego : · of the drive. But things are dearer with respect to instinct, or lnstinkt.
first w IS . , d 't . logy' d
'
1
shall say a little about 'translation an ermmo an a Freud only uses this term rarely, but he does so in a consistent manner,
, ,_-,ff/ but Jshall also say a great deal about reality as
little about con.."r'"', very often to refer to instinct in animals: "If inherited mental forma-
. . . ed by psychoanalysis. For both the conceptual problem and tions exist in the human being - something analogous to instinct in
II IS VleW .
the problem of translation have pervaded our psychoanalytic world animals- these [primal fantasies) constitute the nucleus of the Ucs."4
for almost eighty yem. They have done so in a confused fashion, but (Clearly he could not have said, "If there exists something analogous
this is a confusion that also exists in the real. As I like to say, with a to the drives of animals"). Or consider this: "the little human lacks
touch of irony, 'theoretico-genesis recapitulates ontogenesis'. most of the survival instincts found in animals".5
Let's begin with the simplest matter: the translation of the The most piquant passage for our purposes today is from
Freudian word Trieb by 'wtinct'. Ever since Strachey's edition, which ''Psychogenesis of A Case of Homosexuality in a Woman". It con-
is now very old, 'wtinct' has been the principal English translation cerns a father who, albeit with some misgiving, brings his daughter
of TrinJ. In French we have had 'instincr, or in a manner that really to Freud for analysis. Here is the relevant passage in Freud:
mixes apples and oranges, 'pulsion ou instinct [drive or instinct]', as
Marie Bonaparte was able to say in a single breath. The issue here There was something about his daughter's homo-
is not one of purism, or of mechanical translation. For an immense sexuality that aroused the deepest bitterness in
number of cone~ German has two words - one of Latin ori·
gin, the other of Germanic origin. Thus, for 'conception' it has both 4 'The Unconscious" (1915e), SE. 14, p. 195.
5 [Editor: This is the paraphrase of a statement made by Freud about the lack of
2 1989, vol. 7, no. I. 'realistic anxiety' in human Infants: "It would have been a good thing for them lf
they had Inherited more of those life-preserving instincts" , "Lecture 25: Anxiety",
3 "Psycho-Analytic Notes on an Autobiographical Account of a Case of Parano!JI
!lllrod11ctory LtcturtS on Psyclwa1t11/ysis (1916-17), SE 16, pp. 407-8).
(Dementia P1ranoidesr (191Jc), SE 12, p. 63.

7
6
 Drive and Instinct
. ed to combat it with
e was deteriJUfl The low estimation 'drive', for we are henceforth 'all-adrift', in the realm of the 'pure
. and I, i.:., Power. h ld .
hiJTl,th J1lt:ow
-~"" ill i = · 15 •
SO
generally e m drive'. But drifting/deriving' from what? For if the drive does not
15
all ~ch psychoanalys . from turning to it for drift/derive from the instinct, how can one say that it 'derives' at all?
· whi vent hinl his
Ill did not pre . he still had in reserve There is also a folding back of terms in Freud's own work. I
VieJlll"lf thiS .,..,ay failed, . ....o<>r1y marriage was have emphasized this point ceaselessly for thirty years. Especially in
helP· Jlleasure• a sr-~- •
est counter- . . cts (lnsti11ktel of the girl English, 'drive' is collapsed back into 'instinct' or, sometimes, the two
stJOng the natural 1nsttn . 6 form a sort of mixture: the 'instinctual drive'. In support of the claim
to awal<eJl tural tendenoes.
d stifle her unna that this confusion is present in Freud (side by side with the distinc-
an .1 h . tion) I could note the fact that he never protested against Strachey's
Thi s is a young grr w o 1s not far
see the opPo51'tion here- . must finally, awaken her natural translation and that he rarely, if ever, thematised the opposition
You can ...not1y rnarnage ' , . between drive and instinct. The closest he gets to such a thematisa-
.+v, A Sy<-~- of Instinkt, of comp1ementanty as
n,1st pube..,. a Jllatter . ,
: -. ct (thiS is dear1Y d choke off her 'tendenaes - that's to tion is the following famous passage from the opening of Three Essays.
i.ll.5tin ould say) an The word 'instinct' is not used but it is certainly present in what Freud
. . Gutton w
Philippe l Triebe,
say, her unnatura the penuo . •ous effect of unifyin .
' th
g e two tenns
.
refers to as "the popular view" of sexuality:
We can see d' of ,.insbn'ct' . In Strachev, Here is the key passage:
,, m Mane Bonaparte,
under the single hea ing ists even in France, one finds this general
Popular opinion has quite definite ideas about
and in a lineage that persh language used and the understanding of
· 'thin both t e the nature and characteristics of this sexual drive
confusion WI
[Geschlechtstriebes]. It is generally understood
Freud's own usag~- f th two terms under the heading of 'drive'
unification o e . to be absent in childhood, to set in at the time of
A h ver So it is in Lacan, according to whom
d rous owe . puberty in connection with the process of coming
is no Jess ange 'th ord" instinct? Ever since Lacan, drive has to maturity 1/.L.: each of these tenns is important) and
d " ver wrote e w .
freu ne . fi Id Furthermore, it has been interpreted loosely to be revealed in the manifestations of an irresist-
·ed the entire e ·
occupi . I b Lacan through a play on the English word ible attraction exercised by one sex upon the other;
as 'drift' (en denve Y '
while its aim is presumed to be sexual union, or at
. f c,se of Homosexuality in a Woman" (1920a), SE 18, p. all events actions leading in that direction. We have
6 "The Psychogenes1S o a
149. ~IS analytiques et les traductions officielles de Freud every reason to believe, however, that these views
7 (Editor: "La_ 1~ des t) us mettant de l'instinct plein la bouche, peut-mre y give a very false picture of the true situation. If we
. , . mais ecrit ce mo no d "J
(qui n a Jcl . a h~torique qui obture toute efficace e concept. acques look into them more closely we shall find that they
a-t-il interet aob~er ~e ~ du Seuil 1966), P· 834. It receives a face-saving Eng-
Lacan, lcrit~ (Pa~; Ed•~~ alytic ~tings and official translations of works by
contain a number of errors, inaccuracies and hasty
lish translation as. 'Rea ,hng anrd ,Official') that use the term 'instinct' right and left, conclusions ...
h never wrote I e wo ff . •
Freud (w o rth b . ting a rhetoric that obturates the concept's e ectiveness '
ii is perhaps wo o vifa ·tin · Lacan's assertion (Ecrits [1966) trans. Bruce Fink
which has the effect o rewn g 8 [Trans.: The French verb dtriver (de) can mean either to derive from or to drift).
(New York: WW Norton, 2005), P· 708)).
9
8
 Drive and Instinct Drive and Instinct

view of the sexual drive [Geschlecht- that are double: four limbs, two heads, two sets of genitalia, etc.; but
The popular . .
striebes] is beautifully reflected m the poe~c fable in Plato's version there are three kinds of double beings - man-man,
(J.L.: this is Aristophanes' well-1:"awn fable] which ~ells woman-woman, and man-woman. I take up only the last type as this
how the original human bemgs were cut up into will simplify the matter for the question of instinct. So, we picture
two halves - man and woman - and how these are these androgynes being cut in two:
9
always striving to unite again in love.
Eventually Zeus decided to cut these men in two,
This passage, which is fundamental to our concern here, only ''like a sorb-apple which is halved for pickling".
finds its true resolution in the distinction between drive and instinct. After the division had been made, "the two parts
And yet, in spite of what he writes in Three Essays, in spite of the veri- of man, each desiring his other half, came together,
table 'drift' [derive] (to take up this term) that he proposes with respect and threw their arms about one another eager to
to infantile sexuality, Freud will frequently tend to collapse the drive grow into one" .12
back into an instinctual model. I shall not take up the extensive devel-
opments I have made in order to demonstrate this in Le fourvoiement
biologisant de la sexualite.10 We shall return to it partly later on. I shall 2- For my part, I propose to use both notions, drive and
simply allude to two points: instinct, to demonstrate their opposition, to show their presence and - a
Firstly, the model of tension reduction and of homeostasis is factor which often makes the terms difficult to delimit - the ways in
an instinctual model. It is a consistent model in Freud from his first which they are articulated with and cover up each other.
~~gs 0 n_the 'actual neuroses', where he gives a very precise mech- Someone is bound to say, ''Look at that! Laplanche is return-
anistic version, through to "Instincts and their Vicissitudes" .11 ing to instinct and thus to the body!" Do I have to repeat myself yet
Secondly, Freud will rehabilitate the myth of Aristophanes, the again? I have never left the body and I have never opposed the body
myth of complementarity, in his theory of the 'life drives' which can to the mind. By placing drive and instinct in opposition I am not
reasonably be ·d . ' opposing the psychical to the somatic. The mathematician is being
not to ~ti= i:
is how 6ft consi ered, m that final version, as 'life instincts'. Here
l~ter, Freud takes up the myth of Aristophanes,
shall quote onl h time but to adopt it in relation to the 'life drive'. I
no less 'neurobiological' when he's devouring a steak than when he's
calculating an integral. Drive is no more psychical than instinct. The
y t e last part of the perun
· ent section
• since
• difference is not between the somatic and the psychical but between,
. g 15
run •
more com li ed , the beo--
.
um-
p cat · As you know, it is a myth about beings on the one hand, something that is innate, atavistic and endogenous
and, on the other hand, something that is acquired and epigenetic but
9 Three Essays o11 the Thee
from the Slallltard fditi011ry:~s:it~ (l905d), SE 7, PP- 135-136. ['lrans.: this passage
is by no means less anchored in the body for all that.
~~transla~g Freud's term Trieb :ug,htlr ~tered to reflect Laplanche's pref~ce I would remind you that when Freud abandons the seduction
Jchey's I!USleading tenn, 'instin s dnve <Fr. pulsion) rather than reproduang theory he does not say, "the psychological factor has lost its influence
10 ean laplanche p b,....__ , ct'1.
Freud <Paris· p ' ro ~matiques Vll· Le fo · · cJ
11 o9I5c) · resses Universitaires d ·F urvo,ement biologisant de la sexualrM llZ
, SE 14, pp. 11 7-40_ e ranee, 2006). 12 Beyond tire Ple.as11re Principle (1920g), SE 18, p. 58.

10
11
 Drivt and 111stinct
Drive and Instinct

to the biological factor'', but rather, "the factor of hereditary disposition

the difference between drive and instinct is most pronounced and the
[has) regain[ed) a sphere o f influence" .13
contradiction easiest to see. Once again the contradiction is concen-
trated within a German term. As we just witnessed apropos of Trieb
So instinct and drive, from both a conceptual point of view
and lnstinkt, German sometimes has two words for one thing or two
and with respect to their concrete presence in man.
words that can serve either for one thing or two; and we know that
I shall endeavour to be schematic. Instinct emerges as heredi- the difference between S<Xalled synonyms can be enlarged to create
tary and adaptive. I shall make use of a definition of instinct, which
a conceptual d ifference. Conversely, however, an d as is the case with
Tmbergen proposed some time ago, as: all languages, there are some German w ords which co ncentrate a
contradiction within themselves. Such is the case with the wo rd Lust.
a hierarchically organised nervous mechanism Usually translated as 'pleasure', Lust en tails a con tradiction which
which is susceptible to certain priming, releasing Freud himself takes up. First of all there are the difficulties in articu-
and directing impulses of internal as well as exter- lating wha t is called the 'pleasure principle', the Lustprinzip, because
nal origin, and which responds to these impulses in Freud's formulations it is sometimes a tendency tow ards homeo-
by coordinated movements that conhibute to the stasis (i.e. a tendency aiming a t the best possible level of tension) and
maintenance of the individual and the species.14 sometimes a tendency tow ards complete discharge (i.e. a tendency
aiming a t the lawest possible level of tension). This is the d ifference
I have no doubt that one could make many improvemen ts to between on the one hand an optimum functioning a nd on the other
and criticisms of this definition of 'instinct'. Nevertheless, it is a model what one could call a 'complete' emptying out, an utterly disordered
1
that is often taken up by Freud: in it, instinct is hereditary, fixed, and and anti-physiological functioning.
adaptive; it starts with somatic tension, has a 'specific action' and a But above all there are the ambiguities of the term Lust itself,
satisfying object, and leads to a sustained relaxation of the tension. In which in German - and Freud raises this question twice in the Three
co~trast, d~ve in the pure sense would not be hereditary, nor neces- Essays, in hvo separate notes - means both 'pleasure' (as it is usu-
~y adaptiv~. The model of source, aim, and adequate object cannot ally translated) and 'desire'. Lust in the sense of 'p!easure' refers to
~y ~ applied to the drive. I have insisted more than once, notably discharge and the relaxation of tension; but Lust is sometimes used
m relation to the idea of , , tha . . . in a contrary sense to mean the 'pursuit of e..'Ccitation', even to the
source, t if one can say w ith any ngour
that the anus is the source 0 f th . . point o f complete exhaustion. Thus in the tenns Sc/11111/ust and Ben·,1,.
'th . e anal drive, then o ne must q uestion
WJ even greater rigour how one could ever maintain tha t the drive nmgslust we have, respectively, the Lust to see, w hich is no t o nly the
to see, voyeurism aims t 1 . pleasure of seeing b u t also the d esire or urge to see, a nd Ben'ilmmg-
, . ' · a owenng something that one could call
ocular tension'.
slust, which means not so much the pleasure of touching as the desire
17te economic ~radox In F d . . to touch. Freud alludes to this ambiguity twice, in two notes that are
r · reu , 1t IS at the eco no mic level that
quite characteristic of 11iree Essays.15 In one of these notes he refers to
13 letter to Aiess, 21 Se tember
J. 1897
, The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Yt11·
hd m Fliess: 1887-1904
14 Nikolaas Tmberge~, Th:~,
d
';:ns
11
of.JM ~ n <Harvard: Harvard UP, 1985) p. 265.
Y lnstmct (Oxford: Clarendon, 1951), p. 112.
15 See 17rrtt Essays (1905d), op. cit., p. 135, n. 2 and p. 212, n. 1.

12
13
 Drive and /11sti11ct
Drive aud Instinct

tradiction that allows us to navigate in a Precise 17

it as a fortunate con h aks . y a return to a base level that is optimal and not minimal. The notion
. . th dialectic; then at another moment e spe of 1t as an : a satisfying object and a specific action leads us toward the idea
way wtthin e fro findin
·on that prevents us m g an equiVa;
unfortunate contradicti of instinct.
'b'd m· the sense of desire. He would, he says,like toUSe
lent tenn for l1 1 o In fact, at or near the conclusion of the twentieth century we
a German rather than a Latin tenn for desire but cannot use the Word have two models: the model of instinct and the model of attachment.
t'
LUS Ill place of libido because Lust means pleasure as well as desire. Let us go one step at a time here. The work of Lorenz in particular
• 'th 'dri , .
Thus Lust is sometimes synonymous WI ve , with introduced more flexibility into models of instinct. He established
'libido', 'urge to', 'desire for' and with the 'pursuit of disequilibrium!. that instinct itself has much greater variability than had been thought.
In this case satiety is never attained. He introduced the notion of intercalation or alternation. The German
What we nevertheless take from this - from the point of view term is Verschriinlamg, which expresses his meaning dearly. It entails
of substance rather than terminology - are two radically different mod- a veritable braiding of instinctual threads that are innate and threads
els: drive, which seeks excitation at the cost of total exhaustion, and that have been acquired by training or intelligence.
instinct, which seeks relaxation. But this is not the essential question. The major distinction
among self-preservative behaviours is to be made between those that
3 - How and where do drive and instinct exist in man? have no need of the other and those that do. The attachment model
Can we locate them within those two domains which, since Freud, first introduced by Bowlby does indeed take up an essential aspect
have become standard references and which there is no reason to of instinct - I am referring to innateness - but it also introduces the
renounce completely: the domains of self-preservation and of sexual• notion of a reciprocity. I cite one definition of attachment:
ity, respectively?
Self-preservation, it must be said, can scarcely - if at all - be Innate behaviours that have the function of reduc-
reconciled with the variability and the drift [derive] of the drives. The ing distance from and establishing proximity and
so-called 'primary' model of the 'primary process' is not a biological contact with the mother. Innate behaviours also
model. How many times have I sought acceptance for the idea that exist within the mother and have the same function,
what~ primary in the Primary process does not come 'first' or 'before'! even if learning plays some part in the expression
The pnmary process only becomes 'primary' secondarily, as a conse- of these behaviours.18
quenc_e of repression and within the domain of the unco'nsctous. An
0
rgarusm that would functi . In the behaviours whose goal is to maintain life, we should
of the Pro •ect . . on according to the fundamental principle
i cha ~ for a Scientific Psychofogy16 - I am speaking of the first thus distinguish carefully first of all those automatic, biological func-
ew pters of the Proje t · hi tions that, in a sense, have no need of the other. For example, the
complete evacu ti f c m w ch the only aim of the organism is a
a on o energy _ uld . homeostatic function that keeps stable the amount of carbon dioxide
the very idea of 'self wo not SW"Vlve for a second. ·So
-preservation' implies homeostasis, which is to
17 See Life and Deat/J in Psychamalysis, trans. Jeffrey Mehlman (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins UP, 1977), chapter 6.
16 0950a (1895)), SE I, pp. 283-38?. 11
Hubert Montagner, "L'attachement", in Le Carnet psy, no. 48, October 2CXX>, p. 13.
14
15
 Drive and Instinct
Drive and ltzsti11ct

in the blood is a relatively autonomous one, as is the mechanism that

it remains. Hence the need to push things further still. First of all, by
regulates serum glucose. recalling that there is something in Freud that anticipates the idea of
And what about warmth? Well, with warmth it's not 50
attachment, and this is the notion of affection. When Freud contrasts
simple. An important distinction here is the difference between •~ the "affectionate" relation or the "affectionate current" with the "sen·
kilothenns' and 'homeotherms'. Poikilothenns are those creature, sual current'', he is doing nothing other than contrasting attachment
that do not need to maintain a specific internal temperature; horneo- with sexuality.w The affection, which Freud places under the heading
thenns are those that are capable of doing so. But in the latter- the of self-preservation (at least in his first theory of the drives), corre-
homeothenns - the ability is, at the outset, imperfect That is to say sponds to the fact that the adult nourishes and protects. Thus, from
that autonomous homeothermy is only established bit by bit. You are the start, there is something more than an 'attachment' in the simply
all familiar with the sudden chills and sudden fevers of nurslings. literal sense of the term, i.e. the grasping reflex, the need for contact,
Newly hatched fishes (poikilotherms) have no need of the other, llut and rooting. From birth, the 'affectionate current', the 'affectionate
homeothermic species (which are only imperfectly homeothermic at relation', includes many aspects of the mother-baby relation, beyond
birth) must communicate in order to maintain warmth. I was once just seeking warmth. Moreover, the affectionate relation is not limited
very struck by Jouvet's remark (I have written to him on this subject exclusively to the mother but may include many other adults; and
without getting a reply) that for practical purposes, the line between we know that the attachment relation can exist in the absence of the
the species that dream and those that do not dream is the same as that mother, for instance with a nanny.
between homeotherms and poikilotherms. It seems to me that this Is there an innate self-preservative relation in humans? The
dividing line is also that between species that rely on infant/adult debate has been overrun by the opposition between the so-called
communication and species that do not. baby of observation and the so-called baby of psychoanalysis. For
But it is perhaps man who has the greatest need for interac- when it comes to the observation of muslings in particular one only
~on. ~ence that statement of Freud's which I cited a moment ago: really sees what one wishes to see; but in order to see it at all one
the little human lacks the instincts necessary for survival".19 Evi- must be at least able to detect it by actual observation. Think of Mel-
dently this is only a first approximation because elsewhere he speaks anie Klein, that promoter of the priority of the 'inner world', who
of the 'self-preservati·v
.. · ,. This phrase undoubtedly indicates
e dnve . . his. did not fail to write an article titled "On Observing the Behaviour
~~tion of the deficiency of the instincts in the absence of the oth- of Young Infants" .21 Such observation is, however, very difficult, and
er s intervention Indeed th . . . while animal observation is in some ways indispensable, it is totally
· , ere 1S an entire series of innate reactions
ha
t t do not ~t · th littl insufficient It is indispensable largely because it pemuts us to try to
m e e human being; numerous experiments
ha ve confirmed Freud' · identify, by means of deduction, that which is uniquely important in
5
fear of hei h ~ertion - for example, experiments on the
gt ells, on retreating from objects that can bum the child, etc man. Must we say that what is uniquely important in humans is com-
At a m,ent theory· ·tiall munication? Must we therefore deny the existence of communication
Psychoanalys1S, . . lIU Yemerged as a war machine against
agamst sexu lity .
a and against the unconscious, and so 20 "On the Universal Tendency to Debasement in the Sphere of Love" (1912d), SE
11, p. 180 ff.
19 (Editor: See comment, note SI. 21 In Enuy a11d Gralit11dearul Other Works 1946-1963 (London: Hogarth, 1975).

16 17
 Drive and Instinct
Drive and Instinct

in animals? Of course not - I indicated as much a moment ago a

insecure attachment is only an aspect - the most extreme aspect, to be
pos of homeotherms and the possibility that they dream_ but ,Plt>-
communication is infinitely les.5 developed. Animals have
communication but they do not have true language. To be 5
sys::: sure- of the enigmatic. If it is 'pathological' this is perhaps because the
sexual - and here I am talking about the sexual drive - is nothing less
. . ed . ure, ~ than a deviation itself
as .I ha
. ve msISt many times, adult-baby commuru·caaon JS ·
not JiD.
~tic at the outset. But it is marked from the outset in its div .
1ts_complexity and its ambiguities by the fact that man is a
~ - In other words, the complexity of verbal language exerciseu
Jin= 4 - Before returning to the relation between sexuality and
attachment, I want to touch on two modalities of sexuality: infantile
kind of contagion on pre-verbal communication. sexuality and the sexuality of adolescence.
Infa11tile sexuality is Freud's great discovery. It is the 'sexua/124
. It must be emphasised that attachment in man is primaril a
enlarged beyond the limits of the difference between the sexes and
~ / relation of communication and messa B th y
point, deductively d • -~ fro . ges. ut e secolki beyond sexual reproduction. It is the sexuality of the component
. envit:U m the observation of animals · ....1. drives, connected to erogenous zones and functioning on the model
more mtportant: it 15 • th , JS ffiUU1
h e presence of the sexual unconscious in ,L.. of Vorlust - a term in which we again encounter the word Lust as
uman adult One could . uc
could one · th give up the whole theo.ry of the drives, but meaning pleasure and desire simultaneously. Vor/ust might be called
give up e sexual unconsci ,I
analysis a .-1:---- _. ous. t would be doing psycllO' 'fore-pleaswe-desire', since it is not the pleasure attendant upon the
=vi.ce to reduce this •
baby of observati point to the difference between the reduction of tension but on the increase of tension. Indeed, there is
on and the psychOanal .
only constructed aft ytic baby, a difference that is nothing to suggest that this infantile 'pleasure-desire' corresponds to
. erwarcfs~B ffth
m the Primordial - 1 - • : or e adult unconscious is present any internal physiological tension and that it requires discharge.
•CJdtionship and u .
we do not see it, the reason IS . ' m observing that relationship Let us discuss the body for a moment, and return to end<r
that ,
Would enable us to see 1·t we are not using the means that crinology. We know that the sexual and hypophysary hormones,
· - not so ch
saous direetly, but at least to det ~u to explore the adult uncon- which are present at birth, decline very rapidly to zero within the first
. If I have spoken f th ~ its S}'mptoms.Z3 months of life and do not reappear until puberty or just before it We
IS pexha O e arumaJ 1"t. speak of 1atency', but in my opinion there is gocxt reason to speak of
ps never observabl . IS because attachment in man
attachm t. . e in a rn, .... two types of latency. There is the latency ofthe drive, which is the classic
en IS infiltrated b th r-"' state. 11ti.s is for two reasons:
nated and Y e l1arcissis • type as defined by Freud. This is the latency connected to repression
refus t COillprontised by adult ~c relation, and it is contami-
e O see wh 5eXua.1.ity -ri..,- • and the Oedipus, which occurs between the age of five or six and
which •'-- . en, for eXa.znple, We op,nnco
.., ie child .
· "'~
,
JS precisely what we
15 made to fiee.l r-~ secure' attachment [111 puberty. It is, as we know, a relative latency. And there is the latency of
5ecure) to ,. the instinct, which is in fact the latency defined by the famous 'popu-
- UlSecure' attachment. For
22 Regardless oftli
lated in the SE , e fact that afterw
lar view of sexuality', that is, a latency that exists between birth and
probabl as delezted actiQ , ardsness l&lito F , puberty, an endogenous latency during which only the drive has free
23 On~as ~rly as the seco d n I comes into exist r: reud s N11cl1trliglidtknt, tranS-
ldenti,,, (C po1111 ~-Herman; .Yhear of life. ence very early in human beingS,
•:, onnecticut:Jn o1p eandEJ 24 (Editor: On Laplanche's French neologism 'sexuaJ' (as distinct from the n I
ternationa1 U eanor Gale 'sexuel'), see the Ed'1tor•s note to the Forward of this volume. The term is p onna
- ted
· niversities p nson, lnfa11ti1e Origins ofSexuP1
18 ress, 1981), esp. chapters 13 and 14.
here in italics to mark it off from the standard English term with the same spe~gJ.

19
 Drive and l11sti11ct
Drive and Instinct

rei . Radio silence of the sexual instin~. .. .

gn hall take up again a few negative propositions. Nothing per. make the sexual emerge from the lack of satisfaction of the self-pre-
Is f . . i :~,, __, servative instinct in the same way that that rabbit emerges from the
mits the -a=
--.~....:uOn that the erogeneity.o erotogeruc
. . lUU\t.'Q lo
zones IS
magician's hat. But the trick depends precisely on the fact that there
dogenous internal tension. Nothing pemuts the assertion that the
is someone who has put the rabbit in the hat - and it is certainly the
an ~\Oanalytic Vulgate with its succession of stages corresponds to a
adult who put it there.26
psy ed genetic mechanism.25 I am dismayed that there are still
The theory of seduction, which I shall not elaborate here,
~:titutes that teach Freud as one would teach th~ catechism,
proposes a model of the emergence of the sexual from within the
with an ordered succession of infantile stages of sexuality. Nothing
reciprocal relation of attachment. I say 'reciprocal', but an interfer-
allows us to see, in the always more or less chaotic evolution of the sex-
ence or 'noise' comes to inhabit this communication like a parasite, an
ual drive, anything that is inscribed within a larger schema, assigneda
interference that initially proceeds from one side only, and that is the side
function, with the aim of preparing the way for puberty. It is precisely
of the adult. This adult is most often the mother but only insofar as
such a re-inscription of the drive back into the field of instinct that Freud she is an adult and, let me repeat, her place may be occupied by any
would eventually seek to enforce, setting out, in spite of e v e ~ adult. For lack of time I shall not discuss the representation or model
a kind of pre-programmed course of development in which infan~ that one could give of the process of repression, of the creation of the
sexuality is continuous with pubertal and adult sexuality. unconscious or of the surging up of the drive.
The source of the infantile sexual drive is the unconscious,
5 - Before coming to the moment of puberty, let us pose the and its characteristics are marked by that origin. The infantile sex-
question of the connection between the self-preservative, instinctual ual drive is an endless search and knows no relaxation of tension. It
relationship - which is complicated and enriched by affection - and knows nothing of orgasm, in spite of the analogy that Freud thought
the sexual drive. The theory of 'leaning-on' to which I alluded ear· he could perceive between the satisfaction of the infant who has just
lier is one that is increasingly invoked, increasingly rediscovered and finished sucking and the satisfaction that follows orgasm. It knows
reinterpreted, and increasingly integrated into the Vulgate; but it can nothing of satisfaction by means of the adapted complementary
have a pernicious effect in this domain. object; it always lacks sufficient binding and is ambivalent.
~ infantile sexuality does not have an innate endogenous
mechanism, how can it emerge conjointly with self-preservation? 6 - The major attempt at binding is the Oedipus, the infantile
And if it corresponds to a sunp
· 1e representation· ·m fantasy o f bodily Oedipus. Before speaking of this, however, I shall address the sexual
attachment
. and self-preserva tive functions,
• •
by what miracle would instinct. Gutton suggests a model based on the notion of the 'pubertal' _v
this f~tasmatisation alone confer a sexual character upon somatic If I understand this correctly, a sexual instinct corresponds to genital
fun~ons? As I have pointed out on several occasions in Freud the maturation with an innate tendency to seek out what is 'complemen-
putative ' · ' tary' (this is his term): i.e. the complementary erogenous zone, and,
. . expenence of satisfaction' and the putative 'hallucinatory
satisfaction of desir ,
e are successful exercises in prestidigitation. They
26 The adult who, in the case of theory, is followed in this role by Freud. Once again,
theoretico-genesis is modelled on ontogenesis.
25 Melanie Klein alre d , . 27 Philippe Gutton, Le pubertaire (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2003).
· a Y ,ought against this idea.
20
21
 Dri~ and lusti11rt
Driue and Instinct

as the song goes, "l:he person of the opposite se.x." This is p~

the 'popular opinion' that Freud rejects in the Titrt;'e f-SSays, onty1o However, Freud's description of the infantile Oedipus is quite
adopt it in ~rd the Plat5Un' Principle. Freud has nothing against~ different. The infantile Oedipus is always bipolar, 'positive' and 'nega-
notion as long as its ,1pplication is cl&-uly delimited. I have ~ tive' at the same time. I shall not describe the four attitudes in que.--tion,
since they are obvious. So much so (and this is the essential point) that
Uo<T3.inst it, on the condition that it is properly situated. To situa~ tlijs
the identifications are altwys replacements for IC1lJe relationships. They are
instinct. or this complementarity, is not to position it as a continuati!,a
intemaliz.ations of the lost object. Freud tells us explicitly that identifi-
of infantile se.."X"Uality, not even as a mutation or morphing of it, btt
cation is either the primordial form of relationship with the object or a
rather as a rupture. It is a qualitatively new development and not~
substitute for the relationship , ...ith the love object. Identification with
culmination of infantile sa'Ualil)~
the object and ,rot with the riml is indis~nsable for any understand-
As reganis animals., there are some things we can begin _,
ing of homosexuality and of heterosexuality. In one of Freud's major
learn about the se.,-ual instinct at puberty, but these are very limited
formulations apropos of Leonardo, the homosexual m.1n identifies
and slightly laughable. As regards human nature, fur millennia"' himself with the object of his love, his mother. In the same way, the
tho~t we kne,~ that, as Mozart has it, "Mon cceur soupire'".:is Bti heterosexual must have had a powerful and homosexual love fur his
precisely those things that ,..,-e think we know are, in fact, complicatoo father in order to identify with him. In these texts, Freud always blurs
by~ the cul~ and by infantile sexuality! What psychoanalJ~ the rivalrous identifications. I have had occasion to demonstrate this
~ us - which seems utterly foreign - is that in man the sexual- in respect of the text on Group Psychology and tlre A,wlysis of the Ego.29
~~ of ~tersubjective origin. that is, drive sexuality, the sexualily !Id To put it more clearly, the positive and negative attitudes are present
: : ; ~comes before the sexuality that is innate. Drive comes ~ in er..wy identification.
. · tasy comes before function; and when the sexual instinct
amves, the seat is already occupied. 7 -At adolescence, then, we have the confluence of two riv-
the . A case f
in point here 15. the problem of the Oedipus: 'loved ers bearing strongly heterogeneous waters, and there is nothing to
parent o the opposite sex and ·..,,.1... . guarantee their harmonious convergence. On one side flow the drive
wish to destroy the n · ....... ,, With, the hatred of, or the
formulati parent of the same sex'. I readily admit that this and the infantile fantasies, on the other the pubertal instinct. I shall
on presents a 'homothetic' Oedi pick out the points of difference, even incompatibility between them.
attraction on the other. H . pus. Rivalry on one sidt.
ego, its partner and its : :thetic because the little triangle between Firstly, there are two Oedipuses, one of which is 'complemen-
tary' while the other is irremediably bisexual and, at the same time,
great parental triangle of fath~vould reproduce homothetically the
ambivalent- the sexuality of life and the sexuality of death. The se.xual
appears simple. The iden . . ~other-ego. Here, the structuring
aspect of parricide - taking this term in the most general sense, i.e. the
is an identification th t tification 15 an identification with the rilXI/. It
murder of the parent - cannot in itself be as easily obscured as some
Girard and of the su a some have called 'mimetic' - I am thinking of
ccess of the idea of mimetism. would have us think. Gutton speaks of the "erotic decathexis of the

~ rEditor. ~My heart sighs" 29 Problhnatiq11es /: L'Angoisse (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France 1980) p
m The Mania , the French . 341-347. , , p.
gt of Figaro!. version of Cherubino' s aria, "Voi che sapet{

22
23
 Drive a11d I11sti11cl Drive and l11sti11ct

. facili·tating his being put to death" ,XJ but this is precisely to forget Co11c/11sion
nva1 til Oed. . .
. of the parent in the in.fan e 1pus 1s an erotic act.
that the killing . .
di the place of the object is another pomt of difference or even The object of psychoanalysis is the unconscious, and the
Seco11 y, b. ,I • ,I,, •
opposition: on one side there is the co~plementa?' o. ~ect o,_sat~r•ctio11; unconscious is above all the sexual in the precise Freudian sense
on the other side, there is the so11rce-ob1ect, the des1gnified s1gnifiers {as -drive sexuality, infantile sexuality, pre-, para- or infantile-genital sex-
1call them) in the unconscious. Thirdly, there are, as I indicated earlier, uality. It is the sexuality whose very source is fantasy itself, implanted
two distinct economic modes: the pwsuit of relaxation and orgasm of course within the body.
on one side; on the other side, the pursuit of excitation which is char- And to take up again the terms instinct and drive, I shall reca-
acteristic of the pre-genital. We must emphasise, however, that the pitulate in just a few words:
pre-genital includes the infantile genital. To be sure, there is what is 1. The self-preseroative instinct exists in man, but it must be
called the integration of pre-genital pleasures into fore-pleasure, but understood that (a) it is in large part affection or attachment, which
several comments need to be made on this head. It is not only the pre- is to say that it is mediated by reciprocal communication; and (b) it is
genital which must be integrated into so-called genital primacy; it is from the start covered over and thus hidden by the peculiarly human
the whole of the pre-genital and the para-genital or infantile genital and sexual phenomena of both seduction and the narcissistic reci-
that comes into contact with pubertal and then with adult genitality. procity with the other.
The infantile genital, the phallic, remains in the order of the 'para- 2. In man, there is a sexual drive that occupies a major and deci-
genital' and, later, of 'fore-pleasure': one need only think of how often sive place from birth until puberty. It is this that constitutes the object
the cult of phallic performance is the predominant element of- above of psychoanalysis; it is this that is lodged in the unconscious.
all modem -adult sexuality. 3. There is a sexual instinct, which is pubertal and adult, but it
On ~he other hand, if the drive's pursuit of excitation were 'finds its place occupied' already by the infantile drive.
completely integrated into the sexual instinct what would become of This instinct is thus very difficult to define epistemologically
human cr ti · ? An · - and precisely to the extent that concretely and in the real it does
ea VJty · d if the drive is not at least partially integrated
we find ourselves in what F d 11 , . not appear in a pure state, but only in uncertain transactions with the
. , reu ca ed fixation on preliminary sex·
ua1aims , we find ourselv th · infantile sexuality that reigns in the unconscious.
.
pervers1on.
es, at IS, on the ever present path towards

30 Lt: p11bertaire op ..;1

' -~· ., p, 46.

24
25
 Sexuality and Attachment

2
SEXUALITY AND ATTACHMENT
IN METAPSYCHOLOGY1

Daniel Widl&her introduces his article on ''Primary Love and

Infantile Sexuality''2 with a discussion of Michael Balint's 1937 lec-
ture and article on 'primary object-love'.3 It is difficult not to agree
with this point of departure, since Michael Balint's voice emerges at
a moment when the dominant position is the official Freudian doc-
trine of 'primary narcissism' as an objectless state. The dogma of the
'monad', a state from which the little human being would, somehow,
have to exit in order to join up with the 'object', is vigorously, even
definitively, swept away.
It is yet more remarkable that in just a few lines Daniel
Widlocher is able to characterise this discussion as an "eternal debate"
and as a "debate that did not take place",4 evidence that Michael
Balint (and his Hungarian entourage) had probably not sufficiently

1 First published in Serualite infantile et attachnnent ed. Daniel Widlocher (Paris:

Presses Universitaires de France, 2000).
2 Daniel Widlocher, "Primary Love and Infantile Sexuality: An Eternal Debate",
trans. Susan Fairfield, in Infantile Sexuality and Attachment (London: Karnac, 2002).
3 Michael Balint, "Early Developmental States of the Ego. Primary Object Love",
in Primary Love and Psycl1oa11alytic Techniq11e (London: The Hogarth Press, 1952), pp.
90-108.
4 op. cit. p .1.
26

27
 ·t a11d Att11cJzme11t
Sex11111l Y Sexuality and Attachment

. and had not, in the first instance, sufficiently

established his theses hich he based his arguments. This is not the as the contrast between ego-love and object-love, falls within Eros".8
cleared the ground ~n; th ught as it emerges, in all its complexity, Balint is doubtless aware that there are different points of
place to take up B~lin s Loo a,id Psychocmalytic Technique. The ma~ view in Freud, and this is something that distinguishes him from the
. Uecti Pnmary ve later authors Widlocher cites.9 What we have often tried to show is
in his co on . would probably concentrate on the tenn
. t of our reservations . . that in Freud it is not a question of "fluctuating" views, as Widlocher
pain 'ch . ed to characterise the first mother-child rela-
'love' itself, whi is us b. . . . puts it, but of an entire line of thought which Freud himself attempts
. . that brings together all the am 1gwties present m
hOn. It lS a term . Balin . ·t f hims to re-absorb within his subsequent elaboration, yet which remains
Freud's Iate theonsa
· ti'on ambim1ities which
, o-
t, m sp1 e o elf, extremely stimulating.10 It is worth recalling certain distinctions, some
was to inherit. .. . . . . of which are explicit, some of which are implicit.
The Freudian theory that Balint cntioses 1S that of narC1SS1Sm Explicit distinctions. First of all there is the essential idea that
as the primary state of the human being. But in addition, ~~ud ~tates neither narcissism nor perhaps autoerotism is a primary state. Far
that the key aspect of 'autoerotism' is no longer to be d1Stingutshed from being practically innate a prioris they only appear in the course
as a separate moment: it simply becomes "the sexual activity of the of the adult-child relation. This is the case for autoerotism, which in
narcissistic stage of allocation of the libido" .5 As we know, in this last 1905 Freud believes succeeds a primary phase of relation to the object
Freudian theory the world of the drives is entirely subsumed within the
opposition between 1ife drives' (Eros) and 'death drives'. But given At a time at which the first beginnings of sexual
the fact that the death drive will be rejected by the majority of authors satisfaction are still linked with the taking of nour-
cited by Daniel Widlocher, and that Balint himself expressly criticises ishment [J.L.: this is the moment of leaning-on], the
this hypathesis,6 we end up with an extremely simplified view in sexual drive has a sexual object outside the infant's
which the entire world of the drives is submitted to the hegemony of own body in the shape of the mother's breast. It is
the life drive, of love, or of Eros.7 Under the heading of the latter are only later that the drive loses that object, just at the
gathered not only sexuality but love in its narcissistic forms, and ulti· time, perhaps, when the child is able to form a total
mately the self-preservative drives as well: ''The contrast between the idea of the person to whom the organ that is giving
drives of self-preservation and the preservation of the species, as well him satisfaction belongs. As a rule the sexual drive

5 Sigmund Freud, "Lecture 26: The Libido Theory and Narcissism", Introductory I.le· 8 Sigmund Freud, An Outli11e of Psychoanalysis (1940a), SE 23, p. 148 ['lrans.: James
t11res on Psychonnalysis (1916-17), SE 16, p. 416. Strachey's translation of Freud has been altered here and throughout, where appro-
6 Cf. for example, "On Love and Hate" (1951) in Primary Lave and PsycJwanalylk priate, to reflect Laplanche's preference for rendering Freud's German term Trieb as
Technique, op. cit., pp. 121-135. 'drive' (Fr. pulsion) rather than the more familiar but misleading 'instinct').
7 9 Ci. in particular "Critical Notes on the Theory of the Pregenital Organisations of
It is precisely~ as to provide a counterweight to this hegemony of the narcissis~C
th
Eros at Fre~d introduced the death drive, which, according to my interpretation, 15
the Libido" (1935), in Primary Love a11d Psychoa11alytic Technique, p. 46 (on autoero-
tism) and pp. 56--57 (on narcissism).
~~:ans 0 ~ reintroducing the destructive and 'unbinding' aspects of sexuality itself-
10 Cf. in particular Jean Laplanche, New Foundations for Psyd1oanalysis, trans. David
. m pa~cular Jean Laplanche, Life and Death in Psychoanalysis, trans. Jeffrey Mehl·
Macey (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989) "2.7 A major instance of confusion: the 'objectless'
man (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins 1977), chapter 6, "Why the Death Drive?"; and "The
So-Called Death Drive· ASexu I D • ,, . L - PY voL
. . Joumal of Psyc 1ot,..,,11 state", pp. 68-81. The idea here is that Balint replaces the confusion of the 'objectless'
20 · a nve , m 17te British 1 , state with that of primary 'love'.
, no. 4, 2006, pp. 455-471.

28 29
 S-t'.\ unlity. aml Attad1111m t Sexuality and Attachment

· II
then t,ecomes autoerotic. (W]e are bound to suppose that a unity comparable
to the ego cannot exist in the individual from the
l concluded in 1970 that the above text start; the ego has to be developed .. . so there must
be something added to auto-erotism - a new psy-
14
has an entirely different ring to it from that vast chical action - in order to bring about narcissism.
fable of autoerotism as a state of the primary and
totaJ absence of an object: a state which one leaves This line of thought will of course be rapidly covered over by the
in order to fi,ut an object. A loss of the 'partial' object, notion of 'primary objectless narcissism'. It does persist, however, and
it _hould be noted, since it is a loss of the breast especially in the work of Fedem. It does so to the extent that Freud
which is being considered, and Freud introduces at was led to say he didn't understand Fedem at all, as though he no
th.is point the precious observation that perhaps the longer wanted to understand anything of the position that he had
pa.rtiaJ object is lost at the moment in which the total initially elaborated.15 I have for my part enlarged the funow that was
object - the mother as person - begins to emerge. dug and then abandoned by Freud (i.e. the notion of a sequence: sex-
But above all, if such a text is to be taken seriously, it ual satisfaction linked to need - autoerotism - narcissism), while
means that on t/,e one hand there is from the beginning rejecting the idea of successive 'stages' in favour of "moments that
an oqect, but tJ111t on the other hand sexuality does not are, to a greater or lesser extent, both pimctunl and reiterated" .16
have,from tlie beginning,a real object. 12 Another explicit distinction, which Freud will be led to flat-
ten out, not to say integrate into his all-encompassing Eros, is that
~n ord~r to describe this second moment l have proposed the tenn between the self-preservative drives and the sexual drives. This is
auto-time', a phase in which sexuality is turned back upon the inter• a major distinction, for it already outlines what will be the relation
nal fantasmatic object.U between sexuality and attachment. We shall discuss their connection
ow, the same thing occurs with respect to narcissism, which further on. Let us simply mention that for Freud the self-preservative
when Freud first advances it in "On Narcissism: An Introduction• functions are not objectless: "[they) are never capable of auto-erotic
'°"
a_lso appears as st d in relation to autoerotism: "What is the rela- satisfaction" .17 However shaky this expression may be (referring, as it
does, to an autoerotism of self-preservation!) the idea is clear enough:
tio n of the narcissis O f h' h
. m w 1c we are now speaking to auto-erotism,
which we have described from the beginning, the self-preservative drives are oriented towards
._ . . as an early state of the libido?" The response
15 given m two short . . the good-enough object. Moreover, it is precisely to this extent that
acut d . , sentences, which probably contain Freud's most
e an most disttUed view on this question: they are capable of showing the way to the sexual drives.

14 "On Narcissis m: An Introduction" (1 914c), S£ 14, pp. 76-77.

11 Sigmund Freud Thrtt Es 15 Cf. Life and Deal/,, op. cit., chapter 4, 'The Ego and Narcissism "; and Maria Teresa
eted rt-marks are ~ine. says on Ilic TTzeory of Sexuality (1905d), SE 7, P· 222. Brock· de Melo Carvalho, Paul Feden,. um• a11l1\' ooie pour la tJ,tor~ du moi (Paris : Presses
12 uf<' and DtDth m Psychoa,111/ . . Univer.;itaires de France, 1996).
13 L,f<' and Drot/i 111 PsycJ Y5_15, op.c,t., p . 19. 16 New Fo1111datio11s for Psychoanalysis, op. cit., p . 73.
auto' IS transl.ited by Jef~naj5~j op.cit., PP· 85-102. ITrans. Laplnnche's term ·temps 17 Sigmund Freud, "'Instincts and their Vicissitudes" (19 15c), S£ 14, p . 134, n . 2.
c · man as 'self-phase'!.
30 31
 Sexuality and Altachmrnt

, rth~r w,thout m.1\<lng ref

.I :'tb5thb 1U ,. · , F Strachey's translation by the invention of the barbaric and pseudo-
But
~e .inn,..>t u.t,o: ·t'ptu»l[)alflOJIS t~,t are ,mp 1crt m n?Ud' scientific term 'anadisis'. From that JX>int on, and rapidJy, the notion
. • l.n J,s/vtt:111.'lb lln-l ,i,m , that they cl.re not the object af
to ~rucr ~..:,t U\ tht! sense of a genesis, in which the sexual drive ktms for support upon self-preservative
\'> Or.., T~ ,ue m,.,-
,n.,. U\C'ffld~ <'f'~itwo U\
FreuJ .,m,
a
"'".1vc
1 "-

ton"
gone•
traditton. This
• -~,
on to •be complPhal..
onusslon ls,
instinctual functioning, would be utterly eclipsed by the entirely differ-
..... tU\' cour.ie o 1 " . ent notions of 'anaclitic relation' (the child deriving supJX>rt from the
~~1:~l m the t.'fl • • the German literature but at becomes
mother) and even 'anaclitic depression', which was created by Spitz
to N ure .itre.i~h• noUl'k ~nt English First of all there is the total
he n.--......age 1n o · to describe states in which the child is deprived of the mother. Need it
comr~ \.. ,Lh t t - · d1Stinctton \,rithin the Freudian text itself
be emphasised that it was not until the ' French' reading of Freud and
LI.-.~
[lllllU•--
(\_"\{\\.°'\'f1\l.l\S
. d (Tntb) ,md in.stmet (I rtstm'"
fthe . L•) .18 The d'1ffer-
the selection of the word etayage that all the attention was drawn to
the Oi)bon5 0 nt't'
~'-"'n . . t.'ftainly never thematised by Freud, but this th.is concept?:io
~""" thl.11\ i;; Ct: - · • • th
~~ _ uJe ~re being a very clear dtSnnctlon m e use o( Without going into detail, let us say that the very notion of
does [ll)l precl thi're is for that other pairing of 'drive' and 'need'. leaning-on presupposes the distinction between an instinctual mode
these terms. JUSl '15 Ua
._ 1. transl.ltions of Freud the two tenns are co psed of functioning that is self-preservative and oriented towards the object,
) et U\ t~ Engu:,11
- - -'-a In addition - a serious phenomenon - the authors and an erotic mode of functioning that begins by deriving supJX>rt
into one anuurd, . . _ .
who passt'd from German to English m ~e1r own o~tput cr°:sed. ~ from the former and then detaches itself and 'becomes autoerotic'.
rronher without taking any account of 1t: the frontier, that 15, d1vid- In my view, it would therefore be anachronistic to align
an instinrtual conception, which for Freud is primarily applicable Balint in any way with a conception of leaning-on of which he knows
mg
to self-preservation and to 'instinct ·m aruma
. l s ' , from his conc~,.,~-
<>nlinn nothing, just as he ultimately neglects its Freudian premise, Le. the
of the drroe. Lnsti.nct is relatively fixed within the species, is largely self-preservation/sexuality dualism.
i:nndte, and corresponds to adaptive aims; whereas drive, the model Must we reproach Balint, who joined the Freudian band·
for which remains the sexual drive, is variable from one individual wagon while it was in full swing, for taking the 'myth of the amoeba'
to another, is contingent wHh regard to its aims and objects, and Is as his starting point, thus neglecting the entire development ante-
emphatically 'polymorphous perverse', at least in proximity to its ori- rior to it and everything in Freud's own thought which authorises a
gins. It was not unlll 1967 that this distinction within the Freudian totally different view? Need we reproach him for a reading of Freud
usage was truly revealed.19 that neglt.>Cts the very different strata of the Thm.. Essays? Perhaps
It is from the same date too that the notion of 'leaning-on' not. But we a.re justified ln reproaching those autl,ors who came after
rediscovl'Tl'd not only its meaning and its importance but its Ver/ him, right up to Jeremy Holmes/' for having completely nL-glccted
existence. lndeed, however important it may be, the concept ol what French Freudian and psychoanalytic resean::h has been empha-
Anlthmmg is only used sporadically by Freud. lt was never given
a systemdtic exposition. Moreover, the notion would be crushed in 20 a . Je.an LapLlnc.he and Jean-Bertrand Pontali.s., "'Anadisis" in Tht uingua~ crf
P~wanalys,s. op. cit.; and Jt.-an Laplanc~. Lifr a,ut Do11h, op. d t ~ chapter t , ~
Vital Order ond the Genesis of Human Sexwlity'".
l a . "Dnve and IMtlnct'' in the present volume.
19 Jon Lap!a~ and Jc-an-Bertrand Pontalis, "Instinct (or Drive)", In 'Int umgu4f 21 Allachmffll, Intimacy, Autonomy: Using All«hmn11 Throty m Adult Psycholbcnrpy
(New York: Jason Aronson. 1996). p . 2. •
of ~11.1/ysi.,, tr.in, Donald N1c.holson-Smlth (London: KnmilC, \97)).

32 3J
 Sexuality and Attachment
Sexuality and Attachment

.. .
515mg since 1967-1970·· the difference between
. self-preservation and
. Thus for years a certain, predominantly Anglo-Saxon tradition con-
sexuality, the opening of self-preservation onto the external object,
tinued to wrestle with the myth of the originary monad, or with the
and the articulation of two types of functioning within the relation of false problem raised by Fairbairn of the pleasure-seeking drive and
leaning-on. the object-seeking drive, and without taking account of the fact that
Here I must note that even Michel Renard and Pierre bab,22 the double opposition between self-preservation and sexuality on the
the French authors whom Widlocher describes as coming to the res- one hand, and drive and instinct on the other, would perhaps open
cue of this 'monadological' point of view (which is 'Freudian' only in
onto new perspectives. There thus remained a mutual estrangement
the most restricted sense of the tenn), were writing in 1969 without between, on the one hand, a French line of thought related to the
taking account of either the theory of leaning-on or the following, per- thoroughgoing re-examination of the presuppositions, the implicit
tinent points of view already developed by Daniel Lagache in 1961: concepts, the historical evolution and even the 'goings astray' of
Freudian thought, and, on the other hand, a debate within the Anglo-
It is to deny the evidence to claim that the newborn phone literature which congealed around a static, even ahistorical
has no conscious experiences while it alternates conception of Freudianism,24 the latter being accepted or refused with-
between sleeping and waking. Its conscious expe- out benefit of inventory.
riences are above all experiences of bodily states A striking example would be Mahlerian thought, which for
an~ b~y acts, which means that they depend years dominated entire sectors of Anglo-Saxon thinking and did so, as
~nrnarily upon intero- and proprioceptive recep- Lagache put it, by "denying the evidence". The idea that every child
tions. The child is not, however, enclosed within its passes through an autistic phase and then through a phase of sym-
sub· · · · · biosis with the mother before acquiring its 'separation-individuation'
Jedivtty. It 15 difficult to conceive of the relation
between the newborn and the breast other than as secondarily, is unable to flourish except within the framework of the
~e relation of a subject to an object without exist- theory of 'primary narcissism' conceived as a first state from which
mgd ~s a cognitive structure, the subject functions the 'monad' would somehow have to exit.
an IS success1·v 1 • . Margaret Mahler's theory has really prospered very little on
e Y actualised m the eeds hich
awaken him and motiv him . n w French soil. Lagache' s thought opposes it in a very precise fashion.
tation and th ate , m the acts of orien-
en consumpti hi For my part, ever since Life and Death in Psychoanalysis I have argued
and put him to slee . . on w ch appease him vigorously against the theory of the 'primitive monad', in whatever
milk fulfil th . fun P_· Similarly, the breast and the
eu Ction as b' forms it may take. Finally, a richly researched and argued article by
is any positional co . o Ject long before there Jean Gortais did justice to a realist conception of symbiosis: "in our
nsaousnes.5 of objects.23
view it is essentially on the register of illusion, of the fantasmatic, and
22 Michel Rena';",'La
l.Ji theo · ' natcissisme" .
1969). ne psycha11alytiq11e, ed. Sacha'~:~~1erre -~b, ''La conflit intra-psychique", ill 24 The evidence for this pervasive Anglo-Saxon ahistori~m is th~ ~uthors'
23 Daniel La <Pans. Presses Universitaires de France, citations, which refer largely to the dates of the latest published edition con-
gache, '1..a sulted. Who would guess that the citation 'Freud (1987)' refers to the Three
CEuures IV <Pa . . p P5Ychanatyse et la stru
ns · resses Universitaires d cture de la personnalite" (1961), ill Essays, in the successive versions of 1905, 1910, 1915 and 1924?
34 e France 1986), p. 201.
35
 Seruality arrd Attac/1111eut Sexuality and Attachment

. . regression and delusion that the concept of symbio-

also of definibve . . In order to set out very succinctly such a metapsychology on
. ful For this reason, 1t is fundamentally related to new foundations, we shall take our point of departure from the double
sis can be mearung ·· . . ,, 25
dedifferentiation and not to non-differentiation . distinction already invoked above: that between instinctual function-
As the latest and radically desexualised avatar of originary ing and drive functioning, and that between self-preservation and
naross · m, Mahlerism has in fact been swept away on the intema-
· 15 sexuality. First of all, it is crucial that we treat these two oppositions
tional level by all the data of child observation, which can currently separately, since they only slightly overlap.
be gathered together under the general heading of 'attachment the-
ory'. The refutation is unconditional, and its fullest expression can I. The opposition between drive and instinct is fundamental,
be found in Martin Domes' article, ''La theorie de Margaret Mahler and we can only regret the decades of futile debate occasioned by the
reconsideree".26 But here the danger ultimately remains the same confusion of one with the other: among the chief factors responsible
as it did with Balint's first critique: the return to 'intersubjectivity' for this confusion, although not the only one, would be the migra-
effected under the sign of a motivation-based monism (in this case, tion of Freudian thought into the English language (and not only
attachment; in Balint, it was love) in which ultimately the great loser Strachey's translation). Let us mark the points of difference on three
is infantile sen,ality, in the Freudian sense of the term.27 We should registers: instinct appears as adaptive, genetically programmed and
add that the same disaster could well cause the disappearance of the economically aimed at equilibrium. The drive, as we conceive it, is
Freudian unconscious, along with the major function of fantasy. non- and even anti-adaptive.28 Although it is inscribed within the
,. body and within biology, it is not genetic in origin but owes its emer-
,. ,. gence to the specificity of the adult-child relation. Finally, it functions
according to a principle other than that of a reduction of tensions.
This means that, in our view, owing to the hegemony of Let us take up these points in a schematic fashion. As to
attachment th00ry there is a risk that the debate over attaclunenl instinct, it emerges as hereditary and as adaptive. I recall one defini-
and sexuality • tion - Tmbergen's, from a long time ago - of instinct as:
may never m fact take place, unless attachment can be
accommodated within the fram k 'T'l.:o
would be ewor of a rigorous metapsychology. 111,, a hierarchically organised nervous mechanism
but which aas~etapsychology that certainly has its origins in Freud,
which is susceptible to certain priming, releasing
make h .' he outcome of a working through, does not hesitate to and directing impulses of internal as well as exter-
c otces and propose ·
unportant reconfigurations. nal origin, and which responds to these impulses
25 J~n Cortais, "Le concept des b' .
by coordinated movements that contribute to the
Dersitl, vol.12, no. 46,
20 ym •ose en psychanalyse", in Psychnnalyse tl la UIII" maintenance of the individual and the species.29
26 In Psyche vol SO ppl. 1-257, p. 251.
I .d ' . ' no. 1 1996 Re . ed . -.-hi),
ogre u premieret!ge (Paris.'~ P~nt mMartin Domes Psychnnalyse el y,r·
~ Let u_s recal! again the followm Universitaires de France, 2002). . 28 Primarily in the Freudian lineage of the TI1ree Essays of 1905, but this is not to deny
ob;lati~n,_ this genital or adult r;:,ssa_ge from Balint: '1n contrast to the preg~ that we are making choices which 'put Freud to work'• . .
29 Nikolaas Tmbergen, The Study of Instinct (Oxford: Ox.ford Umvel'Slty Press, 1951),
Ha .:re alion is usually non ion IS always sexual ... whereas the prege!U
te ' op. cit., p. 126. -5exual (sexually not dimorphous)". "On Love and p. 112.

36 37
 Sexuality and Attachment
Sexuality and Attachment

Subsequently, this fixed aspect of instin~t. ha~ been . rendered

was doubtless at the forefront of this critique). To be sure, the vague
noticeably more supple, but without underm~g Its gene~cally pro- succession of 1ibidinal stages' can be correlated in a certain way with
grammed basis. It was chiefly Lorenz who established that m terms of
the progress of rearing (itself determined socially as much as physi-
its development within the individual, instinct is much more variable ologically). But this also means that nothing permits the postulation
than was believed. He speaks of an 'intercalation' (Verschriinkung) of a genetic programming of infantile libidinal evolution as such.
whereby innate instinctual elements are plaited with elements that Let us also add the following point, whose full impact will
are acquired by training or intelligence.30 It is this increased supple- emerge later on: genetic programming, in the sexual domain above
ness in the notion of instinct which has enabled its opening onto the all, presupposes mediation by means of a neuro-hormonal relay. This
more recently explored domain of attachment. is clearly the case, and in a precise way, when it comes to the evolu-
The drive, which is unveiled in magisterial fashion in the 77mt tion and the metamorphoses of adult sexuality. However, it has never
Essays of 1905, is quite different. Here, the points of view of heredity and occurred to anyone to search for the presence of hormones at the level
adaptation are closely connected and in this they are jointly refutable. of the purported somatic 'sources' of the infantile partial drives!
Adaptation is immediately undennined by the notion of 'polymorphous But it is probably at the level of functioning and of the 'econ-
perversity', which is placed at the beginning of the entire elaboration. omy' of pleasure that drive and instinct can be radically distinguished.
The contingency of objects and the variability of aims, which are often We have for a long time recognised the difficulties Freud has in giv-
interchangeable, undennine the 'popular idea' of a subordination of the ing a univocal formulation of the pleasure principle. We had in fact
drives to the biological finality of procreation. As to what Freud calls the proposed distinguishing two very different modes of functioning: a
so~tic 'so~', it is difficult enough to assign in the case of the 'oral' homeostatic functioning governed by the 'constancy principle' and
~~e (the lips?) or the 'anal' drive (the anus?), and it is altogether lack· tending to restore the level to an optimum; and a functioning oriented
mg~ such cases as the voyeuristic drive: how could we make sense of towards pure discharge (the primary process), which leads to a total
the idea of~ 'reduction of tension at its source' here? One would not risk exhaustion of the excitation.31
the a~ty of speaking of 'a reduction of ocular tension'. 'Constancy principle' and 'zero principle': in order to complete
reud (and perhaps even more so his disci" I ch as Abra· the opposition we must add a distinction that is internal to the German
ham or · di.ff p es, su term Lust , and w hich Freud himself reveals: Lust is at once pleasure
• ' ~ a erent way, Ferenczi) doubtless finds himself seized . . as')a
with vertigo when nfro . relaxation of tension (the classical meaning of the 'pleasure pnnaple ,
established fl li co nted with an evolution that lacks any pre- and the 'desire' or 'pleasure-desire' related to the increase of tension.32
ma ty, and Will bi ·
evolution on·ented t s ve to describe a sort of normative
' st
of libidinal owards
. . 'gem'tality' • But the purported succession
·
31 ean La lanche and Jean-Bertrand Pontalis, "Constancy prind~le", "~lrvana
ages, even if 1t SUrvi · • ch· J P . . ,, ·n The Language of Psyd11x111alys1s, op. at.; and
ings of 'psychoanal ti ves Within the Vulgate of the tea principle" and "Pleasure pnnop1e , • . .
much by clinical 0 : c ps~chology has been endlessly discredited, as Jean Laplanche, Life and Dtath in Psycl,oanalys\op. ~;;~- ~1!! p 212 n 1 as well
32 See the two notes in the Tl,ree Essays. op. ciJ·
0
Bo · i on Pierre Colet Jean
servation as by theoretical critique (Melanie I<lein
as my commentary in_Trad11ire F;:.~~i.;:itaires ~:ce: 1989) pp. 125-126,
Lciplanche and Fran~IS Ro~ ( r'a' .' Jaw uiplanchc: Seduclioll, 1hmslalion, Drivts,
30 Konrad Lorenz Slud' . . and ''The Freud Museum Scmma • m
H
arva
rd • ltS'" Animal nd H
University Press 1970 a uman Beliaviour 2 vols (Cambridge M~
. ed. John Fletcher and Martin Stanton (London: ICA, 1992) P· 54.
• and 1971). ' ·
38
39
 Sexuality a11d Attac/J111e11t
Sexuality and Attachment

lf we are prepared to take some distance from the Freudian formu-

clearly demonstrates that these two searches are strictly correlated:
•
1at10ns, w hich are frequently ambiguous and tend to collapse drive the good-enough object is procured by means of the specific action
and instinct into one another,33 we can distinguish between a function- ('aim') and leads to a lasting relaxation of tension ('pleasure'). But
ing of the instinctual type, which always _tends to~ro:cts rel~ation by these are a matter of behaviours that we encompass with the broad
obtaining the best possible level, and a dnve functiorung which defies term 'instinct'. However, what is opposed to this joint pursuit of the
and transgresses the line of the homeostatic level - the principle of object and of satisfaction is most certainly the drive-based quest,
excitation or desire tending sometimes towards an excitation beyond which, for its part, is the pursuit ofexdtation to the point of exhaustion,
all limit, sometimes, and perhaps at the end of the process, towards regardless of both the real object and the relaxation of tension.
total exhaustion This also entails a complete reversal as regards the type of
Homeostatic functioning (instinct) 'object' and its position. The object of the instinct is the real object,
which is situated at the end of the process, even if it is pre-intuited in
the form of a 'value'.34 The object of the drive is to be situated within
unconscious fantasy; it is the exciting object, the 'source-object', of
optimal level which the real can offer nothing but unsatisfying, though in their tum
exciting, effigies.

II. Drive and instinct are general categories. It is important not

to tack their opposition onto the different types of motivation and/
Drive functioning, transgressing homeostasis or behaviour in question. From this second point of view we come
to the terms of the first Freudian dualism (while reserving the right
to nuance and update it): self-preservation/sexuality.l5 But why do
we not simply align self-preservation with the 'instinctual' on the one
optima! level hand, and sexuality with the 'drive' on the other?
On the one hand, 'self-preservation' - the totality of forces that
(1)
tend towards the preservation of the individual - is, by its very defini-
tion, adaptive and innately based, and tends towa~s ~ state ~f vi~
equilibrium. 'Self-preservation' is by nature, then, instinctual , but it
. This radkal repositioning, moreover, enables us better to
situate the question 0 f • b' .
. .
Farrbaun offered fo th
atm, o Ject and pleasure than the clarificatioll 34 In the sense that L1gache speaks of hunger as the intuition of the value of food.
al .. . 35 It seems to me that the 'second dualism', life and dea~h, must be subsumed under
. g' .
seekin ' r ere opposition is not that between 'objed·
and ' 1 d the term 'sexuality' (Cf. Life a11d Dent/, and New Fo1111dntro11s):
P easure-seeking'. From his earliest writings freu

33 Cf, for example Jean La I

Universitaires deF P anche, Problemaliqucs l11: La Sublimnlion (Paris: Pres¢
ranee, 1980), p. 37 ff.
41
40
 Sexuality and Attachment Sexuality and Attachment

. . t t pply some nuances here, owing to the introduction

is 1mportan
.
° a
f , ttachment' Attachment, whi
·ch l1ad alrea d y been Freud's supposition that it is the mechanical path of discharge
(that is, the uncoordinated cries of the thirsty infant) which
of the notion o a · . , .
. red b F d under the name of 'affection , has been cons1dw acquires the function of "mutual understanding" in a "second-
discove Y reu
ably extended by the recent work done in infant observation. After ary'' fashion ,YI
Bowlby came Zazzo, Brazelton, Stem, Domes, ~ontagner etc. Sche-
matically, the following points should be underlined: Let us turn to sexualihJ in respect of our distinction between
drive and instinct. Here it must be affirmed that in man sexuality is
1) Attachment emerges from a domain that is broadly understood double, and profoundly split. The immense Freudian discovery mer-
as that of self-preservation and instinct. The majority of authors its being properly situated within this duality.
insist on the innate and 'attuned' basis of inter-relations between
the adult and the child. This does not mean that one should 1) It is not a matter of denying the existence - within the animal, of
neglect the way in which this relation is enriched in the course of course, but also within man -of an instinctual sexuality connected
its development. But this enrichment (where narcissism and the to the maturation of the organism and involving neuro-hormonal
narcissistic relation will play a major role) remains, despite every- relays, the complexity of which is now beginning to be recognised.
thing, oriented by the self-preseivative aim. As Freud had already emphasised, this sexuality pushes human
2) Attachment is only one part of instinctual self-preservative behaviour. beings towards sexual behaviours that are more or less pre-pro-
it is that part in which the individual essentially needs the other to grammed and that are aimed, without this aim being consciously
ensure his survival, his 'homeostasis'. The proportion of non-rela· posed, at the self-preservation of the species. But the problem is
tional homeostatic mechanisms (for example, the maintenance that this sexuality, which is hormonal in origin, is absent i11 ma,r
of blood constants) to mechanisms that immediately require the from birth to the pre-pubertal period.
intervention of the other, varies according to species. As such, in 2) It is precisely between birth and puberty that human drive sexual-
certain species the provision of nourishment is necessarily medi· ity is situated - the infantile sexuality that Freud discovered and
ated by the congeneric adult, whereas for others it is not. (Roughly which continues to scandalise today.
speaking, we may assume that the dividing line is that which lies This sexuality is an enlarged sexuality and is not, at first,
betw~n homeothermic and poikilothermic species).36 connected to any one erotogenic zone; nor is it connected, in any
3) One fin 1 · t · absolute way, to the difference of the sexes.
. . a pom is essential for our purposes: the attachment rela·
This sexuality is not innate, which does not, however,
tion 15 supported by a communication, an exchange of messages
~etween adult and child. These messages are not initially linguis- justify the objection that we are returning to the notion of the
tithc, evden _though they may become so later on. For the most part 37 (Trans.: Laplanche is quoting Freud's Project for a Scientific Psychology. Freud's
ey enve from an · t . . Cennan tenn is iibereinstimm1mg, which Strachey simply translates as "commu·
mna e ongm, which is in sharp contrast to
nication" ((1950a (1895)), SE 1, p. 318). We render it as 'mutual understanding' in
order to distinguish it from Laplanche's own use of "communi~tion" earlier~ the
36 [Trans: the terms ' homeoth . paragraph and so as to acknowledge Laplanche's own more faithful translation of
blooded animals respectivelytrm•c' a nd 'poikilothermic' refer to warm- and cold· Freud's tenn: "compr811msio1111111t11elle'').

42 43
 Sexuality and Attachment
SauDlity and Altachment

'innocent child'. The child is a 'genetic-sexual-innocent', jf 0llf Here, the notion of lraniug-on remains indispensible, at least
wishes to put it that way, which d~ n~t prevent the child boa as a stage in, or support for, our thinking, in order to grasp what is at
becoming sexual in the first hour.; of its life. stake. Having developed and examined this notion for a long time,33
This drive sexuality is indissociably connected to we shall recall what is at stake in just a few words. lnfantile sexuality
as its cause. Repressed, it is what constitutes the contents of thP first emerges in thee ·ercise of the great functions, in the satisfaction
unconscious and is the very object of psychoanalysis. of the great needs of self•preservation. Initially conjoint with the sat•
3) What, then, is the relation between drive sexuality and ins · isfaction of need (feeding, defecation, etc), sexual pleasure detaches
sexuality within the human being? itself secondarily, beroming autonomous with autoerotism and its
rt is not one of collaboration or of harmonious Dfenm11a relation to fantas, .
but a deeply conflictual relation, which at first glance looks like, This process, which is barely outlined by Freud, requires
temporal succes.sion. lnstinctual sexuality arrives in the pubertalor interpretation. Wt> have proposed to distinguish three versions of it:w
pre-pubertal period, after infantile sexuality. But nevertheless, • ■
in no sense infantile sexuality's legitimate heir. the sequence ol ' J) ,m impoverished interpretation that proposes a mechanistic
tile stages described by Freud is a barelv credible fiction. parallelism;
sexuality before puberty is largely ~ and unconscious, rm- 2) an Interpretation that makes it into a process of emergence;
derin~ i~ all the more toxic. Finally, the two respecti\le mod d J> a contrary interpretation, made in terms oi seduction.
~ncbon~g - 'the pursuit of excitation' and 'the pursuit ol pl
m the object' - are and will ~ i n 01(N diifkuJt to reconcile. The mer::hanistic interpretation is re;ected by WidJocher, as it is by
Ultimately, our idea is that with respect to his sexuality me. It presupposes an homogeneous conception ci instinctual self•pre-
~n is subject to the greatest of paradoxes: oc.quiRd drive servative functioning on the one hand and dri\-e sexuality on the other,
ality ~cedes innate instinctual sexuality within him., such that which I have never stopped rebutting. A single source for two instincts?
~hen •_t surges forth, adaptive instinctual sexuaJ:ih, finds its pfa:e And what source? What parallel aims? What 'object' oommon to both?
occupied', as it were, by the i:nlantile d:ri ~,~~ nd -"-·- The interpretahon by emergmce, of the kind I have proposed as
present within the unconsaous. ves, <UIIC'.dUY a .uw•1"' a way to save the Freudian hypothesis. In this schema we not only
have the notion of support ('leaning-on' ) but simuJtanoously that of a
time-lag and a borrowing by one from the other. Conjunction fo~~
lll. We shall not ad ,J-,.1.....J· · d ...IYnhnti=tion
by emergence, by means of a sort of mc::-ld.UU ISo'.ltion an "'':"""'--
~blerns COnceming subi:n.::e ~to the is.sues that follow from~ of aims and objects. ln this positive and saving interpretation of lean·
tion of desire into the . tion, Pn>hlems ronceming the ~
sexuality within t h e ~ of Pleisure; the persistence of m{antilt 38 ~ Language of PS11Cluxmal1J5rs 11967>, ukllTld IJd:lth tn PsychoarW~ 0 ~ p~
period in which at•- L t. etc. We hall, however: return to ~ kllll bltmatUf1U!S 111 (1 97~76), u fuurvmnnt!nl bwlogis.:mt de la sauahtl chf: Fr-rod O 1~ -
. . "'U11Tlen/ and inftmhk ' )9 Prob/imat,quo VII LL {uurommiart tnoJ~nt tu la ffltliJ]ltl drn Fmui (P ·
is their original relation? ls th 5e:rUilluy serm to coe:xisJ. \\lb# ~ Uruvemta.ues de France. 21XJD), P· 55 ff ibid
them of support? Of genesis? ere a COnnect:ion or relation t,etwetS' 40 One o{ the lllO!,t m:ent d tSCUS!>lon& o f thti appears m PrablmtttlJ.t(un VII, •P
t,(J ti.
4-1 45
 Sexllality and Attachment
Sexuality and Attacl,me11t

. th biDrt of self-preservation is the milk, while the breast~

mg-on, e o ,~~- . th , t . . But the 'creativity' by which Widlocher sets so much store
al bject. With leaning-on there IS us a me onynusation' of
the sexu o d 'thin £ does not in fact go so far as to create sexuality: this is in reality intro-
theoJ b"ect at the same time as a turning aroun WI antasy. For its duced from the earliest intersubjective experience, and introduced by
. . , . . fro th
rt the aim undergoes 'metaphonsation m passing m e domain the activity of the adult rather than the infant.
pa '
of self-preservation to the sexual - anal expu1s·i_o n or projection,
· · for
You can see how it may be said that "seduction is the truth of
example, being the metaphorisation of the excretion of faeces. 41 'leaning-on"' ,-15 Not that I deny the active role of the infant in terms of
This type of solution, which is ultimately endogenous, seems symbolisation and the creation of fantasy, and within the process of
to me to be that retained by Widlocher: it is an action on the part or aftenvardsness. But this activity is brought to bear upon messages that
the subject which, taking up self-preservative functioning in a ~ are already compromised by the sexual on the part of the adult other.
ond moment, transfonns it into sexuality by making it pass into It is precisely by virtue of this enigmatic aspect of the adult message
fantasy. Where I speak of 'metaphorisation', Widlocher uses the that the child is stimulated to develop an unusual activity of 'transla-
tenns "early psychic creativity", "pure subjectivity proper to fantas- tion'. An exchange of messages that remain purely self-preservative
matic activity",.u "treatment of scenes on the level of illusion",u "a benefits from an 'attunement', since the codes used between the adult
resumption within the imaginary which ... confers new meaning". and the child are largely pre-established. However, the child's creativ-
According to Widlocher, "infantile sexuality [would be the] hallucina- ity, asserted by Widlocher, is kindled by the 'drive to translate', which
tory resumption of a physical and relational experience of satisfaction comes to the child from the adult message 'to be translated' - an enig-
which has another origin"."" matic message since it is compromised by the sexuality of the adult.
I have frequently, and for a long time, criticised such a 'creativist' To return to attachment, we can see why the 'communica-
and 'illusionist' conception of human sexuality. In Freud these concep- tion' aspect, the exchange of messages and responses, is essential to
tions find their apogee in the theory of the 'hallucinatory satisfaction of the theory of seduction. It is only because the adult's messages are
desire', which I reject. Indeed, the first real satisfaction can only be the compromised by his sexual unconscious that, secondarily, the child's
~tisfaction of a ne.ed (an alimentary need in the Freudian example); and attempts at symbolisation are set in motion, where the child actively
15
~ reproduction - be it within a memory, a fantasy or even an hallucina· works on material that is already sexual.
46
~on - can only be the reproduction of an alimentary satisfaction. There is
m Freud Relation of self-preservation or attachment
.. and in his
. succes.sors, n'ght up to the mQSt developed version . by
Widl~er, a ventable sleight of hand: if the sexual is not present within
the onginal rm/ Pffll>ri,,..,.,, • will
.' -r-· ....~ it
.
never be rediscovered in the fantasmatiC
Child ___) <--- Adult

reproduction or the symbolic elaboration of that . ~

expenence. Unconscious, sexual aspect of the adult message
41 [Editor: For this derivation of . .. . .
as distinct from relations f . J:->Y~cal entities according to relations of conttgwty
Ufeand Detlt!r, op.cit., pp. ~27~ t y, see "Derivation of Psychoanalytic Entities",
42 Widlocher "Primary . 45 New Fo1111dntio11s for Psycl,oanalysis, op. cit.pp.l44-5- . chi .. (1 ) . E Ire
43 Ibid., ~lation alteredloveand lnfantileSexuality", p. 19. 46 Diagram taken from ''Les forces en jeu dans le_con~•t _psy que 995 , m 11
44 lb'd
1 . ,Ad · · · · /'/ ·. Presses Uruvers11alreS de France, 1999).
(P ns
·• P· 20, translation altered. x , 11ct1011 ct msp1ral1011: romme a •

46 47
 Sexuality and Attachment
Sexuality and Attachment

We shall not pursue here the process of repression resulting innate prerequisite for the later development of a
from these attempts at translation, which always partially fail.47 drive.48
However, apropos of 'the general theory of seduction', I shall
take the occasion of the present article to respond to objections made For the other's message to be implanted we must acknowledge
by Widlocher. the existence of a primary somatic receptivity.49
Widlocher's earlier objection had been that the mother-child To resume my debate with Widlocher briefly, our points of
relation is not sufficiently universal, even among humans, to account view are largely convergent when it comes to the nature of the infan-
for the appearance of infantile sexuality in all cases. I responded,to tile sexual drive (its connection to fantasy) and its mode of functioning
this by saying that I have doubtless been misread, for what I call the being wholly different from instinct. However, as to the articulation
'Fundamental Anthropological Situation' is the truly universal reJa, between self-preservation and the drives, and as to the genesis of the
tion between a child who has no genetically programmed unconscious sexual, our points of view are close but do not coincide: his adherence
('genetically innocent') and an adult (not necessarily the moth~) who, to the fiction of hallucinatory satisfaction (of need? of desire?)-which
psychoanalysis tells us, is inhabited by an unconscious. It is a situa- is still too often considered to be beyond criticism - remains as a point
tion that is absolutely ineluctable, even if the infant has no parents, of dispute between us.
and even if he is ... a clone!
..
. .In his present article, Widlocher's objection is very different .. ..
he willingly accepts the mechanism of seduction but wishes to leave
a space for a more spontan d . Having attempted to situate clearly attachment and sexual-
. eous an 1ess mterpersonal emergence of
autoerotism. To tell the truth th b' . . ity, in terms of their essence, their relationship and their genesis, we
thought but for his own , e o Jection IS valid not only for my
.
uali Wi . . conception of a secondary elaboration of sex· shall say a few words about the errors that lead to the epistemological
~ thin halluanatory 'creativity'. Indeed I think that we both hegemony of one over the other.
adnut that a somatic reacti . ' Attachment has become the privileged domain of those who
certainl be . vity, a general organic excitability must
tomak: it /d~t,_ but that something else is needed in order
15
observe childhood. Even so, must infantile sexuality- as well as adult
sexuality - therefore disappear from the field of observation? I do
Lichtenstein: · something that has already been said by
not think so; and nor do we find among the best child observers the
sort of epistemological blindness with which they are credited by
[Tl here is an innate bod . Andre Green.
.. . to respond t Yresponsiveness, a capacity
o contact with It is, however, true that infantile sexuality, connected as it is
a Specific kind 0 f . another person with
somatic ex0 ·ta ·
drive, because it h . tion which is not a 48 Heinz Lichtenstein, "Identity and Sexuality", in the Journal of the American Psyd10-
as no dtrection, but which is the analytic Association, vol. 9, 1961, p. 250.
49 Cf. Gerard Mendel, u, psydumalyse revisit& (Paris: Le ~~verte, 19_~},_P· 113 ff.
47Th - Mendel thinks that this reactivity is not sexual. Lichtenstein thinks that it 15 already'
.
in Essays
48
Otherness, ed.1::~:
e fullest account of th.
011
;~ort Treatise on the Unconscious" (1993),
ndon: Routledge, 1999).
sexual. A quibble over words? Not at all. The fact that sexuality, ~ ~ud's sense of
the term, only appears with fantasy would rather confirm Mendel s VJew.

49
 Sexuality and Attacl1111e11t Sexuality and Attachment

of fantasy and to repression, is by d efinition le& We can see to what extent abstract metapsychological consid-
to the appearance . .
poorly identified in any direct way. Child observers s uch a_s Roiphe erations a re alone capable of focusing adequately on the essence of
and Galenson demonstrate that these two aspects - a s~ality that is psychoanalytic practice, Freud's primary and inaugural invention.
· the rocess of being repressed and parental sexu a lity - are none,
:elestdiscem able, at the heart of observation itself, if o ne wishes to
take the trouble.!"-.> The path remains open from this observation to
a more concrete identification of the connection between attachment
and infantile sexuality.
011 tlze side ofanalysis, and essentially the a nalysis of the adult,
the point of view is the opposite. Here, drive sexuality is on the way
towards monopolising all our attention (and with good reason!):

1) Within individual evolution, sexuality has a tendency to cover

over like a net and to co-opt the totality of inter-human relations.
This is what I have sometimes called 'pansexualism in action"51•
2) The analytic rule that privileges 'saying everything', even what
is considered improper, necessarily promotes the 'sexual' within
communication.
3) The transference situation itself supports this hegem ony of the
sexual. The two previous factors are constitutive of w hat I once
named the 'tub' of psychoanalysis.52

Coming back to transference, in our view it is ' p rovoked', cre-

:ted b~ the a~a~ytic situation, which confronts the analysand with
h~ erugma: his internal enigma but also the enigma of the other. In
this. sense, the analytic trans,erence
, · essence nothing to d o w1'th
has m
a ~•~pie ~nsference of habits. It places the subject back within the
ongmary situation, that of the genesis of infantile sexu a lity.

50 Herman Roiphe and Eleanor C I .

(New York: International U . . . a enson, The lllfantile Origins of Sexual /dortrty
51 "Sublimation and / or I ru~er~rti:5 Press, 1981), chapters 13 and 14.
52 Cf. Problt!matiq1tes Iv. u°;;;'ratio; ' New Fomrations, no 48, 2002-3, p.35. .
taires de France, 1987). quet. rnuscenda11ce du tra11sfert (Paris: Presses UnivCJ'SI·

51
50
 Dream and Communication

3
DREAM AND COMMUNICATION:
SHOULD CHAPTER VII BE REWRfITEN?1

The theme that is my point of departure today is the relation

between the dream and communication. This issue is much larger
than that of the relation between the dream and language, to which
it has frequently been reduced - especially since Lacan. There are
communications without verbal language, and conversely there are
elements of language that have lost all relation to communication.
However, the question is in reality much older than Freud,
even though it has been revived by the discovery of psychoanalysis
and the role played by dreams within our practice. One might even
say that curiosity about this subject is coextensive in human beings
with the enigma that is posed to us by dreams - those astonishing
fragments of our life which appear to be both meaningful and yet
radically removed from our will to communicate and even from our
will as such.
For the sake of clarity, I shall divide the question into two:
on the one hand, the communication of the dream, chiefly

1 Lecture delivered in Metz on June 23rd, 24th and 25th, 2000, at the congress of the
Association de Recherche en Psychiatrie et Psychanalyse de l'Enfont, on " Le reve
cent ans apres". First published in Le reve da11s la pratiq11e a11alytiq11e (Paris: Dunod,
2003), pp. 51-73.

52 53
 Dream and Co111m1micatio11 Dream a11d Communicatio11

within the treatment; · · posed precisely the question of how to interpret dreams today. Unfor-
the dream ns commurucation; or, more
on the other hand, tunately, the answer came before the question. The young analyst had
. between the phenomenon of the dream and
generally, the re1ation . . barely begun recounting his patient's dream when my neighbouring
. ation They are related but distinct. panellists, this candidate's elders, began to interrupt in order to teach
interhuman comrnuruc ·
him a thing or two. He had not understood what the patient was say-
ing to him by the very act of recounting the dream. The transference and
T1ie Problem of the Communication of the Dream even his counter-transference were obvious. In short, the problem of
the interpretation of the dream had vanished and had been replaced
Evidently, this is a problem that has to be posed in connection with what is sometimes called the intersubjective dynamic.
with the communication constituted by analysis itself. Indeed, our This stance is commonly taken. One sticks with the manifest
practice has considerably expanded what we might call the quantum content. More precisely, the manifest content is considered solely in
of verbalisation with respect to dreams as dreamed, and above all it terms of its value as an utterance. Not: what is the meaning of this
has radically expanded the ways of 'treating' this material. dream? Nor even: why did this analysand have this dream at this
One hundred years have passed since the publication of The moment in the analysis? Rather: what is the analysand saying to me
Interpretation of Dreams and many developments have occurred- pur• by recounting this dream?
poseful and theoretically justified changes as well as surreptitious These on-the-spot interpretations are well known to all of us
changes in our practice. These days one can distinguish two major who attend analytic meetings: most often they rely on symbolism of
attitudes among analysts, which can be contrasted in the following, a very general kind.
somewhat caricatured way: The manifest content is not considered to conceal anything of
the purely subjectivist or intersubjective attitude; a fundamentally heterogeneous nature. It is taken in the same way as
the purely objectivist attitude. all other discourse, even if a few simple modifications apply: transfor-
I say 'caricatured' because one does encounter many positions that mation into the opposite, denial, puns.
are more nuanced. It is difficult to exaggerate the devastation created by the Laca-
nian method of listening to signifiers when this method is adopted in
an exclusive way. For ultimately, this kind of listening is only 'autho-
The lntersubjective Attitude rised' by the listener himself.2 It is the listener, and the listener alone,
who decides that the expression 'prendre sur soi' contains an allusion
. ~ the intersubjective view,. everything happens within the to sexual intercourse.3 It is the listener, and the listener alone, who
analytic dialogue, in the here and now. chooses to hear "ah! que cest difficile adire" as "ah! queuec'estdiffi-
. By way of introduction, I should like to offer a personal recol·
lection of an entire! . 2 [Tra11s.: an allusion to Jacques I.acan's claim that 'l'analyste ne s'autorise que de
Y commonplace situation. During a conference or
a congress I w · · ed lui-meme' ('the analyst is only authorised by himself')).
. b ' as mvit to participate as a discussant of a presenta· 3 [Tra,,s.: 'Prendre sur soi' (literally: 'to take [something] upon oneself) is a common
tion Yan analyst in tra· · Th d
uung. e work had been well prepared an French idiom meaning 'to face up to', 'to accept responsibility for').

54 55
 Dream and Com1111111icatio11
Drenm and Comm1111ication

. d" ,, ~ H one cannot rely unconditionally on Freud's example

cile a ire . ere , ood' . k Lacanian circles. It seems to me that such scorn goes hand in hand
and his frequent recourse to more or 1~ g JO es to support his with the decline of reference to the individual unconscious, both in
interpretations. For Freud's interpretations - and we s hall return clinical practice and in the theory of the treatment.
to this point _ are very far from endorsing ~ e sove~eignty that our It remains true, nonetheless, that Lacan was no stranger to
master interpreters often proclaim. When this putative sovereignty this drift, especially in his pure and simple assimilation of the mech-
is really backed into a comer, the single ~o~rse availa~le to its ~p- anisms of the dream -work - displacement and condensation - to
porters is the claim that the only unconsaous lS the one hidden within universal modes of language functioning: metonymy and metaphor.
common language, an unconscious that is independent of the indi- It is an assimilation that, d espite a thousand critiques with supporting
vidual's attempt to make language serve him, since he himself is in argurnents,5 has given weight to the rumour according to which the
fact at the service of language. Thus we have a collective unconscious dream is a discourse like any other.
- collective and specific to each language. Now, to this factor we must add another: the assimilation
ln sum, within a certain conception of the analytic d ialogue, of the fundamental analytic rule - free association on the side of the
the analysis of dreams appears utterly outdated. Freu d was wrong analysand, evenly suspended attention on the side of the analyst -
to believe he was talking about the dream when in reality he was to a sort of putting-into-parentheses of reality, after the fashion of a
only talking about "the spoken account that the dreamer gives of 'phenomenological reduction', a suspension of the entire referential
his dream" (ibid., p.294). The analysis of dreams has brought to light dimension of discourse, with which one should no longer be con-
mechanisms that can now be recognised as being universal and spe- cerned. From this perspective it is a matter of indifference whether
cific to language: the discourse of the analysand concerns a dream, a fantasy, an event
from everyday life, the words of a third party, etc.
Listening to the dream as a d iscourse has enabled Wmnicott says somewhere. that in the presence of the patient
analysts to understand discourse as a dreamI w hich the analyst cannot reasonably feign ignorance of the fact that King
is to say as being subject to the same grammar of George died that day. However, according to those Wmnicott is
unconscious discourse (ibid.). implicitly criticizing, the statement "King George is dead" is nothing
but a part of the enunciation of the analysand, and the mental asceti-
. A moment ago I mentioned Lacan, but this warrants qualifica· cism of the analyst would be such that, for him, the utterance alone is
tion. It seems to me that Lacan never advocated the reintegration of what occupies the psychic field.
the dream into general d · If psychoanalysis entails the total suspension of reality, then
. 1SCourse, or the abandonment of those rules

world, scorn for the fam

n
,
°
speafic to the interpretaf10 f dre .
ams. What is more in the analytic
'
the 'dream referent' certainly loses all privilege. However, consider
this little experience, which is not rare and which I call the 'the first
ous royal road' is in no way restricted to
minute distraction'. During the first seconds of a session, the men-
4 [Tru11S.: These two homon . h
!qrw_l is d ifficult to s.i y" anr.~ ;ases may betranslilt~ respectively as "~h, ~ 1
IS drfficult to say" ( Th ' ock (queue: means tail nnd is slang for penis'l 5 Among many other critiques, cf. Jean-Franc;ois Lyotard, Discours, Figure (Paris:
IA Nou;,r/1/;:m:iesp
l'anafystc", are borrowed from Jean-Claude L.1vie, "Parler A
e e syc/1m1t1lysc, vol. 5, 1972. Kllncksicck, 1971), pp. 250-260.

56 57
 Dream a11d Comm1micatio11 Dream and Communication

t sometimes lags behind the discourse of the doesn't hesitate to have the dream repeated a second time in order to
tal state of the analys . .
. . b d"stracted
1 by some external or mtemal arcum. note the differences between the two narratives:
patient, having een . •
t regains his concentration he hears the patient
stance. As the analys . ,,
say:,, ...so the car lightly bumped the guy on the b1~cle, etc. I would But the parts of the dream which he describes in
t?
challenge any one of our colleagues _not ask himself, at ~e very different terms are by that fact revealed to me as
least: is this a dream that the patient 1s telling me, or something that the weak spot in the dream's disguise ... That is the
really happened? And I would challenge any colleagu~ to de~y hav- point at which the interpretation of the dream can
ing inwardly tried to pick up clues that woul~ ~nable ~ , as 1t ~ere, be started. My request to the patient to repeat his
to jump aboard the patient's discourse when it 1s already m motion. account of the dream has warned him that I was
Let us draw things together. The subjectivist point of view; proposing to take special pains in solving it; under
which suspends all reference to anything external to the discourse of pressure of the resistance, therefore, he hastily cov-
the session - even reference to the unconscious and to that privileged ers the weak spots in the dream's disguise ... In this
phenomenon, the dream - makes almost three quarters of Freud's way he draws my attention to the expression which
work obsolete. Not only the interpretation of dreams, but also the he has dropped out.7
work on the psychopathology of everyday life, jokes, etc.; and indeed
his works of what is called 'applied' psychoanalysis, if it is true, as Here Freud's realism about dreams is clear. The dream has an
Viderman sometimes declares, that here too the suspension of refer- existence distinct from its telling and distinct from what the analysis
ence should be the rule: "What does it matter what Leonardo saw? ... will make of it. And the best proof of this, for Freud, is that each part
What does it matter what Leonardo said? ... What is important is that of the psychic phenomenon of the dream exceeds the use to which
the analyst ... makes it exist by saying it."6 psychoanalysis puts it as the 'royal road to the unconscious'. As late
as 1923, Freud argues fiercely against the objection that the dreams of
the analysand are entirely shaped by the analytic situation and by the
The Objectivist Attitude suggestions of the analyst. It is worth quoting his conclusion:

. Throughout his life, Freud's point of view about dreams [The patient] recollected some dreams which he
remained objectivist Ob' . . . had had before starting analysis and indeed before
· Jectivist m that he presumed that the dreaIII·
as-dreamed exists, that th

=~
. he had known anything about it; and the analysis
diff e memory of the dream is somethiIIS
erent, and that the tellin of these dreams, which were free from all suspicion
reads with int t h g of the dream is different again. One
of suggestion, led to the same interpretations as the
forgetting of ::;ssages in Chapter VII on the subject of the
later ones.
telling of the d . on the supplementary censorship that tl\e
ream can mtr0 d d
uce. To demonstrate the point, freu
6 Serge Videnna l.a
n, conslruction de I' 7 The foterpretatio11 of Dreams (1900a), S£ 5, p. 515.
CS1X1ce ana/ytique (Paris: Denoel, 1970), P· 164·
58 59
 Dream and Communication Drtam and Communic:atum

And Freud concludes: Now let us cite Danielle Margueritat's article ''L'analyste et le
reveur'':
1 think that in general it is a good plan occasion- 'What happens to me when someone tells me a dream? Some-
ally to bear in mind the fact that people were _in the thing happens to me first of all because I have a tendency to isolate
habit of dreaming before there was such a thing as dreams not from the context of the analysis but from the entirety of
psycho-analysis.8 the discourse of the session."
And the theme returns like a leibnotiv, that of the dream-
To acrept that there is a dream object, which has a re\'& event, which is to say, fundamentally, what Freud designated as 'the
tory capacity independent of its inclusion in the transference, is IQ other scene':
accept the pos.sibility of a different stanre towards dreams and indeed 'Thus, when someone tells me a dream, an alann goes off, my
towards all discourse within the treatment. It is a stance that. follow- attention is mobilized." (Attention and vigilance, not abandonment
ing Guy Rosolato, we could call 'technical', but with the folio~ pure and simple).
important qualifications. Firstly, that the term 'technique' is not to be 'Thus a dream emerges and I am prey to a disturbance in the
understood as something pejorative, but is to be associated with tllf rhythm of time ..."
notion of flexibility, which implies that the activities of listening and 'Thus a dream emerges, with its associations ..." 11
intervening are adapted to their particular object. Secondly, that in "With its associations": I wish to insist upon this, which is
spite of its prosaic appearano? the word 'technique' refers to Freud's a second essential aspect. The dream cannot be reduced to its asso-
major discovery, when he defines psychoanalysis above all as "a pi& ciations. This is so important that as late as 1923, in the previously
cedure for the investigation of mental proces.ses which are almmt cited "Two Encyclopedia Articles", Freud lists the different possible
inaccessible in any other way.""' rules, the different means by which associations may be elicited and
Here I should like to refer not only to Freud's own era but also, obtained. Indeed in Danielle Margueritat we have this astonishing
very briefly. to a contemporary psychoanalyst, Danielle Margueritat. sequence regarding a dream that concerns contact lenses [verres de
whose ~pproach in this area seems to me to be marked by the best kiD:i contact]:
of fidelity to the Freudian position. But let us first cite Ferenczi who rec-
ommends l ic:+..n...- . I no longer knew if we were in the account of the
, _ .... 'o to dreams m a manner completely different from
evenly suspended attention'·· "One should . . . endeavour to o= 1..,.-io dream or in the associations, and when I asked her,
•~
accurately the wording of ... dreams. Complicated dreams I often ha\'I! she replied, "it was in the dream, but in the dream
narrated to me · · it was lentilles [Trans.: meaning both 1enses' and
agam, m cases of necessity, even a third. time''.io
-----
8 · Remarks on then-...-. . .
1entils' }, and I didn't want to say that word". Here
116-117. .._..,,, and Practice of Dream-Interpretation" (1923c), 5£ 19, p. again the strictly Freudian approach considers as
9 "Two Encvdopedia Articles"
10 5.indor , Ferenczi• •A .C1923a), ~ElB, p. 23;_
Contnoutiol?s to tht 11:mry ~ During the Narration of Dreams'', Furl"6 11 Danielle Margueritat, "L'analyste et le reveur', in Lt Fait de /'aTUJl)IS(, no. 4, March
al. {London: The Hn=..1. D.......~erhn~ CJf Psychoanalysis, trans. Jane Isabel Suttie el t99s. pp. 1n-3.
-c,-u,. CC>S, 1969), p. 238.

60 61
 Dream and Communication Dream and Communication

being significant the difference between the formu- On the 'efferent' or output side of the process: "A dream
lation of the dream-as-dreamed (lentil/es) and the does not want to say anything to anyone. It is not a vehicle for
already more censored formulation (verres de con- commuruca • ti'on .12
11

tact) of the dream as it is recounted (ibid., p. 186). On the 'afferent' or input side: "the remarks made by the phy-
sician ... operate like somatic stimuli which impinge on the sleeper
Let me be clear: ever since Freud, and all the more so after during his sleep" (ibid., p. 238).
him, psychoanalysis has been unable to do without the dimension of The latter affirmation, taken in an absolute sense, means that
enunciation or, to use other terms, the address, the transference. On the dream does not take account of any message or, what amounts to
the other hand, however, analysis cannot use this as a pretext for sim- the same thing, that it treats all messages as purely material stimuli.
ply dissolving the dream into its telling - that is to say, into precisely The term 'message' (Botschaft) is relatively rare in Freud,
what Freud considers to be more deceitful, more disguised, more which makes it all the more instructive to identify the passages
defensive than the dream ... itself. where it does occur: primarily in passages concerning telepathy. Let
We cannot, I'm afraid, go much further on the subject of the me briefly summarize what is involved. In the 1920s Freud, chiefly
'communication of the dream'; we'll conclude with the opposition influenced by Ferenczi, became interested in two kinds of occult
between Freudian realism (which admits that all discourse, including phenomena: clairvoyance and thought transmission. These two phe-
that of analysis, refers to existing material or psychic realities) and a nomena could obviously be translated into premonitory dreams on the
sort of idealism of discourse (an idealism of the discourse of clinical one hand and telepathic dreams on the other. Freud's position on this
analysis first of all, and then of all discourses in general). This latter subject will hardly vary at all:13 Premonition is inadmissible in theory,
stance recreates and radicalizes the sophist's position in which the quite simply because it would invert the arrow of time, and because it
dream w~uld be nothing but discourse about the dream, just as love has never been demonstrated by experiment. By contrast, and chiefly
or paternity etc. would be nothing but the words 1ove', 'paternity' ... on the basis of personal experiences, Freud accepts categorically the
possibility of the transmission or 'transference' of thoughts or of
memories that carry a strong affective investment.
Communication and the Dream-as-Dreamed We are not interested here in taking a position on telepathy
itself. We are concerned with the connection between the telepathic
on this H~ving allied myself unambiguously to the Freudian position message and the dream in which it may re-emerge. Would this not
, point.' 1a:n' ~ the more at ease in freely taking up the question be a case in which the dream is the receiver of a certain speech, what-
0 £ commurucation m th dre , ever the means of its arrival? Well, Freud is going to be radical here.
foll . d e am , a question that I would formulate as
ows. oes the dream its lf th .
to do with int h e ' e dream-as-dreamed, have anything
er uman communication? 12 "Lecture 15: Uncertainties and Criticisms", Introductory Lectures 011 Psychoanalysis
Here we come up ag • . 0916-17), SE 15, p. 231. tion 0 ,
tions shockin amst two of Freud's peremptory propas1• 13 This ·n . already the subject of the final paragraphDreof TireIntInterpma. i
' g and revelatory · th post on ts retation as
formulated. m e abruptness with which they are Dreams. For a short account see: 'Some Additional Not~,on . ai;~ erp l3S--l38.
a Whole', part (C), 'The Occult Significance of Dreams (1925i), 19'PP·

62 63
 Dream and Communication DrtJJm and Communication

Accord.mg to him, the theory of dreams need. not change one iota to the systems of memories are suspended like photographic plates:
account for this possibility. Indeed, exactly as 1s the case for all other mts- Pc
sa es the telepathic message does not reach the dream as Speech; ~
isgtreated
' like any other material stimulus: "A te1epathic message Will
be treated as a portion of the material that goes to the formation of a
dream, like any other external or internal stimulus, like a disturbing
noise in the street. .."i.
This assimilation of the message to a noise is obviously some- Figure I (2)

thing we shall have to question. To do so, it is indispensible to enter a For our purposes, let us pause to consider the two ends of the model:
little way into Freud's conception of the psychic machinery, the 'appa- perception: the afferent arrow;
ratus of the soul', as he describes it in Chapter VII of The Interpretation motility: the efferent arrow.
of Dreams.
Here, then, is the apparatus as Freud describes it and makes il According to Freud, there is no communication, no message,
develop before our eyes: either at the entrance or at the exit. At the entrance and at the exit
there are only material actions. Thus we have here a purely behaviour-
ist apparatus for which, according to Freud, the model is the reflex:
Pc M
''Reflex processes remain the model of every psychical function" .15
Let us come immediately to the state of sleep. Here, inputs
and outputs are - almost - totally abolished.
Pc

Figure I (1 )

This is not a somatic apparatus, although the body may be said to be

represen~ ~y the two anows: afferent and efferent.
This is not
. a neurologi·ca1 apparatus. The systems are vinwu --•~-~, Figure I 13)
syste.ms, psychic systems Th
functioning b t th d · ey may be produced by neurological But it is precisely here that a distinction would be instructive:
u ey o not have an d · •
Let Y irect correspondence with 1t. namely, the distinction that must be established between, on the one
Afurthusaccept, then, that this is the 'psychical apparatus'. hand, what is of the order of perception but carries no signification,
er nuance: this ima 15 .
dimensional apparatus _ge a two-dimensional slice of a tlu'ee- and, on the other, what is of the order of the message. In this connection
, one that 15 a sort of parallel-piped tub, in which Andre Bourguignon reports numerous experiments demonstrating
14
"Dreams and Telepathy'' <1922a) SE
, 18, p. 207. 15 TI,e l11terpretatio11 of Dreams, op. cit., p. 538.
64
65
 Comnumication Dream and Communication
Dream and

. rd f r example - are much more react. Dreams, Freud also says, are expressed in the present and not in
• · timuli - WO S, O · . uli h th
that signifying s h are physical stim , w e er or not the optative (we shall ignore the apparent inaccuracy of opposing a
the sleeper t an th h
ily perceived bY . t grated into the dream oug ts.16 'tense' - the present - with a 'mood' - the optative.) In fact, according
I per or are in e .
they wake the s ee perplexed about the Freudian dia-
to Freud, the dream is always expressed in the present indicative.
These remarks chi leave us . d
, as Freud
th human psy ca 1 apparatus cannot be mserte · Ultimately, Freud always refers this wish back to an archaic
gram. If e les of stimulus and reaction, but must wish that, in spite of certain denials, is sexual and, according to the
. hed between the two po . d
wis ' . ed between the pole of messages receive and that of well known metaphor, is always the 'capitalist' of the dream. Yet the
rather be msert h s it would be wise to leave this schema on basis of this entire argument refers to a theory, a model of the origin
messages sent, then per ap d
. tak
hold until we can e 1 ·t up on the basis of other ata. of the infantile wish or desire: namely, 'the experience of satisfaction'.
This 'Befriedigungserlebnis' is itself taken up in the Project for a Scientific
The Interpretation of Dreams is an immense wo~k. The essential PStJchologtJ and we must linger over it for a moment.
parts of Chapters II to VI are devoted to ~o traJecton~ that are c~n- The infant experiences an internal tension, that of need. Here
sidered to be reciprocal even if they are not identical: the mterpretative the need in question is explicitly hunger, which is of course associated
trajectory, which traces the acco~t of the dream back to its ori~ with the experience of suckling.
elements, and, conversely, the traJectory of the dream-work, which IS The need for food is conceived, in a plausible enough man-
supposed to account for the genesis both of the dream-as-dreamed ner, as a continuous mounting up of tension, which the organism
and of the dream-as-recounted. As for Chapter VIl, it develops two or cannot escape. Despite the triviality of the image, imagine a pot of
even three major theses, which are, moreover, interlinked: water on the stove. The water boils, the lid rattles. Ii no one intervenes
the caloric energy will continue to escape in a disordered fashion. "A
the dream is the fulfilment of a wish; hungry baby screams or kicks helplessly" .17 But this series of actions
the dream is hallucinatory (a point that requires explanation); is not capable of halting the stimulus. The alternative possibility is
the dream is the guardian of sleep. what Freud called the specific action: "outside help" (ibid.), a curious
phrase to designate the mother who, alerted by the cries, will bring
On the second of these theses, hallucination, Freud remained food that will, for a significant period of time, halt the excitation. 18
to the end unsatisfied with his formulations, proposing varying Now here is how Freud explains the birth of the wish: a psychi-
explanations of these revived creations. The 'wish fulfilment' thesis, cal connection is created which from then on associates the memory
~owev~r, is fundamental. Its very phrasing gives us material for reflec- of the food with the memory of the excitation of hunger. Then any
tion. It is not that the dream . .J- ·"'
expresses a wish, nor even that the wccw• reoccurrence of the state of tension, of hunger, will revive the image of
represents a wish as ful6lled b f
. . , ut rather the dream is a fulfilment o food and, if real food does not appear, its image will be invested with
a W!Sh without any distan be
ce tween the wish and its fulfilment. so much force as to acquire the intensity of an hallucination.

16 Andre Bourguignon "N . . 17 The Interpretation of Dreams, op.cit., p.565.

18 "Helpful person" is the term Freud uses in the Project for a Scientific Psychology
Psychiatrie de l'en"'nt v0'L europhys,ologie du reve et theorie psychanalytique",l.l
~M ,
11 , no. 1, 1968, p. 6. 0950a [1895]), op. cit., p. 318.
66
67
 Dream and Com1111111icatio11 Dream and Comm1111icatio11

. uls f this kind is what we call a wish; the at is unless from the very beginning the experience of satis-
Anunp eo . st art. Th '
the perception is the fulfilment of faction was double, ambiguous, and in a word, enigmatic.
reappearance of
. h; and the shortest path to the fulfilment Consequently there are only two ways to understand the
the wis . . of
the wish is a path leading direct from the exotation emergence of the sexuality/ self-preservation dualism. Firstly, one
roduced by the need to a complete cathexis of the may presuppose that, from the very beginning, there are two original
p · hall . tin. 19 internal needs acting within the child: the one alimentary, the other
perception ... wishing ended m uona g.
sexual; this, in its simplest form, is what is called the theory of 'lean-
This model is well known, even a bit worn out. There is even an ing on'. Infantile sexuality is present from the start, is endogenous;
attempt to see in it the very birth of infantile sexuality; but to do this it but, in order to establish itself, it needs to lean on the alimentary func-
would be necessary to deal with two major deficiencies. tion. I have frequently pointed out how unsatisfactory this theory is,
First of all, in Freud's account there is practically no role for for it relies on the presupposition of an innate, sexual oral drive for
communication, and even less for dialogue, between mother and which there is no basis at all in the psychology of the child.
infant. The message of the infant is reduced to purely mechanical The second interpretation seems much more plausible to me
movements; and as for the message coming from the mother, in Freud and permits us to preserve the experience of satisfaction as a basis. Yes,
one reads only of a purely material provision of food. this experience does initially take place in the realm of self-preseiva-
Secondly and most importantly, the action takes place solely tion. However, it is an experience that is much more complex, much
on the level of a single need, in this case the alimentary need. The object more intensely charged with meaning and affect than is suggested by
that is given is food, milk. It is hard to see how the mnemic trace of the the simplistic model of the kettle: it is the commencement of recipro-
perception could be anything other than an alimentary image. cal communication, which is established from the first moments of
The so-called 'experience of satisfaction' is certainly a fertile life, probably on the basis of certain innate organisations that develop
model that could be developed in relation to the emergence of the rapidly (Attachment, Bindung i.e. binding).
~al _from a self-preservative relation. But first we must refuse to For the psychoanalyst, however, this is not the essential point.
believe m the il~11sio11 that Freud proposes. From the hat of hun er, from a What matters is the introduction of the sexual element, not from the
self-preservative · tinct F • . g
. ms , reud the illus10nist claims to produce the side of the physiology of the infant but from the side of the messages
rabbit of sexualiru if b .
. ·,, as Y magic. This is only possible if sexuality has coming from the adult. To put it concretely, these messages are located
been hidden somewhere fro th start
easily be derived fro .m e · The image of the breast can on the side of the breast, the sexual breast of the woman, the inseparable
breast would be W: t~e image of milk by association. But such a companion of the milk of 'self-preservation'.
alimentary satisf ~ y instrumental, the means and the symbol of
a on and nothing else
I have thus tried to provide a model of the genesis both of
The experience of sati fa · ·
onto sexuality unless there . s Ction cannot split apart and open the unconscious and of the drive, the source of which is furnished by
15
something sexual that is there from the the unconscious thing-presentations. I shall not spend much time on
19 17,e illlerprelatio11 of D . this model of repression, the 'translational' model, which entails both
reams, op. at., pp. 565-S66. an attempt by the infant to translate the mother's double, enigmatic
68
69
 Dream and Co1111111111icatio11 Dream and Communication

·at failure of this translation, the untransia..._.

messages and the p,arti' · . 'QI once we introduce the notion of the message, and specifically the mes-
remainders of lvhich are precisely what constitute the elements of the sages of the adult, we see that what are expelled into the unamscious
•
unconscious. 1 \"ould
·• only add' without being able to develop the are not accidental, inert perceptions lacking any intersubjective mean-
poutt here, that it is no tonger ~~si~le to hold_onto~ concep~on_of the ing or significance. The elements of the unconscious are fragments
birth of the sexual drive that IS limited to a single time (which JS pte- of message, signifiers that, having been extracted from their context,
cisely the case in the simple model of t~e ex~e~en~e of satisfaction).» acquire a 'thing-like' consistency. These 'designified signifiers' are
for Freud himself taught us that every mscnption m the unconscious entirely different from memories; having lost their links with mean-
requires at least two 1110111e11ts: the experience itself and its signifying ing, their contextual relations in time and space, they quite naturally
res11111ptio11, which I call 'translation' (a necessarily imperfect transla- impose themselves with the force of psychical reality. Consequently,
tion). Thus, to complete the model of the experience of satisfaction, ft there is no need to look for a mechanism by which some additional
must be modified profoundly: we must substitute the notion of the intensity may be added to a perception to transform it into an halluci-
message for the notion of perception; introduce the duality, the com, nation - a problem that never stopped haunting Freud and to which
promise behveen the sexual and the 'self-preservative' on the side ci he gave the most diverse and contradictory answers from the Project
the adult's message; and finally, we must make full use of the nolioo for a Sdentific Psychology to the "Metapsychological Supplement to the
of afterwardsness.21 Theory of Dreams". In the latter text it seems that Freud finally runs
aground on the objection he himself raises: a very powerful regression
At this point, 1should like to note that the introduction of the can produce "very dear visual mnemic images, though we do not on
notions of the message and the signifier has an effect on the problem d that account, for a single moment, take them for real perceptions ...'~
what is called 'the identity of perception' and on the problem of hallu- Without claiming to solve the problem, l should like to point
cination. From the Freudian perspective it is the perceptual remainders out an approach that may be productive: the question of the dream
relating to the satisfying object that are reproduced, and with such considered as hallud11atio11 cannot be detached from that of hallucina-
force that they even become hallucinations - to such an extent, in fact. tion in the clinical sense. Yet here Freud will content himself with a
that one wonders how the infant is able to escape from an hallucina- supposedly clinical model called 'Meynert's amentia', an entity that
tion that fully satisfies the need, and why he would continue to seek disappeared almost as soon as it had been described.n On the other
food when he possesses it so completely as an hallucination. Howeveli hand, there is now a consensus within psychiatry that considers hallu-
20 "As J th 1 cinations as being primarily of the order of speech, heard or re-voiced.
food) a~~ t of ~ in_k that has thus been established, next time this need {hr Oinically, visual hallucinations are relatively rare and above all very
th . '. psychical impulse wiU at once emerge which will seek to re-aithed
e mnem1c unage of the pem>nti d . localized phenomena.
sau tore-e;tablish th 'tu .---r on an to l"e-i!voke the perception itself, that isto
;, e s1 ahon of the O • • I • f . • '-'~dis F~ennore, the question here is not exactly that of the 'sen-
what we call a wish· th ngma satis action. An impulse of this NJ• •
j
...", 771e /nterpretali;n 0 ~::,rance_of the perception is the fulfillment of the~ sorium' involved (sight or hearing) but the presence or absence of
I have added in square brack: ' op. at., PP· 56~566. The words "for food", whidi
the p.1ssage quoted. ets, come directly from the text itself, two lines abo\'t
22 0917d), SE 14, p. 231.
21 /Editor: 'l'apre. cou , F ,
action'.! p, reud s Nachtrtiglichkeit, translated in SE as 'defern>d 23 See Christine Levy-Friesacher, Meynnt-Frt11d, '/'ammtia' (Paris: Presses
Univmitaires de France, 1983).

70 71
 Dream arrd Communication
Dream and Comm1111icatio11

a message. V15ua . . ones, can carry a. m~ ge.

. 1 percepts' like auditory remains . .. unconscious.
. a~
Smee t:ram bauIt, since Freud's wntings on. Schreber,
, . Lacan
since
All this is to make it clear that the very idea of the hallucinatory
and his seminar on the psychoses, the old notion of perc~pt:ion With-
fulfilment of an unconscious wish involves something of a tautology.
out object' has been pushed aside by the m~ch more fertile notion of Fulfilment - as actuation, as abolition of the distance between signi-
a message without a sender or with an indeterminate sender. fier and signified - is in itselfan hallucinatory presentation; and this is
With that key in hand, research about the dream as hallucina- so precisely when what is in question is an unconscious wish.
tion ought to be oriented towards a more elaborated, even a more It is for this reason that I have always considered it clinically
phenomenological description, demarcating, for example, what truly superfluous to attribute psychical reality to the so-called hallucina-
belongs to the visual from that which belongs to the auditory (as spo- tion of the nursling. It is only a question of a metaphor that gives an
ken words) and, above all, to conviction and interior discourse: what intuition of the constitution of a timeless unconscious, an unconscious
clinically is called a verbal psychic hallucination: "/ was telling myself that is always present and current, which is, we might say, always
that my friend Pierre was in the room". actuated.
Moreover, it would be essential to rethink the articulation
I'
between two factors mentioned by Freud which are far from being I shall be returning to my principal question of whetheror not
equivalent: on the one hand, hallucinations per se, and on the othei; the dream is a communication. But first, I shall briefly try to approach
the fact that dreams only have a 'present indicative', thus leaving no a specific problem that is linked to the Freudian model of what, in
distance whatsoever between the expression of the wish and its fulfil- Chapter VII, is called the psychic apparatus.26 In the different versions
ment. Perh.ips it would be useful to pursue the analogy that Freud that he gives of this model, Freud slightly varies the position of the
establishes between the grammatical present ('my father dies') in letters at the right-hand end. Here is a two-dimensional version of the
comparison with the infinitive ('my father to die') and with the sub- diagram:
junctive ('that my father die').25
Vci
Pc ,......., Pa Cs
Let us note only this: if we accept the idea that the unconscious
is characterized by the disappearance of all the links of discourse, /
then the various 1!1odalities of enunciation (grammatical moods)
must also be absent. As such, the unconscious would always be in the
'present', which is to say always presenting its contents as fulfilled. II
wou~d hardly be forcing things to say that, by virtue of its thing-like f,gur,, n (I)
consistency, the unconscious is 'hallucinatory' in itself, except that tt
The advantage of this diagram is that it poses a problem: conscious-
24 !£di/or: The French idiom •· d" · "d to ness is found at both ends of the apparatus: on the left-hand side as
myself' but . Je me ISalS' means literally 'I was telling / sru
- can a1so mean '11 seemed to me']
25 Freud, "Notes Upon C f Obsess· . 318.
Cf. the discussio . a ~se ~ ional Neurosis" (1909d), SE 10, PP· 151- 26 For a more detailed elaboration see Prob/emnliques V: Le baquet: Tran..<eeuJa,ia du
L'nngoiss.• (Paris-~ of th1S ~•~t m _co~nection with "The Rat Man" in Prob/emntiq11esl:
· l'l'SSCS mvers1ta1res de France, 1980), pp. 273-80. tm11sferl. <Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 1987), PP· 34--83

72 73
 Dream and Co1111111111icatio11
Dream and Commm1icatio11

. rception (Pc) of the exterior world, and on the ri.,i;,

the consaous pe . . 6'"· This is a model. In spite of what he promises in the note, E'reud never
hand s1'de, unm
• ecliately after the censorship of the Preconscious (POii1, went on to develop it. Almost no one has noticed this 'rolling up'.
as the consciousness of internal processes. Y~t, for Freud, these lWQ Since January, 1972 (Problematiques, I: '1.:angoisse dans la topique")
types of consciousness are one, and both are_ linked to a perception. It and again in 1980, I have never stopped insisting on it.
is here that he introduces a note, composed m 1919: It is a model, and as such, one should not rush to apply it to a
single reality. It is richer and more polyvalent.
If we attempted to proceed further with this sche- It is not a model of a body, nor is it a model of a neuronal system,
matic picture, in which the systems are unrolled in nor even is it a model of a psychic apparatus (it lacks everything needed
linear succe§ion [Ed. linear aufgerollt], we should to make a psychology: emotions, affects, reasoning, etc.); nor again is it a
have to reckon with the fact that the system next model of the unconscious, for the latter constitutes only a part of it.
beyond the Pcs. [Ed. Preconscious] is the one to which This diagram can be depicted from above, which has the
consciousness must be ascribed-in other words, particular advantage of highlighting a crucial aspect, namely the tan-
that Pcpl = Cs [Ed. perception= consciousness].27 gency of two circuits. It is difficult to imagine that they are anything
other than language-like circuits.
In spite of appearances, this note is clear. It points out that the schema
of the tub is only linear because it has been unrolled. It needs to be
rolled back up again so that the two ends - i.e. the two modalities of
consciousness - coincide.

Flgu" 11 (2) figurt Ill (I e 2)

It should be noted that the idea of tangency corresponds exactly to

c.ul IOII
phrase" '/i,rear
La I h ,
011
f~
S
ero/lr n modified
, here, smce
' c--··
~;a~;;.d111~7.,1:tathaion beeofDreams,_op. cit., p. 541, n. 1. (Editor: This passage from the
5trachey translates Freud's "'"'.''..
as set out', thus erasing the metaphor of 'unrolling', which
the idea of marginality (the prefix neben), which Freud alwa~s uses to
.
designate the emergence of the sexua1 and/ or the unconsaous as a
p anc es reading restores and develops].
by-product (Nebenprodukt).

75
74
 Dn'fllll and Com1111111icatio11
Dream and Communication

Although this is a polyvalent n:'odel, it applies_first and foie.

nce of what one ought call, followmg Lacan ,L
most to the emerge . . , ""
, . f the unconscious'. Thus 1t 1s, among others things
'tom,:itions o ,a
model of the dream. But we must also ack:nowl~ge that the afferent
arrows of the external circuit could be reversed m a subtler manner
than the simple 'all or nothing' of deep slee~.
In relation to all of these formations, the external circuit
should be conceived of as the totality of the everyday, self-preserva. ~~r
tive messages. At the point of tangency the two circuits touch for an
~body
instant but the internal, sexual circuit begins to function on its own,
and it does 50 in reverse, in the opposite direction. The formations of Figure m (3)

the unconscious - dreams, parapraxes, etc. and without doubt analytK I naw retum to my question of the dream as communicntion, or as
sessio11s as well - do not constitute an 'other thing' that purely and sun- the embryo or initiator of communication. It is here that the phrase 'royal
ply excludes everyday discourse, but are rather something produced; road to the unconscious' must not lead us to confuse the two things:
something launched, so to speak, at the point of tangency and which the unconscious and the dream. To say that dreams have no com-
is marginalised and thus becomes autonomous. municative intention, as Freud sometimes says, may be putting it too
What is more, a paradox merges from this rolling back up d strongly. At a pinch the formula is only really valid for the uncon-
Freud's model. The previous model, unrolled in 'linear succession' scious, for the id itself. When, in 1923, Freud re-examines the question
was a model of closure, a black box functioning according to the in "Remarks on the Theory and Practice of Dream-Interpretation",
behaviourist principle of stimulus-response. With the rolling up sug- he is much less categorical. No doubt, he says, "the employment of
gested by Freud, the model that would appear to close up on itselli dreams in analysis is something very remote from their original pur-
paradoxically becomes a model of opening by means of the tangency pose"; but he willingly concedes that "within an analysis far more of
between the hvo circuits. the repressed is brought to light in connection with dreams than by
Returning again to what is called the experience of satisfac- any other method", which reflects "some motive power, some uncon-
tion and the criticisms we have brought to bear on it, one could show scious force." 28
that our model would be fully capable of depicting what I shall now That he attributes this force to suggestion is not satisfactory
call 'the experience of sed11ctio11'. The external circuit, the adult's enig- from our point of view; we are more comfortable when he invokes the
matic message, self-preservative but contaminated by the sexuaLis term transference. Once again we must understand the word!
inscribed at the point of contact and then subject to repression. Whal Do dreams obey a communicative aim during analysis?
we see here is the veritable 11eoge11esis of sexunlihJ in the child, which is Certainly. But however unprecedented, however inaugural the psy-
not the hatching out of something endogenous. In this version of the choanalytic situation may be, we cannot ignore the fact that it is
model, nothing prevents us from representing the body precisely at
the point of tangency. 28 op. cit., p. 117.

76 77
 c w11icatio11
Dream (1 1,d 011111 Dream and Communication

• other interpersonal situations. It

5 ome degree in enigma embodied by the analyst, why wouldn't the same be true for
prefigured to d enywhere dreams have contained a
·ed tl1at a/waysan ev ' dreams during an analysis? The diagram of tangency applies equall
be de~ ' nin . Assuredly, the dream does not speak ·
allocuhOnary_ope fung tioning even if it is forgotten. A multitudea1
well in each case: for the transference in the dream and for the tran:..
to anyone. It is fully c d th h 111 ference in the analysis. In both cases, it is the address of the analyst
. . bli · n But one cannot eny at t ere has alw.
dreams smk mto o VIO • , -;:11 _ real or supposed, but always enigmatic - that incites the transfer-
. mpuJsion to recount one s dreams, to open •~ ence and provokes the sort of libidinal neogenesis that is linked to it.
existed a certain co "-'!!II

up to others. fr ,
· agam· Ferenczi - wrote a short agment, 'To WL~ To give the primacy of the other its due as inherent in the con-
Ferencz1- " 1~
Does One Relate One's Dreams?", which is worth citing in its en~ stitution of our unconscious, I have sought to privilege the verbs and
the actions for which the subject of the verb is the other, as opposed to
We analysts know that one feels impelled to relate those mechanisms that originate in the subject. Thus, to the central
one's dreams to the very person to whom the con- term seduction, we can add that of provocation - or even inspiration
tent relates. Lessing seems to have had an inkling of (the other seduces, provokes, inspires, etc.). Today it occurs to me that
this, for he writes the following epigram: we might add to this list the notion of 1ooking for it' [chercher] in the
popular sense, as in the phrase, "Are you looking for trouble?" [''1i1
Alba mihi semper narrat sua somnia mane, me cherches?"].
Alba sibi dormit; somniat Alba mihi.29 ''He 'looks for it' from me and I find him:" a phrase in which
Picasso ("I don't seek, I find") meets Freud (his 'finding' of the object
But we have to go further, which is to say beyond the notion ofan (Objektfindung)) and even Pascal (who hears from the mouth of Christ
addressee who is a simple receiver astonished by a fantastic story. 'Ii ''You would not seek Me if you had not already found Me"). Thus,
poetic understanding of dreams, whether it be that of the German one could say that in certain circumstances the dream is looked for or
Romantics or the surrealists, far from satisfying us risks misleadq provoked by a potential interlocutor; and the dream in turn will in a
~ 5- ~e art of divination has always required the telling of dreamslr sense 'seek' unconscious desire.
,t to mterp~et, and it is difficult not to suppose that the soothsa~ Within the monument that is The Interpretation of Dreams,
and the enigma that he embodies, is the provoking element in some Chapter VII is a monumental work in its own right. In translating it,
dreams.30 step by step and with considerable difficulties, I learned once again
'Provocation by the analyst' is a phrase I once used apronn!I~ that Freud is not always, as he is often claimed to be, a great writer nor,
transference. If the tr i . r~ a fortiori, an author to be read on the train, but that he is a tremendous
ans erence m analysis is indeed provoked bylllli
thinker. I have, once again, sought to put him to work. But what a joy
29 [Tra11s.: "Alba always tell
by herself· but Alb d s me her dreams in the morning, / Alba sleeP, it is to discover, hidden away in a comer so to speak, the primary tool
Dream?", FurtherCo,aitr'bret~ms for me"]. 'To Whom does one Relate oli5 needed for such work. This three-line footnote on the rolling up of
1 11 ions op c't1
30 a. Alexander's d ' · ., P· 349.
the diagram gives us a kind of door or corridor that opens on another
Probltmnliques V op c1·re1am 2a1bout the taking of Tyre, and my commentary ~
1
• 'Ipp, 7-18,
Chapter VII, one which is virtual but no less powerful. This 'other'

78 79
 ....!.!!.,_

Dream and Comm1111icatio11

Dream and Communication

. h mirror image of the first. Rich with a thou!::>...,

Chapter VII IS not t e ........q ment with which we have long been familia•r,
if elaborates the consequences that flow from it ;,
developments, one . • • '" namely that the psychical apparatus must be con-
's first and ma1or discovery, even if the r.1;._
takes account of Freud . . ..._lJV. structed like a reflex apparatus. Reflex processes
ery itself gets repeatedly buried:_ th~ discovery of the pnma~ of the remain the model of every psychical function.Ji
. the constitution of the sexual unconsaous
message of th e otherm ·
On the face of it, this schema is supposed to represent a liv-
ing organism (alone and having no relation with others) immersed in
Postscript to "Should Chapter VII be Rewritten?" the material world. It receives stimuli (Pc = perception) and releases
motor responses (M). The schema of the reflex arc is characteristic of
To move further in the direction of 'rewriting Chapter VIl', this kind of functioning: it releases everything that it has received.
J should like to quote Freud's inaugural passage and indicate the I propose that what we actually have is an 'apparatus of
inflection that I give it the soul' - be it in man or in social animals (homeothenns) - that is
immersed not in a world of stimuli but a world of messages. It receives
Accordingly, we shall ascribe a sensory and a motor messages and must translate them, albeit at the risk of leaving some-
end to the apparatus. At the sensory end there lies thing untranslated. It is this schema that is rolled up on itself.
a system which receives perceptions; at the motor
end there lies another, which opens the gateway to
motor activity. Psychical processes advance in gen-
eral from the perceptual end to the motor end. Thus
the most general schematic picture of the psychical
apparatus may be represented as follows

Figuro 1

Pc M

....____...
This' however, does no more than fulfil a reqwre-
· 31 The Interpretation of Dreams, op. cit., PP· 537-38.
81
80
-- Co1mtercurrent

4
COUNTERCURRENT1

To go against the current of many things that are said and done
in the psychoanalytic movement - the movement taken in the most
inclusive sense, beyond any reference to psychoanalytic institutions.
First of all, however, it is necessary to clear up a misunderstanding: it
is not a question of advocating, in a nostalgic way, a simple return to
the Freud of 100 years ago. For Freud himself was against the current
of his own era, although he was, more than once, swept away by that
current without knowing it. To go against the current is thus to try to
rediscover the first and constant exigency at work in Freud, which is
in opposition to those aspects of his work I have sometimes called his
'goings astray' .2 We must try to restore this exigency - which contin-
ues in a more or less latent way to drive the practitioners of analysis
- as a live force in both theory and practice. This means that the neces-
sity for 'new foundations' remains always present.
It was not just in 1897, nor in 1900 but as late as 1923, that
Freud continued, like a 'conquistador', to assert the extraordinary

1 First published in, "Courants de la psychanalyse contemporaine", Reuue Fran{tlise

de psy~hanalyse, n° hors ~rie, 2001, pp. 299-309.
2 (Editor: l..aplanche's term here is fourooiement, which he elevates to the rank of
a methodological concept. See Jean I..aplanche, "Exigency and going astray",
Psychoanalysis, Culture a11d Society, vol. 11, 2006, pp. 185-89.)

82 83
 Countercurrenf Counterc11rren t

. this discovery that defines psycho:1n~,

. d. oven) It 1s ~IQly. at rapprochement, it has nothing at all to do with what the poets (the
character of his ,sc · apeutic and theoretical aspects are Onl:
. f 11I while the t1,er . () f y Romantics) or the philosophers (Schopenhauer) refer to by the same name.
sis first o a h Analysis 1s the name 1 o a procec111..
f
O 1·t· "Psyc o- ""t It is certainly true that the tendency to 'read' the conscious
consequences _ • f tal processes which are almost inacc=.,,,.1e
. tigation o men ._,m 'text' for a more deeply hidden intention - hermeneutic 'decoding',
forthemves ,. ( ) "of a method ... for the treatment of neurotic in a word - makes a reappearance in Freud himself: in the power-
2
in any other way' ' l · al inf ti
,, ,, f ollection of psycho ogic orma on ... gradu- ful return of symbolism, for example, as a collective system of keys
disorders ; (3) o a c . tifi d" . lin ,, 3
into a new saen c 1sc1p e . which allows an open book translation. It is as easy and as pointless to
lly being accumu1ated .
a . should1 by the way, serve as a notice to all thn... read sexual symbols everywhere as to read class struggle everywhere.
This passage -

. . th t currently define themselves in their own bylaws Then there's the fact that psychoanalysis invents its own keys: 'Oedi-
Assooations a . .
. f to the therapeutic aspect above all, subordinating their pus', 'castration', or Kleinian 'positions' - universal keys that are very
with re erence . , , .
tn1flrs to the vagaries of technical results and the disagreements often used a priori, before the subject has had a chance to say a word.
about psychopathology. . Further on we shall see what function to attribute to this ongo-
Neither, however, is psychoanalys1S a new theory to explain ing hermeneutic translation. Here it is enough to recall just how
old facts, already appropriately identified but just badly explained. distant it is from Freud's original discovery.
Freud's invention is thus the invention of a method; his dis-
coven; is the unconscious - real, separate, and not immanent within
The Object and its Point of Access the conscious. As to the method, it is essentially divided into two
components: the fundamental rule and the analytic situation. In the
Psychoanalysis is first of all an absolutely new exploratory encyclopedia article cited above which defines 'psychoanalysis', it is
procedure, which reveals a domain of being (the 'processes of the soul'} the 'rule' that comes first.
to which barely anything else gave access. Everything has been tried One has only to note the degree to which this fundamen-
subsequently to banalize the 'realism of the unconscious' - the name tal rule will be subsequently devalued or debased. Devalued by all
of this term incognita - by finding its precursors and equivalenlS. those who speak 'about' psychoanalysis. Thus Levi-Strauss lim-
Indeed - at least, this is our thesis- the radical novelty of the Freudian ited his knowledge of Freud to those texts that are most marked by
unconscious consists in the fact that it does not bring a supplemen- 'symbolism'.
tary meaning to our conscious universe; it is not a new meaning that It is also debased by a large number of clinicians. The~ barely
could be read within phenomena that are already known. It is not a mention it at the beginning of the treatment, instead talcing ~or
code and still less a new theory. It reveals itself through the [aultlintS granted the 'free speaking' that has found acceptance in our sooo-
of consciousness, as another domain of being.4 In spite of all attempts logical climate and which constitutes the common denominator of all
the psychotherapies. How, after all, is this any different from 'confes-
3 " fwo Encyclopaedia Articles" 0923a) SE 18 235
4 Th .15 hin ' ' P· sion' understood in its largest sense? How is it different from lhe free
u ere not _g unusual in the fact that a new instrument should not only ~pest
C~. ~; ::;ations bu~ also new realities that had not previously been ~ speaking of Alcoholics Anonymous groups or from 'd eb n•efings' after
th
intense hu~' ~ m'.croscope, etc. For the human being, however, there 15 serious accidents?
on in d1SCovenng something radically other within hunseif•
85
84
 Coimterc11rre11t
Co1mterc11rrent

Yet, it is barely a paradox to say that the rule relating to 'freely

coherence is achieved primarily by means of a putting into narrative;
occurring ideas' (freie Einfiille) is completely contr~?' to the notion
it corresponds to a temporalization, which is usually incomplete, and
, akin freely'. For we must add to the latter IDJUnction: 'Wilh-
of spe g , . h . is carried out according to registers that may well be poorly integrated
out omitting anything that occurs to you : prern:e1~ w at 15 on the
with one another. Here 'treating' assumes the complex meaning that it
margins of th.is 'confidential' ~course, as its scona, i~ ~ - To /OTrl
has in French: not only in the therapeutic sense but in the 'treatment'
oneself not to omit what seems irrelevant - whether trivzal or meaning-
or processing of a text (breaking it down into its primary elements), or
less (the unbound), or inappropriate and uncomfortable to say (the sexuaJ
again, in the language of war, attacking and putting out of operation
and/or aggressive) - in fact goes, very exactly, against the current ci selected targets.
all confidential discourse, even the freest. W/10 treats? No one treats anyone but himself, at least on the
At the same time, the notion of resistance in the treatment psychic level. It is the human being who treats and is treated, thereby
disappears along with the fundamental rule. But as Freud forc:efully constituting himself as that always more or less precarious unity that
emphasizes, resistance is bound up with any such discourse that is we call 'me' or 'subject'. It would seem at first glance that what the
only apparently 'unrestricted'. Yet it is the latter that will henceforth human being has to treat are his unconscious drives, which are sexual
be legitimated in common practice by being presented in a continu- in the broad sense of the term (sexual death drives and sexual life
ous and coherent manner, with all its edges smoothed. drives). It should also be fully recognized that Freudianism enables
In the same way, it is easy to see that the analysis of the dream is us to go beyond the Platonic image of the spirit taming the passions
very often abandoned in favor of its synthesis, its narrative, its second- of the bcxiy (taking the latter in the biological sense).
ary revision; defensive and 'anagogic' features according to Freud, Here, the general theory of seduction provides a hypothesis
but here pompously adorned with the label and with all the virtues that at the very least deserves to be examined: what from the begin-
of 'symbolization'. ning is 'to be bound', 'to be translated', does not come from the depths
of an innate id but from the other human, the adult, in the essential
asymmetry of our first months. The first attempts at 'treatment'_are
The Therapeutic Dimension made in order to respond to the enigmatic mes.sages (compromised
by sexuality) coming from the adult other. The partial failure of th~
The debate about the relationship between psychoanalysis attempts at translation - by which the ego constitutes itself ~d begins
and psychotherapy has become banal and trifling, to the point what to represent itself within a narrative - entails the exclusion of x:ea1
it is sometimes reduced to matters which, however important lill!f elements, which then become the internal sources of sexual exo~-
may be, are essentially secondary: the number and length of sessianSr tion against which the ego must continue to defend itself. The ~us
-l,..~~ "' by offering the subject
whether the patient sits or lies down, etc. The debate must begin ata provides continual assistance for th.is d1:1e1=
. rtain sense psychotherapy
~eeper l;vel- that is to say, at the metapsychological level: what dOES rules, myths ideologies and ideals. In a ce ' d
' . d thing but take up an
it mean to treat'? And who is it that does the treating? (all psychotherapies, and at all tunes) oes no .
. din . Its effort is at once
, W~ _maintain that to treat means, essentially, to confront ~ systematize this imperious movement of bm g. . d
d . of the dnves an to
unbound m order to give it a form, a meaning, a coherence. 'JbiS to help 'contain' the most destructive ten enoes
87
86
 ,....

Coimterc11rre11t Countercurrent

.b h·on towards giving them a meaning. 'This is some. of professional hypocrisy (Ferenczi). Some have invoked the partici-
make a contn uth rapy has never been sl,ort of narrati"ve schemas,
pant-observer situation in o~der to point out immediately that, in the
thing for which e d f J . . .
L:-"~
0
f shamanistic treatments an o ungtan mdoctrina. case of an inter-human relation, the observer has no privileged posi-
one
. tiw""' . . li • us echoes but also of the schemas d'1Scoverec1 or
hon with its re gto ' . . . tion when it comes to highlighting what, in the patient's statements,
nalysis and mstnmrentalrzed as scenanos for a arises from a projection and what arises from a realistic perception.
renewed bY psychoa
renewed symbolisation: 'castration', 'the murder of the father', 'the With this critique (which is true as far as it goes) the door was thrown
overcoming of the depressive position'• wide open to what has since become a kind of refrain at conferences:
Why, then, would psychoanalysis itself not be just one more the so-called 'transference-countertransference dynamic'.
form of psychotherapy among others? We can only fully understand the inspired invention of the
But does it really have the same status as the others? This is analytic situation, however, if it is coupled with a conception of the
the essential question. 'fundamental anthropological situation' (adult-infans) as originary
When Freud opposes the idea of providing the patient with asymmetry, whose other name is 'seduction'.
a psychosynthesis, he does not do so out of stubbornness or dogma- Only infantile asymmetry can explain and justify the 'intoler-
tism. He merely affirms that the human being, 'the patient', aims at able' asymmetry of analysis. 'Neutrality' is not primarily a refusal to
nothing other than synthesis. The entire specificity of psychoanalysis give the other (the patient) help, advice, knowledge, etc. It can only be
consists precisely in the movement against this current, in the move- maintained by what must be called a 'refusal'5 internal to the analyst
ment of analysis - which is to say, the 'dissolution' of syntheses that an apprehension, perhaps, of his own unconscious mechanisms, but
have previously been accepted by the subject. most importantly a sense of his limitations and a respect for the other
In this respect, we must not be afraid of proposing the idea within himseU. This involves a relinquishing of any aim to master or
that every synthesis, every attempt by the subject to represent him· fashion the other, of a poi"esis or making over.
self within a narrative or a story, is defensive. Which certainly does Transference,6 if we want to preserve for it an analytic speci-
not mean that we must take the 'anarchy of the drives' as our goal ficity, can only be conceived within the framework of this situation,
- something that would, in any case, be impossible, strictly speaking, which fundamentally returns the subject as closely as possible to the
even unthinkable. Some syntheses are better than others: that is to enigmas that were presented to him in his childhood. Beyond the
say, they are more inclusive, better able to integrate the repressed-But enigmas of the internal other (the unconscious), it is the 'treatment' of
we shouldn't fool ourselves: even in the most harmonious life, there
~ll always be something of the repressed, of the unconscious, 0£ that 5 (Editor: 'Refusement' - this is a neologism invented by Laplanche to ~I.ate
mtemal 'other' th at is the residue of the external other. Freud's Versagung, which Strachey translates as 'frustration' in the Sta ndard Edrlron;
Where ''-· · facti.on, '-",.,,menl
uustration' refers to the lack of an external object of satis
This is the moment to call upon the other aspect of •Freud's ••,-
'methodologi·cal' inve ti f . . • us: refers to a subject who refuses a desired object or mode of satisfaction, often to
. n on or gammg access to the unconso0
~ong~ide the fundamental rule is the establishment of the analytie
himself. Here Laplanche applies the term to the analyst, whose refusal to advise 0 l
:ntro_l the analysand or to know in advance the significance of ~ symptoms ai"
s1tuat10n It is a situati lf --~
. · . ° f d"
on ra 1cal asymmetry that has lent itse 31"'
still lends itself to all sorts of • d . pckell
haviour is sustained by a similar refusal with regard to his own mtemal other.uld
Glf one wants to avoid the aporias masterfully described by Lagache: -~ow co ?
ffilSun erstandmgs. Some have s any human act otherwise than in conformity with his history, his dispositions, etc

88 89
 Cou11terc11rrent CounttTrurmrl

the~·gmas of the external other (the adults-- the parents) that'• 10 retran5-1.lt-e the Greek text B into a uitm t t C, and then C into c1
the most favorable cases, a work in progress.' French te"\t D, is ~ecessaril}'. to acrum~te repression upon reprts-
Thus, even if it inevitably slips back into the ruts of the ~ SJOfl. The same thing occurs tn the drattmg rurr, unl it attempts to
cure (the chatting cure) that characterize every form of psycnc1tt1er... undo te,t , and even text B, on the assumption that bt>hind the latter
one can recognize the degree to which the psychotherapy 111
1111
· . _ then> a first message A (Aramaic), which reveals itself in ~ fault·
to analysis takes on a new form when it is able to include witbiaa trne,, the mrongruih and the incoherences of B.
'narrativity' some fragment of otherness unearthed by the 1lu:, moJel is insufficient in relation to whi,t happens with
Without ever forgetting, however, that every new synthesis, 1~ ·htld, m that for the child the first messages are try lhro ru1turr
flexible it may be, remains defensive nonetheles.s.5 tnhahited b~ othan ' - not the alterity lfUlt)reflt in the signifier as
Since I have proposed a 'translational' theory of n>ni'PC:'ci.- llll ~1:5tuldtt.>J by Lacan, but the concrete otherness of the sexual uncon•
me quickly take up that model here.9 Every translation is the ~,._,us l tht> other. ertamly tlus model LS 1mperl«t, AS llN' all models;
tion of a message, which necessarily lets some sroria or ~ but It J ll\i.U .t' le.i.r that ev.!ry rutrrJ tiVWltion of ou:r own history lS
nuances, 'drop out'. All the more so if the uutial message · not \ JI\ShtuteJ " d dd l!nse, anJ that each une lean s out and alwa w1U
parent to itself, that is to say if it is marked by the llllronSCIOU:S ~ \ out -.um'"'thtnA uf the otl°"'r.
sender. On the other hand, I have also Likened the ut;.rt·
within a history, his constitution wittun a narrative orm. to the
tion of received originary messages (translation - mastery- tlsbM!ill The Throrrtu:al D1mn1SJOr1
If A is the first message - for ~mple, the !ew lliSII-.
supposedly composed in Aramaic (but we do not h.,-e The topic proposed for this series of rontnbubo.ns to the RnM
text) - B would be the Greek translation. the only one that 11n aist de p:,--ychanalyse sets out, in just a few Imes, a di.agnom that is
ars have. From A to B, some of the origlna.l sigrufie,'s hlff indisputable: the generalized fragmentation, thf JUXiaposmg of poinb
part, 'allowed to drop out' f r lack ol an adequate equinlenL of view, the absence of referenres to other autbots or contnbutions,
the selective citation - poorly understood, poorly mtegrared, purely
7 Let us llll-rely mention that ii psychoan,.m , r,, ~ ~ _ . . eclectic - of those authors whom one 'must' mention. The immenSe
human condition' (Favl'ffll) thtn the comp!,tte a.bohDon at tbt • • congresses where each participant only warts to sing his theme song
COI\SlStffit wtth this aun. during the ten or twenty minutes that ht- is allocated. The supposro
81do not fttl manyw-.iyobllged IO ......_._~the ............,,........._ tbrnll!:_..
or rather of the ....~ --0"- t"',.........-....., ~ 'roundtables' during which no one engages anyone else Ill dialogue,
How r,"......._ plrt th.tt ~ m0ft Of · ~~-e m IIIOii - -
A- can 01'1«' ~peak Of ~ . m lhe prtCtii'i defiD,ed by • and which are a sort oi ragbag of surplus interventions, in tht- p.tst, thf
V\5 psyduc ~ u, wluch ~ tht unalft!iOOUSKam _,.•- Ptlmals were not themati ally organised but did soml"bl'neS publish
happnw..i, Wluch dot"S not D'lan th.it ~ ..__._ '-L,.._,,l .a.- -
frompsycho,u1.1~cannot i..,.. --- ,...,..~~ - - ; an article worth trunking about; to<hy the journals are suppoc;ed)y
9a
228-29 n:as n.n.-:_,.,
•1.a ~
--~,-m crr:ue Other ~ pemc
Li Pn.,-:w ii, r NtJr !PM'1S. Fb:l!Clilnia thematic but they lad, any oord1nation, ept the 'headlngs' that a
TnmslatlOrl, ~~~ :!_~~-mlan ._. . .,.__.~, talented eJitor-in-chief can artifioally introdu . Evm the best JOUC'-
COM-mrorary Ans, londa,, Jl:)Q".' pp 21]; J.uttn 5t.l.Nan (Lurldon nab are not exempt from th.is.

90
 Co1mterc11rrc11t Cou,rtercurrent

It really does seem as though we are reduced to the noliO!l theory has been poorly defined in terms of its specificity and has itself
that "Everything has been said ... since there have been men Who been bundled up with the numerous models by means of which the
have been thinking." 10 Would Freud's audacious claim- to say SOlllt- human being represents itself metaphorically: it is here that the spon-
tJ,i11g different - be at least accepted by those who claim to refer to him? taneous hermeneutics of the human being offers a helping hand to
One might well doubt it when one sees the 'psychoanalytic' invoked postmodemism and epistemological relativism.
to justify the 'anything goes' that is called postmodernism. 'Allude to So, we propose rigorously to distinguish between two fields:
the topic in passing' is the only rule. 11 1) That of myths, narrative schemas, frameworks for symbol-
"Neither laugh, nor weep, but understand". 12 Let us propose ization and narration, some but not all of which were 'discovered' by
a path towards an understanding of this state of things. We maintaift psychoanalysis: e.g. the Oedipus. It makes no sense to describe such
that the human being is an interpreter by nature: the only originary schemas as being true or false. This doesn't mean (quite the contrary)
hermeneut; a hermeneut by virtue of his condition, according to that they should be considered as a priori axioms or that they cannot
Heidegger. From the very beginning, an interpreter of the enigmatic be studied - studied as to their genesis, their greater or lesser capacity
messages of the human adult other: this is what we propose,with the to symbolize, as to what constitutes their core (e.g. does 'thirdness'
general theory of seduction. explain the power of the Oedipus?), or, finally, as to their 'universal-
The codes he employs to understand these messages do rot ity'. Concerning this last point: on the eve of the appearance of cloned
come from nowhere; they are themselves supplied by the social univme. human beings, is it reasonable to continue to hang the Oedipus on
It is a fact of modern culture that these codes (or ideologies) circulate, biological parenthood13 or on the equation mother= nature, father=
become universal, and wear themselves out more and more quickly. culture and spirituality?14
Psychoanalysis, for its part, has provided two things: on the 2) Pst;choanalytic theory. This is metapsychology; even if it is
one hand, a strict method and a strict theory, which are not easily necessarily articulated with psychology, it makes no claim to encom-
understood and not particularly inviting; on the other, interpretive pass or to conquer it. The extension of 'psychoanalytic psychology'
schemas that it rediscovered within the human being, and which it is one of the grave errors of our era, the cost of which has been the
~m~eled as supposedly universal myths (universal keys). It was 'cognitivist' reaction.
mevi~ble that this second aspect was the only one retained and given Meta psychology is not the theory of clinical work. It is the the-
prominence, not only by public opinion but by psychoanalytic think· ory of the human being insofar as he is affected by an unconscious.
ers themselves (by eve
ryone) • w·1thout this clear distinction, analytic. A theory, therefore, of the unconscious, of its nature, its genesis, its
returns, its effects etc. As such it is fundamentally a theory of repres-
10 [Trans.: "Everythin has been . sion, of its failures and even its absences (which thus opens onto the
too late - seven thous!id
- to say anything that ~~rs :ce ~re
~id, and we come more than seven thousand ~
th have been men who have been thinkill&
!'esprit", Les Caractcres (Paris-°~a n ~1d already". La Bruyere, "Des ouvrages de
theory of psychosis).

11 "My paradigm is as vard· mmanon, 1965), p. 82.J

13 Freud contented himself with saying to those who denied the Oedipus.· ''Don't
from the mouth of a 'La I _as rours; st0P being intolerant!" A phrase of this type
statement, ii one considers~:n . ~unded one day across a congress: a curious you have a father and a mother?" · h
14 As I recall, the reason for this was pater semper i11certus: it_is a!ways un~rtam ;, 0
12 [Tra11s.: A paraphrase f SCJentific pretensions of 'the matheme'.
o a statement by Spinoza). lhe father is. In this age of genetics, who would dare to mamtam the Latin adag ·

92 93
 Co1111terc11rre11t
Co1111terc11rre11t

One of the major tasks of metapsychology must be to prove ifs these suicides, why don't you cure them? And if you can't, please
capacity to account for the f1J11ctio11 of ~1ytlzs and th~fore of h~ leave the premises irnmediately!' 5
neutics, as much within the human bemg as such as m the e.fh.icts~
psychotherapy.
A theory that explicitly aims to account for hermeneutic, can- Freudian rationalism
not itself be a henneneutics! It must aim at rationality, that is to say,ai
articulating truths and refuting errors. In our view, Freudian rationalism is marked by the mis.sed
Rationality within psychoanalysis, such as Freud practkedt encounter between Freud and Popper. ln his critique of psychoanaly-
throughout his work. has nothing to learn from the sciences of phys.- sis, Popper superficially retains only the most ideological aspects of
cal nature. The ideal of mathematisation is in any case a trap, as~ it, such as were being propagated at the time by Adler and Jw1g. It is
that of experimental reprcxiudbility: how many of the physical sci- precisely those aspects that I have placed Wlder the heading of myth
ences are situated explicitly outside of these two criteria? As for the and hermeneutics. Popper was scarcely informed about the real com-
appeal to statistics, the latter has never been anything but a poor n» plexity of psychoanalysis, and was scarcely aware of the profound
lion of rationality. discussions that Freud conducted, most often by taking himseH as a
It is here that psychoanalytic rationality must try tom demanding and contrarian interlocutor.
itself of the vulgar pragmatism that infests it at the present moment. We are not unaware of the criticisms and modifications that
Besides, the expression 'truth is what works' is not univocal but bas have been made to 'Popperism', and which have forced the abandon-
at least h,•o meanings: (1) what succeeds as 'cure', which implies ment of the model of abrupt transformation in science, the model of
a utilitarian definition of practice and a reduction of theory to the localized 'falsifications' leading to complete upheavals. Nevertheless,
~ of_a recipe; (2) what succeeds as explanation, which implies the T11e Logic of Scientific Discauery16 remains an important moment in
dimension of truth, of success- at least provisionally- at the level d epistemological thought, and one that is not bound to a particular
thou~t In a word, the theory of gravitation does not work beanlst ii type of scientific reasoning, nor, as a result, to the sciences of physical
~ e s metbods for constructing bridges. It is verified just as Jilll(D nature alone. The basic idea is that scientific models are never derived
by bridges ~t fall down as by bridges that stay up. on the basis of arduous induction - which could never prove any-
chotheraBut it_must be said that at many psychoanalytic and/or~ thing absolutely - but are rather invented, so as to account in the best
peutic conferences th da . . .i.-
does it he! ">'' 1 . ese ys, the only question is: JJUT'
of failure top. t becomes inconceivable that Freud's own ronf'(!S.50l 15 In place of these two criteria - of success in 'modifying' na~ and su~ in
cure the psychoses •gh _=-..-hl11
of a success in und . nu t be coupled with the an.uu...~ providing rational explanations - a certain sociologi~g epiStemOIDSJ'. . as
sought to substitute a third: success in rallying the pohcy makers ~ ~
• erstanding them! As far as the physical sciences axe
rnn,..,,....,.,.1
-~•-=ucu, our lDlpoteJlce.
15
~ grants. One could ask which of these three criteria our ep!S:': 1heir
theones would wish to have applied to themsell/tS. Have they re:ioun ' that .
but as to human confirmed by a great number of cases;
0
~ domain, the question of what is true and what is false? ls 11 lhe case in
with just a nudge:: ~ne d~'t admit that it cannot be ~ged
epistemology, as elsewhere, anythi11g goes? R utled e
nght direction: these criminals, these znania(S, l6 Kari Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London and New York: 0 g'
2002 (orig. 1935)).
94 95
 Co1mtercurrent Countercurrent

Possible way for the facts that have been iden~ed s~ far._ . The rationality of psychoanalysis has always been open to
These models are henceforth put at nsk of falsification' or, multiple sorts of arguments, drawn from the most varied domains.
more generally, refutation. A model that cannot, on any point, be con. One has only to read any ordinary text by Freud to see that he never
fronted by a refutation is precisely of the order of myth, not of science, limits himself to the dosed universe of the analytic relation, in order
'Nature never says 'yes'; it only expresses itself with 'no': this lilaxiJn 10 define a sacrosanct domain of the 'psychoanalytic' from which
was already adopted by Freud, both in his search for the 'negative those who are not in the inner circle are permanently excluded.is In
case' that would show the absence of the sexual factor and in his Bei;ond the Pleasure Principle Freud just as easily evokes biological
famous discussion of"ACase of Paranoia Running Counter to the Psy- experiments and biological theories as child observation, cosmologi-
choanalytic Theory of the Disease".17 cal speculation, etc. How, in the era of genetics, can we continue to
To maintain a minimal positivism is, in my view, to maintain speak in the same way as before of 'phylogenesis'?
three requirements:
1) To agree on the terms used and be ready to change them The argument proposed by this issue of the Revue has not
if they lead to persistent ambiguity. For instance, what purpose does managed to escape the following contradiction: it denounces, with
it serve to debate 'metaphor' and 'metonymy', when the meaning of great pertinence, the simultaneous fragmentation and lack of com-
these terms is extremely varied from Quintillian to Du Marsais, through munication that reign in the analytic milieu. At the same time, it can
to Fontanier, Jakobson, Lacan, Rosolato and Hock. I fully realize that only propose a juxtaposition of contributions: 'featured side by side
this demand, like others, runs counter to the current tendency to deify but assembled into a single space of writing'.
language and its infinite polysemy (or should we say 'poetry'?). However, we shall have to go much further if psychoanalysis
2) To be capable of saying which domain of 'facts' co~ is not to become a corpse. There is an urgent need to restore debate
sponds to the theory one is propounding. Where in experience can among those who want to debate. It is time for texts and theses to
one find points of contact with the theory? Take, for example, 'the reply to each other, and with a rigour that does not exclude tolerance;
pa!emal metaphor'. In what circumstances of life, in what peried of rigour with respect to ideas, tolerance with respect to others. Do we
childhood, at what moment in the treatment, etc. can one identify its not all too often see the opposite: a laxity of thinking, but bitter and
effects? In what domain of experience is it to be found: verbal Ian· narcissistic polemic vis-a-vis individuals?
guage, meanings, affects, actions?
. ~) To be able at least to imagine circumstances (of fact or rea·
sorung) m which what one affirms could be called into question. This
does not entail any rigid application of the notion of falsification. 'f,he
1
etter of the equinox' (21 September 1897) clearly shows the flexibility
and the variety of the bundle of No's with which Freud objects to hiS
own theory of seduction.
18 A universe that is often combined with another bias, that of skepticism and of
17 (19151), SE 14, pp. 263-2n. J>Ostmodem montage.

96 97
 The Fundamental Anthropological Sihiation

5
STARTING FROM THE
FUNDAMENTAL ANTHROPOLOGICAL SITUATION1

My "starting from" refers to a real point of departure, which

underscores the term fundamental anthropology. This does not mean
that as psychoanalysts we take it as our starting point. We start out
from an experience. This experience is the raHo cognoscendi, a way of
gaining access to knowledge, whereas the fundamental anthropologi-
cal situation might be considered - if you'll pardon the somewhat
pedantic term - to be the raHo essendi. lt is a conjecture to be confirmed,
and possibly to be falsified; it is inferred from our particular paths
of approach, which does not imply that it cannot be corroborated by
experience. It is a historical conjecture, to be situated within the his-
tory of the individual, of any individual we call 'human'.
The theory of seduction is not a metaphysical hypothesis.
Throughout the length of its trajectory in Freud, it is supported by
facts of observation. Nevertheless, I shall quickly come to the ratio
cognoscendi, which is to say, to our path of approach in psychoanaly-
sis: the analytic experience, the Freudian experience as the experience

1 Lecture delivered at the Societe Psychanalytique de Paris on 5ei:>t~ 2?,

2002. The discussant was Andre Green. FIJSt published in Pensu /es /,mites. Ecnts
e11 l'Jionneur d'A,uJre Green, ed. Cesar Botella, Champs psychanalytiques series
(Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestle, 2002).

98 99
 / Antliropological Sit11ation The Fundamental Anthropological Situation
The F1111dament/1

. . d also to the double register that this experiPI\,,. hose consequences we have yet to draw out. However, I think that
0
f radical altenty, an ' . .. . . ~"'
a' . ce of the unconscious and the expenence/in11n. ;e first theory of seduction, the Freudian theory, was perhaps the best
im lies· the expenen . •cy
P · ti· situation which is to say the expenence/invenfu... suited theory possible (given the means Freud had at his disposal) for
1
tionof theana Y c ' ~
·ving an account of this double alterity. There was an extraordinary
of the treatment. . .
The experience of the unconsoous m dreams and sym~ !njunction of the alterity described in the situation of seduction and
2
underlines its alien-ness [etrnngereteJ. Our experience of the drean, ~ this double alterity of the experience of the unconscious within us and
never exhausted. From this emerges a sort of negative metapsy~ the experience of the analytic situation. Freud's stroke of genius is to
ogy of the unconscious (negative in the ~nse of nega~ve theology): the trace back the alteri ty of the unconscious and the alterity of the transfer-
absence of time, of coordination, of negation - all attributes which, ina ence to the alterity of the originary situation of seduction. This alterity
word, show the difficulty we have in grasping the unconscious•in itself. is a radical asymmetry. With the philosophers, we remain stuck in the
The unconscious is explained, however, by the theory of repression- adult-adult relation, the adult other being faced by another adult; and
which is itself 'alien', since within that theory, if one reads Freud's texts in phenomenology, as we know, within this adult-adult situation, the
carefully, the downward movement of repression does not follow the one is supposed to be 'reduced', as in the technical sense of the term
same paths by which the repres.5ed returns. Repression is a los.s, which in phenomenology, by the constitution of the other. In the post-phe-
will never be compensated by a complete return. It used to be said nomenology of the Levinasian type, the other is indeed irreducible in
that communism was a journey without a return ticket. Well, repres- the face-to-face relation. But Levinas does not take account of what
sion is something a little like that - a journey without a return ticket. produces the irreducible, that is to say, the unconscious, the sexual
The unconscious is not an 'ancient consciousness'; it is not a memory unconscious, the infantile sexual unconscious.
that one could hope to recover completely. The unconscious is some- What makes for the irreducible? What is Freud's hypothesis
thing that has dropped out of conscious experience, that has escapro about seduction? It is the hypothesis of the adult-i11ftms asymmetry-
the domain of ordered memories. The unconscious is not a memory,as the asymmetry which we find in major texts such as "The Aetiology of
5
Freud's earliest tenns clearly indicate: it is a 'reminiscence'3, which ~ Hysteria",4 and, much later, in the well known paper by Ferenczi. It is
something completely different from a memory. the asymmetry between what the latter calls two types of language.
. . The alterity of the analytic situation is Freud's extraordinaIY The theory of seduction is the hypothesis best suited to the discovery
mvention - an asymmetry whose raisons d'etre and the full extent rl of the irreducible unconscious. I have tried to say in what respects
it was, in Freud, a restricted theory, a restricted theory of seduction.
2 ITra11s. l.aplanche's noun et ere . . ..JU Restricted because it limited itself to the domain of psychopathol-
'strangeness' -but 'stran em ~ng te IS a neologism in French, not etran~• • ogy; to use an instant formula: 'neurotic daughter, perverse father'.
substantive by preserving th;s5 · Our ~yph~na~ed term seeks to capture this abstrad
than 'strange' or 'ali , g . CO~ection with stranger' and 'alien' as nouns ra~ Freud lacks various elements, which he would have needed in order
3I . en as adjectives I
EJl1tor: 'The return to . d ..
an influence more or less":ic of ~ unage that is not recognized as a melJ\OIY ··· 4 0896c) SE 3, pp. 189-221.
affective tonality domina t " onsoous ... a vague, imprecise memory, where tit 5 "Confusion of Tongues between Adult and the Child: The Language of
~ e the English term 'rees .'~ Nortv;'1u Petit Robert (Paris: le Robert,2010),p.21~ Tendemess and of Passion",
. eel · Julia Borossa
in Sandor Fem1cz1:• SelL>cted ,., ··
nntmgs,
it has become virtual] ll'IIIllscence has kept the emphasis on emotiona!ito~
y synonymous with conscious memory.). (Hannondsworth: Penguin Books, 1999), pp. 293-J0.3.

100
 l Ant/1to/JOlt>~iml Sit11ntio11 The F1111dnme11tal Antliropologicnl Sit11ation
Tire F1111 damt', 1/a •

. cit ins tead of ab:mdo ning it, as he did;,. ii... theory of the driv~, and which I nonetheless strive to put back on the
to refo.nn and genera 11.Z , .., ~
c,.ptl!mber 1 897. Wha t he lacks, beyond the n da although m a greatly expanded way. Self-preservation now
famous letter of 21 = .
f psvchopr,thological perversion, is the no tio n of polymorphoUs
011,,_
"\Ill agen ,, .
has made a return with the notion ~f attachment, together with all the
0
• . h ,, he will describe in the Three Essays w hich W developments and a ll the observations around this theme. Very early
perversity sue " . . ere
·•hll he locks is the notion of early commurucation 11.. on_ perhaps immedia tely - a dialogue, an adult-infnns commuruca-
tO fOllOW; h • I u" . develops upon a manifestly genetic and instinctual foundation .
notion of the mes.sage; what he lacks, a lthough he had, nevertheless, ~~

sk~tched it out more tha n once, is a fully theorized notion of l'eptes- The old theory of symbiosis (a s tate from which one is supposed to
sion as being related to translation. What I a m emphasizing today, exit _ who knows how?) vanishes thanks to the observation of early
however. is something else aga in. Seduction is not a relation that is relations which are organized, differentiated and immectiately recip-
contingent, pathological (even though it can be) and episodic. It is rocal, and in which the 'not-me' is distinguished at the outset from
grounded in a situation from which no human being is exempt: the 'me-possessions'. But what is lacking, both in attachment theory and
'fundam ental anthropological situation', as I call it. Th.is fundamental attachment observation, is a consideration of the asymmetry on the
anthropological situation is the adult-infa11s relation. It consists of the unconscious level. Wha t is lacking in all the observations, among
adult, who has an unconscious such as psychoanalysis has revealed even the best observers, is an insistence on the fact that the adult-
it, i.e. a sexual unconscious that is essentially made up of infantile infans dialogue, as reciprocal as it may be, is nevertheless parasited by
residues, an unconscious that is perverse in the sense d efined in the something else, from the beginning. One does sometimes encounter
Tlirt'~ Essays; and the infant, who is not equipped with any genetic an allusion to this - I am thinking of observers such as Roiphe and
sexual organisation or any hormonal activators of sexuality. The idea Galenson, for example, or even Martin Domes7 - but it is little more
of an endogenous infantile sexuality has been profoundly criticized, than a clue. The adult message is scrambled. On the side of the adult,
and not only by me: I refer you to one of the best aitiques that could and in a unilateral direction, there is the intervention of the uncon-
be made, that by Gerard Mendel.6 The major danger, of course, is scious. I would even say 'of the infantile unconscious of the adult',
moving from a critique of endogenous infantile sexuality to a denial of insofar as the adult-iufans situation is a situation that .reactivates those
infantile sexuality as such. As we know, infantile sexuality is what is unconscious infantile drives.
most easily denied and Freud even made this point one of its charac- To give things some emphasis, I would say the following: why
teristics: the fact that the adult does not want to see it. Might this be speak of the adult and the 'fundamental anthropological situation'?
because it derives from the adult himself? Why not speak of the fundamental familial situation, or even Oedipal
How can the contributions of the modem psychology of lht situation? Because in its generality, in its universality, the adult-infims
first years of life be situated in relation to this notion? There is indeed relation seem s to m e to go beyond the relation between parents and
a great deal to be added here thanks to recent observation. There is child. The fundamental anthropological situation can exist between a
the c~nsiderable d evelopment of what Freud formerly called self-prts· child without a family and an entirely non-familial rearing environ-
eruat,on - something which, incidentally, he forgot about in his second
7 ~artin Domes, PsycJranalyse et psychol"8it du premierr 4ge (Paris: Presses
6 Gerard Mendel, LA psycha11alyse revisilt'e (Paris: L.1 Dtkouverte, 1988). Uruversitaires d e France, 2002).

102 103
 Tile Fuud11111c11t11I A11tl1ropologic11I Situation Tile Fundamental Anthropological Sit11ation

ment. A long time ago I planned a small volume, which was to have neuro-biological corporeal correlate. When Freud abandons the the-
been titled, A Clone 011 the Coucli. A clone, emerging from some labora. of seduction in the famous letter, he does not say: "I am returning
tory in the Far East, goes successively to see several specialists who ory · I", bu t "I am return.in
to the biologica ' g to the innate,
. to the hereditary".
·
treat him as a 'crime against humanity' incarnate. He then visits Pro- 1can give the exact wording of this little text: "with [the abandon-
fessor Freud who says (and this is something Freud actually wrote): ment of the seduction theory] the factor of an hereditary disposition
''You claim not to have an Oedipus complex; but don't you have a regains a sphere of influence from which I had made it my task to dis-
father and a mother?" Yet this clone is a human being who can be lodge it - in the interest of illuminating neurosis."8 At no point does
put on the couch, because he has no more escaped the fundamental he say: "the biological factor regains its sphere of influence", for there
anthropological situation than has anyone else. For the adult-injilns is nothing whatsoever for it to regain. The biological is always pres-
relationship is simultaneously one of attachment and unilateral sexu- ent as the other side of the psychological. This resurgence of heredity
ality, and is characteristic of all human rearing, including the rearing announced by Freud, the return of the hereditary factor, covers the
of a clone. This may all have been a fantasy; but who knows, it could entire history of Freudianism and through several stages, of which I
happen one day! - though don't suppose that I want it to! shall mention only three: the 'primal fantasies', Totem and Taboo (1913),
In this fundamental anthropological situation the important and Moses and Monotheism (1939).
terms are 'communication' and 'message' - together with the follow- To return to the biological, this factor may be acquired as
ing idea, on which I want to insist: I am not speaking of an unconscious well as innate. Thus, as regards infantile sexuality, it is the primacy of
message; for me every message is a message produced on the con- heredity that I oppose. I say sexuality and infantile, by which I mean
scious-preconscious level. When I speak of the enigmatic message, I that there is certainly something innate in what is not sexual, and also
am speaking of a message compromised by the unconscious. There something innate in the sexuality that is not infantile. To my mind
is never an unconscious message in a pure state. The character of there exists a fundamental difference between the sexual drive of
the message is, therefore, compromised from the start, from a single childhood and what surfaces at the moment of adolescence, which
direction, even if reciprocity establishes itself very quickly there as is effectively the emergence of the sexual instinct. The sexual instinct
well, i.e. on the sexual level. In this situation, what matters is what the then catches up with the drive, which has developed over many
receiver makes of the message, that is to say, precisely, the attempt al years, and there is between the two a serious problem of coherence
translation and the necessary failure of translation. and cohesion and, most importantly, of content.
The second point, on which I can give a few indications and
I would like to add three preliminary remarks to what I have which seems to me to be very important, is the question of after-
said so far. UXlrdsness. Since Freud articulated it (in German as Nacl1triiglichkeit),
First of all, the question of tlie biological option. The general a_nd since Lacan underlined the term (proposing the French transla-
theory of seduction and the fundamental anthropological situation tion apres coup but without really giving it a theory), afterwardsness
are absolutely not a way of taking a stance against biology. For me,
8 letter to Fliess, September 21"., 1897, T71e Complete Letters of Sigmund Fmul 10
every human process is indissociably biological and psychical. Even
~Im Fliess, 1887-1904. Trans. and ed. Jeffrey M. Masson (Cambridge: Belknap
the most abstract mathematical reasoning is inconceivable without a of Harvard University Press, 1985), p. 265

104 105
 The Fundamental A11thropologica/ Situation
The F1111dame11tn/ Anthropologicn/ Situation
----
. has flourished These days it is invoked on all sides
0 bVlOUS1Y ' , and ssessed an oral sexuality that will develop in the youn
in contemporary thought - including psychoanalytic thought, buJ Po "N t 11, . . g man.
Others will say, ot a a .; it IS as an adolescent or as a young man
even more so in an entire philosophy based on psychoanalysis_ . that he fantasizes, in a purely retrospective way, the sexual pleasure
. . 11
seems irremediably wedded to the hermeneutic mterpretation. In tlrnt he could have taken at the breast of his wet-nurse". You thus have
other words, afterwardsness is systematically interpreted as a ret- two possible interpretations. First there is what fonnerly prevailed in
roactive conferral of meaning. This interpretation of afterwardsn~ Stmchey's translation with the idea of 'deferred action' -which in fact
seems to have prevailed for decades; one could point to Spence, one refers to the development within the adult of something placed in
could equally well cite Viderman, who was its most eloquent apostle the child like a seed. Then we have the modem, or even postmodern
in France. Even if he does not situate his theory under the banner of interpretation, which is completely inverted by means of a reversal of
afterwardsness, Viderman's conception is clearly that of a retroactive time's arrow: it is the adult who afterwards reinterprets an infantile
conferral of meaning. experience. Whether he does it himself or aided by an analyst is of no
In what way does Freud's conception of afterwardsness Jeave importance. Thus, in the end, 'retroactive attribution' approximates
a way open to the purely retroactive interpretation? I am fond ofdt- to the 'retrospective fantasizing' advocated by Jung, against which
ing the brief passage in which Freud gives an anecdote to illustrate Freud had so much trouble arguing- that purely retroactive interpre-
the notion of Nacl1trtiglichkeit. Let me cite it again: ''Love and hunger tation of fantasy which he discusses at length for many pages in the
... meet at a woman's breast. A young man who was a great admirer Wolf Man case.
of feminine beauty was talking once-so the story went-of the good· What does the theory of seduction contribute to this image, so
looking wet-nurse who had suckled him when he was a baby: 'I'm well devised by Freud, to this anecdote illustrating a.ftetwardsnes.s?
sorry,' he remarked, 'that I didn't make a better use of my opportu- What it conbibutes, alongside the unilinear child-adult succession
nity.' I was in the habit of quoting this anecdote to explain the factor (which is condemned to run either in one direction or the other: either
of aftenvardsness in the mechanism of the psychoneuroses."9 In what in the direction of the arrow of time or in the reverse direction), is the
way, then, does Freud's conception leave itself open to the purely presence of the other of the subject. That is to say, quite simply, what
retroactive or, conversely, the purely progressive interpretation of is completely forgotten in Freud's anecdote: the presence of the we/-
afterwardsness? In this anecdote, and in the form of a com_pogte nurse, i.e. the presence of the other for the child, who is subsequently
~age, he present us with the same subject who is, sucres.sively, an the other for the young man. Once her presence is taken into a~unt,
mfans and a young man. It is evidently the same subject who sees hiill- we are no longer faced with a sequence composed of a succession of
self retrospectively, held at the breast of his wet-nurse. We are therebY pure facts devoid of meaning, infantile facts to be interpreted subse-
enclosed within a 'one-body psychology' -that is to say, a psychology quently. What is to be interpreted by the young man is not pure fa~~or
~ntred upon a single protagonist. The single protagonist is the sul>- even pure trauma; it is already a message awaiting translation, awaiting
Ject X, whether infans or adult. Some will say that the infans aJreadY delivery, so to speak; it is already a message from the nurse to the_nurs-
ling. Furthermore before this 'afterwardsness', which is situated ID the
' . · already
9 The Interpretation of Dreams 0900a) SE 4
Nachtrliglichkeit 'd f . , ' , PP· 204-5. [Trans.: Strachey's
tranSJatotci
refere¢ long period separating the young man from the infant, there 15
for 'afterwardsn:,t erred action has been altered to reflect l.aplanche's P a kind of afterwardsness in the quasi-sun . . ultane.t·ty of the adult other

107
106
 n,e Fimdameutal A11tJrropological Situation The Fundamental Anthropological Sih,ation

with the child who registers and then tran~lates the message. In ~ alluding to some more recent attempts to advance matters. The
end, this conception of afterwardsness, which has been little .... ..
...."-!er. essential thing in the general theory of seduction and in the funda-
stood, is I think essential if we are to escape the dilemma of time' mental anthropological situation is an exchange of messages on the
arrow in which we are trapped, and in which the hermeneuts, ~ conscious-preconscious level, messages that, on the side of the adult,
even a philosopher of history such as Raymond Aron, find themselves are parasited by his unconscious. On the other hand, it is the imper-
trapped. We can only escape this unilinear vision of time's arrow by fect attempt at translation by the recipient, an attempt that leads to a
invoking the simultaneous other and the message of the other. What~ repression of a part of the message. Yet the conscious-preconscious
interpreted is already the bearer of meaning. It is never pure fact. code, to which I have, up to now, principally referred, is the code,
My third point is, in a certain way, the rehabilitation of chi14 both acquired and innate, of attachment: let's say the care given to the
observation. The richness of the observations of modem psycho~ child by the adult, taking the notion of 'care' in the broadest sense.
gists no longer needs to be demonstrated. It is enormous. It remains But there are other codes and other messages. The problem
to be seen whether they are capable of extracting the full quintes- that I lingered over for several years in a Seminar, and which gave
sence of what they observe. One could say that there is an obvious birth to a text, now published in this volume (see essay 9), is that of
blind spot among those who make these observations as well as gender and gender choice. In other words, I consider 'gender identity'
among those who criticize them: namely, the negligible consider- primarily as a message. The problem is that of the birth of gender
ation, or total absence, of the fundamental anthropological situation; identity. Why use the notion of gender? Clearly, it must be used only
that is to say, the intervention of the sexuality of the adult, and m~t on the condition that it doesn't erase either sex or sexuality. In my
of all of his unconscious infantile sexuality, which is awakened by view, Freud's use of the opposition between 'masculinity' and 'femi-
the relation with the child. One can take as an example Roiphe and ninity' demonstrates that gender does have an obvious if rare presence
Galenson's very interesting book on the Infantile Origins of Sexual in his thought. This opposition, he says, does not correspond to the
Identity, published in 1981.10 It contains very finely described obser· oppositions between active and passive or phallic and castrated. In
vations and yet does not take into account the role of adult sexuality Freud, gender is present at two ends of the chain of existence. It is
in the situation, or does so only in the final analysis, with regret and present at the definitive configuration of human existence, he says,
at the end. Here, Roiphe and Galenson have to admit that it would because masculinity and femininity are two complex syntheses made
be indispensible for the observation itself to grasp the action of the up of psychological, biological and sociological elements; but it is also
parental unconscious. present at the beginning, if one recalls the fable that he offers us con-
cerning infantile sexual theories. A traveller from Sirius arriving on
I am convinced that these three points, heredity and/or biolog'J, Earth would be struck by a certain number of enigmas, and among
a~erwardsness, and the psychoanalytic child, could nourish disOJS' ~em the major enigma he would encounter would be the separa-
smn considerably. However, I would not want to stop here wi!houl tion of the human species into two . .. (he does not say 'genders' as
German does not have this term at its disposal; but in the end it is
Precisely gender that is at issue, and not sex). In short, the traveller
~O ~erman R?iphe and Eleanor Galenson, Infantile Origins of Sexual Identity (NeW
ork. lntemational Universities Press, 1981). from Sirius sees the difference in habitus without, at first, necessarily

108 109
 The Fundamental Anthropological Situation The Fundamental Anthropological Situation

discerning the different genital organs. Human beings are 8 . tified by'- In this wa)': the s~bjec~ !s i~entified by the assignment to
. . ~~
mto two genders by means of many other things than their e . ,den . ender. This notion of 1dentificat1on by would certainly enrich
. . . . 'bl think . g Illlals 11 acertalil g 'd I
I n my opuuon, 1t 1s poss1 e to m terms of a sort of tria. ·on of the ego 1 ea -
the quest1 •
the triad made of the terms gender, sex (which sends us back t d, All observers - and Stoller first and foremost - have empha-
th
category of sexuation, and to what Freud calls the phallic-cas~ e . the meaningful impact of gender assignment, however it may
pair), and finally what, a bit provocatively, I like to call the 5 led sIZ~ected, and even if it diverges profoundly from the anatomy and
exua/ 12 I
that is to say, enlarged sexuality, which is essentially based on ~- be iology of the subject. But what I have just added is that this iden-
tile sexuality. :~tion is not only meaningful; it is, at the same time, enigmatic. I
In what way can the general theory of sexuality be called to d to the particular case of first names; but it is clear that
have referre
the rescue here? It allows us to see that gender is first of all a mes- n assignment carries along with it the unconscious desire of the
sage, an assignment (an enigmatic one, as we will see), an assignment a y nts the most baroque and the most incredible desires, which may
pare ,
within the social, in the most general sense of that term, by the soaius be in conflict with the manifest assignment. In other words, the lan-
- that is, by a close relative, a parent, or a friend or a group of people: guage of gender is compromised by sexual difference and even more
"you, little Henry, are a boy''. But frequently there are other modali- by the infantile sexuality of the parents and, more generally, of adults.
ties: if one says: "you, little Leslie, are a boy'', thirlgs are already more Thus alterity is at the heart of the assignment of gender and
difficult because the name itself is more ambiguous. takes shape not as difference, two terms that exclude a third one, but
However it might be inflected, the assignment comes from as diversity. Gender is by rights multiple: why are there two genders,
the other, and this seems to me capable of challenging Freud's why not any number of genders? That is what the traveller com-
famous notion of 'primary identification', a primary identification, ing from Sirius might have asked himself. Blue and pink, those two
which he initially tells us is "with the father of [one's) own personal colours emblematic of the little boy and the little girl, have a relation
prehistory'',13 only to modify this assertion to "identification with the of diversity, not oppositionality. So why not three or four genders to
parents" (ibid., p. 31 n1), because the distinction between masculine go with green and yellow? Why not the 'mauvais genre' as wel1? 14
and feminine does not yet exist during this period of life. Here I sug· Yet the child must master and reduce diversity. This is what
gest a radical inversion of the notion of identification by proposing the I have named phallic logic, whose best possible summary is the fol-
following path: it is not an 'identifying of oneself with', but a 'being lowing, by Jacques Andre: "the primacy of the phallus is the pillar
of a synthesis rather than the last word of analysis. It is a synthesis
which the child effects within his or her sexual theories long before
11 'When you meet a human being, the first distinction you make is 'male or femalef the psychoanalyst'' .15 The function of the castration reaction, 'the early
and you are accustomed to make the distinction with unhesitating certainty. ... whal
constitutes masculinity or femininity is an unknown characteristic which analo~Y
cannot lay hold of." "Lecture 33: Femininity'', New J11troductory Lect11res 011 Psycho- 14 lTmns · 'genr ' · F
Analysis (1933a), SE 22, pp. 113-114. Ira la " e 1s rench ,or
c 'gender'. 'Mauva1· s genre' 1· s an 1d1om
• · that, Iiterally
!2 [Edi;or: On Lapla_nch,e's French neologism 'sexual' (as distinct from ~en~~ idi~led, would be 'bad kind / type (of person)' and is equivalent to the English
!•
sexu_el s~>e the Ed1t~r s note to the Forward of this volume. The tenn 15 P~ I- 15 Jae ~d sort' or 'bad ~e~d'. . . . . . .
here m atahcs to mark 1t off from the standard English tenn with the same spellinS de F q Andre, A11x ong111es fem111ines de la sex11al1te (Pans: Presses Umvers1tmres
13 The Ego and the Id (1923b), SE 19, p. 31. ranee, 1995), p.67,

110 111
 The Fundamental Anthropological Situation
The Fundamental Anthropological Situation

. . , is to reduce the diverse to the same, to th

castration reactton ,
.
. ..
se to the plus/nunus opposition. A moment
e~ / in the failure T?
of that d~mestication. underline matters once again:
less, or in any ca . ago, I der will be domesticated, symbolized by the oversimplified code
R . he and Galenson whose observations are int~
referred to 01p . . · g~ resence/absence, phallic/castrated, the 1/0 of computers. It is
0
in that they tend to dissociate this castratio~ reacti~n from the Oedi. pbtless as a function of the rigidity of the phallic/castrated pair
mplex viewing the fonner as emergmg earlier than the la11- dou th inf til I
pus co ' · tdi · that ,._~-"ti; that the essence of e an e sexua escapes that type of symbol-
·on reaction is a reaction o vers1ty
The ear1y castrati ·'"""·~ to ization. This infantile sexuality is what constitutes the object of our
difference and a response to that difference that resorts to the theory psychoanalytic experience.
of castration.
Speaking anthropologically, I s~ould like_to insist again u~
the following point it is claimed that with castration we have readlf.\i
the 'biological bedrock', and certain Freu~an formulations ~
precisely this. But it is, in fact, an anatomical bedrock of which ~
should speak, and what's more a false or deceptive anatomy. The ~
tion complex is based upon a pen:eived anatomy, one which is illw<.y
and peculiar to the human species. From the moment that humam
assumed the upright posture, only one of the two sets of genital orgam
remained visible. The bedrock of the biological is the bedrock of !hf
anatomical. "Destiny is anatomy",16 says Freud, and it is a completely
contingent and illusory anatomy, one which is connected to the evoh?-
tion of the human animal. Be that as it may, this anatomiall diffmna
furnishes a sort of translation code, which is the most elementary ard
the most restrictive possible: either phallic or castrated. Here we ha\'e
the contingent origin of something that will take on extraordinaiy
dimensions in modern civilization: the rapid growth of the 'digital'.It
is hardly surprising that this translation into presence/ absence, which
is so rigid and so minimal, lets almost everything escape, lets the!tl·
ual, infantile sexuality, slip through the net
To conclude, infantile sexuality is the heart of the unaJII"
scious. It is the irreducible alterity constituted in the very movemeol
of its attempted domestication by difference and p hallic logic, ai-1

16 • Laplanche's
· 17rans: . apparently inverted rend enng ,..._:1,~. Freudian dalill
. o f this 1cSJ1=
IS exp1amed m essay 9 in this volume.)

112 113
 Failures of Translation

6
FAILURES OF TRANSLATION1

Yves Mm1ela: Our thanks to Professor Laplanche for coming

to the Biblio theque de Lamoignon, where we are very honoured to
receive him.

Jean l.nplanche: Thank you. This will be more of a talk than a

lecture. Man who speaks is the phrase you use to introduce this series.
One might also have said man who communicates, which is a little dif-
ferent, for human beings have modes of communication governed by
codes that are not simply verbal but are profoundly influenced, retro-
actively, by spoken language. What I mean is that the mother/ child
code, or, more generally, the non-verbal adult/ child codes, cannot be
equated with the codes that obtain between an animal and its young,
on account of the very fact that the human adult speaks. There are
thus forms of communication other than verbal forms, as we shall see
during the course of what I shall try to say to you.
I have chosen translation, or rather the failures of translation,
as today's theme. We must distinguish among these failures or diffi-
culties; and I have the most extreme reservations about the idea of a

1 D~livered at the Association d es psychiatres franc;ais, January 2_1, ~001. Fi~t

published in " Les conferences de Lamoignon: Le langue -1", Psychiatne fram;atSt,
vol. 33, no.3/4, 2002.

115
114
 Failures of Trn11sl11tion Failures of Translation

• metaphysical failure of translation. I have chn-. some reflections as an interlingual translator;

general or quasi- . ~• this 1. th
theme because it is on the honzon of two of mr current major acnVi- 2. the legitimacy of e concept of translation within
ties: the translation of Freud and a longs~ding ~etapsychologi<:a} meta psychology;
elaboration that is formulated in terms of a translational theory of the 3. failures of translation as a metapsychological concept.
nscious'. 1n order to prepare the present talk I re-read Jakoh,,__ ,
unco . . . ,,2 • u.,un s
article "On the Ungwstic Aspects of Trans1ation -a useful, if question-
able article, and one that leaves room for improv~ent. I_shall take up, 1. My reflections as an interlingual translator will be confi-
while also modifying, the three forms of translation he distinguishes: dences, confessions of a translator of Freud. Let me say immediately
that I am not an unhappy translator. I do not lament each day over
1. intralingual translation, of which little is generally made, and the failure or the difficulty of translation. I am perhaps a masochistic
which refers to reformulation or paraphrase within a single iranslator, but, as you know, one can be a happy masochist. Thus I
language; am chained to Freud, as some among you know, for at least two after-
2. interlingual translation, such as the translation with which noons per week in arduous editorial sessions involving discussions
we are concerned when, for example, we translate Freud into whose primary and secondary gains are of the utmost importance. On
French; thus, translation from one verbal language to another, the other hand, there is a 'masochism', if you will, involved in the fact
3. intersemiotic translation, i.e. interpretation that passes from that along with my partners I am attacked, not to say flogged, with
a non-linguistic system to a linguistic one; but one can also the sarcasm of those who, for the most part, don't know the first word
imagine an intersemiotic translation that would go from o~ of German and certainly don't know the first word of Freud, which
semiotic system to another. is a different matter. Ignorance of one does not preclude ignorance of
the other. The rule is to respond only to intelligent critics, to those who
It is important, then, that Jakobson, like Saussure, introduces understand the issue and who believe that the project merits a certain
the term 'non-linguistic system', and the term 'semiotic system' which loyal and informed discussion. So, I am not an unhappy translator:
encompasses linguistic systems as well as non-verbal languages. We can which is precisely to say that I am not centred on failure. I do not harp
also enlarge the Jakobsonian categories that I have just recalled by say- on that fine, if now slightly tarnished expression that Freud recalled:
ing that what he calls intralingual translation, i.e. reformulation, could traduttore, traditore - a fine expression that is itself untranslatable but
even be understood to take place within a single non-verbal semiotic which can nevertheless be transposed in an intralingual fashion, that
system. A reformulation could take place within a single non-veibal is to say by paraphrase and commentary. Were it not for the fact that
code, such that intralingual translation would not only be intralingual the expression is a pun, I don't think that a commentary would neces-
but perhaps intrasemiotic. This point will be clarified in the secondard sarily lose anything of it.
third parts of my talk. So, here are the three areas I shall cover:
. l am not an unhappy translator, because I think that for every
difficult passage the best possible translation - to an asymptote of
2 Roman Jakobson, "On the Linguistic Aspects of Translation", in The rn1,islizlil 99 %or 99.9% - does exist. One must weigh up what is possible and
Studies Reader, ed. Lawrence Venuti (New York & London: Routledge 2000),

116 117
 Failures of Trnnslntion Failures of Trnnslation

. . ssi·ble not harp on about failure. Without going as far . recently by Janine Altounian. In "Mourning and Melancholia"
w hat IS unpa , as agam .
Wittgenstein's "what we cannot speak about, we must pass over in freud demonstrates that the seli-accusatio~ of the melancholic are in
silence" 3 we can nonetheless imagine something like, "what we l'aJ\.
1
{act directed against someone else. He dedicates a long clinical pas-
not translate ..." not "... we must leave untranslated", but "wemUS1 sage to the description of the melancholic's complaints in order to
explain why". Thus merely to say why one cannot translate SOIJle. demonstrate that in fact they are addressed to others, to a spouse for
thing seems to me to be very important. Whe~ :-7e c?me up against example; and he finishes as follows (forgive me for having to speak
a problem of translation we must, therefore, d1stingwsh the 'why in German, but it's simple German): "Seine Klagen sind Anklage11", which
each case, for problems can range from the most obvious examples lo means that the melancholic's complaints are Anklagen, that's to say
the most uncertain or, if you like, from impossibility to failure. After complaints expressed towards someone, directed against someone.5
all, one cannot bathe in the sea in Paris; one cannot transport cities to We find this difference between the simple verb and the verb with
the countryside: these are absurdities and impossibilities, not failures. the prefix an within another distinction that, as a rule, we maintain
We must demarcate what is impossible to translate. And we scrupulously when we are translating Freud; this is the difference
must point out first of all that one can only translate utterances lb between Drohimg (threat) and Androhung (a threat that is uttered or
,xzrole), and not a language. For example, one patently cannot translare expressed). For example, it's obvious that when the castration threat
a dictionary. Everything that makes up the very fabric of a language is uttered - by the father, according to Freudian ideology - it is an
is untranslatable. It can only be transported as it is. What about a A1rdrolrnng. I return to my example "Seine Klagen sind Anklagen". Here
grammar, as distinct from a dictionary? The metalinguistic discourse is a translation that I came up with a long time ago and which we
within a grammar is easily translated; language as an object is nol The adopted for the CE.uvres completes: "Ses plaints sont des plaints portees
following phrase is more or less invented but it might well be foUM contre" ["His complaints are complaints against''). Which is not, after
in any German grammar: "Unsere Sprache hat ein Neutrum, 'Miidchm' all, a bad translation since it clearly renders the directional implication
zwn Beispiel ist ein Ne11tnm1". This translates as: "notre langue a1m lltll· of an: to complain against and not the simple fact of complaining. These
tre, 'jeime fille' par exemple est un neutre" ["our language has a neuter. complaints are thus complaints that are brought against someone. But
'young girl', for example, is a neuter'']. The absurdity here obviously then, between parentheses I believe, Freud adds the metalinguistic
consists in the words "our language" (which language? those reading remark, "in the old sense of the word", to explain that he is referring
the grammar are French). We must be absolutely precise: "our Ger· to the old, slightly obsolete word "Anklagen". Obviously this remark
man language has a neuter"; and it is equally absurd to say that jeunt -"in the old sense of the word" - is not valid for our translation:
fille is neuter:• we have to write "Miidchen" and place it in quotation "plainte portee contre" is no more an old word in French than jeune fille
marks. I do not see any failure of translation in all this, only one of the is a neuter in French. We must therefore either not translate Freud's
limits of translation. remark or supplement this metalinguistic remark by writing some-
Now here isa famous passage from Freud which was~
3 L~dwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-P/1ilosop/Jicus, trans. Brian Mc(;uin!SSand
5
0
tan~: The sentence to which Laplanche is alluding, and of which he will go on to
his own translation, is translated by James Strachey in the Standard Edition as
1ollerows·
David Pears (New York & London: Routled e 2001) 89 · "IThe melancholic's) complaints are really 'plaints' in the old sense of the
4 [Trans: je1111efille is feminine in FrenchI. g , , p. . word" "M0
' uming and Melancholia" (1917e), SE 14, p. 248.)

118 119
 Failures of Tra11slatio11 Failures of Translation

. Id sense of the German word Anklagen". 1, t unknown categories that emerged for this fonnuJa alone·
. like "m the o , . . Ve no Es are nO . . '
thing ' al f •t after all. I don t consider this to be a"'" terms that appear m complete texts by Freud and which are
.h ake a me o I , •<UJ~ these ar e .
WIS to m . and circumventing an impossibility. •vely explained by him. Doubtless, one can get carried away
I am demarcating d hi . d' . extens1
' f a parenthesis, an t s is a iscussion that ,,,, i:. by the language and isolate this phrase from the whole context of
By way o . , . "un111~
. J
ues with arune
. Altounian in particular, I don t think one can cons·d
I er
the oeuvre. Many authors have do~e just that with this formula. But
, h . ti"c formulas as evidence of the fact that he w0 u1d"" the same, one cannot make of it whatever one wants, precisely
Freud s ap ons . .. .., 11
the signified by starting from the signifier. I take the all "'- :ecause Freud doesn't make just anything of das Ich and das Es, and
to reac h d , I, 'IN
famous example from Lacan: /es noms u pere 1es non-dupes errenr., least of all in the text where he introduces the formula. But this is a
Lacan begins to ramble about this pl~y on words; elsewhere he relies limit case where one can, in a somewhat dangerous way in my view,
on that term une-bevue,7 where there is even a back-and-forth play on risk venturing beyond what Freud says. This is, for example, what
words between German and French, since the une-bevue is the 'u,~ Lacan did, attempting to derive from the formula a sort of philosophy
w1tssr, which is to say the unconscious. Lacan claims to let himself~ of the 'subject' (das lch = I), which in my opinion is profoundly alien to
guided by the signifier and even by the purely phonic fonn 0f puns. Freud's thought. But ultimately one does have the right to try.
He has no interest at all in etymology, for example. It is obvious that A limit case, I said, between two extremes; these two extremes
in the une-bevue or /es non-dupes errent there's no reference whatsoevt>r being, for me, a poetic work on the one hand and an intellectual
to etymology. Compare the difference from what we find in Freud: work on the other. To say that the one is centred on the signifier and
when he refers to language he refers to the etymological fabric of lan- the other on the signified is insufficient, if not simply false. What,
guage itself. Thus, in Freud things are always anchored in language, for example, would a poem be which did not seek to communicate
even in etymology. Moreover, Freud only rarely departs fmm the something? And what would an intellectual work be which did not at
singular usage of the language ('Sprachgebrauch'). He does sometimes some point or other rely upon the signifier? The real issue is knowing
rely upon it, but as a rule his aphoristic formulations are accompa- in what way the work relies upon it. In this connection I am very fond
nied by a long development, such as we have just seen in the cu of the metaphor of dwelling- dwelling in the sense that Holderlin says
of the melancholic's complaints. There is an obvious limit case-the wed well poetically upon this earth. In any event, I would say that the
central formuJa of the entire Freudian oeuvre, which I won't !about author of an intellectual work dwells within his language. He makes
This limit case is 'Wo Es war, soil Ich werden.' Entire pages have been a home of it and within this home - to pursue the metaphor in a triv-
dedicated to this sentence. Yet it must not be forgotten that Ich and ial, spatial way- within this home he prefers to dwell in certain parts,
he prefers to traverse certain corridors, he favours the fact that this
6 [Trans: These phrases, which are virtually homophones in French, mean 'lht Part is split into two smaller rooms, or that certain others have been
nam~ of the father' and 'the non-dupes wander' respectively. Les 110,ns du ~ was joined together as a large drawing room. In a word, he constitutes
~he htl~ of Lacan's abandoned 1963 seminar, the introduction to which is avai11ble
within the very interior of this home his own code, his own dialect. As
m English, Iran~. Jeffrey Mehlman, in October, vol. 40, 1987, pp. 81-95. Les 11ondiqts
errant was the title of Lacan's seminar during 1973--41. to_poetic works, I would not say that they are absolutely coextensive
7 [Trans- A bl d
Se . : Ii
~n er or s p, and hence a parapraxis. See Jacques Lacan.
•Le
with the language in which they are written, but they certainly tend
19
~~~e:, ~1vre X:(N: L'insu que sait de l'une bevue s'aile
7 ' In Ormcar? Vol. 17, 1979).
a mourre, toward being so. The poet is inhabited by language. By definition,

120 121
 ---
......
Failures of Tr1111slatio11 Fnilurrs of Tra11sl11tio11

tic noPtry is, the more untranslatable it is. B

then, the more p<>e r - bl . th . . u1~ ,.,,.phs of Petra, or to be taken there guided by a tour opcrato ?
hotog... .. . • r.
. differently untranslata e texts. e dictionary IJ.•• P The height of untranslatab1bty m poetry, it seems to me, is the
again there are . . " 1111 ~
or certain types of Joke - what Freud r ..11. ,
cited a moment ago, ~ ~ ous Haiku to which most of us have no access except by way of
. kes' rather than 'conceptual jokes' etc. faJll ch .. h'ch
French, by way o f Frcn transpositions, w 1 incidentally are often
JO I could recount a thousand stories from Freud's book , .,.utiful in themselves; and who, after all, is to say that these
ver)' be"
jokes that are conceptual jokes, perfectly translatable and able to 11\ab transp<>sitions are not more beautiful than the originals? All of this is
the hearer laugh whether he is Fre~ch or G~rman. But verba} ~ to underline the fact that I do not weep over the incommunicability
specifically are untranslatable, and m my VIew all translations 1h11 of languages ai1y more than over ~at of consciousnesses. It is some-
endeavour exactly to transpose German verbal jokes into French ~ , tiJnes said that when the terms Wetb and Frau appear in Gennan we
jokes have fairly pitiful results. But one can perfectly well gloss~ are at the heart of the incommunicable, and that the mystery of the
jokes. It should be added, moreover, that a pure verbal joke is aPl feminine is entirely contained within it. I don't think that the mys-
in the sense Victor Hugo was so scathing about, although he did .._ t~ry of the feminine is contained within the German language, least
favour conceptual jokes either. of all in the opposition between Weib and Frau. In a very prosaic and
With poetry things are different. In contrast to verbal pictsao : slightly quibbling fashion I respond by offering instances where the
commentary can realise poetic effect, which is coextensive with 111f opposite is the case: with Weib and Frau we ha ve two words for a
language itself. The translation can only ever be an allusion, an iOOlf- single, impoverished French word (la femme); but in other cases things
ment to consult the original. I thought of this recently while "'iltchiJl1 arc otherwise: the richness lies on the French side, and the poverty on
very fine film by Al Pacino called woking for Richard. The film explm, the German side. If we take Beriihnmg, there is a single word in Ger-
Shakespeare's Richard ill and adds to it the extraordinary characterd man, whereas in French we have the very precise difference between
Al Pacino himself; but this isn't exactly the issue. I thought abouttht contact ['contact'] and touclter l'touch'J. Contact is not the same thing
role of the subtitles; obviously this is a film that only works in Eng- as toucher, but when you translate the Gem1an word Ben'ihnmg you
lish, even if one's own English is a little impoverished. And yet the are constantly forced to choose between them because the German
New York English of Al Pacino and the English of Shakespeare makr knows nothing of this difference that is, nevertheless, essential.
it a delightfully rich linguistic performance. And the subtitling, whidl Let us, then, hold to the difference we have suggested, even if
isn't too bad, helps us savour the extraordinary English that is 1hr the borders are a little blurred: poetry is inhabited by language, its mes-
language of Shakespeare. So, go and see it. But there are various~ sage tending to be coextensive with the language (tending, of course,
of saying go and see it. In the worst case - although even this migli because there is always something of a message nonetheless). On the
be of some use - there's the tourist guide; at best, there's the supeb other hand, intellectual work inhabits its language. Freud, even if he
photograph album. Best because, after all it was Malraux- with whi. has an internal, intimate relationship with his native tongue, inhabits
'.1'any years ago, he already called the 'imaginary m usewn' - ~-hl it in his own way. He does not allow his thought to be led by the lan-
inaugurated and instilled within us the idea that a splendid ~ d guage. He uses and arranges certain rooms within it, certain routes
~ell-taken, sumptuous photographs was perhaps just as i n ~
thro ugh it; he drops others. There are explicit concepts that Freud
if not more so, than the original. Which is better? A beautiful a}bulllci names technical terms, '1msere Tennini', and there is an implicit concep-

122 123
 Failures of Tm11s/atio11
---
Failures of Translation

. ,_ nr to the attentive translator to emphasise. ram th;h._. tlliS returns us to the idea of the 'Freudian' as an idiolect within
tuality that 1a= , . '"'Ul!Jl
wayGerman language. A t th e b egmrung . . of his artic . 1e - and it is truly
the French term etayage, which for a very long H- t
for exampIe, of . •u11e has
. plidt concept in Freudian thought, that of An/ 1 lheeking to say such things - Jakobson claims: "Any representative
covered an un . . . . .
But this distinction between unplicrt and expliat concepts d~
emun 1
s;: cheese-Jess culinary culture will understand the English word
presume that eveiy German tei:m, even those that recur in Freud, 'con. ~eese' if he is aware that in this language it means 'food made of
stitutes' a concept. There are ~erent levels of conceptuality; there~ ressed curds"'9• In any case, this is an example of intralingual trans-
a 'Freudian German', abo~t which I ~nee remarked that _it is n ~ iation, the full responsibility for which I leave to him. Here the idiolect
to translate it into a 'Freudian French and not a Germaruc French. Yi would be the technical, not to say scientific language. It is also worth
. G I OU
see that with this idea of a 'Freud1an erman we return to some~ painting out t11~t in the French. antho!oID:' o~ Jak?bson's writings,
I alluded to a moment ago: a sub-code, a species of idiolect. Freud does Essais de /inguistzque generale, the first article IS titled 'Le langage com-
not allow his thought to be dominated by the German language. Uhe mun des linguistes et des anthropologues" [''The Common Language
did we would be led to an automatic translation, to a sacredness ofthe of Linguists and Anthropologists"]. You can see how the notion of
language and a sacredness of the text. language is displaced here. It is not a question of languages - German,
I could of course say much more, for these remarks relate only French, Polish, etc. - but of a kind of possible idiolect that is common
to my present concerns. I could have tackled the question using many to hvo kinds of specialist. In order to develop this, then, we must com-
other examples that have occupied me and my companions for years bine the idea of communication systems (which include non-linguistic
and which have given us the privilege, if not of being immortal, al systems: semiotics) and the possibility of translation within a single
least of pushing back our expiry date by at least ten years: Freud, our type of communication (thus the idea of sub-systems at the semiotic
torturer, will support us for a good decade or so; which is not, in the level as well). After all, in psychoanalysis a number of indications
final analysis, a disagreeable situation. point in this direction. One often hears mention of Freud's remark
about the 1anguage' of the oral drive.10 There is also the famous let-
2. My second point, then, is the metaphor, or the exporting ter to Riess of December 6th 1896, where he forms the hypothesis of
of the model of translation, in which connection I refer in a certain a system of successive inscriptions and tries to define precisely what
w~y to Jakobson and Saussure so as to propose two extensions in line defines each of these systems: simultaneous association in some cases,
with them. Firstly, the extension of the model of language to other rational association in others etc.11 With this idea of successive inscrip-
systems of commwucation, and thus the idea of a semiotic system tions Freud thus uses the notion of systems in an enlarged sense, and
that is broader than the linguistic system; and secondly, the exrensioll in particular he enlarges the notion of a non-verbal sign system. What
of the model of translation within the very systems themselves: be he describes are successive modes of organisation of signs, which are
they
. . senuo
· tic, mterlingual
· _•..1
or even intrasemiotic. Examined clCR>C1Y, what I characterised a moment ago as idiolects.
this 1D1plies sulrcodes and 1'd•101ects, and you can see that Ill
. ace""'"
....,;n
9
"On the Linguistic Aspects of Translation", op. cit., p. 138.
8 !Trans: Laplanche has for
translate Freud's Alli
choict IO
many years been critical of James Strachey's ~ iS
:f 'Negation" (1925h), SE 19, p. 237. . .
J : · The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to W1lhelm Fhess: 1887-1904, trans.
I
1eaning-on' ). emullg as 'anaclisis'. The English translation he pror--
e YM. Masson (Cambridge Mass..: Harvard UP, 1985).

124 125
 F,ii/11n•s of Tim1slatio11 Failures of Translation

One text that it is good to return to from time to titn . In my view, it is therefore necessary to revisit Ferenczi
., rt"cle on ''The Confusion of Tongues betw- elS . it poses.
Ferencz1 s a 1 . • . . "-en Adil! uon. in mind u,e 'translation letter' cited above, and perhaps to
and the Child" .'2 The content lS a littl~ d1~appomting in places,~. t,ean~gh t letter by way of the notion of the message, which is always
revisit t a
the title alone should catch our attention, if we are Willing to no. ge 'addressed to'.
that it doesn' t refer to the confusi?n of tongues b~tween Patents! a n,essaln the translational model as applied to metapsychology,
children. The Oedipus complex 1s completely dispensed. With ilJ\d d not have two languages that are foreign to each other, such
O
replaced by the fundamental relation between adults and the child. we tu and High German, as the title of Ferenczi's article would
as Ban . .
is a question of adults because adults have drives that the child d It ha s suggest. What do we have? First of all there 15 a common
not, a 'language' other tl,an that of the child. We can therefore un: per page or rather a common semio
Jangu ' hild
"ti'c sys tem, s h ared.mthi"
s mstance
stand why Freud would have wished, on the_ basis of its title alone, b adults and the c . ere 1s a common semiotic system ("m d eed
Th . . .
to sweep the article under the carpet. There IS, to be sure, a certain lere are perhaps several of them). The principal system, which has of
imprecision in the article itself, and it would seem to me that replac- late been developed with increasing thoroughness by psychologists,
ing the notion of confusion with the notion of translation would bea is the communication system of attachment. Yet given that this is a
critical step forward. common system, whence arises the compulsion to translate? What
I am often asked, "Why do you speak of translation ra~ is it that compels a rewording, as the English say? What is it that ulti-
than interpretation?" I have answered this objection from time In mately compels the creation of an idiolect? Well, it is the fact that this
time, and it was put to me again recently. My answer is that interpre- message, even though it is formulated in a common language, is para-
tation seems to me to be centred, by the one who interprets, upon an sited by another thing, another thing that is hardly a language and
object. One can interpret a natural phenomenon just as well as any- which is quite simply the unconscious of the other. Although Ferenczi
thing else; and one can interpret a text, but without referring lo the speaks about adults and the child, he does not endeavour to ask why
fact that this text carries a message. This, I would say, shows,preeisely the adults and the child have two different 1anguages', which in my
the direction in which hermeneutics has drifted over the centuries. opinion is a rather approximate way to define things. He fails at that
In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, hermeneutics be<!ame point to refer to the great Freudian discovery: that adults have an
a hermeneutics of human phenomena and thus became a metlwd· unconscious and children do not, as a direct result of which their dia-
ology within ilie human sciences. If we go back in time, it has long logue takes place on different levels and the language of the adult is
been a hermeneutics of texts, but originally it was a hermeneuticsof!lr enigmatic. The language of the adult is not enigmatic owing to confu-
message. The hermeneutics of the message, as distinct from the herot- sion or absolute foreignness, or owing to polysemy (for in respect of
neutics of human phenomena or even of texts, is a translation that the latter, all messages would be enigmatic); it is enigmatic by virtue
contrasts with iliese derivative forms. Its source does not lie in the of a unilateral excess that introduces a disequilibrium into the very
hermeneut, or in his curiosity, but in the message itself and the ques- heart of the message. Excess, disequilibrium, the need for translation:
lhere is - to take up Ferenczi's two terms - an intrusion of signifiers of
12 "The Confusion of Tongues between Adults and the Child: The Languaf ~ 'passion' into the common language of 'tenderness'.
Tendemess and the Language of Passion" (1933) in Sandor Ferenczi: Selected Yh'i DfSl
ed. and trans. Julia Borossa CHannondsworth: Penguin, 1999).
As you are aware I have used this 'translational' model, as

126 127
 Fni/11 r1!s of Translntio11 Failures of Trn11s/atio11

it's knmvn, to give an account of U,e genesis of ilie unco . . He might, for example, intend to educate, to set an
. . . llSc:ioUs ~...,
of repressio n - primary repress10n, m pa rticular. What bett . ..."' thaJ1 he Ultends- thing else is intuited, and this intuited surplus is
. . er,n !Jft... Je· but some . .
example could there be than the tex t m which Freud descrj v,iv eXall1P ' . Why doesn't it work? Why does 1t fail? Because
lated into 1ove.
genesis of unconscio us fantasy. 1 am referring to "A C hild isbes ~ trans . thing that finds expression in the common French
d rneath JS some
Beaten".•J Freud goes so far as to call this unconscious fantasy a ~ g un e . . b,·en chiitie bien' ['Who loves well, punishes well']. To
. 'Q111aime
fantasy, which clearly undercuts the idea of phylogeneticall ~111llal saying: • h says the proverb. But for the tra nslator, to love and
lo is to purus ,
ited primal fantasies. For Freud will demonstrate the individudi ~- ve . hare opposites. "H e punishes the oilier, he loves only m e,_ so
of this primal fa ntasy. This unconscious fa ntasy is, as you know, esec. /h
ltsis to purus
howcan to Iov
e possibly be to punish?" Because to love and to purush
. . .
ond phase in a sequence that Freud describes with great precision,and .L.~--A • the infantile unconscious of the adult, m the sadistic
are conru:,cu m
it is formulated as follows: "My father is beating me." Let me rapid! · us of the parent since for the parent who does ilie beat-
unconsoo '
recall that Freud discerns a first phase, which is real and perceived,i . to love is also and necessarily to copulate (wiili ilie mother, for
which "My fntlrer is beating the child [little brother or sister]". The second :!mple), to sodomize (you, for example). ~ the tr~la~on "he l~ves
phase is the fantasy, which is entirely unconscious and which itself only me" there is thus a failure of translation. It 1s this repression,
remains inaccessible to consciousness and can only be reconstructt'd this partial failure of the translation, which leads to precisely ilie mos t
in analysis: "My father is beating me''. The third phase is a conscious sexual part of the message falling into ilie unconscious: the equiva-
fa ntasy, "A d,ild is being beaten", which returns symptomatically and lence behveen "My father is beating me" and ''My father loves me".
is usually accompanied by sexual pleasure and masturbation. Let us To summarize: the message is a conscious-preconscious mes-
develop phase 1 a little: "My father is beating the child [little brother"' sage; there is no such thing as an 'unconscious message', a term that
sister] in front of me." He is obviously showing m e this spectacle; it is in my opinion is meaningless. There is ilius a conscious-preconscious
a message. And Freud adds: "He is beating in front of me tire ch11d [littlt mes.sage compromised by the unconscious of ilie transmitter. There
brother or sister] whom I hate." "Whom I hate", is obviously a contextual is then an attempt at translation by the recipient, a translation iliat
element, and one that gives ilie m essage its entire meaning; it isalsoa ~-~ shall call intra-semiotic, for it is done by drawing upon codes or
common element, a secret or a piece of common knowledge behveen ~olects, or by the attempted creation of new ones. I say "by draw-
my father and me. "We two, he and I, know I ha te this little brothe~or ~~ upon" because the child often does not create every part of this
sister." To the formulation "He is beating in front of me the child {the /rt/~ :olect_of the translation; it is offered to him by the social world. Only
brother or sister] whom I hate'' , Freud suddenly adds: "He loves only llll, er this_ attempt at translation does the splitting occur between a
"He beats the one I hate, he loves only me", is a conclusion but aJso ~nsaous and a repressed unconscious element: the preconscious
~ement is the translation, "he loves only me". It bears the scar of the
a kind of illumination, and a kind of translation. Freud introdcodurese,
it elsewhere with these words, das heisst: 'it means'. Another (his
another idiolect appears here, which is invented so as to translate ore
is:~~ h~pe - our ?ood fortune from a clinical point of view -
lhatui.:..:~gam and agam, other partially translatable elements and 1

extraordinary scene: it is a code of love. The father thus says JJl •U1t<1tely the SC will bl • .
initial ar ena e us to reconstitute something of the
abletornessage, a nd lead us to a new translation that is a little better
encompass the total message.
13 Sigmund Freud, "A Child is Being Beaten" (1919e), SE 14, PP· 17s-z04.

128 129
 Failures of Translation failures of Translation

Our other fundamental hope is that there has been a Ill . • and of the very structure of the message, and from
UJUCatton . . .
a compromised message; that there was this interplay betw E!Ssage, of coOUJl • f the recipient of this transmISs10n. Several authors
• tofview o
levels, even if the message sometimes appears to be bruta11 een hvo the Polll a ed in this: the path and the theoretical framework
Ferenczi's text, which one can reread in its entirety, insists !tXUal ·"" a}ready eng g
"'~
t,een propos ,
ed and specifically for psychiatrists
. h ·t
w o, 1 seems o
t
sio11 rather than translation, on the confusion that provokes Wit:;nfu. 1tave . . creasingly confronted with these problems. Is there a
are bemg m .
child, and within ourselves, the possibility that a message might~ me, h it is something no longer compromISed by the uncon-
111essage w en 'bl ,
radically untranslatable or, what may be worse, that there mi h . inhabited absolutely by it? Is such a thing even poss1 e.
no message at all. Both Freud (in his earliest period at the mg t be
soous but . . d. ·ts
e when it 1s something that conveys an rmposes 1
' oment Is there a mesSag . . .
when he was concerned with the facts of sexual abuse) and FerenC'li hen it is something that thus lillposes a translation that IS
od
ownc e, w .
open up the question of the untranslatable. The untranslatable that nothing other than the message itself? Or when the message 1s para-
dumbfounds us, whose horror - which in Freud and in Ferenczi is doxical, perhaps? What possible uses are there for the concept of the
overtly paedophilic and sadistic - obsesses us; the horror too, we paradox, if it is employed with rigor?
would add, of the serial killer. Monsters are making a return nowa- Jhave for years proposed a metapsychological theory founded
days and, with them, the all too easy phenomenon of the scapegoat on this concept of translation and the failure of translation - a theory
we reject into the outside the monstrosity that we do not want to see that bears primarily upon the neuroses. I am tempted to say that this
within ourselves. How many more or less unconscious paedophiles theorization could be used as a basis for widening psychopathologi-
are assembled within the ranks of the long processions of public pro- cal investigation in fields that have become increasingly significant
test condemning sexual abuse? and urgent; but the urgency here risks preventing thought, shock-
ing thought, replicating within the psychiatrist the very shock that is
3. H we want to begin to understand, we must try to use present in the reality of patients.
the concept of translation and this thing that we are attempting lo 'Man who speaks', man who is exposed to messages; thus, man
approach: a radical failure to translate; not a partial but a radical failure who is spoken to, man who must imperatively translate those messages,
of translation. This seems to me to be a fruitful path. There are some make them his own, man who translates. When he fails to translate
who are already engaged in asking what conditions make such a fail. them, in what ways is he possessed by them? This is the line of question-
ure possible. I am thinking in particular of Tarelho's book, Para11oiaet ing that must be pursued in your own field. Thank you for listening . . .
la theorie de la seduction genera/isee. 14 What are the conditions of this fail-
ure? It is a failure that may, in particular, result in an intergenerational
transmission of the message as such, without any metabolisation. l
think that the question of the intergenerational needs to be taken_up
again, asking what are the conditions of failure from the point of vteW

14 Luiz Carlos Tarelho, Pnmnoia et In t/11!orie de la sid11ctio11 genem/iste (Paris: PreSS6

Universitaires de France, 1999).

130 131
 Displacemeut and Co11densatio11

7
DISPLACEMENT AND CONDENSATION IN FREUD'

This nimbly written book contains rigorous and detailed infor-

mation on the question it illuminates: metaphor and metonymy. It
is a question that has been endlessly embroiled, first of all by Lacan
- who tried in vain to make a formalist point of view prevail, with
scant regard for any relation to semantics - and then by a number of
his disciples, who were very uncomfortable in this yoke. The aitiques
formulated by Alain Costes are relevant and supported by evidence
and documentation. The model he proposes is sound and enables us to
find our bearings clearly. So, rather than reprise or paraphrase what he
develops, I offer in what follows a short text that has been in my files
for some time. It does not address the linguistic problem but something
altogether different: what Freud calls condensation and displacement.

Tile Associative Chains

These chains connect (word- and thing-) representations. A, B,

C, D, etc. They thus consist of the links, that is to say the connections,
between two consecutive elements: A-B.

~ nPrefo~e to Alain Costes, l.Aam: Le fo11rvoie111ent li11g11istiq11e (Paris: Presses

iversitaires de France, 2003).

132 133
 Displacement arid Condensation Displacement and Condensation

The connection of A to B is m~de ac~ording to the major types Displacement and Condensation
of association that have been emphasised since at least the eighteenth
century: analogy, contiguity, contraSt These words appear very early in Freud's work,2 but they are
atically foregrounded in The Interpretation of Dreams as
most e[I\ph
mrnlogi;: if Ais wine characterizing the primary process. .
Bis the sun Displacement and condensation are two processes that are
511
ported by the associative chains defined above, and this is so
(Like wine, the sun warms the body and the heart. As the song goes: l'latever the type of association linking the elements to each other.
"wine, it is sunshine in a bottle"). Heat constitutes what is called:
tertium comparationis; it is the common element linking the two
representations. A. Displacement
Contiguity: contiguity may comprise quite diverse modalities
container-contained / part-whole / cause-effect / etc. In an associative link A-B, the representation B receives the
entire investment that was originally assigned to A. Thus B is finally
if A is wine substituted for A.
Bis the glass (container) If the link A-Bis one of analogy, the displacement would be ana-
logical (metaphorical according to post-Freudian terminology):
As to association by contrast, its autonomy is debated,andit~
often reduced to the first two or to analogy alone. wine ➔ sun
Remarks:
a) All of this is thoroughly classical and constantly taken fu The sun, in my discourse or in my dream, replaces the wine.
granted by Freud If the linkA-B is one of contiguity, the displacement would be 'by
b) Freud does not employ the words 'metaphor' and 'meton- contiguity' (metonymic according to the post-Freudian terminology):
ymy'. He frequently speaks of Gleichniss to mean compa~~'. fab!t.
allegory. He also employs the words Ko11tiguittit and Kontm111lat. . wine ➔ glass
c) Metaphor and metonymy are tropes of classical rhetl)lli.
that is to say, figures of speech, 'ways of saying' that involve_lit The glass, in my discourse or in my dream, replaces the wine.
• . roprie!Y
replacement of A by B. It is therefore only by a certain unp . Metonymy and metaphor are thus two types of substitution
that these words are sometimes used to refer to the type of comttrlO those only difference consists in the modality of the connection A-B
according to which the substitution is made. contiguity or analogy).

~
~ the relevant tri ·
language p en _es m Jean Laplanche and Jean-Bertrand Pontalis in The
of sychoa11alysrs, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (London: Kamac, 1973).

135
134
 Displaremeut a11d Co11de11satio11
Displacement a11d Conde11satio11

8. Condensation
Example of condensation:
It frequently happens that associative chains int
a common element; thus, if D is the same representation ~ ii analogy contiguity analogy
(face/ - moon - sun - twine/
chains A-8-C-D and J-K-L-M will cross at the element D:::M_M,~

A-e -c- (0:M)

~ntiguity
~ ntiguity
glass

window

/4alogy
(passage/
K

/ The dream image (wine) condenses the latent representations:

(face) and (passage).
b) A double connection - of contiguity and resemblance
It is a matter of condensation because the element (D = M) conden:LS simultaneously- may exist between two terms. Suppose, for instance,
in itself the entire invesbnent of the two chains. (D = M) comes to rep- that Robert is a carpenter. He becomes known, by contiguity, as The
resent simultaneously J and A. The energies that have been displacal Plank. But it may also be the case that Robert is very thin. He becomes
known as Plank by analogy.
along the two associative chains will be added together at the junctioo
of the representations. There is no reason why Robert might not be both a carpen-
ter and very thin. The determination of his nickname would thus be
double.
NB
a) Each of the connections of each of the chains can be either 'meta-
phorical' or 'metonymic'. Condensation is no more closely relatai Contiguity: his job Is a Carl)fflter

to metonymy than to metaphor; it comprises both metonymies arJ

metaphors. Robert
The Plank

Analogy: he Is very thin

136
137
 Displacement and Condensation Sexual Crime

In Conclusion

Thi
. ·s entire development is strictly Freudian Tl
· le On!
contributions are the words metaphor and metonym B Ynew
Y· ut if
seem to create a problem, one can omit them and only s k they
and contiguity, following the associationist tradition. pea of anal~

8
SEXUAL CRIME1

"Sexual Crime": now there's a title that sounds like something

of a challenge, if only by virtue of the scope it contains. Inevitably,
the result will not entirely live up to expectations, or cover the full
expanse of the theme. But this is a challenge to myself, above all, and
to my own trajectory in attempting to think or rethink psychoanalysis
and the Freudian discovery in a certain way. For, from the moment
one maintains, as I do, that infantile sexuality is not innate but that,
like fantasy, it emerges within a dialogue, an exchange between adult
and infant in which the sexual initiative comes from the adult, one
must completely invert one's perspective on sexual crime.

1shall quote a short excerpt from Freud that can be found in

the Minutes of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society- the proceedings of the
~eetings of the Vienna Society in the historic period. It is a text that
15
perhaps not often read, and since it is not always well translated I
hav~ re~anslated it for you. On January 24, 1912, Freud makes the fol-
lowmg intervention concerning the fantasy of seduction by the father:

-------
\ First published .
in Adolescence, Spring, 2003, 21, 1, pp. 163-78.

138 139
 Sexual Crime
Sexual Crime

The grain of truth contained in this fantasy lies in

fact that the father, by way of his innocent the donetosuppose she also considers herself to be guilty. Then
. .
. . . caresses aught 1ea . d the famous Oecbpal triangle and beyond the
m earliest childhood, has actually awakened . Laius. Beyon . th
there 15 f the father , (which is somewhat overworked), there 1s e
. th ese same aff . the
. l's sexuality . . . It IS
little gu
'murder
O
• d it is a story of paedophilia: in the prehistory or
ate fathers that are the ones who then endection- 510ry
of Lams, an
. · eavour full th Oedipus complex, Laius is the seducer of a pubescent
to break the child of the habit of masturbati rnble to e . thin · f
. ~~
~ h si pus. To further complicate gs, one version o
~h1ch they themselves had by that time become the boynamed C ~d.Pcates that Oedipus himself was Laius' rival for the
mnocent cause.2 the myth even m 1 .
young Chrysippus, and that they both seduced h1m.
The word "innocent" occurs twice. In the Gennan tw . To return to my personal motive for addressing this t~eme,_ it
O
ent words are used, but this is of little importance: Freud ~ea differ. . kind of responsibility, as though something calls me, saying this:
15
that the father is "innocent", that he awakens the little girl/Y says a who return the initiative
"You, · of sexuality to the adult message,
. who
ity with "innocent" caresses. Notice what a complete inversio= believe that the adult message is essentially impregnated with sexu-
of Ferenczi's theses (which we shall have cause to return to), since; ality, how do you distinguish this s;~ual ini~tive on the part_of.the
Freud tenderness is on the side of the adult, and it is the Ianguaged adult from criminal sexual assault? There lS perhaps one pnnapal
tenderness which, so to speak, encounters the language of passion a means of approaching this question: to acknowledge the presence, or
sexuality in the child. the various modalities of the presence of infantile sexuality within the
Of course, Freud does not always forget, as he does here, adult, within every adult- parent or criminal - and especially when
about the sexuality of the parents in this relation, but all the same,in in the presence of a child. Here I shall again quote from the Minutes
the official doctrine at least, the perspective is generally an invertel Oanuary 11, 1911) where Freud, expressing himself a little more freely
one. In the 'Oedipus complex' the criminal is Oedipus, which is In than he does in his writings, says:
say, ultimately, the child. An inversion of culpability is also precisely
what we find in this little excerpt, since in the end the father punishes [T}he chief effect that the sight of the child produces
the child for the masturbation that he himself has provoked. We tlws consists in the revival of the mother's own infantile
have an inversion of culpability. One might even speak of a kind rJ sexuality.
injection of culpability into the child. On the one hand, sexual envy is awakened;
It should be emphasized, then, that Freud does not (far from on the other hand, the sexual repression that often
it) completely follow the ancient myth of Oedipus, in which ~ enough has been carried through and maintained
happen quite differently. First of all, Jocasta hangs herself, which only with great effort takes place again. And thus
it could be that the hostile impulses that express
2 Minutes of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, eds. H~n NunH~. themselves in the maltreatment of children are also
Ernst Federn, trans. Margaret Nunberg with the ass1Stance of . 2-1; connected with the reawakening of the mother's
(New York: International Universities Press, 1962-1975), voL 4• P
translation altered. childhood sexuality.

140 141
 Sexual Crime Sexual Crime

1 shall continue because this passage is extremely interesting: on psychoanalysts! - who face up to the fact that
~ rare even am gf sexual practice in this Freudian sense of the word
. amattero
The gratification of certain erotogenic zones (suck. incest~ thrO ologists and jurists often blithely forget this point.
ling, coprophilic inclinations) in the care of the child ,sexual · ~ w:Ose research is considered to be authoritative, gave
is accompanied by a retrograde character fonna. Irene Thery, h rt while ago on "the nonnative order in sexual mat-
semiJlar as o
tion, by some regression; this often expresses itself a ,, e here the bibliography she gave out at the seminar. The
clearly enough in many a young mother in the form ters . I haV re to texts about matnrno. nial prohib"ti.
1 ons, w
hich
jor re ferences a
of sloppiness.3 ma that the question of the sexual aspect of incest vanishes the
meansent it is evoked, since in the literature "the nonnati.ve ord er m .
Here, it is the mother who is in question; a moment ago it was the
father - and you can see how Freud tends to exonerate the father
::i matters" is reduced to prohibitions in the field of marriage.
One sometimes hears quoted a comment made by the anthropologist
place responsibility onto the mother. What remains clear, noneth: Robin Fox: "Every teenager knows [sex and marriage] are different'' .5
is Freud's preoccupation with the presence, in the adult-child rela- It is a point that a number of anthropologists seem to have forgotten.
tion, of the adult's infantile sexuality. This redounds against many anthropological theories, beginning with
In order to take this step of speaking about adult infanbl? those of the monumental Levi-Strauss, who only ever treats modali-
sexuality it is once again essential not to forget Freud and oneofhil ties of marriage, i.e. marriage as distinct from the sexual. If we are
central discoveries: i.e. precisely, infantile sexuality, which is to say to make any advance, and perhaps to invoke the difference between
'enlarged' sexuality as Freud understands this term. That is: 1. asexu- coitus and sexuality- 'sexuality' in the enlarged sense in which Freud
ality that absolutely goes beyond genitality, and even beyond sexual understood it-we must take the reverse direction along all the paths,
difference; 2. a sexuality that is related to fantasy; 3. a sexuality that~ and dismantle all the structures, which have led to the denial of sex-
extremely mobile as to its aim and its object; and 4. (a point on which uality in the Freudian sense of the term. Some happily sidestep the
I myself lay great emphasis) a sexuality that has its own 'economi' Freudian corpus in order to forget the presence of infantile sexuality,
regime in the Freudian sense of the term, its own principle of fwv:· not only within the child but, in a repressed form, within each of us.
tioning, which is not a systematic tendency towards•discharge, but a To return to the subject of sexual crime more directly, three
specific tendency towards the increase of tension and the pursuit cl ~ of motivation are frequently invoked which end up desexual-
excitation. In short, it is a sexuality that exists before or beyo~-Sl!l '.211'g it sadomasochism, narcissism, and the death drive. They are
or the sexed, and which may perhaps encompass genitalitybutidy ~voked both in the media vulgate and in many more learned discus-

-
under the very specific modality of the phallic.4 sions, but always oriented towards desexualization.
Sadism. After all, to speak of sadism is for some no longer
10
Rare are those theoreticians of incest, and even of sexual speak of sexuality. Recently, two little girls tortured a third girl
;:-:-_
3 Minutes of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, vol. 3, ibid., PP· _119-lZO. . '1)rlf!I¢ l Robin Fox Kin5h. .
4 These points are developed in two essays included in this volume: Penguin ~ks •p and Mnmage: An Anthropological Perspective (Harmondsworth:
, 1967), p. 54.
Instinct" and "Sexuality and Attachment in Metapsychology" ·

142 143
 Sexual Crime Sexual Crime

killer with megalomaniac delusions was categorized

-,. ''But wh
'almost to death. The media reaction was extraordinaru- sion, Recent~y, a d as referred to as 'paranoid' in the media and
they asked, as if it were necessary to find an exhaustive e"Plana !"1' . tic- an w
a 'why' that would be more acceptable than the sadistic dri .~ as narcisS_15 _ which supposedly excludes his psychosis from
tnc vulgate d his nf . .
(even if, of course, the sadistic drive had a particular histo ~e 11seif Psychia · of the sexual· Yet one has only to rerea co ess10n, m
girl}. I am not claiming that the 'sadistic drive' is a final ~ia:~ the domain
whi ·ch he descn
'b his masturbation as incessant and inadequate and
. h es
th final grandiose orgasm to w hich h e asprres,
· and
but rather that we must not skip over sadomasochism in th lior\ ts it Wit e .
sense of the term. Generally speaking, whenever it comes to e 5exual contras t far off achieving by means of the massacre that still
ment, what usually gets left out, without even a mention -~ ~ :· whi.ch he was no .
IS ··•,:uq
I
unts our memones. .
major reflection on the topic, "A Child is Being Beaten", in . 5 ha ,__11 the aggressive drive or death drroe. Here people do rely
. . between the fact of beatin Which FuiauY, · desexualize
he makes the expliat connection think they rely on him, in order, once again, to
on Freu d, or
· ~t
beating · h 'ed.. uc~ti'~~al' ~oti'ves, and. sadis g, l'l'ellis
.. m. No less forgotten criminal act. This is a complex issue, to be sure, and one w hich I have
Freud's d1scuss1on m Instincts and their V1assitudes", in which ~ lhe ed to revitalise under the heading of 'the sexual death drive', in
attempt ed th 'd th dri , .
genesis of sadomasochism is set out step-by-step. effort to show that in the end what Freud call e ea ve is
Narcissism is another kind of evasion of the sexual. Here too :thing but sexuality in its most destructu.red and ~estructuring form._
Freud is passed over. For narcissism would in fact, for many, be~ In either the Oedipus story or the Freudian myth of the pn-
very model of the non-sexual. What is quite simply forgotten is the mal horde, is the 'murder of the father' purely non-sexual? One might
origin of the concept in Freud himself, and no one takes the trouble sometimes think so, to read those who set up this mythic act as an
to follow its course, not even so as to try to refute it. What is forg«• absolute, an absolute that is situated at the level of the so-called foun-
ten is that Freud calls 'narcissism' the libidinal investment- whichis dational References. For example, in Le crime du Caporal Lortie Pierre
thus something sexual - of the ego. He calls narcissism "the libidinal Legendre,9 who doesn't hesitate to capitalize the term Reference,
complement of egoism",6 which clearly shows that narcis.sism is the completely scotomises the sexual relation to the father - an instance
sexual complement of something non-sexual, something that hecalls, of Lacanianism pushed to such an extreme that it succeeds in denying
using a completely different term, the 'ego drives',7 which pertain the very bases of Freudian thought.
to the domain of self-preservation.8 The analysis of megalomaniac
delusion, for example, is forgotten. For Freud, and he has yet to~ What I am proposing, all too rapidly, is not a dogmatic call to
refuted on this point, the megalomaniac delusion is a sexual delu- order in the name of Freud, but an attempt at least to ensure that he is
not entirely forgotten when trying to seize on something solid in the
6 Sigmund Freud, "A Metapsychological Supplement to the Theo!}' of l)iejlnS' :eld of sexual crime. Obviously there is incest and the incest prohibi-
(1917d), in SE 14, p. 223. , ~ on, and these provide, a priori, a good point of departure. In fact in
7 (Trans.: Freud's German term is Ichtriebe, consistently aanslated ~ ~ kt
my . ,
senunar I have for several months conducted an examination of
by James Strachey. We have used "ego drives" to reflect LapJanche 5 P Strache)'s this t .
translating Freud's term Trieb as 'drive' (pulsio11), rather than reproduang opic, demonstrating that the problem of incest is subject to the
misleading choice of 'instinct']. . . " . 17rt~ n[llf-
8 See the articles on ''Ego instincts (pulsions du moil" and "Ego libido ~1 ) ~
ierre Legendre, Le cnme
.
1 d11 Caporal Lortie (Paris: Flammarion, 2000).
of Psychoa11alysis, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (London: l(arnac, ·

144 145
 sexual Crime
nfuSion between
Sexual Crime nusoiity and co little too easily,
al\ end both pr~ off the tongue a . ional c1ause-
. gs to does rou d f proVlS .al
greatest variability, in terms of social practice as well as theo ~' a!\d b~ £\Ten if it t \east as a kin o w i1'5tituting soC
even as ~g~ the very de~~on of the term. Among anthn:,;:
ueneranot\S: ..,..,,-,ositlon, a i.\..e \aWi the la ~,nc.t mcest.
fue o t tN5 p.1-vs: ~ ti'Ve tO u• 7citlOn ag~-
cal theones of incest, that of Levi-Strauss - something of amonUll\en\ \et us acce~d then be cotte :hing but the prohi~o\ogy-l all\ by no_
which Franc;oise Heritier has described as an 'Impregnable Smin~- \l\cest wo u\d itse\f be no nt to \aW and cUrlosity even a cur
hold' - perhaps owes its solidity to its extreme limitatiens. lt is an stt'l~ wo for a tnorne . th a little . current 1aw.
1.,et us ~ i.\..,c:. area, but WI of mcest m .....~onial
appealing theory in that its central proposition is the idea that the rt 1l\ u..., al absence . II\au=·
~"'"' an eY.pe _,......,ost tot \..\bits certain __,......,ent.
incest prohibition is not really negative but in fact has to do with an me01,., a1s the ~· It proiu h ann~·
c.,of"J \ook re"'e t forbid mcest. _,.,...,.l\\ty other t al\. ot incon·
exchange obligation, a claim that obviously makes the law into a com- •1 does no . al\Y y=- ocasta 15 n .:ll

pletely positive injunction or invitation to exchange. The limitations cl french \aw •fuout proposmg f oediP'15 al\d l 1!. 'o and it W1J.>
alliances, but vn ·tal situation o 'under the 'ch 11\arrlage
this theory are obvious, as many psychoanalysts have observed. For -" the tl\at'! _t..:,.1 ..en botl\ if su da :«.-ply b e
i\fter i111, hen we "---ve OUJ.~ • "-i\e. '\3ut
ncewav . woul S=·
Levi-Strauss's theory, working precisely from the point 0£ view of the lUA •
ceivab\e, w 'ess· and \ess mco_ __...ta crune; it. . way sub-
exchange of possible wives, the basis of marriage, takes sororal inces\
nethaP5
become ~
-·'d not be co
t\S1dert:U
. .--c:. theY
are 1l\ no
--""';n authors
alone as its paradigm. This leaves aside the very heart of what interesls r- · "-t ' t wow -·--' re\atl.0.1-..,, cei~--
caro.e to \ign '1 . estuoUS sexU£U- . using to see dvocate the
psychoanalysis: intergenerational incest, father-daughter or father-son annulled, As for ll\~tion. lt 15 all\h supPosedlY a: t between
incest, mother-daughter or mother-son incest. It not only leaves out iect to any specific _.,_.,.,.cbi5t spirits': o 1· 5 needed.1nces things
the intergenerational relation but, what is more, it leaves out 'inter-agt , . t those c1.1-...... _,:~l\uon these are
nsmg up agaiDS_ t' No suchleg~ 1 recall (for . ~er,
relations, which are perhaps the essential thing and which I shall have '\egalization_of ll\ces .ffence nor a crunefue case of a 'Belgia:as prose-
occasion to develop later on. For example, brothers and sisters are of adu\ts is neither an o day in the press) diSCU55ion- Be ghter, with
the same generation but they may be in an adult-child relationship from reported a1most every the sub\ed of 11\u~ved with hiS da~ch he was
the point of view of age and sexual maturation. who for a while was d"tt,rthefl11ore' _,. offence of w t..:ch il\cest
irolia an 1.. th oiuY · w1u.
On the other hand, Levi-Strauss' s theory (like that of many cuted for paedop d cl:tlldret\·
we~~ ~e o!\e res~ lll-relatlOI\ to the
anthropologists) is one which might almost be described as 'eth: whom he even ha: . ,. naedopbilia· til\g factor 1ll- t is included
nographic', in the sense of being a cultural 'curiosity' itself; for it rec1Se1y, r- grava al 1,nces . ·c-
charged was, P 15 as al\ ag . gener · er fuel! vi
presumes solidly constituted kinship groups, which are rathei: diffi· is invoked by the \~W ... ¢t1al abuse lll-r or authority o:er er a legal
cult to find within, or even to transpose into, societies such as ours,
~a, 01 owe teau•
crime of paedop ••,ho have P,," ..ontly thal\ a
fuose ~• Ol!'el .....
except perhaps in restricted pockets within them. At the same wne, within the acts Of treated al\Y
it is a theory of matrimonial alliances in which one would be h~ 15 scarcely c1ienie111
fun. A f.atbet · n0Sl'-" ..,;,o"' 1
•·
.·"" as accou
}0\0""•'
b,...\,
ild'S uu•
pressed to find a single word about sexual relations or about sexu_al °''atdian in thiS r- . fret'cbla"'."• ftOtl'I t}le ell other' s
o- roviSiol\ U\ . idel\tlt)' to 1:ne tll
incest, including all its so-called perverse gradations, especially its t'fU\g to a 'P .t}lhold theU' uent acces5
- - - - ; ; c l l e iS tefe 1:nets to W1 child's subseq
homosexual variant. 10 lTrans.: -i:ap anows t\eW ~~ol\S 01\ t}le
On the basis of the conclusion drawn by Levi-Strauss and by sous x, wrocll d p\aces restri
many other anthropologists, the incest prohibition - so the argument certificate, ~
identity1.
goes _ marks the passage from the state of nature to the state of cul-

146
 Scx1,a/ Crime Sexual Crime

Can we get a purchase on incest with refere ·t excludes those who are not related by kinship
nee ton. rrow, for1 .
when the law itself seems t_o have allowed incest to esca ."1e~Iv, halld, too na in the general sense does not come under the heading
(and probably, I suspect, since the Napoleonic Code pe tis ~ ~al abuse . eople sometimes mistakenly use the word 'incest'
Revolution)? The definition specified as the juridical ono~ the Fl'Pn., ( f iJlCe5t, even•
if Psexual abuse comnutt · ed on minors
· who are not
dictionary attempts to define this· sexual aberration Withe 1l\ the '"'l.frl
R:~IQ\
~,hf1' referring to r) But it is also excessively broad, for it includes
1, the abuse •
the law. This is not an illogical thing to do, but it continreferenceto reJated to . between consenting adults, which are completely
incest to marriage: ues to %t sexual relatio~ It is as if the incest prohibition had, little by little,
igno~
__ ,1 by the aw. · · · 'dl
disappear; what at one time, m ngi y cons t
n·tu ed
Incest. Noun. Masculine. Law: sexual relations allowed to . . d. .
befJ\ 'thin the law, now ends up escaping in every irection.
between a man and a woman who are related. b societies, fell W1
blood or marriage to a degree that entails the proJ. toward psychoanalysis, toward a psychoanalytic
bition of marriage. 11 can we turn . .
k? I hall not discuss an entire current of thought that claims
tram~wor · San anthropological or even criminological fact (words
Thus it is the prohibition of marriage which is alwa that mcest, as . . . 'th th
. used with a touch of disdam), has nothing to do W1 e
the starting point and which serves as the benchmark fort: taken as which are concerns psychoanalysis. . For some: 'In the beginnin'g
incest that .
the sexual crime itself no longer being regarded as a crime ~ffence,
point of view of the law. What we have is an attempt to give the
definition of incest, but one which nevertheless misses out entire road
a: was the fantasy', even the 'primal fantasy' - a pnmal fantasy whose
. . they don't worry about or trouble themselves to explain. In
on~so they completely pass over Freud, who in Totem and Taboo,
of it: paedophilic incest, for example - which is perhaps the ~
aspect - but also homosexual incest, since there is, after
bition against homosexual marriage which could serve as a ~
all,::: domg . ecul .
des ite the rash character of his sp ations, en
ds his b
text y as g
wh!ther, after all, what he has described is not for primitive humanity
kin

ure and simple fantasy already. He then adds: ''There is no reason

point in the above definition, a marriage of this kind not even bein io think so"; and he concludes with Goethe's famous aphorism: "Im
envisaged. Homosexual sexual relations, homosexual incest, can! Anfang war die Tat'' ("in the beginning was the Deed"), emphatically
no way be referred to the rules of matrimony. placing the real sexual criminal act in the beginning.12
One gets the continual impression that incest is a poorly con- ''The Deed" means that we are not free to imagine this "In
ceived category, not only in terms of definition, which would not in the beginning ..." in whatever way we wish. Freud, at any rate, gets
itself be of great concern, but more particularly in terms of what it~ straight to the point. He speaks of historical or pre-historic stages.
supposed to regulate. In the case of homosexual incest, we might say There is a beginning, which has to be overcome and regulated. At dif-
that it loses its pertinence as a category; but what, above all, it allows ferent moments in his thinking, which are not easily reconciled, Freud
to slip away is sexual crime. And what incest fails to encompass and makes several different efforts to imagine this first period of prehis-
contain above all is sexual crime. The category of incest is, on theone tory. I can only cover them rapidly.

11 Le Nouveau Petit Robert, Paul Robert (Paris: Le Robert, 2010). 12Sigmund Freud, Totem and Taboo (1912-13), SE 13, p. 161.

148 149
 Sexual Crime sexual Crime
tablished
fter i.;., murder, the law es
At one point in his essay on "'CiViJi,ed' Sexuai M .
iiw

m ill and then, a .h

Modem Neivous ness,,, he pas,'ts a firs t stage of ciViJiz, :' 'Ill
OraJih, ·sw ' rs 't WIS
hall hl brothe . . but I don
which the sexual drive would have been free, functioning. ~"1;, ,wer t t of th• his in detail, . bility or the
lvitho,,I
regard to the aims of reproouction"." This is a kind of historical ~•• contr•' e upan t on the vana t and
position of what he descnbes m the Three Essays on Sexu,,uty lratis. bYwe 1 to enlarg . to play up . bility of inces , .
unab e f wanttng he vana There IS
the polymorphous peiverse sexuality of the c d. Thu., We ha
hiI llanie)y
I
l aJtl
unpress
°
ion
;ncest.
There is t
hin the saoa
• 1 sciences.
nthropalo-
historical stage modelled upon a stage of a different, on~ w!1" th•of deli!llitingdefining it, wi_~ of incest among :fer also to
vean
kind, and without there being any reason to suppose that the•foon difficUlt)' difficulty of logical theonuld be necessary _to y opinion,
actually plays an active role in the history of the child. er sheer . of ethnO It wo nts, m ID ·

~
ii<' fiabili'Y Levi-Strauss- f incest represe Finally, there IS
In Freud, any notion of promiscuity and Pmna,y poll'lllo,. ii<• •~ ,uuded whose theory oxua)izing tenden_cy. odels are not
phous perversion becomes blurred with the Oedipus myth, lnces g,s•· . r1enuer, f the dese successive m historical
resides in the choice of incestuous objects, which for Freud (as for1 F""I""'
most "'
trem• fortn o d's work, where ther hand, the limi·ta-
.thin Freu On the O -able de
Sophocles), let us recall, is made at the initiative of the child. Th..,;, the bili'Y wt another. t the van . of
an endogenous Propensity towa!rls it in the little human being, whic1, ii< ,.,;, . ed with one eel to inces , f nn the baslS
e. reconcil . . ns with resp .. . ns, cannot o ow often
Freud explicitly connects to the 'primal fantasies'. But in huth, Freud easily al vanatio t civilizatiO f ference. H
made hardly any effort to explain the origin of these Primal fantasie; and cultur . est wi'thin differen freque nt point o re . t Egypt, etc.
. anoen b
to which so many analysts still refer. He never described any SOrt oJ ·ons of me il they are a n siblings !fl will undou t-
'Oedipal stage' of h'lllllanity. • ent, even .age betwee .ts cement ver
do,rgwn about the mam . hip system, ,
an fined and howe
we hear . a stable kinS ever it is de . aming, the
Finally, there is Totem and Taboo and what is referred to as there IS t how 'b'ti n IS n f
the 'scientific myth' of the 'hol'de'. I do not think that when Freud As long as rohibition of inces , dient of prohi , .oe the degrees o
edly be the p rincipal mgre . d memonz
describe, this as our 'sdent;fi, myth' he is saying that it is 'our myth'; hib'ted The P classify an
I think he is emphasizing the fact that science has come to occupy the it is pro l . and thus to . h .t but others
· to name . t" amiliarwit I thro-
place that others •!tribute to myth. In any case, the scientific myth capaoty ming, no mces . u may be f . om by an
of the home - and I only wish to n,fe, to this indii.ctJy as I'm sure kinship. No M t- some of yo treated wttli sc t aboutthe
There IS a tex times been . of the tex .
you will have some thoughts on it- is only Partially compatible with hich has some I am speaking tive itself: A S~cz-
the Oedipal schema. The patenta] couple barely appean;_ The hol'de may not - w ychoanalysts. . little provoca ber this 15 a
d by ps ·t1e 15 a · mun '
is something quite different ••erything is cen1nx1 on the all-pow..-. pologists an civilization. Its ti" However small m of organization.
fu! father, on the law and on the munte, of the lathe,. This lathe, is
Na or Mosuo Husbands. . tinctive model
ety
without Fathers_or extremely d,s d'll"" of ""'
probably incestuous on all levels, but mudt more silJui&ant than the
exhibits an ed in terms of ne another",
sexual dimension is the genesis of the law, firstly; a father subject to no society that . ot ,tw,y• ""'~- m•·"""'""' ';,.n,J.R. , on
rohibition is nwho use certain Kinship, trans. J.H.e 1969), p. 29._
14 "The 1-t] p ;ndivuiu,ls 5t,,dU"' q/ d Spottiswood ' o,ns. Ash
. hi but refers to TIie Elementary Britain: Eyre an e Nn of C/111111,
13 ~gmw,d
0908d), Fre,d,
SE 9, p. 189. "'O , _, - ~ Mruali1y ' "" Mod'"' "-~ 111n.,,.• kins p ·-Strauss, eedhaII\ (Great H11sba11ds: Tii
Claude
Stunner1.kv1 odney N t Fathers or
and R . ty witliou 2001).
15 Cai Hua, A y,
Sociek: :zone Books,
150 Hustvedt (New or
151
 + :,.:ac• _ ....

-... Sexual Crime

-✓
1

The demonstrative character of this model has been criticised

it is of little importance quantitatively, for its demonstrative•~~
repell~t. to all our con~ctions. Here w~ ha~e a society wh05e~~
is matrilineal and matrilocal. The designation of degrees of ~
is fully developed within every family line. The incest prohibition.
strict and was, in the past at least, if not recently, frequently~
by death. 1n any case, the prohibition continues to be extremely Strict
within the entire line, which is solely transmitted by the women. On
the other hand, there is no name of the father; there is no father, no pater.
nal filiation. The very idea that a father could be related to a sonis
entirely absent from the Mosuo system. The Mosuo are not so naive
that they don't realise coitus is necessary for a child to be born; but a
child will be born, as it were, irrespective of whom the coital partner
is. As such, the father is not named in their terminology and is in no
sense the object of a prohibition. Much has been made of this. Some
have said that it was historically linked to social class - I saw this
argument in Levi-Strauss - and others have seen it as a form of orga-
nized prostitution, which is slanderous. 1n any case, here we have a
society that knows nothing of the concept of 'father', where there is
no 'paternal function' -1 use quotation marks deliberately- and where
the role of coitus in impregnation is not unknown but the particular-
ity of any coital act is irrelevant. There is no father<hild relation. The
father is neither named nor integrated into the child's lineage. There
is no marriage and no marriage system.

One often hears, following Freud, the Latin adage according

to which pater semper ignotus. One never knows who the father is. But
in the constellation of the Mosuo, the situation is entirely different.
No one wonders who the father is, since they know that the answer is
always uncertain (at least, it was before the arrival of DNA): the ques-
tion "who is the father?" has no meaning in itself. There is no father
to be identified, to be sought for or even to remain unknown. The
dimension of 'paternity' is non-existent. However, watching footage

152
 .,.
Sexual Crime

preferable to speak rather of •m~ges'. There is also good

to question the clinical content of the article. For exaxnp1e
pointed out that the language of passion is not exclusiv~~tht~
it'
and nor is the language of affection exclusive to the child <Ai¥1-.
you will immediately remember Freud's text whlch~ki ~\liit
opposite, i.e. that affection was exclusive to the adult and ~ ~
sion was exclusive to the child). Nevertheless, what seems to mt\>•
a stroke of genius on Ferenczi's part is to have dared to use \ht b,
mulation: "between adults and the child'". One can understand ~b,
Freud was repelled by this ~ t He may well have been shocked ~
the emphasis on real sexual assaults, which, he believed, jeopardised
the theory of fantasy. He may -well have been equally unsettled, shall
we say, by Ferenczi's rather panicked therapeutic reactions to thetec-
ognition of the frequency of sexual abuse. But the formulation ilsaf
must have been profoundly shocking above all, for it posed a cha\-
lenge to a very significant aspect of the Freudian edifice. ''Between
adults and the child" is very different from "between the parents and
the child" or "between the two parents and their children". What•
called into question here is the Oedipus oomplex itself.

l shall also cite the title of another article - l like the titles of
articles: they are often more interesting than the content - an artide
which is in the same vein as that of Ferenczi. l ask you to pay close
attention to the warding because the title is English. The author is
Bennett Simon, who has published several articles with the intention
of emphasizing the reality of sexual abuse against children - chiefly
incest, but also sexual abuses in general. His title is: "Incest see under
Oedipus complex"' .17 This title is an ironic quotation from Fenichel'S
treatise on the neuroses,'s where indeed, in the index, under the entry

17 Bennet Sm\00. "1ncest Stt under Oi!dipus compl,tx: The History of an Error in
Psychoanalysis• • in ~ J0111'111d of 1M Amo1am ~ y tic .A5sociation, vol 40,
1992, PP· 955-68.
18 Otto Fmichel. Tht ~ ic Thtory of Ncuosis CLondon: Routledge, 1946).

154 - -
 ~1Crime
5
int of
Sexual Crime . 1 frOU\ the Po
. wt is cruoa that the infan·
13eyond
thiS (al\d thiS
) we must n
1:t
neglect the fact e abuset'· It is
n the side of th hich is at
How to define sexual crime? Sexual violen
3 - sy&.olo'Cf tial function o . in particulal', w
within an asymmetrical relation, with rape itself as~~ f t1'etaP al\ esset' tile sexuality
abuse? Let us add the essential thing for us as psychoanalysts:~ Of .;.ew o...,,d alsO ~as sadiStic i!lfa1' . e strikes much
61e35Y"" )(\lallty, sexual criJtt
sexual crime have an historical or prehistoric correlative?
bare within present day societies of a kind of primordial state? N~
ls:~~
by someone who is prey to his awn infantile sexuality. Does contcomll!Ulfd

\-io
tile se user·
4 - 1'h
d deeper
that\ the
erated by
~ ii\ the ab e diSOrder g ~ daJI\tlge it ~ is cllaracteriSti~ of
:o· ding which
. ternal un U\
_,., di50f-
uses Inten""
the headlllg
eonze under
is immune to the temptation of the prehistoric reconstruction of ~ .."er a1\
1
,_"e the U\ . what l th
fa "'. 3\sO at s~ ' --•"my: this is , 1"'1\or·
age state of sexuality. Levi-Strauss with his variations, Freud Wi~~ def is tile se,.u-- ,1:dltace Po r
propositions. We might also mention Godelier, about whom we ma und illfal\ drive.'9 illUSoTY to LL>Jr . dividual or
uJl'oO al death . . intellectuallY . ,.___...;"ning' of 1J\ ued
have a chance to speak in the discussion, with his idea of the •sacrm! of the~ £ven if it lS . mythic-~~- hich the so-ca
of sexuality' for the good of society. But it is clearly an illusion•to posit 5- ' ~ t y lJ\to a this sexuality w . us etc. labOur
ner\lerse . . everthe\ess L:"'ition, ()edip ' steJI\S
a state of primal savagery at the origin of the individual or of SOCiety, pnoUS r · hi5tory, 1t lS n . incest ptoiuv . .ty of such sy
and especially to do so with reference to what Freud calls 'polymor- coUeeti"e terns of \cill5hiP, hasise the divers1
phous perversity'. ln fact, we must get to the point of admitting that 's'ftr"_r,o\i;;~\tc in order :t~-given. adual dehisCence ~
'the animal in man' is not that real, adapted animal that we know, to bllld· t theY are n more or less gr ce of sexu
d the fad tha •vi}.iZation the of the very essen eratiol\S to
but the savage, sexual brute. And this sexual brute is not there in the an 1n rnodern o ye-ernergence future gen
beginning; it is not the 'true' animal. We don't have a prehistoric ani- routs the . haps be for et
these syste~ pe tall'Y· 1t will per are not there y .
mal lurking within us from the start. We ourselves have brought this . all its bru .l:.. But we
animal into being. It is said that "man is a wolf to man". As I have had cnrne, U\ odes of bil\l,llJ,•S· 1nts:
uwent new rn -"e two further Poth '-nsychol-
occasion to explain in a different lecture, man has become a wolf to 1:"e to Il\<il' . on e r·
1 should )ll" touchillg . 'fhiS is an
io conclude, ~ al'\ytlli:n~ al or the victiill·
•
man -or rather a bestial 1upus', for the real wolf is not a wolf to man. ach it
By the same token, the unconscious and the id are not there from the 1) 1 have not . rtn5 of the criJtUll t begUl to appro have
beginning, and perverse fantasies are the very consequence of repres- __ ,.,., crune, 11\ te ain we caJll'O nsooUS, .. 1
o,.,./
01
of ~,.,.... but once ag , ...-.d the unco hi·ch must at
sion. But a point of view of this kind is no doubt difficult to assimilate. robletn ' a\it)', .,... ch w
in'Ul'ense p d infal'\tile seJ(\l clinical approa ' . dicate what
if we forget freu , is(:USSion of the . I shall onlY U\
I do not want to end this rather meandering discussion with· ·tted al'\Y d ed to a pract1C£•
out pinpointing some clear points of view: -'~"
oi;,v
onu • be cOu•• ~... ect
· ratlV. es·' · ·ons;
1-The fundamental sexual crime is sexual abuse. The model
the same nrne two 11\a}or itn~ al tic invesogatl
seem to me to be the it1{tltttile J,J\ an y . I
for this is the abusive adult-child relation, but also rape and other to \ook {or ·ve". in Tht Bnl15 ,
variants. Qrive': A 5e,c:ual Dn
alled '{)eath 7\
2 - Sexual crime is characterized not only by asymmetry, --- •'fhe So,-C 2004, PP· 455- .
- - -t,aplal'che, 20 I\O• 4, 157
which is present in many other kinds of relation, but also by the posi- \9 d . }ea" ho111tfapY, vo1. '
tion of dominance. Jounuil of P5!1'

156
 Sexua/c.
r11ne
Gender, Sex and the Sexual
. to look for the m
ntcation, Which are alw essage, the residue . f
crudest of acts. It is . ays ?resent, even . o rn~ge
notions as th , this Which leads in What are ¾d eon.~
as an 'ob·ect'e Predator', and the ide me to re.iect as. appatenullllll-
and sunp1ly . Even when enslaved tha that the Vit'H- ~fieien1Y~
as a 'thin , e Vi · . ~""u ts lrea ~
Freud?) Presup g'. And the fact of ~ ts ne"er Ire lecf Putei
fication With thposes at least a minim sadism (need atect ni,.}
e Victim Th Uin level we l'Pt-..;, "'l'IY
th·e patient' d esperate ="'-1.· e only 0o,,;din of lllac;n...L, ·- ~ ltlin
~ g thread Within
- in a scarcely Aw
1
""'<U~u for a thread
\.Ullerent J'Po-i.., of messa
- "'-'usti · •q
c tdetui-
Prari;-
9
se ves by estab1:~1.,_ --o=ter-those Vi . ge. Neect '"'-I! ~
AU>lung a IllinimaI . ctitns who h we~ GENDER, SEX AND TIIE SEXUAV
',....;- . 2) My title COuld be ~ogue With th . ave sa"ed th~
-4'ue IS 5eXua.l' read diffe ell' a88resso ~~
5eXual . . In other Words ·t rentiy, it COuld be r?
, m all crime, ev , I poses the . l'ead to
realistic' N en the most o . question of th rnean ~er is plural. It is ordinarily double, as in masculine-feminine,
day that h. hasoanalyst can elude ,-1.,~ the most b~n~e1 roleoflhe but it is not so by nature. It is often plural, as in the history of languages, and
e a 'cruninal'
· on hisuu:. question, even if ... . . ' the ll!Osf
11
IQ

couch. IS not every in social evolution.

Sex is dual. It is so by virtue of sexual reproduction and also by
virtue of its human symbolimtion, which sets and freezes the duality as pres-
ence/absence, phallic/castrated.
The sexual is multiple, polymorphous. The fundamental discavery
of Freud, it is based on repression, the unconscious, and fantasy. It is the
object of psychoanalysis.2
Proposition: The sexual is the unconscious residue of the symboliza-
tion-repression of gender by sex.

What I present here is a sort of synthesis - one which is too

abbreviated and which merits further development - of a work that
we have pursued for about three years in my teaching and research

1 Fust published in Libres calriers pour la psydiannlyse. 'ttudes sur la Tl1forie de la

seduction (Paris: In Press, 2003) pp. 69-103.
2 [Editor: On Laplanche's French neologism 'sexual' (as distinct from the normal
'sexuel'), see the Editor's note to the Forward of thls volume. The term is usually
printed in italics to mark it off from the standard English tenn with the same
158
spelling}.
159
-- Gender, Sex and the Sexual 7
xualtheorti: ,
•,JI thatis
Es5'1Ys on Se hat 1would call
,"fhe1'h¢ rather w peak
al1lP\e, iJ'l al (le sexue0 or_ . on my part to s
seminar; the basic question being, to put things in ave class· I' fore)( f the se"'1 eccentn°ty . dicate clearly
1
ner, the question of sexual identity- as it is called in ~ch callllaii. we ,se,-c1111 .~e theO!Y ~ lt is perhaps andO so in order to 11\ pt.4 In Ger-
otl u• aO • but l di n conce
The current tendency is to speak of gender identi~ i.osaY 1111I (le ¢1' le sexuel, . Of the Freu a which means
question immediately arises whether this is simply a chan and tit ?: e¢
•tll ¢1,111 an
of le
d not ·tr1nality
d the one,- . ,eeschlech ,
sitiOt\ a!\ erro5· 'fhere lS I the sexual (le seX
t' of course,
ueO, which
I am
ality, the
,I
ulary or something more profound. Is it a positive dev!oU\ ,.,OCab.
. dif th . Pment~
. where is it? t}li5 opl'° re twO t alsO ,5~1 , f eniarged seXU t,een
the mark of a repression, an ere lS repress10n, As
tt'at'' the:~but the~ i~en Freud s ~ e:exual. lt would hkav,~
~ay kn~w, I_ ten~ to ~ that 'r_epression in theory' and 'rep~ •seJ'ed ~ ~ial . . . always -·-' wor ,
m the thing itself - that lS to say m the concrete evolution of the ll\di. .,ling we 'le seThree Essays, it lS ntitled his mau~~: 'SeXUa1theCJrie'
vidual - often go hand in hand. ~ ,:w of the d to have e f 5e,cuat1on . called 'non-
~ai>•, for freu eel _ or o t,een
My plan will be very simple. First, I shall spend a little fune thiJU'3ble ry of the 5e" ality that haS . from what
on conceptual distinctions and on the question, "why introduce gen. utl n the 'fheo 'e' s lt is a seXU ed as diStllld t the
f,s53Y5 ~cescJtlechtstheo71 ·. arilY non-se,c , sexual, then, is no
der?" and then, for the second part, I shall sketch the functioning, in iS not a ' a!\d even prun roduction'. The
the early history of the human being, of the triad gender-sex-sexual. proaeauve~ly 'sexed rep infantile sexuality• alytiC di5covery,
iS called p tiallY pef\Terse at psychoa!\ tuaUze- as
. it is essen ..,.,ality is the gre ~•"-cult to concep . for
,. ,. sexed' ed' se,_.. d and auu uestion U\,
'EJ:llal% ._...,...innil'\g to en fleet on the q c1oselY
Conceptual distinctions are not worthwhile in themselves but . . ed frotn oq,..-- e tries to re . ainlY, tnore
main~ -~,.,f shows when h 1t is infantile, cert to-erotic, gov-
only for the conflictual potentialities they harbour; if they are binary freud l:\lll~ troductOTY Lectures. ~,ect and is thUS au unconscious
they are often the mark of negation and therefore of repression. Some e)(atnple, his Itt than to the o l ' .oUS· (1sn' t the . ) So for
displacements may hide repressions. So it is with the displacement ed to fantaSY the unconso . quesbon ·
connect y governedby .w:natelY ask thiS if{erence of the
of the question of sexual identity onto the question of gender iden- erned by fantaS~I? ()ne can legt
tity. What this displacement perhaps conceals is that the fundamental
Freudian discovery does not lie in gender identity but - besides gen-
ultimately ~~I' is exterior to,
freud, the difference of the g
:::rs: prior to, the d ara-genital.
it is oral, anal~:Je is brought
d tries to define t that is to
der, besides sex or the sexed - in the question of the sexual. sexes, even the whenever freu 'th what it is no ,
Following Freud, I would like to distinguish between the sex- Nevertheless, ·t into relation W1
need to put 1 "fheprovenanet;
ual (le sexuel) and the sexed (le sextd) or that which concerns 'sex'. It has back to the liSveryclose- ·c •se)(Uell
e11andsexua Genna1'1 '
been claimed, perhaps correctly, that the etymology of 'sex' is from' ... tert115stXI' dite and Il'ore c:un-ency-
~envationofthe al' iS Il'ore eru as more co~on _,.,.;fie sense,
cut', because the 'sexed' clearly entails the difference of the sexes or the 41nGennanthe . sexiuilis- ,se,cu guagesand ~ it in a quites~ o900al
difference of sex, which in German is called an 'Unterschied' .3 There is of both iS th~~=of the Rorna: ~ c;escJil~•~~~terpretationo~o;:~:e aware
haS Il'Ore a F ud eIX\ploys ThiS iS the case Ill though we ha i.nan"' SE 4,
3 ln a quite general way, although not systematically, Freud uses the term Unterschied 5 Conversely, ret of •sexuality'_- hich 'it was jUSt as and you're a wo ,
(difference) to indicate a binary opposition and Verschitdmheit (diversity) when different frot'I\ tha versation Ill w sav: 'l'rn a man
•'-ere is "a con h l were to , .
there is a plurality of terms: difference between black and white, diversity of colours. where u• . was as thoug 161
[Editor: d . "1811, December, 1973", Problbnatiques ll: CJlstrations-Symbolisations, (Paris: of our sex, t
1

Presses Universitaires de France, 1980), pp. 44-58). p.333,

160
 d the Sexual
Gettd.,,- , sex an
Gender, Sex and the Sexual "ti 1\.
. us defillition, by oppast ~t is
. . a cuno ed because i
t. 5o it 15 --~' is condemn I
to accep . the sexU<U- d ed. Toe sexua
say, with sexed activity or wi~ s~x; and_he does this accordin ~ adlllts reasotu!\g .•.,,,, it is con enm
three classic paths of the association of ideas. First, the path ~ to~
· f0 • cifC' l1at' l' be(:a~
uiil'g s0rt of . )(Ual, or 'seXWl , use it is the seXUll . . g to define
l
blance: Freud seeks resemblances between the pleasures of th resein.
0 iya ·t15se sed be(:a .i:"-cultyofhaVll\
-A"'1al, but i ed· it is repres t the great oiiu p only in tef11\S
the pleasures of infantile sexuality or perverse pleasures ande ~I, 'fl"'- ress ' onfron ble to gras Will
. . f ·ta1 ality l th , Whatis iS t)\e re~ere, then, we t we appear to~ a . the classic se~- .
L~
charactenstic o gem sexu , name y e experience of ali"" ~-•ali'CY ID dd to the co1u....,
orgasin_ r>
ed se')(U ..,hat•i u,a. ,c.ed to 5,:;,,.- -"•"1on,
Some of the resemblances are more or less valid; some are tnoxe
a!\
eniarg • nto ••
15 se '
us orWlU
_..:11 it rather a
less artificial, such as that claimed between the "blissful smile" of~ . re\atio . errn save , ed in
o! its ucing a t ~ t ? • fir5t introduc .
sated nursling and "the expression of sexual satisfaction in later \if ,, 1 il'tr()<i there[',,re5s1on. . 'o-ender' / wbich wasansPosed ,.-to differ·
e. u•
Second and above all, there are the arguments of contiguity: contiguity add to tbifd teflll. 15 0 .__..,.,c:,\ated or tr . f gender is
since the sexual is found in foreplay and in the perversions contiguous 'fhe
ut wbich earn .
e to be u=-
into French-
Toe notion
.
°
femiJlists, an
d
to genital orgasm; and even the argument of 'anatomical' contiguity, -e.ngush, b es and in particular aroong S()Ciologists, sed to }\ave
which Freud already calls a sort of 'destiny', in which the contiguity ent la1'guag . · such success . that it is supPo tenn
oirrentlY en)oymg f nuni5t sociologists, tablished that the .
is between the vagina and the rectum.7 ·all aroong e fact it is now es and later rein-
But what I would like to stress instead is association 'by oppo- Money in 19551
sition', which among the associationists is typically referred to as the
'third type of association'. Does sexual pleasure exist in opposition to
espe<l y ed by thetn• 1n '
\,eeI\_m;::::ed by the se,c.ologist ~by Robert S~oller,
was 11\ ·th wen-known succ '.ty' He thus mtegra
71:: · 1968
tenn

tx()(iuced, 'Wl , re ender identt . s w-

sexed pleasure? Doubtless this is often true in reality, in the pursuit ed the terrn co g • thought. tnfinite and Po
of erotic activities, even in terms of economic characteristics, sin<:e creat cificallY psychoanal~ to enter'll\to the n-conventional
one may imagine - I shall perhaps return to this - that the economic mto speu. it would be n "er' s thought - a no diets hin'Self. I
functioning of the 'sexual' is aimed at the pursuit of tension, whereas
the 'sexed' aims rather at the classic pleasure of relaxation. Bl!t this
---'-•"'y
enu»
~ere . .0 ns of Stou
. ery interes=•
ft con~
sedu cti·ve vanati .....g even if he o en nnr.... 1 psychoana·
out contetnr-
~~
~..;~l Rome,
fuinker who 1S v . te what he says ab pantheon of ilnF-kind of
is not the true opposition. We encounter a sort of subversion of the _.-..cularly like to er ares it to the . ,.,.,.,)(isted in a .
very notion of logical opposition, which itself suddenly becomes an pcuu. h hecomP diviJUties '-""
\ytic thought w enthe roost diverse and after
opposition in the real, i.e. a prohibition. In other words, the sexual is
where temples to . that with Stoller, .ctions:
defined as 'that which is condemned by the adult'. There is not a single . ;.,mble.9 . __,,ment 15 fo a set of convi
text by Freud in which he speaks of infantile sexuality without putting 1oyous i - - rn.aU\ ;pe,-- onyn\ r
However, my t...ororn.es a syn 68' which was
this opposition forward, not as a sort of contingent reaction to infantile f nder ~~ PfeSS 19 .,, crans·
1.:- the notion o ge. . 11te Hogarth I' ide11tite se.'tllelle . cai
sexuality, but as something that truly defines it. I believe that even these 1wn, (London, tiereh.eS sur ,,~culty c\a5Sl
- d c;ender thetitleReC hows the wu- ender.
days infantile sexuality, strictly speaking, is what is most repugnant in sex ~n~1anon underf the title alone~-- and the idea of g1985), P·
8 Robert Stoller,-nchu ...- 1•tion O • gthe •=-· 'ty press,
the eyes of the adult. Even today 'bad habits' remain the most difficult pub\ished in a F•=· tran5Po5 • integtatil\ . '{ale Univers1
Gafilroa.Id, 1978). 1h\ thought h35v~ and London:
French psychoanalY"der <_NeW Ha
6 "Infantile Sexuality", Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905d), SE 7, p. 182. 9 presentations of Gell
7 "On the Universal Tendency to Debasement in the Sphere of Love (Contributions
82.
to the Psychology of Love II)" (1912d), SE 11, p. 189; ibid., p. 187, note 1.

162
 ___ ......... ....._

ff
15 that the
l\ot see
Gender, Sex and the Sexual Reiche does . e agail\St
tnat what f nlUdable If\.acNn
to ti\e rnore 0
the conviction of belonging to one of two social groups d \lt it see¢ es as aJ\ evel\ whole el\ter the
def· i all' sef'l If\.ents as a . . d in the
culine or feminine, or else the conviction that the assi~finedas, gef! er/set- 1' . cove!Y· ~ t rnove . . ts', as it 1S sat , de
these two groups is correct. I shall come back to this term ,ent_toone~
I shall not follow Stoller's thinking here.10
is the appearance of this new anglophone binary, the sex-gee;:~~
What:~.
y,ef.,d (liat' diS at tb.e fe
U'e freu :c. nere th t tb.eY are
\t .., r t\O
etner o bina!Y 1S
,differel\tialiS
. a1ways
reserved· 1Jl.
11\ore or less P __-\• \ 11\ean that
t noSt:U,
tertf\.S 15 no I:' - of se,c. an
d
b3tt1e- ~e,t/ get\~er tiot\ between thebetween the categ: be shown,
ple. 'Sex' being understood principally as biological, and 'gen:~· erid U\e. the di5bt\c the difference . cit but was, as eral pcsi-
socio-cultural but also as subjective. The problem thus as arises:
~u"oi!, f hef b<)01'
till'e o def was~
ot yet e,q,11
could say
that her gen
dati.on, even
if
politi~ of ~lation into languages wi~ no co~on usage of~ at U\e or'/ of gen . ;ucitlY• ()ne ted as a foun e frotn
word gender . French more or less had this, but mainly in conn= U'e categful\ctionlJ\g un? 11\ust be postula rted- l cite a passag
--~uon
with 'grammatical gender', a very rich and tricky question on Which ~~that bio\ogicalts: cotI\Pletely subve
I shall offer a few notes in an appendix at the end of this essay.11 No1a. tiot\ d uon 11\us
bly, German does not have a term that corresponds exactly. Without fo\ll\ a · al
\hlS d SeX: the physic
going into detail, German has 'Geschlecht' which means 'gender' and 'fhe secon lof biology, of ' cannot be
. these facts d wo1I\en1 . _,;fi-
'sex' at the same time. Thus Freudian German only has the opposi- certainlY tween If\.en an have no Slo•--
tion 'Geschlecht I sexual'. In fact, when they translate English texts, dilferences be . thetf\.Selves they but rather as a
Germans are led - and this is important because it amounts to a veri- ·ed _ but 11\ a body, b·ect is
detu . not 11\erely as that the su }
table interpretation - to translate the English 'sex' by 'biological sex', ca.nee . .. lt 1S ...,.1....oos, ..~0 \aws, r _,t:.\rnent.13
•ect tO u;iV - :nc. fUlJ,u,-·
and 'gender' by 'sociological sex', which is already, and obviously, an body suib1 . Mand attc=-
ttnosphere
entire theoretical option itself - one which remains undiscussed. col\ScioUS o f ~ . of the a
Terms and concepts are weapons, weapons of war: gender characteriStlC . h thiS bo01' was
tl a passage . t in wbic . terest-
against sex and, one could say, gender and sex allied against the 'fbis is eviden Y d exiStentia1iS - . es to be veIY 11\ . a
sexual. Gender against sex in Stoller because under the single ban- . o\untarist an ...octs contu'\u . that there 15 .
- \et us cal\ it v bich in other res~: ;ns), '{et it 1S cleat tnost theoreti.-
ner of gender he removes all conflictuality from a large part of the wntten la boo1' w eroUS descnpU t fe~\S - the .ch subverts
problematic of gender. The German author Reimut Reiche devoted an ing bec.3USe of i\S n~the wor1' of tnO~t tnoveinent, w~ retraactive
article titled "Gender ohne Sex''12 to the way in which, in his view, the double rnovernent ~ :cal, 'fhere is ~:"'natil\g it, iJ\ a pute Y i·t is reauzed
introduction of gender - "gender without sex'' - leads to a biased con- th rnost f3\.U f atU=- t when ·
cal and e to the poiJ\t o is a tnotnen tu1ate sotnetbing
ceptualization that completely erases the problem of sex and s~ty. tne notion of sex . nd then there -~c.<>rv to p<>S
Notably, Reiche criticizes the notion of 'imprinting' and especially of b gender, a it is neo=-'
a non-conflictual imprint, which belongs to Stoller' s attempt to define fashion, Y_ of everytbll\g, ·cador, 1988)
•'-at in spite
u, ,
' \..Ondon: P1
M. patshley,
tran5· r\.
10 Cf. "Appendix I: Stoller and Gender" .
... ,cond sex,
_--: - -~- au"
- oll',
• 1)1e ;;,c;
11 Cf. "Appendix II: Linguistic gender". l3Sunonede
12 In Psyche, 1997, 9/10. This title is a mixture of the English words 'gender' and pp. 66-S·
'sex' and a German word (ohne): "Gender without Sex".

164
---
 Genders
, ex and th Se
e xua1
foundational, a sort of Gender, Sex and the Sexual
that ,,. Pure na~
m themselves h e, or, as d
subvert and anniltiJa;... ave no si&nificance"e Beauvoir t it is "largely'' dependent on social environment
This . e it. , even if . . Bays, ''fa Tha · etc. "Chie fly'' : sex
th IS the case With J . It is pl'!>,,:_ cir,
· eJse.
ethiflg . not be totally depend ent on It,
50111
at Matter, constitut ud1th Butler h -~h,fo JJleans that .it may
h domain of procreation. · "Largely''.· one escapes bya
in tha . es a tho , w os , ted 1n t e
tit inun°'"': rough re,,.".
. , ~a tely re· ,__...J •-.:>Jon of h e second"-
. vuoi. i5 acceP dence.17
Jts constraints'
, ex · ·m.•vuuces the 'b·1 ·
er first' C'.-. .. '\, ~- ·;..
-~,iue,, "I.fl.._ partial depen rt the feminists in general, including the 'radicals' - or,
had the 'good tactj~!-;mmg that their onus:::gi~, aspect Of, 'froubfe, ~~ , . .
t he less radical of the radicals - need sex m order to
everybody else ta reason' of acttn as n in the Pree . ~ ~ ould say, . .
Th. . lk about that?"1• g a c0 unterba1 ecfing WQ,1. one c d 'denaturalize' it in gender. But JS It necessary to return
. is JS the case . ance: "d ·~ bvert an . .
su ood old sex/ gender sequence and m the following order: sex
articles, Which . W1th Nicole,.CJ Oes11•1
to the g cul if t 'd ture'
ceptualiz; . 1S extremely diffi . aude Matthieu t,efore gender, nature before . tu.re, even. one agr~ o ena_
fro ntion of the relati b cuJt, IS titled '"T'J.__ , one of Wh 11s Of course in all of this, the Freudian sexual nsks becommg a
Ill the title alone . on etween sex • •u-ee lllOdes Ose nature· ' IysIS
· IS
· mentioned but as something listed
Gender, she that m the end h _and gender" is y. of con. major absence. Psychoana
"constnict" s:ys, c~n "translate" se: e Still needs the ~otiou can see under the class of ideologies that subordinate gender to sex, the first
"by d . x, Which is to , or can "s~b . on of-. being the 'translation' of the second (Matthieu).
estroyin 't" say, constru J•u olize" .....,,_
condition, sin: i • But this positio ct it by reconstruc . ~ or can Does introducing gender into psychoanalysis entail allying
sex that is a1re:lender "translates~ ,~x as a kind of bio:~ It, even oneself with those who would banalize the Freudian discovery? Or
liousJy, a so y there before it ' SYtnbolizes" or ,, gicaJ pre- paradoxically would it be a way to reaffirm the sexual as the intimate
Ji rt of bioiogfcaJ d "-' .. Thus, implicitl constructs" a enemy of gender?
,, ere is a e,uution of . y or even
As With th more recent sex 18 Ulfimat surrepo- I have at least one excuse for introducing gender into psycho-
to leave an e replacement of th passage by Nicol<>J'"'Jely restored.
=X out of e term , , ..~ aude Ma analytic thought: it has a presence, more or less sketchy, throughout
reality by c gender risks race by the t tthieu: Freud. To be sure, he never used the term; the German language
iorgetttn Prese · em, 'ethni
is large/I, de g that bioJo~, l'Ving its status c group' scarcely permits him to because 'Geschlechr means both 'sex' and
3 pende t oJ, and ,L. • as an · '
Words "chieJJ , n on social env cmefiy the ph slo inescapable 'gender'; the word Geschlecht is used even in connection with human-
of thought t ~ and '1argeJy, in ~nrnent".16 1 ha~~ logyof_fertility,
kind [/e genre humain]. Thus Freud lacks the word, even though it
tracts of ind ~s at 8teat . his excerpt. Yo emphastZed the
oJ eternuna ngor, she u see that · could probably be reinvented in German using the scholarly term
ogy of fertility. 1f 1 cy by saying th b nonetheless introd m a body
~ I ·
ntcrv1
tis "chiefly" at iology is ''~1.,
Bo, th • ...1.Jefly, th
uces large 17 Unless one goes as far as the radicalism of certain feminists who, in order to
1996), p. J~; In A Cr/fica/ Sense ·d en It COuJd non th e physi- suppress the notion of sex completely ftnd themselves led to combat the very notion
15 "Trols . , c • i>ctcrOsbo e eless also be of difference at the level of logic (e.g. Monique Wittig). But I can only gesture towards
lllocfes d rne (Lo
/JO1lllquc, (Pon . c conceptuaJJsotJ ndon ond N this point here.
lp6 li1191?,iclfo1111a~/;!t,~,,fcmme11, 199l)on du rapport en,_ ew York, Routledge, 18 It ls precisely here that I am opposed to hastily positioning (and translating into
P · '~8 '1 c du 't.
1 11
· " " 11<:xc French) gender as 'psychosocial sex' ond sex as 'biological sex'. Such a categorization
, emphasis add,.J' m/11fs111e (Pons• P ct 8Cllre", In L' . reduces the gender-sex opposition to the old sociology / biology refrain, whereas the
~... • resSes U 111111/om,e
166 nJversJtaJres d F opposition is much more fruitful and complex. Further on I shall show in particular
e •ranee, 2000), that the sex that entel'5 Into a symbolic relation with gender is not the sex of biology
but in large part the sex of a fantasy an11tomy, profoundly marked by the conditi.o n
of the human animal.

167
 Gender
, Sex and
the Se
'Genus'.19 8 t al )(uai _
u though th Gender, Sex and the Sexual
completely ab e Word ,
Within sent. Freud ins. gender' .
, the human be. ISts- I recall ~ lackin
resent in adults. But Freud very often forgets
~d phallic-castratect1 of three Pairs o~ briefly: the¾ . ""erence p f .
~d, 'maSCUline-fe . . ut, also, Which is opposites. ~nthee ~is ~
difficult to think· . ll1Inine . l-Ie tells What int . &ct:i"e-
the two ends f , it rnay even be Us that the %res~ Us ?<lssive-
~t, t,01.lt thiS ~• What 1 mean is that the category o gender 1S often
a . q1.1estioning, ht One could mention, for example, the whole
u,is Or unthoug .
abSeilt •
. h
t Freud constructs concerrung omosexu ty an
ali d

~SCUlinity-fe~evoiution tha:::::tiaUy fesis~t&ir

thing that is neith ty enigma. In th s to adultho to th0u hlli0st
is~;·
the P oia 11\ the
th
robletlla~c ~eber case. Freud writes the basic statement, which
ch f · · th f 11 ·
Parall.:nplayWl·thbymodifyingea o 1tsterms,m e o owmgway:
Purely SOciolo . er Purely bioloo; ale adult, it is th Od,_ one ~,;i_l i\1 1ieww love him (a man)".22 Furthermore, we know how Freud's
''Wh gical, but . o·C , nor e ell.i8tna_ ~ ~
. , en You rneet a h a CUriou.s lltixture Purely psych of so~ "l (~ Jl\;~ectic concerning the different modes of delusion consists of
IS male or £ lllllan bein of the fh- . oiogicai en~ . the "1" of "1 love", the "him" of "him (a man)" and also,
With emale?' and g, the first dis . •ll~. As F , l\or
unhesitatin You are ac tinct:ion tha l'eud sa modifYU'eg the verb 'to love' which can be transformed into 'to hate'.
of cours ,
fullow g Certainh,,, 20 CU.Stomed t 0 t Yo Ys:
. creature cliff, 'J · 'Ihe 'fir . lllake th u lllake us the whole dialectic of "l (a man) / 1 love him (a man)" is cen-
line and f ~ erentiates in an , st sight' of a h e disnncti.o ~ ~n the second part of the sentence without ever calling into question
: : o,:her end Wee~t the other end, =:itt;;:~ht' Way~ being, of: what is meant by "1, a man'' . To do so would constitute a problematic,
n , Where F ve a farnou.s te ,, Interests een ll'lascu. however, that is precisely that of Schreber himself, and which with
traveller Who c:ud creates the arn:. On the Sexual~ ev~n lllere, at good reason many analysts have aligned with that of transsexualism.
w~ose CUriosi ::es from another Ing and CUriou.s h eones of Chu. In psychoanalysis, and generally in clinical practice, the vast
Wished to moty_ <lroUsect by the Planet <from Sin }'pofuesis ©fa majority of 'observations' - if not all of them - begin unthinkingly
ders', for . . dify Freud's t .Presence of th Us let's say) and
be it is actu ext slight} ese two , with: ''This is a 30 year old man ..." or 'A woman of 25 ..." ls gender
ing that counts ally the 'habitu.s' f y one Would hav sexes'. If one truly non-conflictual to the point of being unquestioningly assumed
ally conceaied 21 anct not the genitalo these two categ ~ to say 'gen- from the beginning? Has gender, so to speak, expelled the conflictual
0
P..~, · organs :mes of·hurn.
beca ·_ll!"Uler on I h as such_, Which an outside of itself in the form of the sexual?
Use in this s all come b are Usu-
succes . case the h ack to this
s1on, Whereb uman bein . probie.rn of ..
~ the child y the child bee g IS not enVisa . the enigma
IS the child . that he Was b oznes adult ged In terms of
zn the , Ut rath or Whe b a 1 now come to my second part, which is the history of the
presence o' th er in tern-.- re Y the adult
::-:---._ 1 eadult ..... '-'i ofa s · gender-sex-sexual triad. By 'history' 1 mean purely and simply the
19 A tenn~ Who asks hi.ms llllultaneity: it
;:~gecl ed II\ relation to linguistic , elf the question
infantile genesis of this triad in the human being, the little human
being; a genesis that psychoanalysts must not hesitate to approach.
22, p ~ 33: Feiltittin.ity, gender' but Whose
There generally exists a kind of foundational 'adulto-cen-
21 (190Bc), SE 9 , New lntrOducto Usage couJd have been
, Pp. 207-226 ry Lectures on p trism' . I have spoken of the feminists but they are certainly not the
· ~choa~z -
168 Ysis 0933a), SE
22 "Psychoanalytic Notes on an Autobiographical Account of a Case of Paranoia
<Dementia Paranoides)" (1911c), SE p. 63.

169

----
 Genders
, ex and th
e5e"Ual
only ones - one could - ;:r Gender, Sex and the Sexual
this about ethn 0 1 . say the same th.
ogists b Ulg of
the theory of th . ecause, if you tak the ethn
f challging afterwards the meaning of the past, 'resig-
level of the aduJet UlBc~t prohibition is a th e levi-Stra11.._01~-I
·
IS the prohib'ti
· es1des, the ma1·orm · eory s1tua~.....
· -, f""v, ~~- lb.. ., o!JllU~t~: was a}ready the Jungian thesis of Zuriickphantasieren,
. 1 on aga · cest p hi '<:\l entire- '<IIJ'ip~ nificau00 ·. fantaSizing'. In this line of thought there is the 'perfor-
JS a question of aduJtsUlSf t sororaJ incest Whir~ch bition in r , ~yon 11. '
certam1 . o the sa ' cl <-ev1-~ ~, -~ ~v:er as performative, as certain feminists say. On the other
t . y IS a post-Canes· ?'e age, a WorJd farly s~ v1rallss inau"e ' g~ Freud, there is determinism, which is also confirmed
hat IS not even cl tan pre1udice th-. of Only"~ s t~ I it
ose to bein "'e, a kind """Ulls st·de' thatd of the lecture on fenururuty
· · · m · new
11.r Intr,oductory Lectures,
In a few lines g abolished. of aduit · ll,ete I the en his d . . . . lured
I have contrasted
woman, but
that Were circuiat
two sentences: de ed before this
0-cen, a here freud accentuates t etemurusm ma canca and rather
w Jeasant way, in order to assert that a woman, once she has become
n,,,.,,,:_ becomes one"23 Beauvoir's ''On Pfesentati un~dult, has a "psychic rigidity" and "unchangeability'' that he has
P'-uuar nature and Freud' , '
woman is - that, psycho-analysis does s, 'In COnfol'lltityot boni a
Would be not try
e is n
With .
on,
:ver encountered in youn~ men of t~e same age.25 The responsibility
about enquiri h a task it couJd to descnbe its for this assertion I leave entirely to him.
ng ow she c . scarcely What Thus one could identify a point of view that splits de Beau-
h One could sa omes into being'' u perforzn - but a
voir-Freud on the question of afterwardsness between 'retroactive
t ese two sentences Y_ many things about . . sets
does not feel th . FU'St of all and s . . the sliltilarities be modification' - the action of the future and of the present upon the
her OWn Alth e need to cite Freud' trikingly, de Beau.. . tween past - and 'deferred action' - a determinism, however delayed it
· ough · s stat vOJr in 19
of everythin . . qUite clese, it . . ement, which . 49 may be, of the present by the past. I have tried to go beyond this
g, it IS the Ptecurs JS certainly different· lS so cl05e to split by introducing two essential elements into afterwardsness:
The In What respect are thor to her Work. , and yet, in spite one element is the primacy of the other which, because they remain in
. Yare remote insot: . ey cl05e and .
voir shows h ar as, ma Gerta. lI1 What res:n.,,,,. the frame of a single individual, is precisely what these conceptions
as a be' erself more 'naturalis 1n Wav JlonecouJd r'-'-L .,.,._ ..... ,ote? of afterwardsness do not mention. They do not bring the presence
one is 1:!'t:s a given, as a sort oft' than Freud. She=that,de Beau- of the other into play in the process of afterwardsness. The second
it 'Sh be take up suJ.;~~· nature, a raw . pts Woman' element, equally lacking from these conceptions, is child-adult
e com . , "'J<:\.llVelv Wh given that .
quit es zt. In Freud JI ether to bee evidently simultaneity. What I mean is that the child-adult couple should not
Fre e extraordinary in tha ~ on the other han ome it or to refuse
ud tells us: "She this statemen . d, We have som . be conceived essentially in terms of one succeeding the other, but
certain sense F becomes What t lS completely ething rather of one actually finding itself in the presence of the other - con-
. , reud is h We are · contradicto
vou: One Could a1s . ere more eXist . Ulcapable of fiet:;n . ,,.,, ry. cretely so, in the first years of life, from the first months. I think that
one sid O sttuate th . entiafist ,.1,.__ . 1' In,5 • In a the key to the notion of afterwardsness is to take it beyond the consid-
e, that of de B em rn the ditm.. "lcUl Sunone de Be
eauvoir ~ ha -,,..te over 'aft.erw. au- eration of just the single individual, where one remains enclosed in
~ ' e Ve retroactive . 'llrdsness'. On an opposition with no exit: asking whether the child is the cause of
ff;
:/1:~5::_ond Sex, op.cit, p. 29 rnte.tpretation, the the adult, or whether the adult freely reinterprets the child; asking
"-"-'-'ute 33: Fenunw , 5.
ty' , op. cit., p. ll whether determinism follows the arrow of time or whether, on the
l~ ~ I
I
25 "Lecture 33: Femininity'', op. cit., pp. 134-5.
I
I

I
171
 Genders
, ex and the
Se>cua1
contran, 1·t
• J, moves in th Gender, Sex and the Sexual
can only be overcom . e opposite direc . -,
of the other if e if one positto tion. It is
, one positt ns the • . an 0
~d as receiving messa e ons the child inind.i"idua1 .llPositio . ons are, in the end, what I call 'ipsercentrist'
• n these n Otl . . . '
given, but are 'to be trg s from the aduit the Presetz In the p~t i.abit- r,,,
say cen
tred on the mdividual alone.
.
3 1• •
anslated' 26 'lllessag ce of " -,~ ,vtiich IS : define gender in my sens_e, and I am not ~one m sa~g this,
. es that the ilq
So, for this talk a~ llot lllt 1i is ,assignment'. Assignment underlines the pnmacy of
sexu.ar• 'T'10 speak f I have p roposed . <1 r,,,. dal tenn
t11ecfll . the process-whether t e
h firs . .
t assignment is the declara-
:town
'l(J

der in first pl o ~e little human b ., zn this order , t11e other hall, at the church or in some other official place, a
d. ace. It 1s the, eing · , gend
ifference as a foundat . efore to cal[ into in t~ order . er, ~- n. tioll at ~ involving the assignment of a first name, the assignment
Sub. . ton. question the _IS to ~t "ie ec1arat1on
d lace in a kinship network, etc., or very often the assignment to
ob Jectively speakin PH11zari, &eii. 10 a Pbership in a religion. But I want to emphasize this important
servations are . g - and h -:1 o
f~
biolocricaI . . qUite numerou ere the r1;~- . rn~tnt: it is a process that is not discrete, not done once and for all,
0 • sex 1s ll1t:im s - nofuin -uss10
subject in any w ately perceived g pellltits th ns ¾d th Po~liJnited to a single act. In this I distinguish myself clearly from all
texts ay at all in th , apprehend e d¾ll e
. ~uch as that of p e first months of lif ed and liveq b ~t :at could be said, for example, of 'determination by the name'. This
nzes 111 his book erson and 0v e. Iiere I h y the is a field already opened up by Stekel, but which only received fur-
G on '1 esey,21 wi.., ave .
alenson's book ove relations "28 , ~uch l<ernbe ll'llllind ther development (partly unwarranted) with the Lacanian inflation
published in F on The Infantile Ori~ and in Part:icuiar Rrg· s¾una. of the notion of the signifier. That the assignment of the first name
Gend:,e:: SO~e Years ago. ns ofSexu.a1 Identity, 29
the observatio cording to all thes
;:he ilnd
ch was
can carry unconscious messages is one thing. But the 'signifier' is not
a determining factor in itself. Assignment is a complex ensemble of
com l ns they repo e authors d
P eteiy con . . rt - I cann0 t . an acco~:- acts that go on within language and within the meaningful behaviour
in VIncmg- ate th ·~g to all of the family circle. One could speak of an ongoing assignment, of a
t g conscious, and it w gender Would be firs _em here but the
he first Year B Ould start to b t in time and . }' are veritable prescription. Prescription in the sense in which one speaks of
•
neither a h · ut - and We mUst . ecome s le toward 111 beeom.
tab messages called 'prescriptives'; it is therefore of the order of the mes-
of hormon~;hetica} cerebral im Inune~tely add a but - the end of sage, even a bombardment of messages.
perinatal h pregnation (alth Pregnation, Which gender is A word of warning! It is said that 'gender is social', 'sex is
ormonai . ough We kn Would be
ence on th . llllpregnati . . ow that th . a sort biological'. Caution must be taken with the term 'social', because
e choice of gend ) on, it ends rapid! ere Is a certain here it covers up at least two realities that interseet. On the one hand
---- er , nor an . Y and has •
26 Cf. "N---;--- Imprint in S no in.flu- there is the social, or the socio-cultural, in general. Of course it is in
&N o es on Afte toiler's
ew York: Ro ti l'Wardsness" in Es sense, nor 'the social' that the assignment is inscribed, if only in that famous
27 Ethel p.,__ u edge, 1999) PP 1',/\ ~s on Otz.-
in The -=n and t· , . 2"v--o;) •icrness ed J declaration at the beginning of life that is made at the level of the
28 Journal of the A IO~el Ovesey, "Ps . , . ohn Fletcher <Lond
Ych0ana1Ytic 'Dl
Otto I<ernbe 1nerican Acad
;;:r ofPsychoanalysis on institutional structures of a given society. But the inscriber is not the
1995). rg, Leve Relations
29 <New York: InternattonaJ U . ew Haven and
ruversities P
~::~~~\:83u,
eones of Gender Id

e
. ,
~P· 203-~~: ,
ruversity Press
social in general; it is the little group of close socii, of friends and
blood relations. This is, effectively, the father, the mother, a friend, a
172 ress, 1981). ,

173
 Genders
, ex and the
Se)(ua1
brother, a cousin Gender, Sex and the Sexual
in the social b : e_tc. Thus it is th 1i
, ut It Is not S . e ttle o-..
ociety th
atdo.,,,
o•Oup Ofso ..
'T'L.: - • ...., the cz, w1. tion of gender identity. Person and Ovesey
ha .1..1us Idea of ass· ass18nitt •10~, the ques
c nges the vector of . ~81Unent or of ,. g.ao "lbe article on h onunonly accepted sequence - that is, of the
131.lt • verl t e c . .
aporia of Freud's ,~dentification. Bere th Identifica.ti IJlPJetelY Jl\ . before the social - by saymg the followmg (you
thought and so beautiful, f, ere is a w on by ~ 10gi·cal coJlUllg cts can be accepted and which can be criticized or
identifi . commentary: ,, . ~llnula Which ay to &et eo,,,/11,,., blO hich aspe
\\Till see w , this sense, one can say that gender precedes sexuality
. cation, his iden . . ~ llldiVictuaI's has ca OJ.ltoi'<lY .J;f;ed): 'In t and organizes sexuallty, not the reverse. " 34 A f ormula
Prehistory".a1 .As tification With th first and ~So ~ 111()1.l"·
contradicted b You know, this be ~ father in J..:lllast hri~ ill developr:ne~ough only partially. As to the idea of precedence, you
Y a note · autifuI c •us otu.. : ~·'<Ill!
t1tat I ac:!'t\ subscribe to this absolutely - that is to say, to the prece-
..~c
~er to say 'wt·th in Which F .1onnui . :· •1 ~ ...
kn the p reud sa a is In..--._ :~
owledge of the . arents'; for before ~s: "Perha ~"lll!Qialefy catl see f der in relation to anything else. As to the term 'sexuality',
denceo gen
does not distin .difference betwee
· guish · n the
a child has
~•.1veq
;i,!8
It \vOllJ~ L
" '-\!
think it is too vague to be accepted (except as a sort of general term,
1
Cit. p. 31, n.I).a2 This In :alue between its sexes, the lack of atdefini~ . d of bridging term). For my part, I would say, "gender precedes
sonai P""'J..,_ Prtntitive .d . father and . a Penis . a~ and furthermore, differing from Person and Ovesey, who say,
•=ustonr Which has bee I entification With Its .. rn th
by cp1-1--,;_ -p ,o er'·, d t ~~der precedes sex and organizes it'', I would say, "Yes, gender pre-
- <QUI Lacazu n re · the fa ,op
Work o · ans Q clJl1 th;-,_. VlVed as 's .
e . n Identification) 33 • - ..... UQI\g of Flo Ynlbolic' identifi Per-
. go Ideal. I sin,_ ' IS consid rence, for
ther Of .
Ciltion
!ies sex. But, far from organizing it, it is organized by it''.
1 I am tempted here to call upon the schema of what I have
instead ofbein p y ask the folloWin erect more or less thexa.rnple, in his called the 'general theory of seduction'. The general theory of seduc-
tion h. "? In g an 'identificati g question, or rath e Illatrix of •L
vy . Other on With' er I Ltle tion starts from the idea of messages from the other. In these messages,
soctUs of Words, I wou.1 , Wouldn't ~J..,_ ProJ>Ose this· there is a code or a carrier wave, that is to say a basic language, which
Personal P""'J..:_ d say: 'p . . . .,.us bean 'iden . ·
Beca ·=ustory'. ntnitive identifi . tifica. is a conscious/preconscious language. In other words, I have never
for breath Use I am not the firs canon by the
a moment to . t to go in this . said - I do not think I have ever said - that there are unconscious
Cite Person direction I messages from the parents. On the contrary, I think that there are con-
~ and Ovesey in theh- v:haJJ_ pa115e scious/ preconscious messages and that the parental unconscious is
~ that ,, frog of Group p ry Ullpor-
SOciaJ J)sych . . . m the v S!fchology aru1 like the 'noise' - in the sense of communication theory- that comes to
J)sycholo ,ology as Well" ezy first, indiVi the Anal!fSis Of perturb and to compromise the conscious/preconscious message.
of the SOci~ ~~hich he 5 ~£_ 18 p . 69).d ~ J)sychoJogy . ~~ Ego 092Jc) Freud
<Utd ... his . •~ Pclrents u_t one CZUiclcl But the code, or the language that corresponds to a code - the
IS that of d
31 The E Physician" (ibid<Utd . . . his broth OSe lllteractions ~.~ that the
32 For go a'.1'! the Id Cl 923b) p. 70). ers <Utd sisters
IS at the sante .
, s!:
u.un the narrow circI
carrier language - is not necessarily always the same. Until now, in
<Utd sV.: <:ritique of th , SE 19, p. 31 , ... the object of his 1 e the general theory of seduction, which aims to explain the genesis of
J ~,ptoma . ese Passa • ove the drive, I have mainly focused on the code of attachment in so far as
Univesitaires tic, cf. Je<Ut La ges of Freud' ,
33 Jean Flo de France, 1980 Pl<Utche Prob~' .Which are it is carried by bodily care given to the child. Thus, in this case, com-
BlUssels, 19;:)ce, l 'idennficai/op. 335-37_ tiques I l'an a~lute1y enigntati
. n dans la thee, . gcnsse, <Pans: P-_. c munication takes place within the attachment relation. Here, today, I
ne freud · • '""li€5
174 lenne (Universites c_,_
'-"U.llt-Louis:
34 Ethel Spector Person, The Sexual Century, (New Haven and London: Yale
University Press, 1999), p.70.

175
 Gemkr, Sex and tl,e c:.~-- b ''The Anatomical
~ual
rated, he says, ,Y ~..,,,,ment cal'\I\Ot
es, sepa freud s cuo- .
try to advance a second, more hypothetical ste
two se" ,, 36 But here . ts in int:roduong
are ge,c.es · hi h conslS
articulated with the funner. Communication d p that dell'lan.ds .,.,at there - n the t of haJ\d, w c eed at other moments,
:<. v· aetW,:;- . ligh . 1 ... d , . . ya
. oes not on1: to"-
the language of bodily care; there is also the SOcial Y~ ~
ur,Y"' • \'\ V tail\ S d molo&Y• 11 ' • thi5 desbn
··tit''uo .th a cer totllY an . effect roaldng . . m'
lanc,oUage; there are also the messages of the sodus: th <:ode, the ~ 015 t\se ,"1 tWee1' mta ' f biolog)', U\ . f Freud's 'b1ologis
diSf Jusio1' t,ethe '\,e(irocI<: o see an ~tion o is not biology, nor
chiefly messages of gender assignment. But they are :ll\~ges~ acO al'5 of .. ~ nY people . y'' . But anatom~_....;n,c.m. There are
th
a good deal of 'noise', all that is brought by the adults e carnets OI sf te tv•a · destll\ al deteu•=- . __,i
to the child: parents, grand-parents, brothers and
tasies, their unconscious or preconscious expectations. A fu eit ~
sis:o c~
~
th
\\~ ~ogical fa ·,, p..nato1l\~ 15 is it horroon
b10 F\l!ase
it\ u,.e 5io\ov;i'
af\d still 1ess thel' registers) WI
ention o
.thin anatoroy i[St:11:
urelY descn
•ptive or may
. it phY (not to 1l\ hich 1l\aY be P ~fie apparatuses,
consciously as.sign the masculine gender to his offsprtn ~ tl\ay iS ~' 1evelS..,&;c af\ato1l\Y, w the anatotnY of s~---on the basis of
expected a daughter, even have unconsciously desired t! t have sever"' ·enw• le aratuS
.i.ere iS so al - for e,c.att\P , f the genital app ul , anatoroy. But
a daughter. Actually, this field of the unconscious relation :netraie u•
be stf\l
ctUf
'be5 the
£unction °
d then there
is 'PoP ar
v and moreo
ver
to their children has been very poorly explored; the first messa~ls ·ch desert ~ - an , ular' anatoill;, _...-.ort? In
w\ll ·cal st:rU • y' is a PoP _,, · what i=r--·
generally maternal (but not necessarily solely maternal), and I do~ .115 at\atotrll tis a 'destll\ rperceptul11 U\ groups of
think that the parental unconscious is limited to infiltrating the~
tornY tha l illusory- there are twO
the al\a tual, even pure y upright Posture . aUzed as such, the
given to the infant's body. These unconscious wishes also infiltrate it iS percethP t do not have al\ ch that is to say viSU ...c:ible and alsO,
the assignment of gender. Therefore it's what is 'sexed' and-also and J;lilna\S a eivfd as SU , ptible - v= sexes,
a -~' genitals perc being perfectlY perce . al there are twO .
above all the 'sexual' of the parents that makes a noise in the assign-
ment. I say the sexual above all because I want to hold onto the idea
e)(tenw- ·tal organs for the anU1\
feJllale geiu eived by smell· ~ ' there is a double fo: eptual loSS•
of the sight
that adults in the presence of a child will, most importantly, reactivate abOve all, ~ g to hiS erect Po5 rception, and ~ethen reduced to
0
their own infanh1e sexuality. For Jnan, ~10
· n of olfadOtY pe
ans- p-..,.,,ption
,:;i---
15 to say
. ) that ·is hl.llfl3ll
The theory of seduction, as I have attempted to formulate i~ the loSS or i,:;1,•- ale genital org . , (Inspektion,
of the e')(t
erna1 fexnetiJne5 calls 'inS...--t:1on
r-- of the tefll\·
for the
ption of
postulates a translation, and so a translation code. Here it is evidently ud som edical sense the perce
F
what re . . in the Ill is no longer the sexes
on the side of sex that one must search. Gender is acquired, assigned,
ure vi5ua\iZclnon_ f genital organs .,,uerence between
but enigmatic, until about fifteen months. Sex comes to stabilize and P ~rception o ne 'fhe CllU
being, the y- · but of onlY O • . ally fond,
to translate gender in the course of the second year, in what Roiphe
and Galenson call 'the early genital phase'. twO genital ~ c e of sei. sage of which ftn ~ectlY· Be
be(:otl\es a . there iS a p~ but in reality wor the essence of
The castration c;omplex is at the centre of it. Of course it offers 1n Spmoza to do anythil'g uld constitute
some certainties, but these very certainties are too clear-cut and must . does not seem will that wo
be questioned. The certainty of the castration complex is based upon which the intellect and BetWee" the
35
says: "For . I)istillction
ideology and illusion. Freud said: ''Destiny is anatomy''. This des- Anatorn1cal
of the
~cal eons~..m1ences
..- 177
35 As a translation, this is preferable to "Anatomy is destiny". German pennits the 36 freud, "~sySE 19, P· 7-43-
phrase to be translated in this way, and I believe it is more striking to say "Destiny Sexes" 0925\),
is anatomy".

sd
176
 Gender, Sex and the Sexuai

God would have to be vastly different from hUil'\an intellect

and would have no point of a~ment except the 1\atne. 1'h~ ~
be no more alike than the celestial constellation of the dog ey ~
that barks." 37 Well, this is a disparity between two things::~
tht'\ig
have nothing in common except the name: "the celestial co ~
of the dog" and "the dog that barks". I would say that ~
transposed onto the question of the difference of the sexes: the tan '0t
tible difference of sex as sign or as signifier has practically ~
do with biological and physiological male/ female difference. ~
Isn't this contingency an extraordinary destiny? The~~
makes the female organs perceptually inaccessible; but this t'Ol\tin.
gency has been raised by many civilizations, and no doubt our OWII,
to the rank of a major, universal, signifier of presence/ absence.
Is perceptual anatomical difference a language, a code? lt is
certainly not a complete code, but it is at the least something that
structures a code - a most rigid code at that, structured precisely by
the law of the excluded third, by presence/ absence. It is rather a skel-
eton of a code, but of a logical code that for a long time I have referred
to as 'phallic logic' .38 This is the logic of presence/ absence, of zero
and one, which has received an impressive expansion in the modem
universe of computer science.
Thus it is difficult to disengage the question of the difference
of sex from the castration romplex..
Once disentangled from certain ideological presuppositions,
studies such as those by Roiphe and Galenson, long-term observa-
tions of an entire population of closely observed children, appear
emphatically to reinforce the idea of a very widespread, even uni-
versal castration complex. But in contrast to Freud, the castration

37 Spinoza, Ethics, Part 1, "Prop. 17, Schor, in ~ Essential Spinoza: Ethics and
Related Writings, trans. Samuel Shirley, ed. Michael L Morgan Ondianapolis: Hackett
Publishing Company, 2006), p. 15. 179
38 Cf. Problbnatiques II, Castnition, symbolisation <Paris: Presses Universitaires de
France, 1980).

178
 Gender S
, ex and th
---- -
esev..
I h --ual h Sexual _ Appendix I
Gender, sex and t e
. s all short}
diseussion hi Y close this
, w ch is t Present
o say to anon .
uncertainti in Ord APPENDIX I
es. er to· .
&i\>e \v
ijy~
,. ,. STOLLER AND GENDER
Iwantect
some h to Pl'OVide
Yl'0 theses and a Precise fr
of these profounct1 some uncertain . amework in o
off by noting a few impressions that arise
y unsettle conuno ties. .As to the hrcter to o?en uld like to s t a rt t
_ p nly accepted . ~theses lip I -wo
. Sto er-
ll Stoller as researcher and thinker. .
recedence of Views: , Sollie frO!ll read 1I1g trikingly impressive freedom of style, m fact
that upe d gender· g Stoller shows a s . .
put the n_ s habits of tho~ ender comes befi . H d sn't hesitate to criticize and reconsider his own
ts it e oe
'b10IogicaJ' b ght, the ruts ore sex he f}aun . · ( in Chapter 5 of Presentations of Gender, ''How Biol-
- o..... efore th , of roui-:- , a Po· ervations e.g., fun
4•t:eedence of . e SOcial' •411e tho lilt
SJll\bolizati ass1g?lrnent· ·. Ught that obS Can Contribute to Gender Identity''). Sometimes he makes
- p . o~. . ass1g?lrnent ogy . lf or of explanations that are too complete. Among many
llinary
tification 'With'
identifi . collles J... of hiJllSe '
examples, there is the moment m · ( pp. 81-82) w h ere
· Perversion
cation: far fro "\'!fore other . ch I . al h .
identification 'b (the adult), this 1:11 being a p . . he throws into a single rag-bag non-analytic psy o ogic or p ys1-
- The contin y' ( the adult). IS, I Propose~. Iden. ological theories as well as analytic theories, and concludes that
tolllical PJ:Uh~--
.
0 Vilizati
sexua1gent,A,,.,.perceptual and ill -~ y "psychoanalytic theory is the most syncretic system since the Pan-
~erence th USory ch theon of the Romans" (Perversion, p . 82 n).
on. , e Vezitabl at'acter of
e desnn cl!la- Or again in Presentations of Gender (pp. 3--4) he criticizes psy-
. As to th Y of lllOdern
choanalytic jargon, while also showing a mistrust of "case reports"
Will raise th e uncertainfies. th
Jin el?\. I shall · ese (pp. 2 and 9) - a mistrust concerning theory that can, however, end
es of eni . J>oint to are numero
collle t g?natic Illes the questi us, and I'm up in a curious scepticism: "A last hopeless mutter: of what practical
o be colllb.
onct line, that
Iiow are th
of:~= sages Which I
that is to sa
<>cial ass·1
on of knoWin
~ CUn-ent1 g_how the two
y, We lllust
sure Y0u

y trying to d "-
importance is it whether perversions are classified as neuroses or as
something different?" (Perversion, p. 101 n).
Wi e Pl'0bl &nznent lllake e,uie
th respect to ~ . ellls of fe . . . , next to the . l'Oom. fer the sec- Excessively simplistic biological explanations are shown no
have suggested his double ~ t y and bise ~e of atta~ent mercy, especially those drawn from animal experimentation con-
ego ideal? I concenun ,. . ~ t i s the ~ t y to be P0siti . cerning the erection centre in monkeys (Perversion, pp. 21-22); Stoller
questi have certainl g Identificati relation betw oned
ons and the ob. . Y not address on by and th een What I returns here to explanations that take account of fantasy, while under-
1ections that eel all of th e notion of th lining the fact that fantasy is no less neurophysiological than the rest.
You Will e llnce . . e Similarly, in Chapter 5 of Presentations of Gender cited above, he finally
Want to rais rtainties, the
e. gives pre-eminence to the individual acquisition of gender over the
180
1 Works referred to: Sex and Gender (London: Kamac, 1984 [orig. 1968]); Perversion:
the Erotic fonn of Hatred (London: Karnac, 1986 [orig. 19751); Presentations of Gender
<New Haven: Yale Univeristy Press, 1985).

181

-
 Genders
, e.\" and II, Se
e xun1 .. A
hyPotl1esis of h0 PPt:i1d;x I
rrnonal d -:;;,, .. x aml tltc Sexual -Appendix I
Neverthel , eterrninistn ,, Ge11de1, 5c.
ambiguous On ess, Stol!er's po ...
. . e has th . Srtions .
With allusions to se e impression in relation to . ries that Stoller gives of Freudian theory are so
I c surnrna
question in real XUal physioJo that he sp . h1o1°8>' •1.1n1ple, t 1 f'ci'al that one wonders where or even whether he
e~ d super 1 ,
sio11 (p. 1S ff) depth. One of ~L gy so as to av ~es his ~ l,1rs0rt an d Freud at all.
s , but · ure most 01d d lVii!ill.
1ins re.illy ren ,ple in chapter 8 of Perversion, we read among other
toUer starts out frolll the end the COnfi.!s~X?licit PaSSa ealing "-'il!i"11 for exan ,
cal "bedfOck".2 " . n, a J>aSSage in w . ion is OnJ 8es is ht P. ~ "[Freud] saw homosexuality in males especially as a
of hand b VIthout llOtiri.. hich Freud y lll.UltipUA,,I , . th
Y equafin ~,g that F sPeaks •1.1, ~
things a:f the resolution of a boy's oedipal conflict with his father"
nal ge11it11/ organs Wi~the ~na~lltical d ~himself 'Perl:
the bio~ 1"1 tl~~t~ purported summary that is com~lete~y sile~t. about the
StoUer 80es a b10Iogica1 diffe ce of the o ~ aslei&ht (p. al aetiology (cf. the Leonardo text), which, m addition, Stoller
tary series, Which o~ ~ refer to the F ren~. hie t:tftt. n1atern'butes to other authors: ,,oth ers emph asIZ . ed that male homo-
ataVisti~\ m· Positions ~Le , reudian notio :ality, which seemed to Freud to spring primarily from a son's
'-J Op,nn... . UI COnstitu . n of
r"'<>ltion to th , tionaJ' (" C01t1pJ
. 1-lowever, by . e aCddenta1' , . Innate, end0 l!1tien. disturbed relationship with his father, could be traced back to preoe-
lil'IJ>Osed on an t.lnJustin . ,acqlU.red 8eno11s dipal disturbances in mother-son relationships" (ibid.). Furthermore
P5Ychos0Cia.l to the oppositio ed. slippage this o , ex~~enoUs). ,
. n between th PP0s1tion is Stoller attributes this to some of the 'modems', without mentioning
e biologicaJ SUPef. the 'Leonardo theory' that can be found regularly in Freud.
and tlie Stoller's capacity for mockery and his freedom of style can be
innate
bioJ<>gica.1 seductive, but they all too often mark an absence of serious thinking.
acqUired This applies not only to his reading of Freud, but to his own thought.
This assintila . P5Ychologica.l-s .
Take his explanation of 'perversion'. The suggestive title Perversion: the
return tion is un OC'ial
to the old sou1 boci Warranted and . Erotic Fonn of Hatred does not live up to its promise. For the '11atred"
I) the fact - Y ProbJezna . lllisleading: it en in question has nothing to do with the death drive or with unbinding;
Chunger) and that that the bioJ<>gica.1tic and it neg1ects, courages a in the end it is related, in an unambiguous fashion and apropos of all
COunternart, the lllentaJ can have a .
-r , nE!Cessaril inenta1 perversions, to a desire for vengeance experienced by the boy, follow-
2) the fa Y has a ne expression ing a humiliation ('trauma') undergone in childhood.
acquire(i ct that there Ul'OphysiologicaJ
Plri.,.:_ ' even at the Jeve1 may be bioJoo. Another type of explanation, reduced to a sbict minimum,
-~1g'psyc1t . oftheindi . -o•Cal chara . is that which relates transsexualism to "too much mother, too little
. The en~' dolllain (SOciaJ\riduaJ, and that th~ti~ that are
father" (Presentations of Gender, pp. 28, 63), a formula so general and
canon of n........ Clsin of siJnp,1:_ti categories SVn.L_ lSagiven, pre-
ex -~•t"nt us c ~ ' 7 ... auolic so abstract that one can find it in innumerable attempts to identify a
fl'eltlely siJnplis ~.lanations falls g or of the SJ'Stezns, etc). psychogenesis of neuroses, psychoses and perversions, all the way up
tic a<mo.-......_
- rq,:lB of certain
flat When ConfroUseless comp·''· u to and including Lacanian foreclosure (although Lacan had criticized
~1.
YSJs yp,....,_
StoUenan d eveJ nfed With the
- ~UIJabJe and Inte . opinents. For this type of ''lame reply'' in advance).3
182 llninable" 0937c)
,SE23, p. 252.
3 Jacques Lacan, "On a Question Prior to any Possible Treatment of Psychosis", in
Ecrits, trans. Broce Fink (New York: WW Norton), p. 480.

183
 Gender, Sex nnd the Se><
Ua 1-,'lp
Penrt;x 1 d the Sexu al - Appendix I
- sex an O
On the same level of theorenca1 Y ,, ce11der, bJ'ect or the eg '
the answer to the question: how is feltlinin; tr '8itauon,
Pl'estict· · °"' . 'deof thesu
~
d on the s1 . "
"I do not know ... I doubt if there is a.._ ty. anslltitteq?St \ >UJU hat is situate "object choice . uld be as follows:
ntt b'ect or ' -wo
11
humans for merging With each other th 0re intense way ava;1. O erS,iYs; Jetlle f the o J t Stoller s . . fundamen-
•
art e .de o this - no . t choice, 15 b
other,s eyes; !oven; have always knoi.n lltis an to loak d eep1y •~
"""'hie I fi11allY
0, fl the s1 tary on t d with ob1ec ulam. the Schre er
~
to men rrela e f rm (
haps in this way, espeaauy, the boys n...:_, ;~ as have Il'lothers . a11d fl • 'Y cotll if it is co d's basic o h 'I' may be or
iv• even 11 f reu f rmula t e .
ti' With' sense.. th~·
.. ,, merge choice, m it. Reca )" 4 In this o his is the question
.....,,uU<
are a part of their mothers' femaleness" (Presp,,,£ "I!!
g',d:;fferent i:ve him (a roan,..;, or a woman: t in the I,eonanlo
..,,.aOiti
ons of
. G ,p,33) °"'
·"'Y
~
Another subterfuge, tnostly Used When 0
.UY_•J(a .,,n) . seU to be) a for homosexuality .
(th
ory aCCtunulate, consists in acknowledging that Wh ~h of his tl1e- case• onsider h~ in the formul~ llowing connection.
111aY cder So again t blishes the o
e ,,)'runary
. transsexual", the "very feJrtinine" boy)• """ "'I
a e ts dP<,...,b·
of gen d~ Freud es a ardo
rare condition that may never have eXisted (ibid., pp.; : ~
an identikit picture. """1 casestu ,, - Leonardo . e of the chil• d Leon ·
er _ loves in the nna.g
Moth - loves - a boy ender of the
Leonardo . tified with the g
. not1den
t Leonardo 15 f the gen-
Let us enter into the question ofgender, Without l05ing sight of For all tha ' he takes, cl rly independent o
h se place . thus ea
mother w o nesis of gender 15
What serves as a point of reference for Stoller. the disco- of adult
lranssexuat,, a certain degree, the discot1rae and/or behaViou,
and, toboys. ~
. t.choice. ostulates ~the
of "very feminine"
.,;s of ohJeC . 1 gy that Stoller P !1-12), Stolle,
The rentral affinnation of this diseourse is: "I have the souJ tum to the aetio ~ s of Gender (pp.
Let us now tity In Presentatwn £ ctors:
of a woman in the body of a man". Taken at face value, it is ad;, . . f gender iden . rding to five a
ongm o this aetiology acco
course that confirms gender as something psychological, as a matte, sums up
of belief, and which affirms sex as a PUrely somatic reality. Gende
Would be U,e subjective aspect, the consciousness of sex. Although 1 A biologic · forcetat birth h way in which the child is
Stolleradheres
t:ially S<>metimes
to it. maintains the SOUi-body dichotomy, he only pa,- 2.· Sex ass1·anmen
o·--·s of the parents (t e
3. The attitude d raised)
A more tautological but perhaps more interesting definition is perce1·vedan. henomena'
found in Presentations ofGender (pp. 10-11). Here, gender is defined as 4. 'Biopsyohic p g body ego d·
the belief or feeling that one belongs to one of the two genders. Thus, 5 The developm d regroupe ·
the transsexual does not believe that he is of the female sex, but of the · . · ate or
are elinun
female gender. One sees that we are Pulled toward several conver- f these factors f Paranoia
Some o , t of a Case o
gent ideas: "a dense mass of beliefs" and "convictions"; the feeling . al Accoun
. graphic
Autob10
of belonging to a group (one of the two large human groups); and, .c Notes on an
"P ycho-Analyti_ )" (1911c), SE 12, p. 63.
s . p aranoides
4(Dementia
184
185

-
 Genders
' ex and th
e Se)(uaJ - ,1
No. 5, the dev . Ppehd4: I
d the Sexual - Appendix I
~rceptions by th . elopmg body Gender, Sex an
eliminates this 1 e child ofits ot.... ego, corresp
ast fa t ••.u sexed b onqg
When anatom . c or as bein Ody (ib. to<¼, ff and P· 25 ff (in chapter 3, "An Emphasis on
sense of y JS defective ~ secondary . ld., p. 14 %iii nd 6
call t,e fou on P· :or example, in Perversion chapter 8 ("Symbiosis
Il1aleness o fi ... the .tndiVid in the 1i ).fl111 ~
Uaj deveJo ttle Chijd; ~
unequivoeaJ" (ib1.d )r emaleness if th It ")· and also, culinity'')
t,,1othetS ' th Development of Mas ·
ment + · · Stoller ft e sex assi Ps an "k t p.n,ciet}' and e ·a1 eference p oint is the theory of Margaret Mahler,
parental attitud o en comb.
es). This leaves 0:::
8nlnent ""'~ Iii
factors 2 and ~ ~
factors t 1-."._lld 3 (as.;~
'fhe essenti r . . .
. . ficult for us in France to imagine the hold this notion has
and it 15 dif lo-Saxon thought from 1952 almost until the present day.
oue ~ had on Ang rd Margaret Mahler inferred. from the observation
1n a WO , •
A. The bio/oe>icfi . . d symbiotic children the postulate that m the course of
7'i.. o· ~~ f ut1st1c an
0 11
-llle inf} el pment every child necessarily passed through these two
choic · uence of 1 dev o
•ts
e IS fiercely d b genetic and h to which the subject could subsequently regress. On the other
·
this tnfluen e at,.,.J ·
~; Uldeect th om.
•u•Onaj f. phases, . d tail , .
so.Ille ce. The idea of h ere are two actors on d a normal development IS presume to en a separation-
th What debatable id ormona1 dete . Ways to con 8~ :~duation' phase in terms of the child's relation to the mother, an
eoretically sp eak-in ea, from an exJJerimrrttination in th cel>tuaJise evolution that Mahler was led to divide into four sub-phases.
- directt g, be manuest enta1 po. e 'brain, la To be sure, this theory had some influence in France. But very
ing to be . y by a lllale ed: int of View)
ar this out (cf or female ' lllay, quickly it was sharply criticized, both in its own right and by virtue of
- or · d • · two the not psyche', thou h its affinity with the Freudian theory of a primary narcissism understood
~natonuca1 apm lrectly through thes on pp. 22 and 23~- there is notJi.
in the literal sense, that is, as something that exists from the first days
assio-n- Pearance. 7'1.. , th e deternuna~ ,
o ...,.uent + p "US en 1..1.on by th of life. Here I can only mention in outline a few stages of this critique:5
fe?Ted b S arenta1 atoh. rettuns the e 'bfain,
Y taller. I •1..1.des' This matter to of For a critique that is much more recent and is based on child
. can Only n,~ '-e . our factor of
cthe rela. ted fioll ow-u .. <CU\ re[,,,,..._
second op~
1..1.on is cl observation, one should re.fer to Martin Domes and to the cluster of
onbibute to G p data Present -:<=.r.•ce to the Ion earJy pre..
ThUs th enderJdennty' ed m chapter 5· ,,J case report and
arguments he assembles.6
Domes's article demolishes the idea of a primitive symbiotic
and 'assignm e Only factors left . . ow Biology can
essen · ent + Paren in Pla phase in the child, acknow ledging that at most there are symbiotic
tially that of 'b. tal attitudes' s· Y are 'biopsychi moments in some children.
iopsychic Ph . ince Stouer's c phenomena•
enolllena', I shall o:"21 theo.iy ~
5 See Jean Laplanche and Jean-Bertrand Pontalis, " Primary Narcissism " in Tiie
begin With that factot u mguage of Psychoanalysis, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (Lond on: Kamac, 1973)
B. llndertL
ne tenn 'I,;,_,__ . and Jean Laplanche, Problematiques, vols. I to V: refer to the index to the Problematiques
'l"l.. - ~r-,ychicp,1.-. at the end of Nouveaux fo11dements pour la pyscha11alyse (Paris: Presses Universitaires
~ 11e notion 'ten<»nerza, de France, 2008 [orig. 1987)) p. 187). See also the arguments against Wmnicott's idea
theory founded of biopsychj of a 'first not-me possession', w hich presupposes an original lack of differentiation
on the idea f c Phenome between mother and child (Nouveaux fo11deme11ts ind ex, ibid ., p. 172). See jean
o SJ/lnbios . na comp . Gortais' survey article, "Le concept de symbiose en psychanalyse", in Psyclumalyse d
186 ts, Which h.uns l1ses an entire
l'Universite, vol. 12, no. 46, April 1987, pp. 201- 38.
up repeatedly. 6 Martin Dom es, "La theorie de Margaret Mahler reconsider~", in Psychanalyse et
psycltologie du 1" tlgc (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2002).

187
 .. _----
Gender
, Sex and th
eSex
Th tlal-,1
qt.lite ~ way in wh_j Ppendi:c I
x and the Sexual - Appendix I
peeuliar: ch Stoller a Gender, Se
1) lied dheres to A,r_,.
2) lie C>esn't care at all ··"<tlllel'isin .
Conclusion
to separao ?<>stuJates th . about the , . ts, h~
. on-tndi . at tn iL autisti ei•
"''e Proc ~
is gend
. el'ed and .
Viduan
on there . ess of c.ph-- -~
.
·an explanation of gender identity collapses on all
tn the cas IS different ;.. IS a p~...., golllg '---0 . 'fheStollen
e of "p . I' '01n s . .... l.lCUlar s '' lll 5nnh:_
fro
m the moth runary transs '!flnbiosis in 1'lnbi0s· _ ~~
res er and bee exua1s,, t 8enera, In IS, o11e sideS: Mahlerian foundation is contested. Already in the
his ;;::s,
but Without ::a:e ~O.tnpletely in~ boy CouJ~ Other Iv 'hat
her (Presentati rgtng to sepa ePendent f 5eJJarate hi~ debate
1) Its

:ee
.
.th Stem in Presentations of Gender (p. 39 n. 9, and pp. 39-40)
all the 'complementary hypotheses' that Stoller is forced
As t ons ofGent1, rate hitnse/ o her in ,-·~
to 'too ,_ o the aenoJoPv er, Pp. 16-18) rtfr01n the I.... -~ ' one canand his reader accept in order to try to 'save' a theory that is
... ,uch .tn ~L oJ, we h • ' ""1111111 - to deJX\dicted by the facts. At that point, when the Mahlerian founda-
Stoller. o"',er, not ave seen ~L- • '~"
, good , • enou h .. ldt 1t al ; ::::napses (a debate that I shall not take up again here), the whole
~ctability (if SCiennsr that he .g father', a gen ~a.vs collles "--•
like ii.,_ a lllother · . IS, WouJd lik eraliiatio • "'l(l Sto!lerian aetiology collapses.
'-'l.lS, the Ill IS like that e to find n in '\Vk , 2) In addition, the latent idea according to which symbiosis
th.is des· other .tnust h , the son tA,m elenten1s ''-Qt
Ired prnA, ave 1-,,.._ . ·• ,l.lJ be 1ik of Pre. = identification is thoroughly questionable. The biological model of
never finds ·--~ctability is a ~ like that ( e this; if a .
a Pure 'ptizn~,exempJary ~ c;;ds With the far:::--34)). ffowS::,
symbiosis implies complementarity and not assimilation. Why would
1 - J fransseXUal, a son who. . tone p . , it be otherwise in a 'psychic' 'symbiosis'?
sh . cases of , . Stoller ~u:;__ is 'like this' tha 1:'ctieany 3) Even supposing that there is a primary identification with
OuJd not be conf.,-~~ feminine b-•1..1.cns that: , tJS losay the motlier (whether or not by means of symbiosis), why would this
2• he ha - - ~ With • oys'
far O
S nev L
ho~
-4t0Selfu- J_
are a s,,.,~,,
~ " U { lltin • be a primary identification with the mother as a woman? And why in
into aduJth er ,allowed - - ~ (p. 41)• onty and
tranc.-~. _ 00d as to 0 ne of th ' particular with femininity, which is a very elaborated trait?
-~uals'; be abJe to ese 'very, fi ..
4) Why would 'disidentification' (Greenson' s term) or 'separa-
, 3. no see then, trans e.tninine boys•so
Pti.tnary tr t one of the cas fonn into prim,.,., tion-individuation' (Mahler's terms), succeed on all levels except on the
anssexuai, ( es followed -...,, level of gender? How could such a split be conceived? (cl. pp. 40-41).
p. 41 n. 1 ) by RirJ.. __ _,
WJt,,..s 2 · --tcU"Q Green""'- 5) The appearance of masculine and feminine traits happens
. ~, toUerf:ri . ""=Ille a
it concer-n- es, mone ca when the child begins to be socialised (at the end of the first year and
•• .., a ho se, tod
_old and Wh 'Y Who did not ~onstrate ,, . the beginning of the second). Who would say of a nursling that it is
idenfikit i OSe description is begio to dress !redi_ctability'' (p.38ft) a masculine rather than a feminine creature (even if we project "It's
P cture) descn1-,,..... Profoundl a gu-1 unw 3a , a boy!")?
~ PreVi Y at Odds · ¾ Years
OtJsly (p. 19ff)_ With the "type" (or Nevertheless, Stoller' s work has the following immense merits:
1) To have underlined the early appearance of gender identity.
2) To have, in his moments of greatest lucidity (Presentations,
188 P· 73££), attributed gender identity to the complex unity created by
"assignment" and the "endless messages reflecting parents' attitudes
delivered to the child's body and psyche" (ibid. p. 74-75) (one can see

189
 Gender c:_
- ~andthe5e
a doo lC\JaJ - tt
H,- - r o.Pening Up to ~hI
.. ut.-e factors · the genera1 (iertder, Sex and the Sexual - Appendix U
+ n;,,...,._ s1ng1ed out theory
.-.<=.11taJ attitud , above the o of SeQu .
In th es (factors 2 nly one Cf:ioll). Fih. - APPENDIX II
St0 e very • and 3 of his l"enl,.;_ • · - "lilJI
ller Vigo llnportant . aeo -1~ &is, ~Of11.
tion TOUsly refu ending of o O&icai ~i&nr,,:-4'
gen! f;::'er: honnon:S the notion of :;a!'ter 5 (ibi~ ). - ~ LINGUISTIC GENDER
E ---..y only lead to , even When a direct honn .Pp.~
on a non 1·
h
. the SCepti~'
U/Uet, his Preti
· 76).
t changes . 1ll ~~ ""
'-Cl..! style h

P5YdtoJno;
1ll 8~ e'
ven though, With sntall or lllOdes dntinistet'ed . <>na1 ~- '.6l,

YPothesis (ibid. PP 75-erence is for the e often adopts er behaVi~.,

' Stoller "It
what follows, we shall designate as gender (5) the gender
. Instake for analysts, psychologists and social science special-
-o•caland E!tQs that is : enerallY- Here (S) stands for 'sexological'. We introduce this
~~ istS~:ti!n 50 that in all cases in which confusion would be pos.sible
~ able to distinguish between 'gender (S)' and linguistic gender,
: 'gender (L)'. We are well aware that by introducing this (5) we are
to some extent raising questions about the distinctions between gen-
der, sex and the sexual.1 But we have never claimed to be creating a
categoriz.ation that would be clear-cut, as if by a knife, so to speak. Far
from it! To repeat our point about assignment, gender is intrinsically
freighted with contents that are conceptually 'impure'; that is to say,
to a great extent unconscious and bearing on sex and sexuality.
1. - We are led, then, to an important excursus on linguistics.
Why venture into what might appear to be a digression?
a. In part, the feminist (and antifeminist) battle crystallizes
around gender (L). Beyond those aspects of this which are anecdotal
and somewhat ridiculous - in particular, the desire to modify mental
attitudes by artificially modifying language2- it is worth taking seri-
ously the notion of 'symbolic systems' that impose their supremacy
- Bourdieu's notion of 'masculine domination' being a case in point.

1 (Editor: On Laplanche's French neologism 'sexual' (as distinct from the normal
'sexuel'), see the Editor's note to the Fonvard of this volume. The term is printed
here in italics to mark it off from the standard English term with the same spelling).
2 In a separate domain, Roy Schafer's attempt to create a 'new language for
psychoanalysis' moved in the same direction: from the moment analyst and
analysand agree to replace the substantive or the adjective 'unconscious' with the
190 adverb 'unconsciously', we are already a long way on the road towards disalienation.
See Agne; Oppenheimer, "Le meilleur des mondes possible. Apropos du projet de
R. Schafer'', in Psydumalyse d /a U11iversite, vol. 9, no. 35, p. 467

191
 Gender S
' e.t and tire Se
b G XUaJ _ A
x and tire Sexual -Appendix II
to lnngun: ender (L) em;- Ppe,,dix /J cen der, Se
r.)e ns n .. uuenuy
the assjon..... system Un l relates t
and o•u11ent of angueJ s· o Jan . t as consequences for agreement (the agreement of
to see the gender (S) . lnce we gt.rage or 11
stOOd as the assumption of an act of zttt have a te~lllol'l!~. e:;uli;I• 1111t1ve .tha pronouns, even of verbs, and so on).
r,,.~i":'Y~;:"- 1· . d·eetrves,
t/~rticles," . .
! d \'berate technical restrtctton .

"Il '~
of gender mutilates the
the distincHon~tion of a !ender asap:: • 'fl\\S el '
l'esemblance ri kstween these :age, it is ev that COllJa . . din1 ension of Corbett's book:
1
2. - s leading us o types of en Illa~ dbe I, ant1U'0~1~t:ike La Grasserie, Corbett prohibits himself from con-
complex hisThroughout th do-wn the 'IA,-. gender (S Urgent~- . :gender' in this narrow sense with the presence of noun classes
ton al e cours ·••ung clnd t) ~
cover exh c evoluti e of its . Path. , ivh~ neeung es that do riot require agreement (non-inflected languages). In
d austivel ) ons (whj tnnlltne ''I.lie j11/t111g11t1g
ch lilJ'\guages, gender - understood m • the broad sense given
• by La
ency towards Y , gender {L) ch We co.. 'd table vatia .
the b · a logic ~ n't
seems lions ~rasserie: "families of things" (La Grasserie, p. 624) - manifests itself
tnary and excl . of the excluded to us to ha Possibly rkar.i
ted· us1v 1 H,; _ _, Ve ~ to in, for example, the presence of classificatory words and affixes.
tra , or: phalli
th e Ogic of th '-'um, Which . enlaiJed
at the c-a.u the e castt ti lrresistib a ten. Thus, in Chinese, all the names of trees are followed by the

::el as ;:::;;~c-
Warcfs corres
of~!~)
, tn fact corres ,
U:.:,exten~, :i;::Plex (p~':::
from bein . e see ein .
generic name: tree (cltou) (ibid. p . 598).
5

A pine would be a pine-tree (song chou); a pear, a pear-tree (ly

and o ~ Pondence With Ponds to, or atg situated at ~g is clro11). Sometimes the affix retains its meaning even when it is sep-
gender (S) What I caU , least has a t 5atne arate (chou by itself means 'tree'); sometimes it has no more than a
(even th3 • - Th e two auth
· sex ,
tha end
t Which ,._ __ency classificatory value, which is dependent on its affixed position (e.g.
ough · ors fro ..cuisla in Algonquin where "every second word becomes an empty word
Corbe . it means m Who tes
tt, In his boo expandin m We shall which serves to form the substantive" (ibid. p. 600)). This is a little
gone psych k Getuie,- 3 g our dnr.,- take our be .
o1oi,;
o•que de la cl
, and Ra --......"entan
ouJ de 1 G
anno.
on) are G 0" similar to the e ending in French, which is used to mark the feminine:
N0 do b assifi a ra · revilie
separates th u t the differen cation, revelee S5er:ie in his "La
mlonnation,: ~o •uthon; ".',of nearJy one
struck by the &uistic 'seien~ci es Corbett su - ~ years Which
h: le langage•:•i.
thee by itself has no meaning.
This entire domain is excluded from Corbett's investigation.
b - Corbett asks artificially complex questions concerning
approach d ~wly t,,,..1._, ty', etc. Yet perjonty in t,,...... f what he calls "the assignment of gender", which is to say "the way
, esp1te th - .......1.Jucal and one cann - .....,, o in which native speakers allocate nouns to genders ... How native
of This appro e ~ent of his d Testricted chara ot help but be speakers know that the word for 'house' is masculine in Russian, fem-
the probJ . ach IS chara . Ocumentati cter of Corbett' 6
ctn! emanc of ctenzeci on. s inine in French and neuter in Tamil" (Corbett, p. 3).
nan-owly defin genders Whi from the s All of which is fine so long as the subject has semantic criteria
of clSSociated ed as "clas, ch (Eono .....:- tart by a Testricti
Words" ( ses of no · ••ug Chari on at his disposal. Thus "'house' in Tamil is neuter because it does not
~(Ca quoted in Co beuns reflected . es F. Hockett)
lllbrid r tt In the l.,..L_
5 lt will be immediately noticed that the notion of class or of gender in linguistics
length in ge: Cainbridg U . , p. 1). Gend . ~naviour
4 In Reuu my selllinar b e ruversi er IS a pro 0 in no way implies distinction by sex. As Christophe Dejours has pointed out, the
e philasops.;~. Y Christophe tyDe~' 199]) C 'pe,ty / number of genders (L) can vary from 2 to 20 or more, among which sexual distinction
....,..e, vol. 45 1 1<>urs . orbett's t is possible but not always present. In our example, 'tree' is a gender, in the same way
192 , 898, pp. 59½24. ext was analysed at
that 'insect' could be a gender, or 'non-meat food', etc.
6 Here l am summarizing, on the basis of Dejours' work.
193
 ----=~~-::...:t~t~~~ SeX a,td the
_-dix II
5e"ual-Apr-·--

Gender, Sex and the Sexual_ ApPendix U T c e11der, d r

~egell e
,-ver,i to the rn
denote a human" (ibid.). __, relateS i' tree
,v-vei, ~ ;ust as , the gende
, il\e to . _,.,.t bOth
Bu~ th~ p~blem becomes more complicated when , relateS P t as it is ~ .
no semantic criteria: why is 'house' masculine in R~? ~ - •pil\e-tree ert1\ assigttmert . ts it\ relanon
on the t ..-.c:vchologlS
Corbett has, then, to make do with 'phonotno,;,..,., ore word (L) and by r J
phological' criteria. -o-...... ax-1 lltl- 3-one fl\ . n to gender
...,,ists ·\J\ re1at10 · a.;
-r""""
d~-
His reasoning is as follows. It would be too c:omFlicall!d b by \illo- cla5¢· h man bettl6w' al
each speaking subject to learn the gender of each noun when~- nder (S)- of 1rvin& or u . ed.) to se)(U
defil\e5 noUJ\
to ge Gender (L) lie5 to ciasse5 be detefllUil
not determined by meaning. There must therefore exist formal~ c;ender (S) a~P relation (yet to ge which
(phonological or morphological) which are more or less hiddesui-1 e a cerW1' e710n of rangtta peaic-
which have not been formulated by linguists. In thi5 regani Cuhl!
'"hi!i=on- tt o gender (L) is a_ph:;ectlve, ~en~Y s
relies on certain regularities (e.g. in French the words ending in 'Sil'
rep The assi~~ !ireadY sornethil'~ propertl~~tiott (a Jl'\es-
are feminine) and on experimental studies in which one presenb ~ a noun ,1 that shaJ1? "comrnuni arti,cula1"
native speakers words borrowed. from a foreign language, or~ mdud~ . class of no\lI\S (S) is an act o1 l ngs to a p
. ,.' ,\T\thil\ a of gender . .dual be o
created artificially, in order to see how they make gender assignmem. tn1,1 11te assignment that an il\divi . ted by
Here one can see that the term 'assignment' has takenonbllo hich d ~ lf be JlUS
sage, il\ fac_t), w ns not to let on~ ent (5) iS not
meanings: from spontaneous as.signment by a speaker, it beams c\aSS of beU\g- two reaSO der (L); aSSlgiun
assignment by a linguist or by a subject in an experiment. Of~ ihete are thus san,.e as gen uive
certain regularities are uncovered. but they are not sufficient to explain . ender (S) is not the to dfaW 5011'\e r;:5Gras-
words- g . gnrnent (L). eld let us trY . ·t as doe5
how a native speaker almost never makes a mistake (see ibid. P· 7).
Hence Corbett's quasi-mystical appeal to 'hidden rules'• .
the same as asst. cleared the fi der
(L), tal<iJlg i , .
4 - }-laving o\iOt\ of gen . cla5¢· , __.hef enrtch-
bQUl then ,:_.....,,istJ.C n>n to rw ... _.1,,r we
It seems to me that that Corbett makes a simple error wilh condusiOI\S a ed sense
of u.>•o-:- 10 . nal and Or- In particu- "
respect to both the speaking subject and the subject learning a lan- · · the enlal'g ptoV1S -ro:.Prie: 1)e
sene, U\ dusio!\S are . e infortPllti01'· La Gr~ rise
guage. It consists in making gender an intrinsic property of then~ These con e,cten51" -..-1-1de by t a sUfP
.ght of tl\ore second i:i>.. e" _9 Wha . twO
which is "reflected in the behaviour of associated words"• This JS ment i1\ the \i take aceout\t o:;te daJ\S la 1anga~ow between hlS
dearly true in the context of an ape, in.ent, where one presents a sub- would haVe to l'"dee de se,cu u~ht at'd to see
ject with an isolated substantive: verre (glass). But when one learns a y expression de_ l u,.or bad(. to b'. ther
. thiS au . voweo
language (whether as a child or as an adult) one is never presented it 15 to bnng biJU' rfli:-Y 11' igtlll'ent
with 'vem!, but always with '1.e verre'. The associated word, the article, . tration of" • reJjgiouS 3SS
the~ ('white ),
is a part of one and the same syntagm, which the subject learns at - - = ; ; s.\ . countti~ ilSSigtlll'ent igtlll'ent, etc•
7 lTnins.: see~ that i l l ~ (S): fllda:1 .i;ellgious 3SS
a single stroke (it's as easy to learn 'l.e verre' as to learn 'verre'). One S ll is to~ tha1' thal of S':1' . 01\, ete-> r3ci
3
\904. 195
could even say that in French the article plays precisely the role of careson~ us\itn, no tell~7 , 5eptetllbef
teatho\iC, ~ hiqiu:• vol.
'gender classifier' as it is defined above on the basis of La Grasserie:
9 ~pln!DSOP

194
 Ge11der 5,
, t:.t ll//d fl
~~
ie Sexual
=--
..... ucles he -Apµe11dix 11 •
Geuder, Sex n11d the Sexual - Appendix II
rnoves fro
SJ)eciiicau m the
yon sexuarty general ProbJ
Form J (Freud's Th ern of class·
sense of , y part, I shaJJ ree Essays w ificalion to . - concrete classifications, and
all th a category of cl . USe the terrn ' as published . aPil'Q! - abstract classifications.
e classes of s bs ass1fication gender (L)' . in l~iJu His definition of"concrete" classifications,if taken literally, could
or not the la u tannves f _revealed by I in the geneiai
nguage in o Which La anguage' . 5eem absurd. How could certain peoples "limit themselves strictly to
question . Grassene , including
A La Gra . requ1.res 'agreeme 5Peaks, Whether what is individual"? How could one have "languages devoid of all
- SSene and C nt'. classification"? Isn't the substantive itself a classification? U Chinese
tion ma are not limited t orbett agree in . has no word for 'brother' but only 'older' and 'younger', there are, at
y even be absent· o the sexual dorn 5_<3Ymg that genders Q):
least, those two classes! (ibid. p. 598).
- can be Inulti '1 am. The sexed clc!S.5ifi . What La Grasserie seems to want to say by means of this dis-
- often · p e; ca.
Include a ,res·d tinction is:
l Ual'
B. La G category• 'All a. that certain languages - those said to be without classifica-
He ana1 Tassene 1:-1- · the rest' tion -do not go beyond the substantive, that is to say do not go so far
}'Zes his ..., UG g .
rnan" · t instinct . ender to an ,,. .
lllto a "kinshi in terrns of Instinct for classifi . " as to have a class of classes;
Lan P cl.Olan . a trans . . cation . b. that at a level which is already superior to the absence of
this . gtlage w uJ g obJects" ("La .P<>sition of "kinshi .
lllstinct• "P o d then be categorie" ... pm classification, concrete classification proceeds, so to speak, little by little,
translates th. . SYchic need bee a revealer of ,' ~-.:>%). by means of analogy between the members of the class (and perhaps
e Idea, just as . omes gram : or a 1itmus test" for,
f. . . CWith this .d the Idea h---.__ Illatical need"· "G also by contiguity), but without logical opposition, without thinking
aJnilies of pea I ea of kinsh . ... cu15Jates the ob. ' ranunar of the exclusion between classes.
Strauss' .,.,_ pie to famn,__ 1P between n .. ,_ ')eet'' (ibid.).
s , ne Sav, ~ of thin '-'ungs - of Concrete classification would be "down to earth"(ibid. P· 610).
rige Mind)_" gs - We find a _a passage from
According to our own terminology, this would be a classification in
C. La prefiguring of Levi-
terms of diversity and not a classification by difference. In my view, this
Plici GraSSerie ·
ty of classifican tries to bzin w~uld be a new reason for a rapprochement with Levi-Strauss, as much
~ ons by dis . _g order to this
tribRaoul de la C . tingtushing ~ often dense mulli- Wtth the notion of the 'savage mind' as with his revitalised conception
una1s in B . Tassene (b ~rween of 'totemism' _12
of many othernlttany. lie w~~839 d . 1914) wa According to La Grasserie, the concrete classifications could be:
h
than
~ titles)
earned = a Ille i.._
SOcieties muer of the
s a Doct
. or of uiw .
~Id in unanirn on law, SOciol . Th_e author of Societ~ de Jin ~n~ a JUdge at many "objective": aimed at identifying "kinship" among objects or
tried to foUnd ous regard in ~ linguistics numerous ~slique de Paris and
actions (might we say 'metaphoric'?);
f ch Sf)eci.fic ~ew PhilOSoph own era: "H: ychology and a~d articles (more "subjective": that is, those which "are connected to a part of
.acts, and create ~ ce - and lo ~not a genera, : to be cla~hilOSophy, he was
tnlmiatiana/ d ~m them a . g out the la p ilosaphy, b among those who the human body, either as an object, as an instrument, 0 ~ as a move-
(~ ~laude 1..::-t;::;i-ns;
vol. r;.synthesis'~~Which g~v: ihilOSophy within ment of the body" (ibid. p. 608) (might we say 'metonyrruc'?)
hJcago and l.ond uss, nee S11tt1 1909). . Call"Oy, Dictic he ?bservation of
on: Chicago lJP.'ge Mind, trans nnaire biograpltique
196 , 1968). . John and Do 12 Oaude Levi-Strauss, Totrmism, trans. Rodne)' Needham (Boston: Beacon Press,
reen Weightman
1%3).
197
 Genders
-
, ex and th
eSexual-A
-
D- p Ppendix 1J Gender, sex and the Sexual - Appendix 11
term "difference"
' artaIl (ibid., p. 610ff) deals .
of our hyPoth . Ppears lllUnecfia With abstra t . . founded on movement, one of the most general and most unpor-
more or 1 . esJS: abstract las . tely, Which is c classification 11 IS f. . lari f bl
ty 1t seems pre era e
differe ess m terms of
nee.
A:: sification is tha a &OOd con,;- ·~
o..uuerences t Which . ·~uiatic.i
of the physical factors. Because o its c
~en1 to the sexualist classification; for the vitalist classification encom-
, or Which JS fo
La
Grasse . at least . l'nlulat~ pas.ses all beings, which it divides up more equally and according to
ne proP<>ses anns to\Vaids a p05itive classification, whereas in order to include all beings the
111) The vi . a typology of abstract cl . sexuali5t classification must institute a negative category, the neuter
2nc1) 'M. taltst classifi . assification.t or asexual. So the vitalist classification could have been adopted by
4Ue rational' cation into .
3n1) The horn; .tst one, into bein artimate and inanuna more civilised peoples and to better advantage. However, the oppo-
be. n,st one be gs With and . le. site occurred, the vitalist classification remained restricted to peoples
4th) mgs. , tween hum Wtthout reason.
Thev;·,· an and non-human with an inferior civilization, while those with a superior civilization
5th) n zst one be
~e intens;Vis,' on:Ween male hUlllans adopted the sexualist classification.13
6u,) beings. , between stron ~d other~
The gradual' g beings and Weak F - The sexualist classifi.cation often includes three genders:
tive bein zst one, betw . ~a~e, feminine, neuter. Neuter being the asexual and not the
7th) Th gs. een diminuti
e 11Ulsculinist ve and augmen1a- marumate (ibid. p. 618).
8u,) other beings one, between
The 5eXualist· male beings and all the G - So according to La Grasserie again, there would be:
clSexuaI. O
ne, between a) A general evolution of 'vitalism' toward 'sexualism'.
mascuune, fpm;ft;_
-.uuw1e and b) Some superimpositions of one system over another, and
Corbett
ob·:Jections to thisrefen; to La G .
:me survivals- in particular, the survival of the inanimate classifica-
classincanon.l'assetie and ·r:i; ..~ on within sexualism.
---=:. on}
E- On y relatively minor .b. c) "Some usurpations, or rather, some expansions'' or "invasions"
that there . e of the ad (l lei. p. 614).
ti JS a kind van~g In particular: "within the se,cualist classification, one endeav-
ons. The , . . of evolufion es of La G
of th TJlfa/zsr dassio and a rassene's w . ours to give a grammatical gender to many objects which do not
e most Printitiv cation ( . trend in the his ork JS to show
The , . e. aniznate - . . tory of das.sifica- naturally possess one" (ibid. p. 618).
one towan:1 ~ t ' classi.6 .
Which th canon O
Inanimate) Would be one This happens according to two mechanisms:
emov ' nth a 'psychological' mechanism: semantic analogies (a certain
ernent of d ~ other hand
·t This vifolist dis . tion tend . , Would be the object resembles the masculine or the feminine)
a 'morphological' mechanism: words ending in a, in Latin,
i , comb·med With tinction is th s·
others, in most e most SOlidJ are feminine.
198 of theCauCc1Sian
. Y 8l'ounded-
lan , we find
8Uages; indeed, 13 La Grasserie, Revue pl1ilosophiq11e de la Fr1111ce et de /'itm11ger, vol. 45, p. 616.

199

..
 -Au II
Gender, Sn and the Sexual - Arr·-
Ii - For rny JlOrt, I IYouJd P"'JJose lhe folio . .
- ll1a1 becnUSe i1 USes the dh.c, I lh, lving ide,
"JISlan is lhe on• Which lends itself best o . se.xes, the . 11
orid Is we known.lethal,justalthepo,·ntofbeing loaacq
i
tJ:i:ral',
4

lhis is Probably by Ylrtu•

• • a ngon,u, da ....,_ lroUblmg
,

of lhe binary I0 · ( ha/ . ·'""I p0raJl' w . less remarkab . . ediately doomed .,_,.?
Whl h lhis dilferena, lends itself; ogic p I~~ , It is no . difference 15 unm . bility
. within bma:ry '"l:1"-
f mimne . fan msta
masculine- e . ls this the sign
. 'gender troubIe., (Judith Butler)?
o
- . Iha1, J>ilrado>cicaJJy, ii is also lhe one Whid, lend, Usdl orcontaminatton.
of a certain
I~ usurpr,1.,,,s of '•nilory between genders: Whether ii ho lhe ,,. The victory
hon by lllascu!ineI lentinine di//~, whJch, in Frenci, for.:::
has ahnos1 entin,ly ovenun lhe terntory of lhe neu1er; or wi.u.,,
be lhe •ncroac1unen1 of one gender upon anolhe,: Th~ ~""""
J)ation is rnos1 often, but no1 always, lhe Usurpafion of the r,,,,;,,,
S•nder by lhe lllasculine gender, on lhe 8mUnds lhat the mascui;,
gender is 'tuunarkect· <Madame le ininistre, elc.)."
On lhe other hand, in French lhe wold 'fl'rSotmt, whxf, ,
feminine, is said lo be 'unmarked•, While in German M;;,t,J,,,, is""
ter (L) but feminine (S).

To return lo assisnrnen1 (S), lhe pan,n1 al lhe town hall who

is registering lhe birth of ein Mildche,,, daes no1 suppose himse// 10 I,
registering a neuter or asexual being!

So it is only Wilh irnrnense caution lha1 one might suppa;,

lhe C!Xislence of a relationship between lhis 'war of lhe gender, lLr
and a 'war of lhe sexes (S)'t At rnost one mlgh1 propose that in ii,
'war of the genders (L)' a <ertain 'OUlsculinism' (whose cL,ssiflOllioo
ls: lhe masculine Versus 'lhe resn ls the 'obi<ctive any of• <l'rtaill
'sexualism• (the only logical difference, since it is dearly symbolizab~
in fenns of the phallus, is sexed difference) and lhe 'objectlve ally' of
the 'digital' binarism or system (I - 0), whose succe,., in lhe ronlem-

J< i'IJ••~.,
lap!nn,h~, paronth,.; g;,.,, on """"Pio of "'•dam Frend, "~°?'
practice whereby II grommaUcally mascuJinc pro/c.>ssionnJ title Or minisJrr) rctuns ars
gmmmatlcc1l
of gender even when colloc,,t,'d With tfllldQm,. to indicate that the holder
the post Is fomaleJ.

200
 Three Meanings of the Tenn 'Unconscrous'
.

10
THREE MEANINGS OF THE TERM 'UNCONSQOUS'
IN THE FRAMEWORK OF
THE GENERAL THEORY OF SEDUCTION1

~1 The General Theory of Seduction has its origin in a generalisa-

p°n of Freud's theory of seduction. Formulated in the years 1896--97
~d'5 theory gave an account of ~ i o n but within the limits o;
a situation that was contingent and restricted: it was ronfined to the
domain of psychopathology. To ooin a phrase: 'for every neurotic
daughter, a perverse father'. A variety of elements was lacking for any
reconstruction of the theory by Freud through a generalisation of it, as
an alternative to the repudiation of it that took place in the famous let-
ter to Fliess of 21• September, 1897. What was Jacking was the ronrept
of the polymorphous perverse and a rona!ption of sexuality in general,
such as he was to desmbe in the Three Essays of 1905. What was lacking
Was the concept of primordial communication and of a message. What
was also lacking was an in-depth theorisation of the notion of translation
as the mechanism of repression. The notion of translation is rongruent
With the conception of the human being as a being of language and
communication; it can be aptly substituted for the mechanical schemas
drawn on in the classical theory of repression.
202
1 Paris, 2003.

203
 TlrreeM .
emungsof th
e 1'er,n 'U
1.2 Th nconsciou ,
th e general tl1eo s "anings 011 tlte Tenn 'Unconscious'
e genesis of th .ry of seducti Three M•·
ing from . e psychosexua1 on seeks t
lllterhu~ appa o p;
The h ~ ..an relatio . ratus of th o•Ve an would exit), has disappeared thanks to the observa-
utnan psychical nships and e hllllJ acco~
the sexual d . apparatus is b not frolll b· an bein It! ~ 10 saY hoW one · ed, differentia ted, reoproca
lations that are orgarus · l
The nve Cunder the fi a ove all JoJogi &s¾ tion of early .re ing and where from the beginning the 'not-me' is
. somatic instincts onn of both wedded t caJ Otj . • the begtnn ' .
of r11fa11ti/e sexuarty are not denied b the life and do tliedritJe~ (rofll relation of personal belonging.
unconscious i nor involved .' ut they are n . eath dn , lo rnarked by a ver what the theory and observations of attachment
. ll1 the genesis e1t1ier the ~es).
Howe ,
. to account is the asymmetry on the sexual plane. What
0
. Seduction is
tion - even thou . not a contingent
~~
rep'~ l31·1to take lll
. aussmg
• is an insistence on the fact that the adult-infans dialogue,
. .
::aprocal as it may be, is nevertheless paras,ted by something else from
on a situa,-; gh it can some,,_ , pathoJogicai e beginning. The adult message is scrambled. On the side of the
uon that h u.u1es app . or ep· th
damental a thro no u.man bein ear in that £. 1Sodic te4. ·
dult there is a unilatera 1·intervention
· by th e unconsoous.
. Let us
relation, th: 1 ~logical situation~;._~ ~cape, Whicho;'11· It is~
SJ)eech re ation betw . i,us situatio . Cali the 'fun_
:ven say, an intervention by the infantile unconscious of the adult, to
d . ). The aduJt ha een the aduJt and th ~ is theadUlt-· the extent that the adult-infans situation is a situation that reactivates
escribed s an unco . e 1n1,, . lllfanr these unconscious infantile drives.
d ues an , a sexual un coilSdous . nsaous such 1uns ffit. wi•L
as psych "'oUt
theW. ~conscious that 15
ant 1s With
. , made essenna11
perverse in th
~analysis has
Y of infan . I.5 In order to underline these points, let us ask the question: why
vators of sexuaJi out genetic sexual ins . e sense of the Thri tile l'esi-
_ speak of the adult and the fundamental anthropological situation?
tdea of an end ty and at the be8'innin tin~ts, Without ho -ee ~ Why not speak of a fundamental familial, even oedipal, situation?
cized and ogenous infanol g Without se"n,~' '- nnonaJ aCfi.. We do so because the adult-infans relation, in its generality, even its
' not onJ b e sexuality h ~..,u ,antasi
denial of infa . Y Y me, but this . . as been tho es.7ne universality, goes beyond the parent-infant relation. The fundamen-
an ill ntile sexuali . Ctiticism has roughly Criti-
·fonnuJated theory. ty in general, or to its ~ :occas!on led to the tal anthropological situation would exist between an infant without
a family and an absolutely non-familial educational environment. In
I.4 g assunilated into
How can this fundamental anthropological situation the important terms are
PSYcholo We I0cate here 'communication' and 'message'. Here I would insist that, in speak-
th gy of the earJ . the contnb .
e Work of rece y infant Years? Utions of conte ing of adult messages, we don' t mean unconscious messages. All
considerable deve~t observation stud~ There is much to a:1'°rary messages are produced on the conscious-preconscious level; when I
Preservation' F Pment of WJ1at F es. There has bee from speak of an enigmatic message, I speak of a message 'compromised'
'attac1tm · reudian self-p reud had pr, . n, notably, by the unconscious. I insist on the compromised character of the mes-
around t~n:h With all the dev:Servation returnse;~usly called 'self. sage and this only on the side of the adult at the beginning, even if a
an adult-1n:n eme. On an evid:igments and observati~r the rubric of reciprocity is established very quickly afterwards, even on the sexual
1" s comm . eneoc • . ons oro- · ed
ately. The old h Ultication d Instinctual b . •oarus level. What counts, finally, in this situation is in fact what the recipient
t eozy of 's.Ymbio;is:Velops very qUickl asis a dialogue, does with the message, that is to say, precisely the attempt at transla-
(a state fro Y, even immedi
204 ll1 Which 1·t · . . tion and the necessary failure of that attempt.
15 Impossible

205
 ThreeM .
ean,ngs o' th ..,
J e ~er,,z 'l..l
I.6 neons .
Lt c10Us•
. e me add h Three Meanings of the Tenn 'Unconscious'
dimension 'rt. ere a remark
. ,. ne genera] h on th
damenta1 anthro . t eory of Sedu . e question
a ~ition agains~!:racaI situation ab::: clnd its Pos~he bio~ . h mess becomes a veritable 'thing in us' or 'internal
·ch in its ot e ,
SOdably bioloo-ical and gy. In my View. all hely does not;.. te of H. \l'hl ' ,.t'
.
foreign
body' ,
an i .
reaso · 0
• psy,..1., ' un-.~- ..,vol 'lij\.
lllng cannot be uuc. Even th -·&CU1 Prac "efak.
relate. u,,_ F conceived ••hth e most abs,._ es5es ilte. """'!
•vnen reud b ·•• out b· ..,.ctct lllcfis.
1etter of th . a andons th a JologiCaJ lllathl'llla . Primal Repression, Translation,
the biologi~~llln~x' in 1897, heed~? of Seducti:d _co~ll!a.l~ the Constitution of the Unconsdous
He does , ut 1 am h,-, n t say, ,1 Ill his~
and the Psychical Apparatus in its Normal and Neurotic Form2
. n tat aI1 sa th . ....,iung back t ' am hunin OUs
ISn't anYthin to y at the biological o the innate, the 8 bac1c1o
as the oth ~ be regained 'rt. . factor reg::i;,.,._ . heTedit:...,, u.1 The fundamental anthropological situation confronts an
er side f th . ,. ne b101 . ......~ its Pla ...., .
quest by the h o_ e PSYchoJop;,..~' ogica.1 always re ~e, for there adult, who has an unconscious that is sexual but essentially pregeni-
f. erecfitan, o•'-<U. On th lll<Uns
actor, runs thro - J announced e Other h Presen, tal, with an infant, who has not yet constituted an unconscious nor
Which I shaJl Ughout the hist by Freud, the re~d, this l'econ- the opposition unconscious-preconscious, in a dialogue that is both
Tot,,... 0 nly meno ory of Freudi of the inft.
~,,, and Taboo on three an meta - ..1c1te symmetrical at one level and asymmetrical at another. The sexual
As 0913), Moses a..A l I moments: the 'p . P5rchoiogy of unconscious of the adult is reactivated in the relation with the small
· regards th '"' ,vionotz.,.,_ nmaI fan
innate. It is th
eret0
e bioloo-i,..~, ~1.,. ,,c,:,m 0939)
o•'-<U, uus can be ·
lasies-, infant. The messages of the adult are conscious-preconscious and are
as I'egards . . re the Prima acquired necessarily compromised (in the sense of a return of the repressed), by
in order to ~~tile seXUality. I cy of the herecfi,-,.,... thas Well as being the presence of unconscious scrambling or interference. These mes-
lildicate th · say pr.:,,..;- ......Y at I chaIJ
Pro&ranun . at there . --.....:,ely sexuar enge sages are therefore enigmatic, both for the adult sender and for the
non-infantil: .: ....~~tis not sexua~tertainly an inna.te1ty andd infantile, infant recipient.
would --uulzty (adol self-presery . , an hereditary
;,..,t..,_ clrgue, a fund,,.... escent gonadal ation ), and em,,,., . While in a normal dialogue (verbal or non-verbal) there exists
-•«mcy and ......,entaI diff, seXUality) -.......y m a common code and there is no need of translation (or it is instanta-
effeCf:i What kicks · erence be1-.. . · There exists I
Veapl'earan lil at the •vveen the ' neous), in the primordial communication the adult message cannot
to catch up . ce of the sex ~otnent of adol sexua1 drive of
autonotn With the driVe of . Ua1 Instinct. The est:en_ce, Which is the be grasped in its contradictory totality. For example, in the typical
model of breast-feeding, there is a mixture of love and hate, appease-
Iem of int':;.;-over a long :~ersubiecove ori= Instinct then has
lATL tion and cohes· nOd, and there,,_ t has deveio~ ment and excitation, milk and breast, the 'containing' breast and the
. ••nat r 1On betw -...,erg r-..i sexually exciting breast, etc.
id at the on· . WouJd equa11y .1 -,_,, een the,..__ es a serious prob-
. gin of c.ld.J..I •vvo. The 'codes', innate or acquired, that the infant makes use of
llllplied by th .PsYchic life enge is the n .
hUtnan be· e notion of the,.{_; an idea that Otion of a primordial are therefore insufficient to cope with this enigmatic message. The
lilgs) to '-<J.l\'e a contradi infant must resort to a new code, at once improvised by him and
a :rneanmg, it is . a Pl'e-establishect s ~ sexual Proces cts the novelty invoking the schemas furnished by his cultural environment.
lil Order to chara aitn. If the no . snot adapted (in
206 ctense th tion of an .d .
e repress i retains
ed unconsaous, 2 See my "Short Treatise on the Unconscious" in Essays on Otherness, ed. John
Fletcher (London: Routledge, 1999), pp. 84-116.

207
 Three Mea .
~~

nzngs of th
eTenn 'U
izconsr-:
---- ___ ..,..

•
n·2 Th tr ~•0 us'
e ansJatio f nings of the Term 'Unconscious'
all at once but in no the enigma ti Three Mea
is the sam two motnents 1'hi cadu.Jtll'les
h e as that of th . s schell'l saged
t e message is s· e model oft a of two Oesn'tha e absence of time in the unconscious, since it is what
stooct It . Inlply inscriJ...- _,
· Is as if main . Ut:CJ. or im
he traUJna. . lllolllents P!Jeii
· In the . or ti,,, ~ t~e process of repression, from the constitution of the
1
consciousness, or , tainect or held in p <Ut_t:d, 'Withollt firs_t llioiii"'l\'s esca~, ~ the temporal that is the flowering and enrichment of the
reactivated fro ~der the skin' In PDsition llnd betng hh en~ doJllain o . .
m Within 1 · a sec0 d er a fl,: _ -..1der nscious personality,
at all costs b · tacts lik . n mom "lUl lay · preco _ the absence of coordination and of negation, since it is precisely
e masterect and . e an Internal f, ent the Ill er Of
. It is a questi Integrated. Oreign boct ~ge~ es from coordination that is indispensable to the process
what escaP
m very early ...1...:,dhon, Freud tells us of,, Ythatll!11.. of translation;
Which '-'lU Ood , eXpe . °'O(
_ the realism of the unconscious, corresponding to Freud's
Were subsequently c:~tr:;;:h~ot unde;;::a:~ch Oc~ ,
5
chical reality', is repudiated as scandalous by a large number of
Il.3 Th understood and . e time but ;;ern interpretations. This realism opposes the idea that the uncon-
chicaI app;::~ation or attempt at tr . lllterptetect".J scious is a second meaning subjacent to the 'official' and preconscious
ego - correspo d preconscious level Thansiation establishes . meaning proposed by the subject. On the contrar,y, the unconscious is
represents its on st~ the way in Whiche~~reconsaous-ess lll~epsy. what has escaped from that construction of meaning that I call trans-
the wn history. Th •ue subject. ennallylhe lation. It isn' t part of the domain of meaning, but is constituted by
Production of a his
located o
But bee tory,
ause the messa
more or
ess
1
. e translation o
coherent
IS constituted
f messages is . and
In essence
signifiers deprived of their original context, therefore largely deprived
ntw· ge · · of meaning, and scarcely coordinated among themselves.
feet, With c~compatible planesIS ~ompromised and . In a word, the repressed unconscious is at the origin of the
constitute the residues left asid , The translation is alwIne?o~erent, drives, sexual life drives and sexual death drives, drives that one can
oppositi unconscious in the e. ese are the .ays unper. consider - by inverting Freud's famous formulation4 - as 'the demand
on to the PT"oper F • I"emaind
marked by these Preco~ous ego. It is reudzan sense of the ters ~t for work' imposed on the body by its relation to the repressed uncon-
the adult m XUal, since it ow . clear that the enn, m scious signifiers.
adu1 essage by th es Its Origin unconscious .
tunconsoous h,.,_ e sexua1. But it. . to the compromis• JS
h as llnde . , ~Use of th IS not m any mg of
sage on t~one m its trajectory•ae ~ouble 'metabolis;:y a copy of the The Psychotic and the Borderline:
complete} p~ of the adult . distornon in the that the sexual the Radical Failure of Translation and the Untranslated Enclave
y the llllplanted , and a Work of tr compromised mes-
Il.4 T'L message on the Part ansflation that revises
iue typ· o the inf. ill.I The partial failure of translation accounts for the 'classical'
Freud J...:_ - ica1 characte . . ant recipient normal-neurotic unconscious. Alongside this, we should make room
•umself are th rIStics attnb
e direct co Uted to th for the possibility of a radical failure of translation. Nothing is trans-
~ IlSequence of its . _e unconscious by
'Remem1...,.~ ongm in lated, the original message remains as such in the psychical apparatus,
"=lllg, Repeatin repression:
g and WorJcin
208 g Through" o9 4 (Editor: cf. "an 'instinct' appears to us ... as a measure of the demand made upon
14g), SE 12, p. 149. the mind for work in consequence of its connection with the body" , "Instincts and
their Vicissitudes" (1915c), SE 14, pp. 121-2].

209
 --- •tJnconscioUS'
. gs of the Tertn
•Aearttn bl
Three Meanings of the Tenn 'Unconscious'
r1tree iv• . is unu-anslata e
.cal i.Inperative bOUse· 'you
. an categon . nnssible to Jl\eta f. ·t by
}.(alltl · unr- unt o 1
whether implanted or intromitted.5 It thus constitutes ha .-t wat the ·tself belJ\g oi.ve an aceo
w tone
rgoev than 1 '. sible to er
call an 'inserted' / 'enclosed' unconscious [l'inconscient en lave)~ o~ef\ a thlJ\g other ust'. It is unPo5
What are the characteristics and the causes ~f ~ ...
il'to i f\Y u5e you rn . tification- cal failure of
f1\1.15t t,eea ariY other jU5 f such a radi
'unconscious' ?7 .... f\Ce to d causes 0
refete ditiol\5 an here
the con ""'ned up
ill. 2 This unconscious enclave is not correlated with the wnat are . le 1 have Or- and 1
scious system. With the psychotic there is little or no narra:a~ Ul-4 . ?
-~"s\ation-
o,...- 'fhe con
ditions are p
.
robably rnult1P . one to e,cpl~re
not the onlY
which 1 arn . if 1·t tur1'S out O
t be viable.
. tergen-
history. The unconscious enclave remains, so to speak, just be)~ tigauon, . uing 1t, froJl\ an U\
consciousness. It is maintained by a thin layer of conscious defence a \ille of i.J\Ves the task of con~ can result notab_y 'fhe question of 1
functioning according to an apparently logical, 'operational' ~ to others f translation etabOUsauon- ·ts con-
\eave 'fhe fail~ ~on, without any Jl\....otl by asking what are 1 of the
whose principle modality of defence would be disavowal (Freud's
. nal transtniSS , t be develor,- the very strUctUfe e
Verleugnung) rather than that of repression-translation. It is often said erabO erational JllUS . t of vieW of . . of the Jl\essag .
that defence (conscious reasoning) is like the inverted reflection of •the intergen ce froJl\ the p<>Ul of the reop1ent and the the-
£e,dsten . t of vieW tigation .
what is disavowed. Only the "symbol of negation" separates them.• dition5 ° d froJl\ the p<>Ul thi5· the liJ\e of iIW~all for psychiatnSts
message ~adyworldngon £ ~u}ated es~ ~eseproble]llS• Is
ill. 3 Among the untranslated messages constituting this uncon- MallY are ework h,ave been -~ see]llS to Jl\e, Wlthnused as illh.abited
scious, one notes in particular the messages of the superego. I have oretical framed ore and Jl\ore, as i so Jl\Uch coJl\P~ Is thiS even pas-
-'-'nt Jl\ essage ~"-..
COIU>v UU>
tis not di5tal\Ce fro..... ..,.. it?. ode aJ\d so
5 (E.ditor: cf. "While implantation allows the individual to take things up actively,at there even a in . without any d :...-.pases its own c ·ts'elf? Or
_.,,.,ous, •es an ...... ,..,,c:,.ge 1
once translating and repressing, one must try to ronceive of a process which blodG the unco•..,.... that earn the Jl\~ . . ons
this, short-circuits the differentiation of the agencies in the process of their formation, by ? Is there a Jl\essage . othing other than ssible applicatl
and puts into the interior an element resistant to all metabolisation", "Implantation, sible. 1 tion that is n What are the Po 1
lmtromission", Jean Laplanche, in Essays on Otherness, op.cit., p .136]. unpcse5 a tranS a is parado,cical? ed in a rigorous way seduction la.

6 (E.ditor: Laplanche has previously formulated in an earlier text the idea of the Jl\essage if ·tis us h , rie de
intromitted, unmetaboli.sable messages from the other as "psychotic enclaves within when the arado'X, 1 iil et la t eo . thiS axea.9
the human personality as such", New Foundations for Psychoanalysis, trans. David of the notion of theJ as Tarelho's Pa;.:n:f investigation~ to tranS-
Macey (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989) p. 139. He here extends this notion of an A boOk su interesting pat essages that he . sed for
'enclave', from untranslatable messages to include messages awaiting translation.
Lacking verbal forms for the English noun enclave (the French have enclaver, e11c/av{),
generalise£ open5be~Popsse55ed' by th~::r set of probleJllS 15 Po
I have specified the double and linked meanings of 'insertion / enclosure.'] Can someone . Jl\Y vie . w that a .......)
,
7 I find Christophe Dejours' proposal of the term 'amentiaJ unconscious' difficult to late? It is h~• U'\ chopathology-
accept, for it presupposes that repression-translation is a process of mentalisation
which the psychotic unconscious does not undergo. It therefore presupposes that the psychoanalYtlC psY
messages of the other a re not 'mental' but must become so. I have trouble accepting •-~n (Pans: p-resses
any such opposition as soul / body, mens/ soma. ction general'"""
· de la sbJu
? (~ilor: d. "A negative jud~ent is ~e intellectual substitute for repression; its _--:-:-:;::::;:\hO,
,·n et la thlon£
paratJOu•
no JS the hallmark of repression, a certificate of origin - like, let us say, 'Made in
G~~y'- With the ~elp o~,th~ symbol of negation, thinking frees itself from the
9 Luiz <:3r~os ~ranee, 1999)- 211
UniversitaifeS
restrictions of repressio n ... , Sigmund Freud, "Negation" (1925h), SE 19, p . 236].

210
 'llnconscio11s'
. f tlte Tenn
tv1ear11r1gs o
Three Meanings of the Tenn 'U . r1,ree . · g
·t1n
nconsc,ous' es tn Wal .
tory' of mes.sag
.. a l<iJ\d of 'purga . . .de
Towards a Unified Theory of the Apparatu ,, he f '"'aitiJlg, . tion in his arti
so, t Sau/ a place o here Freud's d~cnp side in the same
ol5" . ent to recall h e,astence side by . f repression
IV.1 The Freudian model of the 'apparatus of the SOul' .
neurotic model. Confronted more and more in their practj IS a-~ 1\1.
3 It i: .
. pertU'
htttl'g
of the eg~,
of t e
hantSJllS·
. the neurotic Jl\
. echaI\151ll o
· mecfuinlSJl\
. of disavowal

deviating from this model Oimit cases, psychoses, men:i~

th cases o" the spal of two rnee rverse or psycho~c Christophe Oejours, to
. dividu ) and the pe se, following . as being present
perversions) a large number of theoreticians have put to one~ ~ ~ erdra11g1111g) 1 would P1:°Po hat Freud descrtbeS
Freudian conception, founded on repression and the unconso the
being relevant only to a small number of cases. They have th~t as
~ver/ell~ ut;! ~U h ~ n be~gs w
geJ\eralise
. certai
·n individuals-
. s can be un
derstood to
structed other models alongside the Freudian edifice, without seeking ltl!\-
oJUYlJl . f all hUJl\an betng b t with pathways
keep a consistency with Freudian thought Furthermore, these IllOd: hie life o f the other u ne
are, most of the time, desexualised, and they scarcely make use of the 4 'fhe psyc each ignorant o rder fluctuates froJl'l o
JV. . O f two parts, these parts the bo Uf within the sarne
notion of the unconscious. It is as if, in another theoretical register, fa~ n51st B tween ....nrhs of e, . la-
co n thelll• e d at different er1-- . al frontier tn re
with different aspects of the world, one were to propose two perfectly t,etwee ther an , . · a vernc nflict
distinct cosmologies, each without communication with the other. individual to anotrontier of thiS splitttng,sion, isn' t a site of co of
. .dual- The ' b .er of repres two 'processes
ind1V1 'horizontal am aration between le when
IV. 2 On what basis does the general theory of seduction propose tion to the d's account, a sep be crossed, for examP
but, as with Freu re thiS frontier can ff [see figure 2.11
a unitary view, subsuming the so called separate models of normal- , Furthenn° ' · ered o · ch 1arger
neurotic and borderline-psychotic functioning? defence · f translation is tngg tt· """rl A is very mu d Jines
rocess o rmal-neuro c, r-. . urs un er ,
a) by referring them to a common basis in the fundamental a new P case of the no _,..,.,tic. But, as De.JO hand;
1n the .th the non-nt:.... ~ take the upre!
anthropological situation and the translational hypothesis; B lt is the reverse Wl ·ght-halld side (B) can fro deliriutn, even
b) by recalling that the untranslated, the unconscious enclave, is than · . tances the n tjsation or IJ\
not the exclusive result of a single radical failure of translation. Indeed we in certain cifO.Uil5 heltered froJl'l soll\3 thers" (ibid. P· 95).
iDrt • totally s
"no sub,---- lS
~ed than°
better prol.l::'-•
should remember that in the model of neurosis the translation process • tnictureS are · the mes-
if certain s . 1 repression,
always happens in two moments, the first being that of the latent dimen- pecificallY in pnilla huJl'lan being, tlte
sion of the other's message in an untranslated state, in waiting, an actual 1n repression, and s the sole reality for the , _ _,rribed in the
state of 'sub-conscious' insaiption, without having yet been "understood IV. 5 frolll tandareu1'7'-•· .
f the other come . firSt rnornen taken up agam,
and interpreted."10 There would exist, therefore, not only in the infant sages o They coxne in a d are then la-
reality of the ot/ier. ·ous' enclave, an reconscioUS trans
but in all human beings, a stock of untmnslated messages: some practically
unconscious or 'sub-cofnsorth divided between a p{see figure 2.21
impossible to translate, others temporarily in waiting for translation. h nee o ainders-
Translation can only be got under way by a reactivation, a reactualisa- translated and e d unconscious rern
tion and its represse •g 19861), PP· 39-117·
tion. This unconscious enclave can therefore be a place of stagnation, but
• . payot, 2001 1on ·
. urs z..ecorps, d'abord (PaflS• 213
11 Christophe DeJO '
10 "Remembering, Repeating and Working Through", op .cit., p. 149.

212
 Three Meanings of the Tenn 'l.!ncon .
. s'
sc1011s, · gs 01 ,I the Term 'Unconsciou
Three Meantn

Reality== the human Other

cs -- -- Message

-
from the

---
other

The Preconscious --
:::-

The
Unconscious
I Enclave

The Repressed I Toe Repressed

Unconscious

Q.I
.§
0,
C
:§
>
'o
J

A
J
~ 8
B
Figure 1 A

Figure 2

214
215
..
J
Three Mea •
mngs of the Ten ,
n llncons .
IV c1ous· iings of the Term 'Unconscious'
. 6 Once these two Three Mea,
one reconcile the idea Parts A and B have bee
<?eiours, p. 98) betw~on the one hand, of n ~tulateq - reservation), the infans must seek for new codes.
line of a split, and o th two Parts that are a Illutua.z . , ho\\> c.. tJllent, se lf p thi ·u h h od
1 f attlld , invent these from no ng. very soon e as c es,
comm · . ' n e other th
UIUcation, of co
separa,-,,...,
. , e Fossibility
here to the Prod . mtnunicating v-.,=1-
·=
of a PhA.. bot'der
8llorah~•
by the ~11.'e"
0
aut he doesn t
ed narra tive schemas, wi
·thin reach ·
m his general cultural
UCtive deve1 ~ on e.ith ..... ,olllen . pref0 rtllonly familial) environment One could speak here of a veri-
appeals to what he call ,, opments of Chris er Side? \V, on Of 1
(a11d n~ translation' offered by the surrounding culture.13
97), and above all to th s a zone of sensitiVity tophe h.-,_ e l'efet table 'aid to
e Inech · of the ...,.,JOl.lrs
. To return to the t an.isms of Workin llncollscio , ~ What is called the universe of the 'mytho-symbolic' inter-
SIS and P5Ychosis this haoPographical Illode1 g through i n ~ (p. 2
of reference t : s the major adv common lo bo tris.12 V. here, including, as well as those classic codes of the Oedipus
translation of::~~~ a d,ouble proble:~e of p~~in~ ~ venes 0.., the 'murder of the father' and the 'castration complex', the
comP1=,
the ps ch ~'-'Crted messa e Poss1bijj - "tile
mo re modem narrative schemas, partly related to the previous ones
the y . ~~erapy of borderlin ges [messages enc,~-~ ty of a new but partly innovatory.
J:'OS81bility in all h . e or P5Ychotic '"ves], notabJ .
The mistake of psychoanalysis in relation to the mytho-sym-
ous mstability. Uinan beings (even if it is cases, and, convP!,lll
Let us note h -~'- a Weak o -~y, 1,olic is double.
. ne) of a dor:~,
Ste treatzn , ..umennore . ~- First, there is the attempt to include among the truths that it
"""---· ent of neuroses b . , in another don-..,.;_
.....,t'U Of tem . , y Its Illain . - <Q.UI, that th has effectively discovered (concerning the 'apparatus of the soul' and
lated

through pan 8 of th
PrecollScious. .
Porarily ennchin
?
e Sch<>n-.~
action of detra . la .
, l°E!Sylnbolised_What . the stoc:Jc of messa ns tum, has the
IS interpreted.
-•1.<1, before be.in
must th<>-£
. -ciore f>ass a .
g l'eintegrated .
e das.

ges to be re.....__
~cuis-

gain
Into a richer
the intersubjective situation of the adult-infant couple) and which are
'metapsychological' truths, the more or less contingent schemas of
narration which enable human beings in a cultural situation to put
their destiny into an order, a history. This is very much the case with
I
the Oedipus complex, which, however general it may be (with nwner-
ous variations), isn't a universal characteristic of the human, as it is
Trrmslafion and N.
l?-0-code: the Mytho-s not necessarily present in the fundamental anthropological situation.
V. 1 Cont:.......
.,.uunted \ •th
Ytnbolic Orrl-
ucr Second, there is the attempt, more or less explicitly, to index the
uncollScious d Vl adult mes.sa myths according to the psychosexual evolution of the individual One
an are th ges that
means at his dis erefore eni8Jllati are compromised b generally lists together as formations of the unconscious: symptoms,
~ J>QsaJ (the relati0 c, untransiatabJ y the bungled actions, jokes, etc . . . and myths. But myths are not a production
12 For my ?art nal Codes which e by the only
~ o n of the
oUcib•-· f
ri:...l~U1
With and after
~-=am, by con . . other.; I ha
belong to the order or even a sketch of individual evolution. They are part of the cultural
"' o the unco . ceivtng of the , ve tried universe, where they can be observed, desaibed and possibly explained.
sexua, uncullSCi llSci<>us, a oUabJ dream not · to describe a • On the other hand, psychoanalysis must not abandon the
Un.iversi"''-- ous; see Jean ta e of WorJtin JUst as an ey,. • O'eative
"Dn>am ........:s de France 1 Planche, Prob/ern/ thoUgh and ~ --rress1on but as a attempt to give an account of the intervention of the mytho-symbolic
and CommUn.i ' _987), p . 197- 210 ...._ tiques V: &! 11,,_ ec>-creanon by the
Cl lion", in this v; · • ne 5iUne aint --,uet (Paris. Pr,
216
olume. can be found in . esses
my essay,
13 The idea of an 'aid to translation' has been proposed and developed by Francis
Martens (verbal communication, Jo1m1ees Jean I.aplanclre, Lanzarote, August, 2003).

217
 ThreeM .
eanmgs of the Ten,, ,, '
. '-'nconsc-
m the COnstituti 1-0Us•
. th on of the h Three Meanings of the Tenn 'Unconscious'
m e model of trans1a . lUnan psychj
tion, Which . ca.I apPara
V IS one of 'ts tus ilnct
. 3 Among ethnol . I essential ~ re rather than the associative-dissociative method, which has
~yths that have been C>gists, the descn . ~ ilt na !:U ' . .
individual psychoanalytic treatment as its field of application. It
th~ this restricted sense that they are ready to speak of the ,
apally With th elaborated fo Ption anct
beco e thought of ' ~ . r SOtne decad thecn,;.___ _ is iJl
. , when they discover a readability proper to myths .
uncon-
me more and ~VI-StraUSs. Th es now-~ ~ scious , . , . , using

ning With simple lo~::

or perhaps a pluraJimore Productive. Myth e notion of~~
codes. They are tnu:rks by o ~~ ._
point of View of th gi schemes.H Each of th all~ conv~tibJet~
perhaps som~ psychoanalY_tlc 'keys , b~t without having to overcome
anY
censorship or repression, and without having recourse to an
. .
other than mtellectual means. In this they approximate to the man-
Y

remains opa e others, but in itself . em IS l'eadaBJefi......~ ner in which Freud described the domain of symbolism and myth, a
que. The meanm . , Without an . .."1111... domain in which it is legitimate to read myth 'as an open book', for
that any one myth g IS latent so that y interor-:.,-"'
reveals a 1;,.._1 u1 one can:n-:-~, there is no need of the analytic method to access it.
One can make - ~ timate me . ot say &i..1. Such a conception of psychoanalysis isn't so far removed from
nologists . two DlaJOr ob· · aning. --,
' especjaDy th '}ections in n:.~ the c:un-ent Vulgate concerning the unconscious: it is a question of a
e students of mythology: r-uucuJar to thel'fh, hidden meaning, whether universal or trans-individual, which one can
access without too much effort, other than being a little infozmed. The
a) they Proclaim their wish
while vezy often th not to be called 'anthro ()edipus and castration flourish in these writings whether they be in
Jar ey COnfin th ~ the media or more so-called specialist works. The 'realism of the uncon-
, _sectois of the human e .. emseives lo very . • scious', such as I have sought to recover in Freud, has given place to a
P~tive SOcieties', thus 1con~aon , namely the Pilrliai-
SOcieties and their own v eavmg ~ one side contem80-called
universal readability of certain grand mythic schemas ofunderstanding.
For Freud, however, the 'symbolic method' never substitutes
b) another limita • . e.ry Specific myths-13 por,ny
tion IS that th , for the individual associative method: it complements it. However, as
adult univen;e Without ey confine themsei this 'complementarity' is not adequate in my view, I intend to offer an
Which m ~ ever investiiratin th ves to the
alternative mode of articulating the two methods.
cated to the child lie thought is offeredg de manner in
, even the in/ans. an communi-
V. 5 I am far from refusing the idea of the implicit (which others
V. 4 The ethno .
retain those logists closest to psych would perhaps call the 'unconscious') in the domain of the mytho-
.lege those c1Speds of it that fit in With th:;,na1ysis
most often only symbolic. Myths are interpreted in terms of each other, as aresymbols.
16

- aspects closest to SJmboiism framework. They privi- It is a question of a universal reversibility, which sometimes seems to
14 Claude levi-Str.t , th05e conceived as universal be what Levi-Strauss is saying, in which case there would be no ques-
fumdon: \v;....,_,- • ~, T1e Sawge La.:..~ tion of a final interpretation. Only the totality of myths would permit
Otorier ·~uietc1 and Nicholson ""fill, trans J, hn
15 ~Chicago and london: Chica , 1966~, and The ~eak,:![;;reen Weightman
l e a v e ~ SUCh as that of the ?o Uruv~ty Press, 1988) , trans. Benedicte
. . ---., lo be desil1ld Pn>letariar, or more recently
· Iha 16 Lacan remarked that nothing would prevent a penis in the manifest content of
epic of Asclnn'al' for corrmi-.,... a dream from referring to an umbrella in the latent content, as well as the reverse.
. --r~•r and ef:ficaoty . t of the 'star',
1n C01llparison with 'the See Jacques Lacan, f.crils, trans. Brore Fink (New York and London: W.W. Norton),
218 p.594.
219
 h Term 'Unconscious'
•Aeanings oft e
Three Meanings of the Tenn 'U r1iree JV>
nconscious'
conclusion
the uncovering of general structures orgams •
. . , mg structu :1...,,..pofooical situation is to
for example to the contamer-contamed opposition ( res, ~f . d ~""ental ant.1uv o- d.
the fuI\ (UA• from the other an its
or to the notion of 'thirdness'. The lealoUs ~g if\\101<.e niamatic message
Thus the conception of the individual rep er), 'fo --:1y the e i:,--
..:111.aIJ.l · ' can
ressed, ·der pi..-- e the word 'unconscious
such as I would maintain, does not exclude taking . llnc:ol'lsciO\ls co¢l1 ti01'· . point of departur , ding to three elements refer-
alongside it the notion of the implicit, which m:to c:onsiderati~ tl'a¢ a fror1' this_..;ngs each correspon ul
• Y other thih1. · ¢~-- ' ~ci~W• ~
unwarrantably substitute for the Freudian unconscto ~-~ ue t\ll'ee a of the appara Freudian sense can only
conception one may hold of the superimposition of cod:·. 'Whatever 3cq~ the schelll . oUS in the proper . der of the always
ril'g to unconsct t rrns the remain
scenario, whether one admits a hierarchy of levels or not~ a Il\Ythic
, lt ten,,:_ 'fhe . to say, in our e ' It is moppasition to a
d that 15 h , message. •
appropriate, nonetheless, to give a place, not to another unc:o -·'."1115 11resse , . n of the ot er s h the narration of its
1he rer an5lat10 . hich throug .
but to another kind of latency, which is common most notic:eab~ Us,
. cultural productions.
1ective . This 1atency is
· of th e order of the im
0

Ylnco\.
1i. .
~pe;:::us
pre<: . ry a perso
ego, th::;~c:;tute~, a personaliz:~::;:
while at the same
the movement of its interpretation is that of an explication (Ausle~:~. wfl histo '. der pressure,
o scioUS un . ' .
a work that does not require the overcoming of resistances. g· ,i.e Ul'con all d 'sub-conscious , m
u• 't be c e
trated by l . nconscious enclave can ' conscious defence. Com-
,f'\,,e u :1..:~ layer 01 •t
V. 6 What is in every case decisive for us is the way in whic:h col- ll' t l tent by a hw• to consider l as
. nlY kep a . uld be wrong .
lective narrative structures - whatever their level of generality or, that it 15 o lated messages, it wo an being. Afuller exami-
inversely, their concrete, anecdotal aspects - are inscribed in the schema sed of untra~ s chotic part of the hurn as truly undergone
Po tensive with a p. y . . h - alongside what h unilable
of the psychical apparatus. co-e,c us to distingtilS . h would be unass '
Contrary to general opinion, and especially to that of Freud nation afi.ows f translation, and whic age that are not yet
who saw the oedipal relation as the 'kernel' of the unconscious, it is a radical fa~ur: :ome components of the m::so detranslated mes-
necessary to situate such structures not on the side of the repressed but of pre-psychotlc .ting translation, and perhap e of stagnation,such
the repressing; not on the side of the sexual but of that which organises translated, awai tr~"'c;lation. As well as a zon ·t
· · g a neW cu~ e of tran51 ·
it, and finally desexualises it in the name of the laws of alliance, of saO'eS awaitin b a zone of passag , . f the mytho-
0 uld also e onsc1ous O •
procreation, etc.... There is nothing in the least sexual (in the original an enclave wo . the pseudo-unc . . of the psych1ca1
. all there 1s . the interior
Fm y, . d its place m . . the srruc-
sense of the Three Essays) in the myth of Oedipus and the tragedy of
symbolic that does not ~ed as implicit: as to_itsboln~~ a solely
Sophocles; nothing that speaks to us less of sexual jouissance or of the be descn dec1da e . d
pursuit of sexual excitation. apparatus. It c~n . l dimensions are ~ st be distingmshe
tural and sooologica . Its psychic tunctwn mu . function, crucial
The great narrative schemas, transmitted then modified by lytic viewpoint. · l enesis. 'fhis . 'aid
culture, come to help the human subject to process, that is to bind and psychoana . historico-soc1a g . arl on with an
from its nature and its . is to furnish him e y d with the task
to symbolise, or to translate, the messages, both enigmatic and trau- little human being, him helpless, face
matising, which come to him from the adult·other. Very obviously this for th e ot to leave
to translation' ' so as n 221
relation is indispensable for the human being's entry into his humanity.

220
 Three Me •
tinzngs of the Tenn ,
l.lncons .
of cont · · cious'
nev ammg, SYJnbolising of , for Psychoanalysis at the University
er cease to assail him , Processin
to them and against th , a task of narran!'
em.
th:
adult ~
g his his "•essa
tolY, ho &es •~-
th tl ~lclf
''ilftks

11
FOR PSYCHOANALYSIS AT THE UNIVERSITY1

In October 1994, after nineteen years, the journal Psychanalyse

a/'Universite ceased publication, not owing to an internal decision, but
solely to the decision of the publisher. At the ti.me, I wrote: "'Ibis exper-
iment, which we are proud of having sustained for nineteen years, has
been supported by a limited but faithful readership, and organized by
an Editorial Committee whose choices were always marked by rigour
when it came to judging what was serious, innovative and - not the
least of virtues - readable in terms of style and thought. All of which
are qualities that derive primarily - but by no means exclusively -
from what is called, quite simply, the university spirit. Laying claim
to the Freudian example, we have always understood that 'academic'
and 'university' are terms that remain fundamentally opposed, and
which only a pen dipped in venom and envy would care to confuse".
In one short page I announced even at that 'end' a 'sequel',
and, it's worth noting, under the anticipated title of La Recherche
psychanalytique.
It would be ten years before this project was reborn, and
in the same place: the University of Paris VII. The very title of the
I
1 First published in La Recherc/1e psychanalytique, the journal of the psychoanalysis
laboratory at the University of Paris VIl, no. 1, 2004.

223
 . at the UniversihJ
sychoana Iys• 5
For Psychoanalysis at the University for P
. . ed that the presence of psy-
i s maintain th f
l have alwaY. . arantee among o ers o a
old journal rang out as a challenge, or at least as an person~Ut the tJni:ve~~ty tS o~~entation, of a taking up
Psychoanalysis, at the University, must win back ;m.trna_tion
that siS withll' . of pos1t1.ons, o
o3ttalY frontanon f futation. ......,..lf,
merited position as an entirely distinct discipline. The~~lain its cl' ,:00s con . and even o re difficulties one of the most s1&' ......-
journal was marked by the parallel presence and the ory of the rigo ea! posinons~hich is without cho~alysis and psychology.
Psychoanalysis at Paris VIL gOOd fortune Of of c\ r-Jone of . nshiP between psy 1 0 f the "unity of psy-
he relat:1° _ the prob em
The good fortune, that is, of the Unite d'enseign t being t etical problem . . that has very often been
recherche (UER) des sciences humaines clinique,2 created
th
ami=t
et de
vour of 1968 and the emancipation of a clinical psychology . e_fer.
~ be a theor
lt rflaY , s 1,agache p
-.I , a
ut it' - but it tS one
1 pragma c
u· basis by including Psy
.
1 gy'
choanalysis

diolOoJ a siIJ\P y titled 'Psycho o . th

by Psychoanalysis (which must be constantly reclaimed) fro:Plred ..,.c0\Ved on . departinents en
J= - . uiuvers1ty . d tail why psychoaiuuY ,
___, sis even under e
'dered a
was then known as ,expenment . al' psycho1ogy (only the epithetWhat
has with!Jl lain m e · ' cannot be consi
changed). Also the good fortune of a 'Psychoanalysis laborato 'To e,<p chology of the unconsaous 'f this short introduction.
which was immediately established, and which did not profess~~ tl'e of a ,Psy l gy is beyond the scope o kind of reversal that
na f Psycho o f th ~.-cn,ment. By a l that
unify but to enrich, and to do so by means of the passionate yet objec. bf<ltlch o n1 the \:hrU5t o e cue,-- al . - or more exact y
Uoi.ve o Y • 15
· psychoan ysis hich
tive confrontation of different points of view. Finally, the good fortune l sha 0 - inside out', it • nlarged sexuality - w
of a doctoral programme in Psychoanalysis, which was attacked vio- 'tuftl.5 the g1ove h art of psychoanalysis, e .cal rocesses. What is
lently, and sometimes in bad faith, by those who thought they saw in which is at the talie'ty of psychic or psycholofgict thapt sexuality can be
the to · ' (the a ..
it an 'institution' threatening their own, but which survived against reinvests d's 'pansexualism ds to a legitunate
- - A to as Freu _,_,,thing) corresPon
all the odds. Beyond these specific institutional transformations, some refern:u ven if it is not i:;vr.., , . which are uncon-
d everywhere e . ary processes, ult
major problematics came into play and remain present today. I shall foun al ticism': the prun . . chology, with the res
cite just a few, which were the object of much debate. 'panpsychoan y rk covertly within psy - the purported
. us and sexual, wo being, psychology . elude.
1) Is psychoanalysis a scientific discipline? A branch of knowl- scio 1 of the humail h t 't purports tom
edge? Or, to put things a little less abruptly, is it open to discussion, that, at the lev~ , 15 · '" fact invaded by w a th1 undertaking of the
f,. clus1on - .,.. ·tunates e
to refutation, in the same way as are other university disciplines? It agent o ~ . that drives and legi .
is true that nowadays the question may seem old-fashioned to some, lt is preosely _this unent. lysis is to be found m
psychoanalytic trea f 'relativising' psychoanagy' In doing this, one
inasmuch as the 'postmodernist' fashion goes so far as to deny the
Another way o . 'th 'psychopatholo . h (even a 'doc-
term 'knowledge' even to disciplines which have a much more rig- the titles that collocate 1~ W1 ecific mode of app~ac ng others-
orous appearance. Given that the notion of the 'rationally correct' is b' es what JS asp f xplorabon axno .
subject to mockery, how would the frequent reduction of psychoanal- blithely com m ud)withonefieldo e . Freud's day the firSt
...,;ne' according to Fre dilution. Even 1l\
ysis to one narrative schema among others, avoid ending up a vague uu.• I ' ck tO effect a
lt 1S• a discreet tn et ,=chologie
hermeneutics, itself not so different from the 'anything goes' position . -- "'rime11t111e r~
so dear to someone like Feyerabend? . psycl1ologte .,.r- })
. d la psycholog1e: 2004 [orig. 1949 .
. l Lagache L'umte e -~;..- de France,
3 Daroe . ' es univefSl!,.OU- 225
dinique (Pans: press
2 [Trans.: The Centre for Teaching and Research in the Clinical Human Sciences].

224
 I sis at the University
For Psychoanalysis at th U . s11cl1oat1a Y
...,, for P ,
e ntversity
' tried to put into perspec-
1,,1ectio1\ that l have artiest seminars, notably
publication (the Jahrbuch, an annual jollrnal) · an° from the ..:=eofmye
""'is is l developed the fl o-
Jung, called the "Jahrbuch of research in ps ;as, in a col\ . • •? P' fute,
lU••
1 971
'1"\..
4 u,ere,
•\'\a\Ysisd· e\Je!\ to re f norembet 14, . ss1·hi that communication
pathology''. As soon as Freud took back co!tr °analysis an~ \ii • 1' · ar o v'-- of nece ' 1' 'bl
. . 01of the· c•y~ u11e,_a t\\e set¢\ . "\Ne postulate, use, potentially, it is pcss1 e
break with Jung, 1t went back to being a "Jahrbuch 10
2) More insidious still is the question of psych~:
the University - doctoral dissertations but als helher ~,-, ·
:f
\lrt\alilftet d\lf\1\g ~e!\t· ·ally -possible beca . "th one's own uncon-
\o\~g a us iS pote~tl te with oneself, that 15, W1
t'<.,,ee1' 0 ~utuca rt from the
• • I O teac:hin, .~ at ioe 01\e tO C 54). its nncipal suppc
etc. - can address clinical themes. The very simplistic . g ~
0
. \o~ s' (ibid- p.1 ent does not take " p . tempera\ stroctures
since the University is not a site of clinical practice ~Jectionis~ ,e1ou 'f\\lS argutn alysis but from certall\ral categories which are
. " to resear\:u
1tse11 -\.. that is
. 'theoretical', 'applied' and , it sho1lld '•-·· "'1 U\ of an ' lf the temPo . 'rep-
' 80 on. B\lt\... .a\ aspect , relation to onese , ht To enumerate a few.
same token, where in the world are reflection and research uy tl-t rp-1 _.,t.1,g one s b Freudian thoug . , this last category,
y,aIV"· t light y ,_c.. rWardness - -
tice carried out in the same place as practice itself? Are SOci~'Prat,. ~ 5t\Y brought o dy-there', and c:U'e the baSis for the very pos
groups of analysts as such places of practice? Yet it is in such plaCl!S ~ \\1 . , the •airea all l,eeauseitforros . be reworked,
etit\01' , ness' , above , that something can . th in a
rightl~ so, that clinical material is generally presented, commen~: •a\terwards trnent, for it means to life, and acquue trU e
and discussed. One could also ask whether the very idea of a pld('e sibiUlY of trea_ belatedly, come back . ssible at the level of th
in which research and practice are tightly connected (there are tare uife ll\eaning . an atterWardsness is Po other kinds of after-
ad~erent way. 'But ifed on the fact that therethare..nctence of each of us.
examples, such as the Tavistock Clinic in London) does not invo\~ u• . . bas .thin e e,..,., all f
a practice that is reoriented toward some form of experimentation, tteaunent, it i~ch are already there w1 d without demagogy, _o,,
.,,ardsness, w .,..., precise sense, an . g to be' in analysis
which is quite contrary to the spirit of the psychoanalytic method. ~ . utnited but ve. J • been' and 'haVlI\
Psychoanalytic research is and will always remain at a distance from 1n thiS ·tuation of 'haVU\g uld
inas1 ry l wo
the clinical experience to which it relates, and so much the better. In you are ''The one catego .
(ibid.P· 155). .,~~'-;evously, l add~: . ·t As to the fact of being
this respect as in others, University research is in no way restricted or A uttle u=---~ f currently being in t . .. k to lie down on a
inferior. 1n any event, the place(s) where treatments take place will cl de is that O f urnes a wee freud-
rn>rhaps ex u rt~;n number o ..;pulation, the
never be those in which we reflect on the treatments or on clinical l'- ' ing a ce ..... ncrete Su d any
in analysis, go that if taken as a c~ . ne is to understan . t
phenomena in general. couch, l would say ne be in analysis if o amst itself and agaiilS
All valid psychoanalytic reflection makes reference, in variable . uiferoent that o . ediately turns ag es froll\ every
combinations, to four essential coordinates: the theoretical, the clinical, 1an req: analysis, uuJn . analysis emerg . . . order
discourse about t that one be in 'thin a dirUC, in
the extra-mural and the historical. There is no need to install couches uifernen a post WI ttend
analysis.1'he req: hat one may occuPY . der that one may a ?
or consulting rooms at the University for psychoanalytic observation direction-in order t chotherapies, in or a attend this course .
and psychoanalytic experience to have a rightful place there. ...-.ay conduct psy . der that one m y
that one ... h: not in or
3) Objections of this kind are sometimes augmented by seminars; sow y 1980) P· 153 If.
1
C OSed ' • de FI3Jlce,
another, which, in a certain way, goes back to the earliest period of urovers1taifeS
psychoanalysis, not to say to Freud himself. Can one teach - and _ - - ; - , oisSt tPariS: pres¢ Tl.7
4 ProbJematiques I. r; ang
above all discuss and work collectively with - others who are not 'in

226
 For Psychoanalysis at the Uniuersity . a Debate
Intervention in

Are YOU in analysis? Are YOU on a 'Wailing lisr (Which •a1mo,,

good as
not?" being
(ibid. in analysis)? With whom? Is it a 'training' ana!J,;s•
p. 1.54-5)

Here we can see another problem emerging: behind die

enigma of 'being in analysis' in order to W\den;laruf and dioa,, I
the.-. emerges in a different light the requirement of haYmghad,
'training analysis on an accredited couch. In short, there is a comtaJi
slippage between teaching, l'eSearch, personaJ analysis and ... ioooc-
trination. The proliferation of Societies, Associations and Institulrs 12
has changed nothing, it only reflects the proliferation of allegwm
Although it is not infallible, the universality and the freedom ofthinking INTERVENTIONINA DEBATE
in the University constitute a certain antidote to this. between . Miller:
4) The next eJ>isode-in wluct, the same p-goru,tsp!aJ,dlr .. ch and Jacqu es-Alam
. "1
Daniel Widlo er f PsychoanalystS
the same stakes - was the creation of a 'Doctorate in Psychoanalysis'. ''"The Future o
This quickly gave rise to offense, with some claiming that the Uni-
ve,.;ty intended it as a diploma in psychoanalytic practice. Yet""" . 2 and
Bleu m 2004'
criticisms emanated from Precisely the side (and from all directiols lished by Le Cavalier d reose. way by Ber-
This debate was pedu~ a very detailed anf m · ptervening beca~th
IPA as Well as U>Caruan) When, What is COnskfered the most unporr,,1
wasdsubsequently . W
revie I take the li"berty O ho is concerned W1
Jlll
part of one's b-aining- the """'°""1 analysis_ must be framed-. G lse in Le Carnet psy. hich no one w
nar o touches on themes to w . t.
lionaJly, from its lmtiation through its trajectory and to its m:ogru~ the debate re.main indifferen
by institutions Which, while not being official, are all the more insidi- psychoanalysis today can
ously constraining. These are old questions, but ones that have been
""'""'ed in the rncent debates when, they have been re-engaged. ·es
To finish, briefly: far from constituting a sort of institutional 11,e Psyclzotlternpt has
and offlcia! enclave, psyct,Danal}'tic "'5earch at the unive,sity is ,bJe of the debate
.
hasises, this aspectches on the matter
to offe,- a double gua,..,,tee, the rigor and boldness of debate, and !he Golse rightly emp ·et Widlocher t~u d psychotherapy.
<ecogruson of an epist""°"'g;ca1/idd that is rightfully independent All
~f ~luct,, by a .""" of ,-,dox, constitutes a pledge of the extnat,ml~
not . , :tackled
apropos o f the social
.
m".;'.:!,,';',:
psych""';;'=,;,:ouches on ;, apro-
if I unders tand him c
nal,ty ofanalytic practice Vis-a-Vis nil institutions. Alain Miller, .
Jacques- bruary 2005. Alain Miller (Pans:
---.b-"lisdhued, .U\""'
, • Carnet
• no. 96
psy,entre
dtbat Fe Widlocher aml Jacques-
D~11iLI
1 First pu psychanalyse-
2 L' auenir de la 2004). 3-16.
Le Cavalier Ble~ 2004, PP· 1
3 no 94, Novem
228
 . a Debate
r1tiort trt
1nterve
Intervention in a Debate
i

pos of the cultural danger of that demand H

distin . hin firml be . owever neith
~ . g. . Y. tween psychotherapy and erol\ttis\s
Yet the distinction is srmple, if one merely ref P8Yc.hoanai1,oo;_
. .
the Freudian invention: . erstowhatis .' ~
analysis. Psychoanalysis funus ~?eci6c1a
the means of dissociating, of unbinding [delier} the . hes 1tse\f \\ri\h
conscious discourse, our personality (our ego), ourties that '1phol(l
ideologies that orient how we tell ourselves our ownS:pt~tns, \he
allows something to manifest itself, something we rep tones. '\'his -wansference
the courtt t:J . ,
ress and Which talisatiort f O
1
to a large extent governs our lives: the repressed sexual unco .
The 1nstrUtr1el1 . can be very exact y
Conversely, psychotherapy - the psychotherapies 1~ und tlds which . .ded psycho-
existed for as long as man has been man - seeks to rebind, to rea~~ ...,c::cation aro . bv a nu.sgu1
is a U\Ysuµ . . . de wntten i
synthesise. w h a t ever, ansmg
. . from our unconsoous · e,1o
fantasies, makes -mere th uuna\ ar\l hich the
1950 and e 6 • e led to w
dominant within us the unbinding whose most extreme form is the dated to ul Beirnanl\• the mcreasing n g d ocate the ana·
death drive. a1\a1yst, Pa_ ~usion is re\at~ t;or one can natdlY a e:t if one no\ds
Sowehave: 'fhiS rt5cious is sub\ed· ce il\ the tteatln . to the reg-
-what has always existed and still exists today: psychothtru- freudian unc~ '-•c. co@tertranSfe~ ............nsference pertaiJ'Sn onlY gain
'·•=' 01 1..., untei\•-- -'·yst ca
pies of the most diverse kinds; shamanistic, supportive, containing \yst' s ...,... . that the co hich the an.u unuates to
,,_,y to the notion_ a register tow roent one ass . ·thiJl
and persuasive psychotherapies, counselling, cognitive therapy, etc.; nn1u coI\SClOUS, {toll\ the lJ:\O . e thiJlg W1
all diverse paths towards cohesion that only confirm the ego's natural ister oi the un t _1:C-kcult'f· But •'- 'east 'sub\eeb.V ~.-.t (affects,
·th CJTea uuu ~ ps u,e f tteatn\=•
tendency towards synthesis; access wt "-- ,. bich is per a urse oi the ed. to as the
~ous ,w _ lI\ the co _"' referr ._
- since Freud, psychoanalysis, whose axis is the reverse prin- the unco al: t' s reactioI\S hat is banau y thiS false reet
ciple: namely, the unbinding that aims to bring out something of the us) a\\. the an y:e field is open t~; anuc.To breal< upe trat\Sference
buried unconscious. But psychoanalytic practice does not consist of
•l.ouo-h\:S, acts)
u, o untertra•..,
..,.c.ference "ft\
that a pa
tlent nas ort
nereas we
uuun-
't:ransforence-<:O . t to paint out bis analyst) w 5 10 or 15
analysis alone. The movement of unbinding and the ineluctable ten-
,rrnclty it is suffioe~...c.{erence toward:\. psychoanalyst haferes~ces that
dency towards rebinding coexist within it side by side (Freud uses r· - •oUS trcu= that u,e rtraI\S
(an unconso . . an eyebrow . nts, counte ch new ses·
the image of a chemical entity that always tends to reunify itself after . without rrosing ards bis pane . crubs - for ea
its elements have been separated).4 The tendency towards binding is l:aU\ i rences tow doe5 hiS s
countertraI\S e as the surgeon uial ,diotl\ fot1 a
the work of the analysand, and ordinarily the analyst has no need uld cnange - re.'fhe coUoq
to bring into play his own choices (his own ideologies) in this work. he wo . (iu\g \linnte\ h~ up'\. f p5ycho-
wotd bll' · or ty\l'g . I JourilJI1 0
This psychotherapeutic aspect exists, in the most varied proportions, ---=- -
----- •ay ot\ me
5 \Trans: 1'.hete
is a\''
_.A bi1'dit1.g
h to neo::u
'mad enoug ter--rransleret'
I 1er11n11011a
ce", 11
within every psychoanalysis. But the situation is in fact more complex . \iterallYtl\eat'S "On cout\ 2.'.J \
her ..__. in\aJ\t\' 51-4
6 naula ne , 31 Pl'· ·
,.- 1 950 VO•· '
Analysis, '
4 "Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy" (1919a), SE 17, p . 161, n 1.

230
 lntervention
· in
a Debate Intervention in a Debate
sion of the day Fift
Which· · een 'tr
IS rather a lot c . ansferenc
'l'L. ior Ju t e-co ,,co-thinking". Widlocher tells us that "co-thinking'',
J. uIS tran f s one Untertr 9
the SO-Called . s erence-coun man or one ansfere .., hef calls . ork" "implies the countertransference", and one
(rea . mtersub. . tertransi wo111 nee' cl w
l'i ov·
..,1 ass ·anve i.;.,,, I'have no wish to depreciate this exploration
Proctty, self . Jective r . erence an! hi,_ 1 dl 00 .
- not With -dISclosure p actices that ll"less ha - "'llllies ,sJ,al't"
:~cJil'ed to believernplernentary
1=•" movement of associations between
out g . , etc ) 1 F we h s aft:_. '
seriously - . ettmg himself . . erenczi ear ab0......'llities p
j,v- paraUel dor andco the analyst. But the rule of 'evenly suspended
mamtamed
· . WI.th the notion • burnt confro 1.J.t e ""%
of ' , but at I nteq n. llciJ~ 0i1ie analysaI' h every wording refers us to the 'well-tempered' (glei-
betw could only mutual an east h 4te q.. ly
een a ·
single anal
take place b alySIS', · ea
Whi PPtoach on
"E!sij rten°.0n'-W d ) os
. e 'balanced' musical scale - does not always seem
3disc/fl¢/Jeri e I dl, with
•/ this kind of preconscious accompaniment. On
It should yst and several et_ween hoo ch he lJ.J • eq it
tee or inner . also be noted th patients People lhtiatei~1 to t,e in accor
ry, it often underlines and accentuates what the patient is
circle t k at · , anc1
countertransferentiaI as , ed With eval among . more H,~- llot ~e ~o: ~ve in the shadows. In short, it too operates in the service
c~lleague Will touch' Will uating a futu.r ..l<Ul one co 1 and does not always correspond with the picture of two
lllclil'lb. ding
his patient, an~Ude to the death :ways get a ..,,: COIJeagu, ,,. of Ufl in rocesses that are perfectly in tune.
the session Th ther to a traffic _f his mother d ?11 Welco"' lltt1e thought P
b · ec acad Utin .,,e. On
ut a matter . Onunittees alw ent that he Wi g the anaJ . e
events or of insubstantial ays fall for tltis· tnOSsed iu.st y,,,OI The Short, Foreshortened or Scanned Session
w1.. affects . allusions , and yet . . before
• v uere is th expenencect b to consci It IS non,,.
e uncons · Y the a ous or "uog
careful not t crous in all this nalyst dunn PrecollSci0 Here my position is clear, even though my grounds would
or · 0 commum ? The . g the l:rea Us not be the same as those of Widlocher. In a word: the short session is
mvestigatio cate anythin candidate Will bnent
One ns of such affects g further about . , moreover be
a psychotherapeutic practice.
lertransfere "".' only deplore th "".d
events. his - ~ ro a) The short session, whose duration is subject solely to the
Wid nee has a1m e iact that th good will of the 'analyst', does not permit the free development of
espread drcl'es th ost become a ' hib e 'handling of th
culated I ' e very on . s boleth' . e coun. associations, and thus does not permit analysis. It submits the patient
arti east. es m Which the WordWithin ' the most to a constraint that must put pressure upon the course taken by
unconscious' is
his thoughts: what will I say of any importance, and how will it be
judged by my 'analyst'? We have few accounts of short sessions. In
The Debate on the C contrast we have numerous reports from sessions with a normal and
Let us excI ountertransference contractual duration. In the latter, one can follow the movements, the
different libidinal movements, the defences, the inflection provoked
ence what Golse calls
ude"thfrom this debate ab
by an intervention from the analyst - in short, a whole dynamic in
e nature of out the countertransfer-
1 psychoanalyt - 1.
7[ zc zsten · , which the unconscious sometimes surfaces.
Trans: 'self-d• mg' sand wh t b) To characterise the analyst, Lacan introduced the 'subject
8 Golse . 1Sclosure' in . a
' op. ct., p. 14. English in theongma1J.
. .
9 Miller and Widlocher, op. cit., p. 47; emphasis added.
232 233
 lnte,-,.,_
-, ~Ilion ·
supP<:'>sed in a Debq
,..1.. tu kn te _
~,anged O\v' - such
- PeliOd! ~tly since then a ~Utifu1 fo Levels of Proof
little iznport ether or not h~ for the 'anai l'Q\~! AJ
realise ~1.._ •ance. In ai,y kno\\'S by Ysr is 'th "s! h,
uiat lO ce . case O ll\eans eon ., , 1..
of the naine o rt<Un PSJctua' _ne Only tleecf of the • e '"ho h ~I\
the J>ati f the father· . t:ric sel'Vil'b,,. s to prj,.,_ llla11.... ~~\'
ent shouid lS llsecI . -..._,then:_ '-ll; Up - ~ IS
any cont'enl - be dil'f>M.... __, lJ\ everyd '-4.!fl&ttosis Otle•s& ~ ~
for list-eiun .-~•t'Q down the ay Practice Of 'fol't>tl""~to
iznp11· As Ja('(Jues-AJ.i;~ fo~ dialogue Path of tll~,c\t1d th..... '
sub· •r•thin indi-.,. Miller eit\phaor.ps't>,,1..
Ccltecj '-'.: .
J~IOthe
'"-lClti "'llsti..
on \\>j "loll
~ to ap Vidua1 la Slses 1...._ tapy. ¾
13
1

on whj,..1..1 .I>eal: the d~"' Cclnian Pra : "llO\vleq ,

~ to lilt -~on to • ctice &e is
c) The, et"rupt it. lnf-errupt the ' an~ here too-~ ~
the Unco . short-SE!s.sio ~on ¾d ttis ~ LEVELS OF PROOF'
blO\vs of llSc:ioUs h n anaiysr the
. · e .b,<nvs th not Only kn ~
can on} lnf-erruPtion to th e Law and th o-<t>.s the 'Stni
the izn y ~- 'Understood e 5ession (''cut"' e SYlnbolic. lb Clure-~
~ ~~~
I suggested the slightly austere "Levels of Proof" as a title sim-
CouJd ~:on of the the enforcern~t:/he fihn ply because Bertrand Hanin asked me for one. But permit me to give
binding n, __ be a lllore Violtrary anct ~ Castration,..,___~~) this presentation the form of a wider ranging talk, rather than holding
'4l(Ul the La ent - not to cal law ~ on
castrated•·? I . . w anct its . . say effecti of the Fan,_ me to that restricted theme, though it will come up at a certain point.
trary . . t lS in this PnVilegect d "e- instnun -~ I speak first and foremost in honour of Daniel Widl&her who has
SE!s.sions SE!eins 5ense that the edaration. ,, ent 11
SUc:h, to a rnoct

-e,y.
to rne to b .

In t-tCX> t{lor.A-.
Practice of sh
a certain ideo!:::~f J)sychotherap~~t ~ back to the
J . I aims to . -· ,,,atroe
llllJ>ose u
:~~ed,
thou shalt be
albj.
, and, as
for years deepened the theme of 'debate in psychoanalysis', which
is essential. Before listening to the introductory talks I was asking
myself once again whether those of us who still speak about debate
• ~. pon the J>alien are not dinosaurs. Every day the mail floods us with programm~ for
IP - in opP<>siti l
:A \Ve IllUst be on to a ,.,__ . congresses, meetings and conferences on the most tempting themes -
\Vhi \Van, ~, U4ln COn
ch negates the- J of the 'bansferen C'eption that is . classic as well as new - yet one can see that for the most part there is
- in O ~etry })enraSJve in the
. C'e-countel"transfi no real question of debate. Even when what is proposed are 'row1d-
that the sh P.Position to (c ~tia} to the trea eI'ence' thetne tables', they are not really roundtables; the talks are parallel and never
1..aw, towards
Ort 5ession 15
· erfllin?) lacan;~- _. trnent
an ins --<A<UIS 1t ' come into contact with each other; and, finally, the time given for
non:nati"e and trurnent for the IllUst be llnderstOOd discussion is minimal. But it doesn't matter. Speakers do not try to
P5Jrchotherapeuti enforcement of the convince each other; they come, they do their thing and then leave.
cends. Is this what's called postmodemism? I agree with the idea

1 Delivered at Debat en Psychanalyse, the sixth colloquium organized by the APEP

(Association psychanalyse et psychotherapies), the CHU Pitie-Salpetriere and the
Association de sante mentale, Thursday, March 10, 2005. Discussion opened by
Professor Daniel Widlocher.

235
 Levels 0 ,p
' roof
that the truth . uvels of Proof
d , rernatns al
. oesn t rnean that 'an ':ays out of si
mg Phrase.2 Ything goeg, as ght, but on t
Shall , Feyera1...- he o~L alytt·c Association - agreed to modify
I~ ~d ~L • 1 Psychoan · bo all
capital 'T' in a Word or tw Put it in .'<Ille!'"' e 1nternat1on~. which defined psychoanalysIS a ve as
he Order to s o about.__ ilqeri:llS of tlid's own pos1~on, before defining it as a therapy. From that
art of debate Le peak about it .. uth? I J.._ ..~ freu d s soence, . al W
coheren · t's say truth , but truth . 'l.<l\re n hod all therapeu
a ti" ~im has been made the pnmary go • e
Or sun 1

cl~'
ce. This teq . lS l\e O nl\,f 111et c ,...•.
the so-called h 1.Urernent of h p y reason "ettheJ""- Of a oJllent the . u·on of practitioners. This moves us away from
111 n assooa With
· ard SCi co ere ' a cert::.:_ at •
re de pire a f tn1th which was Freud's constant goal. 1 my
~ debate, to the h ences but also if nee is aPpli -~ the a . tific goal o , . ersed . F d' . . al
invoked in co ~ sciences , one Wants to cable not o Ve thesaen translator since I am urun m reu s ongm
be quite Wro nnecnon With the ,~ lne 'ham, SCie engage e(f:!Y to ~ne
· nee as a '
imply point to the German term E g, w
rfol hich
can
or rel . . ng to Use this certainty . .nces are ~11ve1y 1
.....inology, s d ul
111
te ~· , r 'result' Thus an Erfolg may be an a verse res t.
is its ~ti'Vlsrn; for the un as~ Weapon in thPnno.pJe'. Bllto.,'lllet\Uy 'success o ·
mean uld v as one did in old French, cette avenhm a eu un succes
of be~n something argu~ertthroainty Principle lS_e ~~<ce of U"rati~\V<lllld One co sa,, /' "'I
..,g a Prin . ugh I-=u- Ill ona1;._ "this venture has had an unfortunate outcome success .
deplorable [
"''-4
in the obse o.pJe. Even if 1·t and refutabI atheniai;..:::-i'1 .. . •
rvano asserts e Precise "<ol'Q• it Which means - and Freud himself testifies to this - that any kind of
ation of the un n ?f the object - th an uncertainty . ly by ' 'tendentiousness', even the tendentiousness which claims that this or
not Prese . certainty Prine; l . e debate re . lll the obiect
nt Itself as be. p e 1S a rational lllains open) the (or that is the correct procedure for therapy, is alien to Freud. At least, it is
Psychoana1y . mg uncertain. affinnation w1-., afti,-,,,. not his major concern. If psychoanalysis wishes to be a part of the sci-
transpo 'ti SIS can ft •uch nft.
e s1 on of rela . . o en get bo
I
""l!S entific community, where I believe it certainly belongs,3 it must accept
nee as against . ,,tiVistn into our gged doWn in that there are some propositions without any practical consequences.
another. This . Illine , says one· ,, OWn domain ' an ex~e There are results of our work which are failures from the point of view
that has bee IS the tendency th , Your lllother as .. 'Yollr transfer.
Otne breath} . at for Illy against tnin " of a certain norm of healing, of happiness, even of life. The theory of
Not that th ess in its ho Part I caU 'pas,_ e , says gravitation, to refer to Newton, is verified by a bridge that collapses
clearly, d ere is tror of 'th L<110dern•
, ebate is d . no debate th e theorenca.u ,and just as much as by one which stays up; and yet none of us escapes this
groups, our sen,;- onunated by th ese days; but it y correcr. fascination with the technology of therapy. This includes those who,
debate ~~1- - ... ,ars, our . e Illedia n.r , tnust be .
...,._es place . Pnvate . vr course said in France, have succeeded in inscribing psychoanalysis in the corpus
one concerns th lll the llledia Ii tneenngs, but uI . We have OUr
tion of normati ~rapy as a 't~o ere, two points timately the ~
of psychotherapies and, in doing so, have only extended the general

our Ptedecesso:r As to therapy :gy', the Other~ consistenu,

tnoinent When th ear_t~e 8teatest ~ technology, it ~erns,the ques-,
aim of the International Psychoanalytic Association; and it includes,
on the other hand, those who claim to represent 'absolute knowledge'
by the ways of the matheme. In this manner they have succeeded - I
e offio.a1 orgilniza . J)Onsibility, _Ills to tne that
~ I ;:::_~_did
tions _ am so from the am referring to the current situation, which everyone can confirm -
they have succeeded by means of an outcry in having a Government
eyerabend, Against Me ""'U\lllg P"'-.... «cular!y
lhod <London: V. Minister censor the text of a report, which was published on the inter-
236 ezso, 2010 r~19~
.
3 a. Jean Laplanche, "La psychanalyse dans la communaute scientifique", in Entre
seduction et inspiration: l'homme (Paris: Quadridge/Presses Universitaires de France,
1999), pp. 1~188.

'237
 Lf'Vels of Proof
Levels of Proof
onnPr' s most important
..J:..-.g Qneof P rr- 1..~t is
. derstanuu• . . ture is a model hw
. flllSUn . 6 A. cortJCC d
net, on the evaluation of psychotherapies.• I haven't there is d Refutattotts, . themselves alrea y
' side . tu res art facts which are ,. ~
cannot JU· d ge its
· worth; b u t 1' t 1s
· astorushing
· that theread this ....
'"Pott 1 f 5 . co111ec observed ' xi.sting models. n;,
should be resolved by an outcry, by an assembly problem of U\l~ ~or\cS 1s account for the basis of other, pre-e . never inductive.
, so We're t
1
# to ted on from facts, 1S
a thousand psychoanalysts. Censorship, pure and sun °ld, Of de . UY col\StrUc . ence is ne-ver drawn ent about habit. I leave my
1
place of argument and debate. p e, takes the ~ a f r p 0 pper SCl tlurne' s old arguxn can onPn the door
c\l o ·-ves up i-1. d' ent room. 1 r--~
The other offshoot of this current debate - a media 'd sll ' popper U1l' 1 go into the a l3° er of ten or however
r1ere, l open the door~usand tunes, ten to the pow r What would hap-
to be sure, but a debate all the same - is the issue of normat:~tt,
shall simply offer one thought about this: psychoanalysts
invited to give their judgment on all the current social issues. ~w
:ty.
l otfice,dred tunes, a th_ always coroe out on a_fl~ . thin
ahill' . es, and l will
~r.Y til1\ the door open
ed onto the void. No
nnits the
g peid. This is
open onto the -vo .
psych~alysts? o~e ~ght ask. ~ey are ~x-officio members on all t~ if one day door will not, one day, d ' th vicour. Inductum
pen that the p nPr defen Wl O
• , ta
committees on ethics, violence, avil marnages, cloning, homophobia .,ci>rnon th t tturne and opr- f tis · u·cs but no law is s -
lP"' ition a ....o<>lc o sta ' ·tis
etc. ln each instance they intervene in the name of a norm, and it m~ •"'e proPos ~.,.,nty. One can Sr,-· e " One roust say: 1
u• ead to a cei~· ''This is 95% trU · . Which
be said that the norm to which they return is a Lacanian norm; which ca1111ot I , One cannot say, . 95% of the tune.
passes as the psychoanalytic point of view. The Symbolic, the Name tisticallY trUe .t this phenoroenon will ~ap~ statistical troth and the
of the Father, the Law. Psychoanalysis is reduced not to the ten com- 100% trUe tha t There is no such thing f tabS ' tics is a logical fallacy,
differen · th basis o s bso-
mandments but to two or three. Psychoanalysis becomes a sort of is very build induction on e ace the notion of an a .
Law of the social. attempt to re Popper does not embr On the contrary, for him
However, . any other sense- H starts from
Freud says repeatedly that bias is quite alien to him. All "ten- • he Platonic or . rnnM'V tn1th, e
dentiousness [Tendenz]" - this is his word - is alien to him.5 lute trUth mt . rovisional, even unao~-, under the names of
the Only trUth 1S. acture'p \..c<>lluently taken up
- sUu.,...,_ roain5 provlSt
. ·onal until it
After these excursions into therapy as a 'technology' and nor-
mativity, I return to what is the central concern for me today, a problem the idea of ,con}e . , - as something that re d? 'fhere are certain
•modeY or 'paradigm 1..:~ so far away from freu f.__;1.ar passage in
at a tangent to that of debate - the problem of scientificity, of verifica- ifi d ls tui.> · the au,...
is refuted, fals ~ · in Freud. There 15 d focuse5 rnore per-
tion or proof: 'psychoanalysis in the scientific community'. Although 1
frao-ments of epistemo_~SY_ ..,des" in which freu and in which
I don't have time to go into detail, I allude here to what we might call 0 -· d th ir V1ossi.... een thetn,
"lnstincts an e ._,._e relations betw h y are no longer
the parallel trajectories of Freud and Popper. These two men of genius, ts than on u• al When t e
even if one doesn't measure the genius of one against the other, are at haps on concep nsidered provision . ast to Popper, he fo1:1'U-
the concepts are co change thetn• In contr refutation. The idea
cross-purposes to an incredible extent. There is a lack of awareness on
adequate, he_says, we of inadequacy rathe~ t:by what is observed:
the side of Freud, who I don't think ever cited Popper; and on Pop-
\ates things m terms will be contradict
4 [Trans.: The report to which Laplanche is referring was published in Februµy that one day e eory th th
. I ·fie Knowledge (London:
2004 by the lnstitut nationale de la sant~ et de la recherche m~icale (INSERM), !ft of 5ciCJI I
· s•TheGTOW
-6----=-:
and was deeply critical of psychoanalysis. The report was initially published on a
Government website but subsequently withdrawn from it, allegedly under pressure . ctures and Reftilntton ·
Kar\ Popper, Con1e 239
from certain figures in the French psychoanalytic community].
Routledge: \963),
5 "On Narcissism: An Introduction" (1914c), SE 14, p. 89.

238
 r..evels of proof
Levels of Proof that are not deduced
ther hand statements choanalysis but for
.-.don the~ lid not only for ~sy un.at would be
this aspect is sometimes present in Freud. It 15 · • el.,... ry lS va l enphery. v-v u
. . U\terestin • .:.e \(ert' era! tneo , k ..ne\ a supp er p uld claim to devise
the rudiments of Poppenan thought in Freud. Think g to d.et dew· gel' h rd e•~· ' hi h we co
of the title of a text that is single-handedly Popp . ' _for ex<\tl\pettl ll1 tile e SO, a a alysis for w c . take what causes
enan ll\ 1•ts . e, f!O ·epC . cnoal' ? No mis /
programme, "A Case of Paranoia Running Count llllpu..: ,;e!Y sCl erl'e\ of psY nan procedures. tl being left to one
er to the p ,,1 :\\e \\~rd \{ossib\e?) Po:; kernel, what's _c:5:d ~e paths of access
Analytic Theory of the Disease". Whatever the fate and 5Ych(}.

this text, its purpose is to test a falsification of a theo ~he ~th of liS t\ll5 p daY, the h . the unconsoo . b t above all they
. hin f . ry, ll\ Pop"" .
at\dal to tile se,<uality, y well be ob}ects, u_ ality that
sense, wit a case o paranoia - a case of female paran . . r ,r s rJ. . ~all . These rna . he infantile sexu
Ola lt\ Whi side, is d repression-els at'\d their centre lS t 5) l cite a short passage
the underlying homosexuality had not been apparent. ch
to it, al'strtlcted rood din the Three Essays (19~ . le epistemology:
Here, though, the following question might be posed: if t are cott. t formulate . ch invo\ves some sunp
case really did contradict the theory, would everything colla h~ creud firS Essays, whi
r " '[hree h disad-
Would the whole of metapsychology come crashing down? l-l ~ - '-"'tt' tL,e .i..:1c1ren has t e
. ere is 11v • of Cllll il
where the question of the levels of statements and the coherence of . ect observation hich are eas y
'fhe dir . pon data w dif
theories arises. It is true that in Popper as well as Freud one some- aPtage of working u cha-analysis is made -
times encounters an absolutism that may lead one to believe that v . derstat'\dable~ psy nl reach its data, as
'the throne and the altar' ultimately depend on a certain number of
nusun th t ·t call o Y b
6cult by the fact _a i after long detours. B~t y
shibboleths, such that the refutation of one small point of the meta- ·ts conclusions, ttain a satisfac-
well as l --ethods can a
psychology might imperil the entire system. This is clear in Popper . the two u• d" s 7
co-operanon . ty in their fin mg .
because he takes the Einsteinian revolution as his model. Yet this e of certain
tor'j degre both ends and by
revolution is actually a very unusual case, where ultimately a single . dug from .
experiment, that of Michelson and Morley, was the origin of the fal. . e of a tunnel being . .s because it is not sun-
'-' can see the unag d " g l emphasize thi . 1f that must be
sification of Newtonian theory. But is it the case that things always 1ou d rstat'\ m · ti t'\ 1tse
way of rigorous un, e rvation'; it is obse~a o infants, and on the
happen this way? I think not; and along with many epistemologists ly a question of obse hand the observation of
who have followed up Popper's thought, developing and nuancing P .J on the one ti n of
it, I accept that there are intermediate levels between what one might imderstoou - alytiC experience. hat a concatena o .
other hand psych~an ms sunple, and yet w .ces are the categon-
call 'psychoanalytic doctrine' , to use Freud' s term, or general meta- All of which see _;nent among the vo1 1· n of children, that
psychology, and something I shall shortly call the 'mytho-symbolic'. d Prouµ,.• . b erva t0
. dis· thus create . hoanalyt1c o s ·cl " t.: ellfant
Between these two levels there are the intermediate levels of theories discor · st the psyc • 1979 artl e .
cal positions for or agro:d of the tunnel. ~ his inion on the sub1ect),
of conflict, of psychopathology, of symptoms, of Witz, etc., even the
is, for or againS~ o::: he has changed his :~of science: 'sciences of
theory of dreams. Would a modification of the theory of dreams nec- .J.'-le' 0. don t t trasts tw0 typ
essarily entail a falsification of the whole of metapsychology? I don't mout:i . . diately con
Andre Green unrne
think so.
lity (1905d), SE 7,,p. 201.
You see that the idea of a theory that is ultimately supple and Theory of Sex«tl 241
open to reworking, a theory containing on the one hand a relatively 7 Three Essays on 1he

240
 levels o'p
'J roof
observation' and , . Levels of Proof
an epistern I . sciences of int
episternolo: ogil cal dilernrna of theerpretanon'.e 'h.,
o•Ca seq most • •ung
refutation is d' uence, Which radical L, s start o that the Freud's metapsychology- the first or the sec-
,· ' IS placed · WouJct "-trld '1'L llt ~- 1"not say 1 · th ult of an ,.mterpretation'
· m · the
interpretati , into an op .. be obs . • lle Po '•% 00c0 •· grap1,y for examp e -1s e res . . .
c on . An o .. PGsttion b er-oat; p~lia
nnd domains of k PPGsttion WhicI1 1·ts etween 'obso11, co,,;,.,..t ti 0od toPo I tic sense of the term. It is a con1ecture m Popper's sense.
ed ge of the child nowled b ge: on the o elf correspond erviltio1\' . N. ''"', ,r,YChoana1Y . page of meaning,· Green gets very near to mamtauung
· · ·
nnd , o servati ne hand s to lw a11q by as ip .
on the other hand ans devoted to ' Psycholo . o folltis Yel, sychoanalysts who treat adults would constitute a model
al that p
Would be the darn . , psychoanalytic kn What is Pure1" ,gical lQiow1 h
t' . because they th'm kby m . terpretati'on: conJecture,
. construe-
am of re owled J Perce . · !0rsc1ence .
. ·e,,tific hypothesis.
thi I nrn revisiting tJ1 · Presentation and int ge of the aduit Plible-; 11•on sci
. s opposition beh. - is question beca . erpretation , whJCh ' This debate is important. It has been somewhat distorted by
inten" . •vveen U1e • use 1t · • · d .ind by all those who, a little imprudently at certain moments,
. l"'retntion, Wh' l . science of ob is I.J?lport
knowJect ic 11s PGsect n servation ant to teiiw
ge, anct not s . ' s a general o llnd the SCi NI have sp'oken of the direct observation of the child as a scientific finding.
freu
pas of observatio,, ~fically to ps PPosition pe . enc:e of
even observflf , there is no s11cl, t/1. Ycl1oanalysis First rtinent l'o au In my opinion, the central problems of psychoanalysis remain
by conjecnu: ;n ~f the stars. Obs~; a~ n Science ~f obseof n~, apro. the unconscious and the paths of access to it (for Freud this is the very
of nurslings J. he idea of direct ob ati~n fu.i1ctions on1rv~tion, not definition of psychoanalysis), and the position and genesis of infan-
not O.rient<v-J bust as much ns ~alnv· 8ervntion is a ""'~r o y if 8Uidet1 tile sexuality or, if one prefers, of the sexual drive. I speak of infantile
'-\.I y h"'"'' o< •V\les. Th . rvu ne in
Even the ob • J ,-,vtheses: tJ1ere . ere IS no obse resl'ect sexuality in the sense of the Three Essays, that is to say in the sense
ence points ::rvation of the stars ~; : domain of Purerv;:on that is of what l call the 'sexual' 9 beyond the 'sexed', beyond the difference
.,., , nrts, suppos1·tio e ancients pre servat:lon.
1
1us G ns co · suppa between the sexes and beyond even the diversity of genders.
nnct an en1piri i:een places into o;,c bnJectures. Sed refer-
lt is interesting to read the Three Essays of 1905. Once separated
Yet UlOde CJsm that opernte . ag psychology. clti.Id
. rn psycI,oJo s Without re.fi ' P8Ycllolo from the later additions, the original essays emerge as a composite
::, When supportel~ such ~s that of Stern o;-:ce to any princip: being, an enigmatic sphinx, which is often ambiguous and some-
at he plnces • Y C:OnJectures th rnes, can on1 times contradictory. Nevertheless, these essays are consistent in their
But here then ~~ oPP<>sition to this at often are quite I ~ func- affirmation of the notion of an enlarged sexuality - the major problem
With Whicl O'\ gutty beconlt~s are the Sciences of . e a orate. that is also the most denied and the most repressed, even though we
lytic interp:.::i~hoannlysis is we:~:al, s~ce 'interpretati::~retafion.
thei 1011 thnt is cqumntect Is · is a Word sometimes dedicate study days to it. Freud begins his "Second Essay''

- PS)'chonnnlytlc i ~:
r Pl'ilctice; but ti at stake here? p . it really psycho
have i_lever Want~ t?chonnalysts interprea::
rpretation - th . make that interp t .
with two subchapters, entitling the first "Neglect of the Infantile
Factor" and the second "lnfantile Amnesia". This immediately under-
lines the repression that affects not only the child with respect Lo his
:---_ e Path of Sci re atton
8 Andro =---c, ence. For exn-ple own sexuality, but also the adult parent and the adult observer. If we
...."
-~ ~
enJ.1111 ll)Odi'I ., .
~,,
take account of this neglect of the infantile factor and take accow1t
c , in No1tllt://t· l'l'1J11e de JS
I , .I/C/1111111/yse 1979
' , VOi. 19. 9 IE,litor. On Lnplanche's f.rench neologism 'sexual' (as distinct from ~e n~nnal
'st•xucl' ), see the Editor's note 10 the Forward of lhi!l volume. The term 1s pnnted
here in itnlics to m ark 11 off from 1he standard English term with the same spell mg).

243
r Levels 0 ,p
J r0o1
of infantile . Levels of Proof
theo b amnesia, what we d.
ry, ut the root . IScover .
the entire d . of its hyPel"f.- IS not the
omam of th . «1ophy l'oot
theory should h e infantile. My and its tend of atta . tind does not originally serve the purposes of reproduction
ave no 1 cone . enn, Chr,,.
the space. 1nf . P ace in this d em is not -J to 0.:"-'l\t. se:<ll31: has as its aim the gaining of particular kinds of pleasure".11
antile sexu li omain that ~n.. at aU, shall not unpack here my own 'conjecture' - the theory of
mentioned. If paediatri a ty is, for its Part , but that it attaehtn~ 1
field -albeit With c . c and Perinatal s , '_Va~ered downlakes lip~ es that are compromised by the sexuality of the adult and then
such as 'dri , ertain concepts th Pecialists ov and~....- JTles:~!ed by the child. It is a theory of the genesis of the unconscious
E ve or 'attachm at have a errun th ""1:1}' : of the genesis of the 'apparatus of the soul', which for me is at the
or their Part be ent drive' - psycho:in~, . e Whoie
· ' ready t0 b some ~'<t!Ytic "- art of metapsychology.
Clans of attachm . a andon th psychoana1 '!cl\'oUr
sexuality is onI ent, smce, according t e Whole field to th Ysts WoUJd, he What truth is there in what here must be named the 'general
. Ya retros . 0 a certain ese th..,__ -, theory of seduction', what falsification is possible? Surely we are a
re-significatio . Pective proiectj . concepti _-""weij.
n, as it's som . J on mto the on, lllfan . Jong way from having found the means of falsifying Freud's first or
I do not have th . etimes called). past by the ad tile
even second topography, and no less so the theory of seduction as I
of afterwardsness e time to dwell u . lllt(a
afterwards . as a matter of Pon this distorted propose it. But this is so precisely to the extent that one is not in the posi-
ticuJar pa· ness IS completely tra!';e back-projection Th conception tion to consider the adult and the child as a simultaneous and asymmetrical
indudingmFt of view that seems to haonned When one ~.,.,,.~notion of couple. Not an interaction but an asymmetry of communication. That
reud 10 In ve bee ~<U11es a is, to consider in particular the analysis of the parental adult (or care-
studied th . . Freud hims If n neglected b par.
e chi.Id and th e and amon Y everyone giver) as being no less pertinent to the situation than conjectures about
are always envisaged fr e adult-child relationstall those Who ha~ the genesis of the psyche of the child. This taking into consideration
a fsuccessu:m·. the chi.Id . om the bei:nnn;_ o-uuug and .P, child . and d
a ult of the unconscious of the adult in the adult/ child situation is what
o the adult; the adult IS the antecedent of th Pnmaruy in terms of
is lacking, and what will always be lacking, in the infinite develop-
the chi.Id Within hims regressively finds the e ~dult, the Prehistory
ments of 'the experience of satisfaction' (nursing), which is habitually
that the child and elf. The Point I hav . chi.Id and the traces
second, and i....,. the adult - before th ~ tried to hammer h ~ reduced to a single person: namely, the child.
&:-. ~ore th e first · ome IS How is it possible to set forth and perhaps refute or falsify a
•~t - must be . e second finds . . IS the antecedent f
nin . conceived b Within hims o the process that bears on messages (primarily nonverbal messages), their
g srrnuftaneous, in d. y psychoanalysis ~If the traces of the
reception, their translation, and even the failure of this translation?
a~ult in the presen zalogue, engaged in as bemg from the begin.
Within h;__ . ., ce 01 the child is an exchange 0 , mes In a sense, observations, which are at once individual and col-
. •uul.Selt all th an adult h 'I sages. The lective, such as those of Roiphe and Galenson in The Infrmtile Origins of
~art:ial excitations ande Pre-genital, Partial w o_sees re-burgeoning
nzes int..._ . pleas11-... sexuality th . Sexual Identity,12 show us one possible path. In any case they demonstrate
~«<U1tile 5eXUali . ~=· Here is ho at IS aimed at that, in a given adult/ child situation, it is a matter of putting oonjectures
ty as it emerges . w Freud in 1908
m the Th sununa. to the test, and not of lining up meaningless 'observations'. Further-
~ ree Essays: "in man the
more, where they fail somewhat is where it comes to conjecturing about
de FranQ? .,nnf)lanche, Probitmat •
'4VVO • "IUes VJ f'
, apres-coup (Pans-
2k
. Presses ur.u ~ ~ 11 "'Civilised' Sexual Morality and Modem Nervous Illness" (1908d), SE 9, p. 188.
12 Herman Roiphe and Eleanor Galenson, The Infantile Origins of Sexual Identity
<New York: International Universities Press, 1981).

245
r Levels of Proof

th . . th ry that does not, of course, call into ques-

e impact and the evolution of lyt1c eo conscious. In this we encounter something
recisel . }JarentaI os"choana
P y m the observation - b w . messages 1 un
vation - of adults th . Y hich I mean th · Where th e1· ar '
1ev .i.e h)'Pothe51S
· of De
d above all to his successors.
' e caregivers or the e Psych ey fail ·
I shall now return to the ~ t s of these ~Ytic oh... IS ll·otl. t••c1 se to popper, an d . cerned the existence of one or several mter-
.
0
to the possibility f question of lev ls children ~- 1
jlllte
We h\vebut thus 1s
the major opposition is the one between the two
the o some kind of obs . e before c :
processes leading to the f . ervation and . onu.ngb ...1jate level ' osition founded by the theory itself. There is on
Popper showed onnation of the 'ap a con1ecture a ack 11,ev els the opp
schematicallv th . _us the way forward b p ratus of the s bout e;.u-etl'e leV ' sexual Theory or the Meta psychology, the theory of
. J' e saenti.fic and th y opposin OUl' 1re011e 1wr1d .the d its genesis centred on infanti1e sexuality; and on
which is susceptible to be" ~ _m etaphysical. Th ~, soinew~ 1 nscious an ,
possible falsificatio Th mg falsified and indi e scientific is that the unco nd there are the 'sexual theories' of children or adults. Yet
is possible. Don't :u e ::taphysical is that for :::the Paths of i~ t)reo/lter ha rtar·n ambicmity-which some have rejoiced in - between
: , however. He consf X:rs that .P~pper devalues thz: falsification freudleftalatheory
ce of the o -
Three Essays, which is the theory of the scien-
etaphysical system so Darwinism, for exampl metaphysi- ~e ~ the sexual theories of every individual, the theories that the
5

~ falsified, but which as:e of whose consequence:,cto be a fruitful nst, an

. dividual creates for hlmself a b out his own eXJ.stence
. and his own
mgs, 'Popn,:,,.;.,....., h
r-=•u as beensystem. . cannot. SinCe P oppean, themse1ves :XUality- We thus have psychoanalytic theory at one extreme, and at
Th e
elimin
all-or-nothin g of great ch significantly .
modified andr s .OWn ...,,.t-
,.,.,
the other extreme the way in which the human being 'theorises him-
. ated by Einstein . anges of system, such unproved. self', on the basis of messages from the other which he has to translate
as I indicated ho , IS now considered t as Newton h-'-
a ve in ch o be ex . v,:mg and which he must integrate by assimilating. The most conspicuous
kernel _ th ' ea theory th . ceptionaI In 14
e most difficuI ere IS most fr · fact example in the article on ''The Sexual Theories of Children" is the
hyPotheses subject to t t _to endanger - as well as equentiy a hard castration complex, which is a way for the child to represent for itself
does not directly end esting and falsificatio b an entire series of
anger th n ut wh in a 'story' or a narration the difference between the genders as com-
In psychoanai . e centre. ose refutation
municated by the parental messages that assign gender to the child.15
truth or of proof. I s ys1S, this can be found .
:eexampleoftheC:1:tf the intermediate le: ~hat I call levels of The castration complex and the Oedipus complex are mythic
e same level. Inte . Paranoia but I could . . have already cited theories that do not require proof. In Popper' s terms, they belong to
here. The disc restingly Freud give another ex the level of metaphysics; what I call the 'mytho-symbolic' is presented
down h overy of a single ,, ~ploys the term ,, _ample of
a yPothesis. It negative case" negative case" to the human being largely by his cultural surroundings. Unfortu-
texts, Freud sa . ,, comes up in res Would permit b . . nately, however, Freud ended up regarding the sexual theories of
tion" (h . ys. neurasthenia . pect of neurasthe . nngmg
e IS thinkin IS always ca ma. In his earl children - the apparatus best suited to repressing the unconscious -
theory of th g essentially of used by a genital d y as the very kernel of the unconscious.
no n . e 5exual aetiolo masturbation) ,, ysfunc-
egative cases"_13 H gy of neurasthe . . , and so far as th The strength of the theory of seduction consists in its ability to
ere we are at ma IS concerned e
- -- what I Would call , there are account for the non-scientific function of psychoanalytic myths. It is
13 "Sexuality m . -
the Aeti
an intermediate .
o Iogy of the Ne
246 Ul'Oses" 0898a)' SE 3, p. 269. 14 (1908c), SE 9, pp. 209-26.
15 a. "Gender, Sex and the Sexual" in this volume.

247
,...,;
Levels of Proof

thus necessary to situate the two PoPJ>erian !eve1s Tire nu-ee Essays and the Theory of Seduction
chology is scientific in Popper•s sense of the lenn. Thc,,,,l\,uy_ 1.t.,.

~
is narrativ, and its Principal function is both SUbliir,e lllylh~.
sive, helping to give fonn to a !'ersona] histoiy that . atory "11<1
importance fo'. the human being.. ts clea,1Y or~
There ts no den}'lng the difncuities fo,. obse,y .
arise here- for the observation of What I can the fund ation U..t ""'"4
polog;ca1 situation. The latter reqUireg COniOint father~: "'U...
observation, psychoana]yt;c observation, psychC>ana!Ytic . ""-ii,.
tion of the adult-chiJd dialogue in its entirety, and of the res IOvOSlig. 14
infantile sexuaiity in the adult pro1agorus1.11 is itn"°'lant~~
line that the adult in the situation of relating to an infant ""Pe'"1d,,_ TIIREEESSAYS
a fesurgence of his own infantile sexuaiity. Freud Underline, U::,"""- ~ORY OF SEDUCTION1
AND THE
eraJ limes and everybody realises it. ""-
We should, then, pay clase attention to the two warn;,,
Freud puts at the ~ g of his "Second F.ssay, on 5exua] lhet,: for the present talk were
titles that I initially P":ona1 'The Three Essays ,md
"Neglect of the Infantile Factor" and "Infantile Amnesia•. These or, Theabandoned for the more
all ·t1 that came spontaneously to mmd
one and the same: the repression of the sexua1. Th y f Seduction". The ti es
eventu ,, or 'The Three Essays as
eory o Eni atic Message d' this
Finding a ioint methodology for the observation and inte,. !he "The Three Essays as then gmthat I count this work ofFreu f s,'the-
the
Ptelation of adult-chiJd conununication and its results WOu!d reopen uma . ,, You can see,
were, ' t at the very heart o
the question of the "neglect of the infantile factor'', is it the result of Tra tiSm . dian thought, as an even 'th and against . that theory.
· Freu gles wi • · "'
repression or an absence? I believe that a large Fart of so-caned psy- episode m - n' and ofFreud' s strug . , . lie' or 'traumatism.
choana!ytic child psychology- Which has existed for decades and has oryofseductio rience fully this erugma that's to say, to
In order to expe f to the event of 1905 ~. 2 f which I
taken on a new e/an With 'attachment theory' - however Scientific the . . . rtant to re er nch edition, o .
psychology may be, must begin by questioning (and trying to elimi- aspect rt IS impo Three Essays. In the Fte k with a ronlinu-
the first editi(m of ~or, we have decided _to ':.,, the subsequ'."'t
nate) the
above all, "'Pression of infantile sexuaiity in the adult and of cmu-se,
in the 'observer'. am the scentific d . all the passages dating d something similar
ous line in the ~ O 1924. I advise you to :.d it following just
editions, 1910, 1915, f the GWor the SE, thendisruptive. Everything
'th your own copy o . tartling, deeply
Wl . The effect IS s
the 1905 ven;ion. . c _,
Psychoanalytischen
Deutschen ,._ ·e
·vered at the congn,ss of the · Vol VL ·-rro;, Essais de la """"
aris· th""n
Deli
1Saarbrucken, 05/06/2005.completes.. Pscyhoanalysis:
Bourgwgnon, . Pierre Cotet (P .
2 Sigmund F~eud: ?eii17~planche, Andre
248
d, la """'"""' di,. . ._.., 2006).
·....:-deFran
Univers1.,...= 249
 The Three Essays nnd the Theory , Sed . d the Tl1eonJ u1 ..,~- -- -
0 e Essays all
1 Uct1on yJ,e Thre
that seems to be well known - the 'stages' of libidinaJ d . .ew formulated in 1905
gth on this

:d
'""'t at len child - w c hi h persistently
r
. evoIu_tion towarc1s gen;taJ Prinia
narcissism, the progresstve vi
e"eloth... d discourse ation of the . dhood and the pube -
it has disappeared. We are left With a strange, even b 'Y-'11,
one that is nevertheless suppor,eq by solid fundan,.:::~e '"'--,. '(le ,o:Jll simple o:;:n auto-erotic who for a long time
1 .,iant fr rrier betw f model of a licitly mentioned
and foremost there is the incessant affinnation of inlantiled""- ~.,. d1 aclearbak
,s0 t1f' h olatte r not being. exp_th
d s etches a sort WI
masturbation.
with its particular characteristics - partial drives, !!rotoge ~ablY, • " riod, an ntasies, t e d in connection 905 than the fol-
d
leaning-on, etc. - an wit. h I·ts mystenous,
. if not insoluble Ilic
- zones, ,,ip• .,;thoutfa
e,xists • relation
to puberty an f the Three Essays oil them in 1908:
outline o lf summanses
problem: the difference between the pleasure of .,,citation
'-"Ollolll·
••ct~, ~cef' uld give no . h which Freud himse
t IJ'\ better
pleasure cau~ed by _the reduction of tension. There is also the a1a,'.
mation _of ~ngu,al . polymorph~us pervers,ty anct of its 'Ventuai °''."' few Unes w,t
10 . . serve the pur•
integration into gemtal pleasure 1n the form of lore-pleasure. r !'au,, ,"1ng . does not onginally ·ts aim the
al drive
{t}heessexu rod ction at all, but has as 1 .
It manifests
here to emphasise that in the co\llse of the text these funct.,.,."1
themes are h,quently ll!Stuned in a somewhat contradictory way. pas of reparticular
u kinds of
. pleasure.
dunng. w hich it
g
shall return to this point: we are in the Presence of an entity that ;, aining of_p in human infancy, t only from the
1 . tlus way l asure no
somewhat composite, an enigmatic and seducing sphinx_ Don·t sui> itself m_ aim of gaining p e e body (the erOto-
pose that the portions •ddeq h, later editions will clarify thing,. ln,y attainS its from other parts of th rud any objects
will only enable a historico-genetic schema to make a forcible entry genitals but d can therefore disreg call this stage
. zones), an . tones. We . .
Ulto the text, linking the sexu.fity of the infant to that of the •doles. geruc those converuen hild' s upbnngmg
cent by a series of stages or 'organisations'. Freud does not, how~, other than tism, and the c . 4
the stage of auto-e: task of restricting it.
give llUnself the insurmountable task of remodelling the whole text" h
a consequence - as one can see, for example, at the besinning of the in our view, t e t in broad
as, things ou
thin! ch,pter when, an emphatic opposition is delineated between . having sketched ht that link the
puberty and the whole anterior sexua1 life in Which With this overview. dicate the two lines of thoug
. time tom . .
strokes, it ,s he theory of seduction. rwards,
[t]he sexuaJ. drive has hitherto been predominantly auto-
erotic . . . a number of separate drives and erotogeruc
11,,... Essays to I . g eight years afte d n·
Y
l. ln what wa_s does. this text,
ts for co~deration of 'the aban o
a recons1
zones .. . independently of one another have f'Urnued a
certain sort of pleasure as their sole 5eXual aizn. rting-pom •tself?
3 contribute '°":i::on theory'? ed by seduction mthe texll .
ment of these make of the role play d. n

has b.en al-

~ t h e Tl~n, of Sexu.1uy 0905d), SE 7, p. 207. Page number.; will

misleading
hon, and thn,ughou, to,.,,..,I"'""'
h,_forth S. cih>d U, "'""'"'""- U, <he tw. <he Slandan, Edition tran,1, tto,
laplaneh,•, ""''"""' to, rendering
.,.., 1n,b., 'drive· <Fe. pul,Wn) ,.,.., than the mon, familiM but
'instinct'].
F...,d's G.,_
2. What to
l - On the first point, it7)s
.
theory of seducti
. hould
·on (1895-189 w
d thatthe Freu •~
as essentially intended to explain
be recalle

" 0 908d), SE 9, p. 188.

250
4 " 'Civilized' Sexua nd Modem Nervous Illness
l Morality a 251
 The7'1.._ _
·•uee Essay
~
sand ti
le Theo
patlzologica/ ph ry 01Seducr E ays and the Theory of Seduction
ti enomen 1011 fJ,eThfee ss
on of the unco . a: the aetiol
sununed up in llScious in that illnogy of hyste .
Parents'. As suthe foUoWing fonn ess. The sec1.:a _and the
or again:
amounts to a ~, Freud's ab Ula: 'hystenc ction theo collsijtii.
;"'ithout ente,.:en~able 'falsific:ct;:,~ent of : daughter,ry C'al} be . mes impossible not to recognize that this
it beCO f kind.IS a gen-
neuron , g into detaiJ b , in Popp , 5educn Perv~ ·· · dispasition to perversions o every
ca , let us a out th er s se on th
ance and ,.1_ emphasise a . e calling . llSe of iL ~?}' :~d fundamental human characteristic (p. 191).
p <uU10St irrefu single Into 4
1e t
. reud, at least o table: to Ptod argulllent, statisq~estion of~
IS the case that ne perverse Parent uce one hYsten tica.1 in ap the reover, this infantile sexual potentiality is awakened
genie factors . Parental J)erversj (the seducer) is ca.I Patient Pear. .,1.:n :eoadult carer in the course of his relation with the child:
greater m_order to give . on must be al.lied ~Uired-1\zi' ~Ys \\~U""'

Proportion of pe nse to a hystena With Oth d if it

[T]he person in charge of [the child], who, after all,
rverse Parents . , one wouJd er Patho.
"rL in thep . need is as a rule his mother, herself regards him with feel-
,. uen the Slim · :l'eVioUs g
eneraJ.:
a Sl:ilJ
exclucfin -~ l-'nse that in all 40n: ings that are derived from her own sexual life: she
verse - thg my own, had to b cases the father strokes him, kisses him, rocks him and quite clearly
e realisa . e acCUsed , not
of hysteria . tion of the un of being per- treats him as a substitute for a complete sexual
Vailing · ' Wi th Pl'ecisely the e)(pected frequen object (p. 223).
perv.,.... ·in each' whereag Sazne concfi..: .,.ons cy
-<>tons againg . Sllre.ly Such · pre-
t children ,....,.. Widespread The 'statistical' argument against the seduction theory thus collapses:
B0 ~-=notvPn, all parents, all Pflegepersonen [caregivers], all adults are potentially per-
. wever th ,,.,_ - J probables
s1veatgu.rn ' e~nree£ · verse seducers.
men' e~t a?ainst this o:~s_ofJ9Q5willbelat
poten:Z.~ ~em from 1::= namely, that :1!~~Pp~y
a dee.
This is something that of course obliges us to reconsider the
terms of the letter of 21 September 1897: seduction has in fact every
pass away with t _ts more, this Pol 00d a Pol,Ylnorpho lchildren of chance of being produced within every relation of care (Pflege).
sists a childhood• Ymorphous us Y perverse
s a potentiality . · whether rep perversity does This is not to claim that the Three Essays of 1905 constitute the
in every adult res.sect or subfunat . not unique missing link for a restoration of the seduction theory. Many
N . ~tt~
other steps would still have to be taken in order to acknowledge that
o healthy person .
some add'ti , 1t appe,. .... repression and the unconscious are not exceptional, pathological
t on that . .....,, can fail
nol"Illal sexua1 . Iltight be called to make phenomena, but are the lot of humanity as such. In this progression
~ aim ... (p. 160) ?erverse to th towards the general theory of seduction, further theoretical elements
5 n1e Complete letters
M Mas 'I .
e
are absent: the generality of the 'fundamental anthropological situ-
da~ecf son (Canibrid o /1~gm111ut Freud to .
21 Septembe ge mass. and Lo Wilhelm Fl' ation' between the adult and the child, which extends beyond even
r 1897. ndon: Harvard less: 1887-1904
25 University~ trans. Jeffrey the familial or oedipal situation; the notion of the message, and of the
2 ' 1985), letter enigmatic message originating from the adult; the attempt to apply
to repression a model much more removed from a pure mechanical

253
 The Three Essa
ysand th
I e Theory o ....i. e Essays and the Theory of Seduction
p ay of forces and
tr much
f Seduct1.
011
,
.:/ r1,e 11,re
anslation - fail closer to a . very complicated text where arguments inter-
ure of translation. commllnicalion .
th
2 -Th eoh,. ro!ll tht1salways agree, let us try to bring out some lines of
. e sexual -'. tnes f
d do no
seduction in all . theory thus sage ,eet all_
its a Ii com '
ion itself? This s mp tude. But wha ~ too late to
t' .
disC''5510ll•
econd point Will t zs there . save th )'[he biological line. The origin of the drive is beyond dispute
L et us em h req · ,With · eth
Essays two d p asise finat of all llU'e a length; in th, ,.,, '°'),,1 A :...nate biological factors:
reference m · anth three. The ma1·or t that seduCtioer develop:fSed.uc, re1ated to 11u•
. e Th ext of his 0 n is ... ,ent
tena" (the text th ree Essays 15, . as it h ,.....
·• •1 to Whi o.tnniPtesen. 'fhere seems no doubt that germs of sexual impulses
not only a at develops th h appens, "Th. ch Freud tin are already present in the new-born child and that
s regards the im e t eory of sed _e Aetiolo~, lllakes
these continue to develop for a time, but are then
portance of ;-.c
uuantij UCtion"" e of. liyS-
•410St 01
As long a . e sexuality _ Xplicit1y) overtaken by a progressive process of suppression
. goasmth , (p. 176).
s10n;~
b ...u,cance of the e year 1896 I . .
of certain . years of childh lnSISted on th
Import Ood · e jhe general theme is well known: infantile sexuality is bound to ero-
sexual lif
~mphasise the
e, and s·
ra::
ant pheno.,.,...
...ena co
m the Ori .
then I have n.:'""ed With
e factor (p. 176) p yed in sexuality b r ceased to
Ytheinfan-
gm togenic zones and subdivided into component drives, each seeking
pleasure on its own terms. But these erotogenic zones are in turn part
of a potential erotogeneity of the whole body. The entire body surface,
the whole skin, is equipped with a potential erotogeneity:
- butaisoseducti·
on:
We have already discovered in examining the ero-
I cannot admit th .
togenic zones that these regions of the skin merely
ogy of Hystena" . ( at m my paper ,
or importan 1896) I exagg on The Aetiol show a special intensification of a kind of suscep-
ce of [ erated th - tibility to stimulus which is possessed in a certain
know that persons sedhuction], though I ;dfrequency
the same . w o remain n0 not then degree by the whole cutaneous surface (p. 201).
experienc · nnal ma ha
The es m their childh y ve had
The same would apply (this is a later addition) to the internal organs.
Pcc,.,.~entis Worth . 00d ... (p. 190).
All are capable of sexual excitation. This raises multiple problems.
-y:,, seduction • pau.smg over for
believed in 1 JS_not more ex . a moment according . Firstly, the problem of excitation in its relation to pleasure. Freud leaves
896. It JS }Ust. C'eptionaI but to the 'T'l......
m which as like! more frequen , ,,n:e open -mysterious and unelucidated- the fact that excitation (that's to
Fro
normai Freud might ha y to show up t than Freud
unconsci ve drawn th among nonna} say, the increase of tension) might in itself be a pleasure, something
he has not estabi:: as well as patholo . e conclusion that it ~ple...
ed, so it would gicaI facts. Buth d explains the
that contradicts the general idea of pleasure. He retumS several times
254 seem, the idea ofa ,norma}'
e oes not do so' for to this paradox of excitation-pleasure:
unconscious.
255
 The Three Essays and the Theory of S I
eduction
'
This strikes us as somewhat strange onl bee
in order to remove one stimulus, it seem:.ause,
u,._,necess
to adduce a second one at the same spot (p. ~
185

Furthermore, however fertile is the notion of a somati ,

c source- f
drive, the enlargement of its application also entails man .0 th~
ties. It may appear obvious for certain zones- oral .,.~_, y _diffiCU\..
, <Ul<U, gemtal b
there are many deficiencies that ought to be underlined Th - ut
· eerotog .
zone of the woman's breast is never mentioned; and once we mo enic
veaway
from the simplest cases, the original schema fits poorly. Freud
sists, for example, in considering the eye as the source, the erotog~~
zone of Schaulust (voyeurism/ exhibitionism). Yet the conception of~
organic tumescence of the organ of vision is utterly improbable.More-
over, Freud quite creatively emphasises that certain events or general
processes can be at the origin, at the 'source of infantile sexuality' (and
adult sexuality): train journeys, affective processes, intellectual work
.. . Yet, in many of these cases the mediating function of cutaneous
erotogeneity seems uncertain. \
B) Moving beyond these difficulties, which will later bring us
back to the general question of fantasy, let us now recall the function
or the major role attributed to seduction in the birth of sexuality. Freud is
clear, even categorical: seduction occurs with great frequency, and its
significance cannot be overestimated. But conversely:

Obviously seduction is not required in order to

arouse a child's sexual life; that can also come about
spontaneously from internal causes (pp. 190-1).

Having thus set down the limit to a psychogenesis or an intersub-

jective genesis of the drive (which is our own thesis), Freud is then
free to give a broad description of the modalities of the influence of
seductive gestures on the part of the adult. It is interesting to note the

256

-
 The Three Essays and the 1',L ---...._.____
rieory O'S
of Seduction
tasy on the Part of the adult At 1 ed'<c'-' ssays an d the Theory
''Otz
. . o., the "'ecliamcal
want to Insist
al · severai p ints
. F%d h~eE b. t
0 f /1e T b. ect and of o Jee
• . •<tio eve" . ,
together the relationai asJ>ect: aspect of e:>cCiting h the notion . f the O l t
o rtam· approach o
uc "thin a ce th
)<POW
hoW mredomID . ant Wl we are so to speak at. ede
The "'1atonucai situation of this . l:\s, leq~ lo we become p the Three Essays, not always clarifi .
lions in which it is bathed, the w..;::on, the ...,._
80iit .,, I"''. j-lere, in ·on and matters an,ect in question is that
!la1ys1s,f this evolutith , first that the obJ .
to Which it is subiected in the C0urs., of! "'1Q '."bbing
"' d""'
.13110
to e This pro
blem is never
,;f . g poin videntd from
ti1rUJl btless e the sexu
al drive alone. al as conceived by
1 bJ·ect in gener ,
as Well as accidental stunuJation (such chiJQ 8 to;z.,, s doll ·ve an ptua o
It is ,4x11al drth t of the perce . open and

=
ment of intestinal Wonns in the cas fas the lllove,. the "" · h t a • · ott. tion remains
• mev11able
11 · • that the pleasurable r..,ling w~"".'
e Q girJs) llbL
,I ;,sol w,t O,even wuuu~ t / partial object ques . used to ref& ., a
part of the bajY is <-apabJe of Pmducmg shouJa. tt;: ~, p;,get the total ob]'£ Essays, 'object' ,s ding of 'aW·
noticed
h uld by
.
children
.
even during earliest infau • ~" j-lo~-=~e first of
t oear-cu . d Freud w~r
th
i:
::mvely urule,- object choice.
give nse to a need for ii,; repe,;lion (p. cy, illld articularly homo. as erson, Freud
s o 188).
'.,i,1
° ,-. ~,son, an f the object'' P choice of object p • trinsk

~~-
,..pect o ance of the notion of an m
Perm;, me to put a perscna/ development inm play he . ~•"" "' this first appear early on about W, .
the following
have myself proP<>sed What l call 'the senera.1 theory of se<!Uc,; , F A> ,.g,.Js rvations very th sex of the obJ'.""- f this conception.
re, slllce resses
resethe drive and e ts . charactenstic o
me, there is no question of denying the notion of a general 0 ""cita:ili"'
1 eXP between from 1915,
(Reizbarke;,i in every liVing being, especiaIJy at the leve1 of the cu~ iiok d,nittedly dates . of an object
neot1s envelope, "'1d in Pilrticular With "'8pec, to the body, Pbc,, which• . ersthatachmce ually
of entry and exit. H:ow can we deny in the child that Which "'°'" l al sis cons1d
P]sychoan y f·tssex-freed
d ntly o 1 .
om to range eq .
- as i
·tis found m
. .
for every °'llanism, even a monOCelluJar ban of PmtopJasm? But th, indepen
mal e d female obJects . hr is the ongi-

assimilation of this genera.1 Re;zbarla,;, to a Veifuh,barke;t <se<tucibiJityJ over

chil e an
. rimitive states o f soae.J, . m
f the restriction ·
risks being ntisleading, insofar as it implies the Prior Presence of sexu, dhood, mp .ch s a result o 1 and the
nal basis from whi other,, a both the norma
ality Within the o'8anism. Yet we know that !"ecisely in the chi!d, th, . ction or an 14&-7).
little human being, the honnona1 conditions of 5"Xuality that We find one dire develop (pp. an! the sex
at the pubertal period are practically absent. inverted types drive with reg 10 eel to the
In our View, the Properly sexuai chara- of the 'sexuaJ life of inherent · the
m It is, to be sure, relat . • tain
the
This .
ventable indifference
. warrants emp hasis.
tion goes furth ereeks
and toreio~
roam
the child' namains impossible to define on a l'Wely physiologioo ba,;,_ O
It is inseparable from the appearance of the seXUaJ fantasy, Which ;, f the total obJectality· but the ques tion that Freud s
b. exu , ·a1 separa hether
itself con-elative to the intervention of the other (the sexuaJ adult). notion of ,s es,enti estion of w .I
tion of the truly, b·ect'. he simpler q11 n) ora parl1a
ques 'drive' and o lf all go back tot t l object (a p~ o will change
C) Another line concerning seduction is no less strange or inter- between first o ds the to a rspecttve
esting: that regarding the object. But let us d understan . that the pe
by sexual objectf Freu
the body) . We notice 259
258
object (a Part o
 nrut the Tl .
lt'Ory O/
The Three Essays and the n,eory of Seduction
)mpletetv bet.. ed11r,,0,,
latter th~ ob. V\.'eJ1 the Fir.it Ess.1
nent driv _Jl'Ct wilt suddenly y (total object) a rified the drive and were prepared on its account
. t r thte> nuTSlin . - bccon,e the nd the lnird
ln t-1ct on wo g infant this is ~rt ob~ of . In the to honour even an inferior object; while we despise
points oi vi uld have • quLntes.sentia the~ the drive activity in itself. and find excuses for it
c ti~ tl ew - totul/ partial. Th~ilt difficulty s U~, the h.......
ev ~ ry a the i11fa11til . is L'i becaUSe }'nthesisin -•~. only in the merits of the object {p. 149 n . 1).
en ~y that he i . . e dmie o 11 the I . Freud centres g the l\\·o
fore cit<:"ltion andni~1Uy ronsiders the :~t,on to the object ~dl!lllny It is not at all easy to imagine what Freud means by "the drive itself' or
ta.I ynthesis th p easure connected ~ect as inessential . could even "what is essential and constant in the sexual drive". A drive whose
pubertal de:el e connection With p to the erotogenic to the 8earth sole aim is pleasure and which is auto-erotic, that is to say, with no object
cal n . opments. Freud ' k rocreation - th zones. Ceni-
t'eption of th s etches ese are es i,eyond the subject's own body. (Unfortunately, the question of fantasy
onglnaJ ' tate
part of the ~ne that is without e:;
e sexual drive . . a mysterious alm senlially
itself; auto-era~ . ost tnystj.
The y can be taken as a emal object and in w ~ an ahn0s1
and the 'internal' fantasmatic object are not invoked at all, even in the
reversal that leads from sucking at the breast to thumb sucking).
To maximise the surprise it is important to put this drive/
end of the most surprising passa pai:mer in a sort of . hich another
chapter on the "De . .ge IS found in th fimirror relation. object opposition into contact with the passage that follows. It con-
v1ations · e rst Essa cerns the effects of seduction on the drive itself:
Th in respect of th y, at the
e most general e sexuai object":
these discuss· conclusion that t l1 Moreover, the effects of seduction do not help to
a ions seems h o ows fro reveal the early history of the sex'tlal drive; the
gt'eat number , owever, to be . m alJ
numerous ind. _of conditions and . this. Under rather confuse our view of it by presenting chil-
of the ividuals, the in surprising! dren prematurely with a sexual object for which the
sexua1 ob· nature and · Y
What is essenr JeCt recedes into th importance infantile sexual drive at first shows no need (p. 191).
something el~a(I and constant in th e background.
p. 149). e sexual drive is The main point here is the remarkable comment, epistemological in
This passa . nature. that sed11ctio,1 confuses our view (vfn11irrt 1111s;-rt! £ins, Ill) .ind
from 1910 but . ge is completed b prevents us from understanding whot the drive n>ally is, ond that 1t
high estirna , in the same v . ya no less surp . .
tion \ . h hon for the dri ~in, where Freud nsing note, dating does so by erroneously introducing the object into a process wlwrv it
v1t the object: ve itself to our over! opposes the ancients' has no role to play.
Y exclusive p reoccupa-
What better way of experiencing how Freud is at one"' dose
The most Shi kin d . .
of antiqu · g JShnction be to -yet far from - the sol11tio11 as we co11ceive ii. W(' too think that 1t IS
that the a~~ and o~r own no d:;v:n. the erotic life by seduction thnt the other intervenes in inf,mtile sc,trnlity, but f.tr
whereas we :;'ts laid the stress u u t lies in the fact from this observation putting Freud on the path towards lhe genesis
rnphasize its ob' . pon the drive itself of sexuality, the precocious object introduced by seduction bcromes a
260 Ject. The ancients glo-' sort of inopportune artefact. If one ccmsiders thot the driv\? c, aln•aJ y
2ol

:-:,
 to be regard
~ edasad .
...ore serious . ev-iant ins .
epistelllologi tinct, sedu .
Tile Three Essays and the Theory of Seduction
ca} deViafio C'tion Woll! .
D) B n. d lllti,
easij Ut all of thi • Oqll.ce
, y colllpatibJe . s Will Under aSti!J
'1be Trans£ With the ab go a furth -rhe chapter that follows again
. resumes, over two long pages' the
questi onnations of Pub ove. It has t er alterati "'heine of seduction - seduction by the nurse, by those dispensing
on of the object. erty'', in Whi oh do With th o~t~~t is I\ t and of course by the mother above all. Freud gives the great-
To be s c Freud . e - ·iirc:t ll~- ot care~t to this seduction, attributing to it the awakening and the
earlier ideas - ~e, Freud begins . Picks Up aftes~Y,
With their p 111 a way th . hthe strength of the sexual drive in the future adult:
est
arad 0 XicaJ at is co .
The sexu.a1 dri character•
. llsistent With
the A mother would probably be horrified if she were
been r ve has hithert . made aware that all her marks of affection were
p edolllinant1 o h.e. be£
sexu.a1 Object Its ~ auto-erotic· i·t ore Pub.:....__ ] rousing her child's drive and preparing for its later
intensity (p. 223).
fro · aC'tiVity h ' now ~.=-""(Y
ll'I a nllrnber f as been hith •q1ds a
Zones, which . o separate d . erto denv<>,.l
, llldep nves and "~ Let us emphasise several points in the light of this.
Pursued a . endentJy of erotogenic
ua} certain sort f one anoth One the one hand, this seduction appears here as a regular, even
aiJn (p. 207) o pleasure as th . er, have
universal, phenomenon, since it depends not only on the direct exci-
But sorne p . eir sole sex-
tation of the genital zones, which is "unavoidable in nursery care",
unoJ' ('"T'L ages further o th but also on the simple relation of affection:
6 i ne Findin o n ere appears the
I am referrin t g fan Object") whi . chapteron "dieo .
With the farng o the first Paragra h ch inverts the enti bJektfind- [T]he sexual drive is not aroused only by direct
findung'' ('"T'Lo~ Eonnu1a "die
i ne findin
o/k ~f this chapter, whichre PerspectiVe.
~e tfindun · . conclud
excitation of the genital zone. What we call affec-
tion will unfailingly show its effects one day on the
Within a c g ?fan object is in f. g zst ezgentfich eine Wio,,_es
Pass iew lin act a refindin ><-«<:r- genital zones as well (p. 223).6
ages from the c_ - es, anct in appar g of it" (p. 222))
~onct Es ent contr d · ·
l) that th
say, Freud lllai.ntains:
. a lCtion With the On the other hand, this infantile seduction has a double effect:
e sexua1 dnv . it "prepar[es] for [the] later intensity" of the sexual drive, but it is also
subject's own boct .e in genera} has a first . at the origin of numerous relations . of sexu al love with the diverse
. .
2) that auto-erotis
Sed .
t the rnother's bre . obJect, beyond the
rn is not an o . . ast,
'people who look after the child', in particular the mother. \ 15 : -
. UCtion WOuJct "confuse" ngina1 s tate that the . ficult to reconcile this passage with the aforementioned claim t at e
With the loss of tl b , but a second influence of sexual life of the individual knows no object before puberty.
becornes auto-e 1~,, reast: "As a rule th arr
state that appears
ronc (p. 222). e sexual instinct then . ti of an idea that we have developed at
6 One cannot fail to see here the prefigura on . M tapsychology" (this volume):
' the article
. "Sexuality and Attachment m e • . 'the carrier
262 length in es which relate to it) constitutes . ,
the relation of attachment (and t~e meS:tte part of the adult comes to 'compro~e .
wave' which the sexual uncons~1ous o for the contemporilry term 'attachment .
. "affection" is the earliest name
Freud 1an

263
 The Three Essays and the Theo h Theory of Seduction
ry of Sed'4ction Three Essays and t e
rJte

hi h .Moreover, Freud maintains that th , . . . d from the adult. .

h . h e finctin es sent to the chil_ ued. to hold to the first versi~n
w c JS t e mam t eme of this chapter m g of an ok. .
'findin h , ere1y succPo,,1 -~ . t tnessag art, we contin virtually invaded with
g' of t e maternal breast. The obiect is thus ,. """an Oli&in,j "',.rlleS out second pnd Third Essays are cribed as being, in its
say, dwith breastfeeding. But at no point does F llllrod.u""t', 1,i IJl'{he 5eeond : While the drive IS d"".eel until puberty, the
h th
-~,,.u
won er w e er 1t. 1s. not a matter ofa first seducfion.feud allow h;;.._ . llsto
d 190\n of seducti: fue question of th~ o:~cording to Freud) ille-
t First of all, he consid""' the 'Saugen• (suckin . ~• noll . different t d in a way that IS ( . from the adult
· ·ty
ac iv, pureIy on _1he chil.d's part; it is only much later,
g, suckling)
With t as.,, ~nee,.:~be introducedt,:vitable seductions conuni!.,logical, into a
ardo paper and With the interrogation of the l"'SsiVity inh he_i,,,,. :ort: w
i,,. a1tnos al and epIS . d
obr- te, by the . turbance, at once re e ri htly recogruses-an
vuihJre fantasy, that he will wonder whether this Saugen ~t,. the ~~ i.JltfO
duce a dis . B t although here h g f seduction, Freud
drive u . · e role o
reality correspond to a SaUgen (giving suck), thereby inlrod,"": 11ot,. ti>'' ,,;,ion of the 1r'- the intersubJ<,ctiV alyse the first intro-
question of activity on the part of the mother. Uctng the deaf. pite of him5e ·ty to use this idea to an of a seduction
if J.Il s pporturo ry prototype . this
Moreover, Freud remains resistant to the idea that the as 't seize the o breast, as the ve . otagonist m
L....
an s uffllSt
I •
IS •
a ma1or erotogen,c, zone. Introducing this idea WouJd\Votn.
hii. °
doesn. n of an b3·ect, the his account, the active pr
into play the entire relation of seduction within what is OOrrirn,,,,Jg duc\10 maternal other..On d not the mother, duction to nonnal
called 'the experience of satisfaction'. y by the·ence 15. the nursling an l'"""
h h genera ..,.,., the facts of se
· partance, Freud
expen . all althoug e th · immense lDl . educ-
On our View, the matemaJ unconsci<>us is in play in the ad Fm y, hasiseS err would assign s .
of the Saiigen. Taking a step further we can ask what /l"SS<s, With the childhood, and thus e::~chological theo~~:pression, the genes1S
introduction of the breast, as a partially UUCOnsciaus message fmn, ·ve at a me th ry of norma.t .
the mother to the child. Yet it is essential to recognise that this,fiist
does not arr;,tional role in the eo n of the sexual dnve. I conunu-
tion a found . and the erupliO . . the idea of an ear y sages
page on the 'finding of the object' remains silent with respect to seduc- conscious till missmg. that the mes
of the un l ments ares child· the idea gard to those
tion by breastfeeding, even though seduction in general is very much Many e e th dult and the , etry with re til sex-
present throughout the Second and Third Essays. . b tween e a • · of asynun the infan e
nication e er are in a pcs1tton . infiltrated b~ attempt to
f the adult oth essages bemg missing is any eriving
o the child, the adult m transmitter. A}so . atic messages d
of . us of the f these erogtn
Conclusion ual unconsoo ' treatment o . ) f cts of seduc-
describe the child s lation - repress;n~resence of the acasion is not
In our first part we showed that the notion of generalised sex- from the adult (transneral might be t :e note that t~e ~t would be
uality and that of an infantile polymorphous perversity that remains However ge £ ays of 1905, I seduction ·caI theory,
present, in purely latent and unconscious manner, in the adult, c~uld tion within the Thr;n::al theory o~~=psychopathologt
d to develop a ·on of the res
answer one of the major objections that Freud poses in 'falsifying' use extens1 97
. ted as
s1tua . anthe years 1895-18 .
the theory of seduction. Every adult, especially in the presence of the outlined lI\
small child, sees th.is 'perverse' sexuality (in the most general se~ of
the term) awaken within him - which cannot but be channelled mto 265

264
 Freud and Philosophy

15
FREUD AND PlilLOSOPHY1

The general nature of this question risks simply leading us

back to aporias, namely:
Which Freud exactly?
And what philosophy?

Which Freud? We shall, of course, refrain from putting Freud

'on the couch', as they say .. . But there does perhaps exist an inter-
mediate level, which I shall further try to define as that of the exigency.
An uncontrollable exigency that makes up the originality of an other-
wise unpredictable intellectual trajectory. 'This Freud of the exigency is
not purely subjective. It is found - and can be demonstrated - in the
written work and its equilibrium.
What Freud says and what he does vis-a-vis phil0SOphy can
II
only leave us perplexed.
Here, Paul-Laurent Assoun's little work Freud, la philosophie et
les philosophes2 provides the necessary reference points. In it, we find
the double-handed language and the double attitude which Freud dis-
plays in relation to philosophy - what Assoun calls Freud's 'double

1 Introductory remarks to a discussion organised by the ''France Culture" radio

station, February 25, 2006, at the BibliotMque nationale de France.
266 2 (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1976).

267
 e_
nd Philosophy
freud a
. oes, and wbich,
_,,..;ngthat •anytbing ~ t 'ail to assert
Freud and Philosophy
' s to
t\\Jl'-'e,
~tc1U---
. '-'tI\ tbe re ,
alys\S \1v
ar does no \
_,. ,c
cn.oanc11-ys....
now bas no
speech'. Out of a dozen examples, two quotations Will sUffi. . , it ,ot\ti1'\l:ttad<. ps~cboa: are "Valid tben -psy, that it 1S oruy one nar-
secretly nourish the hope of arriving, via these same pa~'-- ce. 'l_ lX\os\ t\\ ..tef to eu.t\C key ..."e scn.etna ,
~!;:ii at lX\y \!\ii..,\ . otv {{'(\e~ •narra~~
ii\ ·t ~ \\e
I
goal of philosophy' f but many years later (in 1925): "l have '<Ql anY otber that Freud
avoided any contact with philosophy proper. This avoidance~ y
wat,
e abo'-'e clearly observe
vfi'n\e~ o1\g otnets• , r\d 'JieWS , \et ':15 ucitly to wbat be c~
greatly facilitated by constitutional incapacity'' .4 ~ iati"e a'(X\ turn to wo will subsCr\be exp . psycboana\ys1s.
All of this, at least as far as explicit statements are con 'fo ~eet fuetI\ a\l but , to wbicb b~ allies - and tbis 1S an
forms part of an intellectual autobiography that Freud e\abora::ed., ,,i& t\ot_re\tific Wettanshau~ng'ucifortn aro.binon, _but a rogtat(\Il\e
modified ceaselessly. But what does he say from a more thorou ~ "soe1' . _--A by 1\:.S _ ,. nce1ved as P ds
U\e . -"'ara,cte~ . _,..,.. 1S not Qiu)' CO easing\y toWaI
argued point of view? The standpoint on philosophy is clearly set o!t J \S u• tNS cu>•· ~ • ., ~aced unc · ce
11 too . difference - . be found ~P • tics of soen
the chapter on ''The Question of a Weltanscnnuung" in the Neu, Ini:. et\tta\ . htl\ent \S to the cnaractens .ects·
e$S e accorn?US . rong to de'-'e\op c ud in no way re\ ·
ductory Lectures (1933). Here the uniform and universal point of view i'fl<:fo v,Jithout vns . 5 ects, wbicb i:-re . or funita-
characteristic of all world systems is rejected, and both its internal 1.he {\lture· ·ts absolutiSt a :p . Oi no cornpronuse5 160)
\et us note 1 t it adnu\:.S . nussa\S'' (ibid., P· ·
connection to narcissism and the aim of comforting those who live by nete, cannot be to\eran_ . . . .ections and d\S ' tion of fa\sifica-
those systems are explicitly brought forward as decisive arguments. "tIU~, . . t "procedles1 vnth re1 rorectlY to Popper s n~, rrned critique
But the principal critique is in fact reserved for the religious view of tiot\S , \ . would retu.rn us ond bis unuuO boued
the world; the philosophical view remains relatively inoffensive, of 1\US last view en1Sterno\ogy-beY_ b t which actually . '
r wbose r- alysis u nomts o1
interest only to a restricted elite, and therefore having little influence \ion~ a \>o:ppe . d to be psycboan . - shows rn.anY t'-
on the course of the world. \ what be c1aune unpustic l\,dlensrn
od :wn to a somewhats ·tb which he full~
While claiming repeatedly that he is "not properly competent 0
ed. to so-
to judge lthe different systems)" ,5 Freud does not refrain from offer- contact vnu,
. L\.. freu.d' s. .
tbis V1S1on o
f science, Wl
freud compares ~y which, be says, \S tbods" (ibid.) , butit
. "not o:ppas . \
ing opinions on Marxism and its active branch, 'Bolshevism. But-and
cutS to that of pbilosop_ , artby the same rne . to 611 the gaps
this is no less interesting for us - he also breaks a few spears against c.on ' ;n: "wot\<S \I\ P ·n'-'e assertt0115, . \ways
the intellectual "nihilism" of those he calls "anarchists", those who ence" . 1.'bilosop y ,,:.,., bv means of pas1 . nee such a uIUt)' a
· see~,g, 1 as for soe
claim that "we find only what we need and see only what we want ~oes wro~~: t wbich it aiII\S, wh:nanc prll\ciple.
to see": "the relativity theory of modem physics seems to have gone m the uro: tive and progt thiS paint,
to their head" (ibid., pp. 175-6). Without taking Freud as an authority remains a regula d's renectlon at ;\\ica\
'\ ve Freu: t pbilosop
here, let us simply note that he already arraigns, after his own fashion, u\d not W15t\ to ea r;n.atiC character O e unuortn,
what is nowadays called 'postmodemism'. This is a postmodemism . 'We w;e absolutist and sys::1 tltesideof philOSoP~•iustrated by
pomtIDg at . for on the one }tand, as ct of trongs, ~ to recognise i.ts
3 The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Wilhelm Fliess: 1887-1904, trans. Jeffrey world systeros• ts ,ust one pe '- as to fail. ,,ouaard , with-
M. Masson (Cambridge Mass. and London: Harvatd University Press, 1985), letter . renresen I .,. so tnUCll
• talisffiO' aU1\ I' d detes,_,
dated 1 January 1896. ,o o
C
hich I"reu u.ffi e to mennon \(ierr--o
4 An Autobiographical Study (1925d), SE 20, p. 59. Hege\ianisrn, w_ force. lt will 5 c 169
5 "Lecture 35: The Question of a Weltanschauung", New Introductory Lectures on dialectical moVll\g
Psychoannlysis (1933a), SE 72, p. 175.

268 /
 ttd Philosophy
freu d (l
Freud and Philosophy l derstood - in
. ed but just poor y un
arreadY recogtUS_ vitalised mstruments. Psycho-
out listing the great number of modem philosophers for a that are supplied with re . f a new procedure and a
0,e1'• ycho\og)' mauguranon o
'Weltansdumung' or 'world vision' is the least of their,_,.. Whom the 110 _.,.\ a ps : ...-.ultaneoUS
....vncerns ~O'IV' h Su•· • his
But 011 the other hnnd, on the side of Freud himself · i' \ sis is t e . d l am barely g1ossmg
, another t ~11a ydo111ttill of betrll~sis, Freud will say - an ess to hitherto unknown
will be advanced and will be ceaselessly repeated by hitn.: et'tl\
'speculation', to which he willingly admits dedicating himselfl\atne\y 11e'~ psyd,oa~ rocedute that allows ace . ed t once of a new
ecific p . thus compns a .ch I
he does so without abandoning 'patient observation' . I shall e~en if _.As- is asp . us entities. lt 1S . the exicency of whi
,~oru consoo th same tune, o
mention some of the great texts that contain a Speculative ~ply tities, un ew ob)ect. At e \.. researcher: it is the very pres-
sion - Totem and Taboo, Civilisation and its Discontents and man~ e11 '"od and a n belonging to tne
...-,eh• y.icenC'f
,,. is not al\ e o . . ous - as
- in order to pause for a few moments over the text that is Paradi _ spea\<:. d by his object. lism of the unconso
matic among them: Beyond the Pleasure Principle, where Spe<:ula_ij! sure exerte ch is the meaning of the :ea - which the following very
is defined as "an attempt to follow out an idea consistently, out;
curiosity to see where it will lead" .6 Here one could see Precisely Po o?Posed to
Su
all hertnen
eutic conceptions
cteristics denote: . ted by the well-known
\
per' s procedure of conjecture, where the imagination can be given~ rticu\ar cnara erete\ 8 as also des1gna \
Fa alie11-ness letra~~ ~y' lcorps etranger interne1;. f tempo-
reign, to be followed by refutation or falsification of the conjecture based a 'mternal foreign bo exactly, the exclusion o
iortt'u\
on one or another of its results. But this speculation - which in the aternporai·..,,i..,,
and, more
case of Beyond the Pleasure Principle is metacosmological - does not for
the most part lead to refutations or solidly grounded findings. It will ra\isation; of coordination;
the absence . . · to be
lead, a few years later, to a formulation that sounds like an absolute, negat1ott, f th unconsoous,
the absence Of the sexua c
l haracter O e
inf tile sexua ·
lity
beyond all proof: ''To begin with it was only tentatively that I put for.
ward the views that I have developed here, but in the course of time also, of c~urse~ sense of pa\ymorpho~s i:ud is sometiines
they have gained such a hold upon me that I can no longer think in understood here 11\ thfhis theory of the uncortSCIOIIS . not entirely free of
In supp<>rt o ;,.. a (7enealogy that is beSt The refer-
any other way" .1 irolosophers, ,... o .1:...... entar)' at · .
Exigency. This is the term I now propose to descnbe what led to refer to p to I(ant is ru=· runa1 unconsoous,
-'-·"ions. The referen~ , - A ces the idea of a~ life We cannot
pushes Freud in a single direction, which is constantly at work in him c01u'-"' -hauer reinuuuu consoous . .
throughout all his 'goings-astray'. In the case of Beyond the Pleasure ence to Scho_r·--. , as the bedrOci< of ouroccasions that 'every_thlng
Principle it is the exigency of the 'death drive' - a notion that will, to an 'unconsoous ~ , elf states on several_ , and that 'the prunary
be sure, undergo further elaboration. But primarily it is the exigency deny that Freu~ ~ first beet\ unconsooU:tions that it is unpartant
which is consoous __ ,, These are all prop<>S
of the unconscious, encountered in the practice of analysis. edes the second;u J •
To speak of the Freudian discovery is not to speak of analysis prec uanslated in
we opp<>Se. ess, whi·ch we have. Laplanches,
as merely the updating of a procedure to access in a new way phe-
- - - e • s teTftl \s
8 lEditor: Lap
.

as •alien-ness
u,t~:
U 'stral\ger-n r the noun in .
~b\e the read~~:~':{ the other as alien.\
of the irfe(iuo
hyt>henated {oTft\ reserve the sense 271
6 Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920g), SE 18, p. 25. ,..;~and top
7 Civilisation and ifs Discontents (1930a), SE 21, p . 119. neo\oi,----

270
 Freud and Philosophy
Freud and Philosophy
I am Well aware that by issUing SUcJ, tese .
ing on behai! ofone Freud a!lainst another, the.... tvations l <llll hJn t d urce of that alterity in the
andtristhe eXigency of alterity, a!lainst the Freuct of e"'Pet;,, pt o etect the so sage 1"nfiltrated by the
trin tha · l"J"euct of th I" "~d- ..;cal attem
ore•• rring here to the theory of
f the adult other, af mes
cen t n>-cen g t fe-etnerges <ease!ess1y anda Ptoiel'h~, ho. --..,~ iPso. Ce .,d Jh• ess,ge o ,dull. I am re e . of the unconscious
fonnuJa of the folloWing kind: in the depths and at th ils d°"'n to , c,1l·gll'"tic mnsoous of the ble from the eXIgency f the adult-in/ans
e111 1.lllco . msepara symmetry o rred
flush out the instinctual id: "Nothing has entel'ed intoe 0 "&ln of"""-
You froll\
. ,. ,""
~
. ~al 11 hich 1s
• w
.
Herr to
the sexual a . h t may be refe
. tic of w a .

~
out; u . only a part of YourseIf Which You do not teco ,,,.,,. ' itlUI' us.
· ·•<Ii. that is charadens . ' - the unconsaous
. IS
would be the formula I reject_ 8nis. ¼
;, cJh~ an asymtne:Janthropological situationound ourselves nor
Two further remarks to finish up: ,,i,tiO• 'fundament we do not gravitate ar nature.
1Ht is not for nothing that the exigency of the death d • to as ertherenunds•ustinct-
thatbased id that is genetic
undmthe enigmatic other,
impose itself towards the end of the Freudian oeuvre. I ,..:;,;ha"':J ••' d an U\S • e gravitate aro h is moreover,
own statement '1 can no longer think in any other way•_ l-!o,,l"eud' even aroun
From the beginmng£ourwchildhood, that other w o ,
this exigency is not a pure lived expe;ence, a SUbiective collStraint.
a constraint that is at once legible in the very structure of the F ~
7' dult other o
sexual a . li .
tin part
hich is itseli but a y f
the tic to himse . choana!ysis - w s is a body o
oeuvre and in its evolution. SinceUfeand Death i n ~ - rhave enigma F this reason, psykn ledge of the cosmo - eel up from

~
tried to pose the qUestion, "Why the death driver''" Now, the "'Plana. or unfinished ow . 'wounded', open
lion can be faund in the drift taken by Freud's Work during the yea,, our forev;hich we might descni:,: of the unconscious.renounce
owledge . a of the expen alysis has to
around 1915, a drift that tends to make one forget the llncontroUabJe, kn first by the erugm . lies that psychoan . uld be one of the
~ncilab!e "SJ>ect of the 8eXuaI drive, Which Freud names 'Luor,, the This in no way imp ded rationalism: tlus woh in the know-
Amor• in the letters to Fliess." It is a drift that, among other things, ;, . nalist option.
. A woun. to Freud,s philosop Y,
the ratio ulas for refemng . ul ting element.
consolidated by the place aCCorded to a 8exuality unified under the pcssible form wound is a stim a
ledge that that very
aeg;s of 'the Ero. of the diVine Plato· - a term very difficult to reconcile
With the 'polYtnorphous 8exuality situated at the Origin of our being
and of our SJmptoins_ As such, the death drive may be dectphezed as a
reaffirmation of the heterogeneity of the sexual Within us, the infantile
sexuaiity that is unbound and in neec1 of binding.
2) Nor is it Without significance that the discovery of the
unconscious, in the earliest yea,s, should be aceomJ>anied by a dini-

9Cf.• A Wficu1;;;in 1be Path of """"""'Y'"'" (1917a), SE 1_7, p. 142 .

10 Ufe
UP, •ndpP.
1977), 0,,,1h in l"'J<lwa,""y,;,, -
103-124_ ·)"6ey MohJman Ola!runo.., John, H0pkin,
10
July, 1900.
11 n,, ea..,,,,, LLttm "{ Sig,nund F""' lo W;/h,/n, Ft;,,,, 1887-1904, • - dared

273
 In Debate With Freud

16
IN DEBATE WITH FRElJDl

The Freud that concerns me is neither the name, which is

sp<>rted like a 'badge' by the divergent psychoanalytic movements,
nor, conversely, the individual, for whose biographies I have very
little appetite, especially those that claim to be psychoanalytic. It is
above all what he himself wanted to be: the Freud of the written and
published oeuvre. This does not mean that I want to transform this
oeuvre into a sacred text.
It is an oeuvre of debates, of second thoughts, of certainties but
also of doubts. A text written in German, which we (as an entire team:
Andre Bourguignon Pierre Cotet, Janine Altounian, Franc;ois Robert)
gave ourselves the task of publishing in French in an CEuvres campletes
as faithful as possible to the original. The fidelity of the translator:
this means resisting unceasingly and to the greatest extent possible
the adage according to which 'every translator is a traitor' and 'every
translation an interpretation'. On the basis of principles such as these,
it becomes too easy to give up truly translating. I propose in contrast a
form of translation that far from imposing an interpretation, remains
open to the most various, even the most offensive interpretations on
the part of the reader. 'Doing justice' to a great text, means not mask-

274 1 First published in the weekly Le Point, April 20, 2006, no. 1753.

275
 With Freud
111 Debate
. enres and styles,
most vaned g i hti-
In Debate With Freud I d' s texts the . . thf<)ugh to the we g .
i1' freu st novel1&tlC, . . f the Genna.roe
fit\ds d a\Jt\O di5opnneo
\egal't an
ing but restoring its contradictions, its weaknesses, its m
. .. d .ts . 'I...
hesitation and lffiprec1S1on, an even 1 mconerences.
oments
of "'t\\e
()1\e
\ ost e . , tninker
ti\' cade¢c
traU'ed in the
\.,c. diversity, ho
wever, l wan
. haunted
t to streSS that,
by an
. cy
ex1gett
Freud the thinker is the man of a discovery, and I shall · .
\l{l1•• .i.e a
ot u• . '3eyo~
d ti'-"'
.tis as thoug
h he 1S
him not by 1u.1 °
'I...," wn

on this aspect first of all. Here we have a researcher betw ll\sist

~~"ersitieS· 1sso-1s90, i niS is unposed upa~ ll on any psycho-
een th;....__ \)(\\ U\e years . on- p..nd t . it unposes itse
and forty years old, highly cultured and endowed with solid ·":'lY ltOtt'_ dJawil'g ~ ve!'f object, i'15t as the Freudian method:· seek-
tific experience, moved by an unshakeable positivist rationalis SCiel\. U'at" t but b)' N . s hU!lself to use . e of a mountameer
an equally unshakeable ambition - he sometimes sees himself:and U'o'JV,h, hO cot\Str~ mployed the un~g _,...._ st inaccessible an~
role of a 'conquistador', a Christopher Columbus of psychopathol:he .(lawst w sotl\etifi\es e -·--""''t that 1S '111"0 -..thing, but it
"'. \ na'1e . alayan suuu~- ck' is eve1 J ~--
- who decides to put into practice the method of investigation deve. gyl uer a Bin' . the 'right tra th leading to a
ii\'{, to conC\: the douds- 5ee\<lng .ght take a wrong pa ? Or should
oped by his elder colleague Joseph Breuer. As a method it consists in
\oSt a{!\ong. t b\e that our f1\a1\ nu,, ..,.~d retrace our steps.
inducing the patient to speak 'freely', by agreeing to reveal his most we\1\ a turn bacr- =· .
incongruous thoughts. iS a\SO , Should we . these pomts
'sneer droP . clin'bing pegs? decisive junctions, and I
But at this point the application of a simple 'method' Will t 0 ut the -"· 1 it is these fascinate me,
change everything: it ceases to be a matter of ameliorating the exist- ,~eie a\<ingperso1\<1UY • oeuvre which . f ·ust what is
spe ,I . the Freudian discUSS\01\ 0 J hich
ing psychopathology with the aid of a new instrument. The method . astraJ 11\ rong up a . ency w
known as 'free associations' suddenly opens onto a new object: that ~
':::~ royse\f the taskts~fw: then becomes o~:ye :lought? Fokr
which Freud names the Unconscious. Not that this terra incognita can 1,a . uch rnornen · tbis strange . his wor
ever be charted, as was the America of the conquerors; but it does at 1rlay ~ s th entire movement of ck to work, of rn_al<ing
agnet12es e . Freud ba . with it. .
allow itself to be inferred, supposed and reconstructed on the basis
:e it is a roatt~r o\~=gperhaps) by w~:!eosive rnotn~rF::
of its effects: dreams, daydreams, parapraxes, slips, jokes... In order
'work' (of tn~g cly one eXatnple, ~the Studies on Hysteria 'aimed

~=
to refer to it, Freud employs strange terms that bear witness to its l shall ate o . analytic cases ' d cioUS theory . 'th
otherness: the unconscious acts within us as an 'internal foreign body' . · of his nrst tionallY au a cioUS lll e
the publication trUcts an excep . . of the Uf\cons the corn-
(one imagines a kind of implant, deposited by a neurosurgeon). The
unconscious manifests itself in the neurotic as a 'reminiscence', that sunultaneously : : eXP\ain\1\g the rnetatnorphos::!dult who
is to say as a memory that would remain forever cut off from its at notrol\g \ess -nc:. of the details an een the infant a: abruptly, on
hysten\; , •-' bytnec:u~ "''
al re\atiOJ15luP betw ak ll'en
, so to spe · . ·caJ. work, frotn
sources. Freud is also certain that the unconscious is bound to our · erson t 'other , cliJU ,
earliest childhood, and that it is indissociable from 'infantile sexual- p\ex mterp to life, its firS . ns drawn froOl •coJl\lllon sense
first onet'IS it up sing objeetiO -nc:e (but what W1l as the
ity'. A sexuality whose trail he picks up in each case he analyzes, a r 1 1s97, po -mon 5,::,- . heory lalO .
Sentember2 , in'P1ecol1~- ces thiS t t tustorta!\5
sexuality so different from our adult sexuality (which nowadays one ·J:'.' a1so frotn s he renoun hion, IJl.OS th
theory and oanalysis?), heep-like fas birth of the e-
speaks of as being liberated) that one would even hesitate to employ
the same term to refer to it. This polymorphous, anarchic, infantile applies tof P5J~tion' . 1l\ a ra:;e~ent: of the future 277
'sexual', which seeks excitation more than satisfaction, is destined for 'tbeo1'Y ~ s favourable aP!l,O
gee in thiS a
(more or less total) repression within each of us.
,< 1
276
 In Debate With Freud
Psychoanalys1s. and Psychotherapy

ory of 'fantasy' and the 'Oedipus COtnplex'. But the llegati .

uus volte-fi,ce goes unremarked: an hered1ta,y
. theory of theVe asno...
~~'Of
or 'phylogenetic' origins of the human psyche resau,, thei:histo,;,
rain. This is a path leadmg to Impasses that Will recu,. throu Ii., ler.
length of Freud' s oeuvre. It asserts the acqlrisition and genef°"t th,
tion of lived scenes from prehistory that Will be lransnutted
the unconscious of every human being. This Would be the Ugh
:np.
ca,!
·

famous 'murder of the father', even though there is no evid foru,,

it could be memorized and acquir,d during the Prehistory of ~ t 17
It is therefore worthwhile thoroughly to r...,'"tnine the d. ,r
culties of the 'theory of seduction• and to see whether tnore ifij. PSYCHOANALYSIS AND PSYCHOTHERAPY1
advances with
. respect to preverbaI COtnmllnication v,
. . between thel'ecent
young child and the adult Would allow us to enlarge the bases of
supposedly obsolete theory.
uZ
hi q ddled by considerations
Many are the points in Freud's oeuvre that Call for re-ex.,,,;. Since t s uestion has been so rn~ rnainly extrinsic (that
f verything,
nation and for a new 'work'. I shall cite only that much debated idea . rtant but, in spite o e to be brief and clear.
of the 'death drive'. that are nnpo ttin'g' in particular), I shall try . ct - what the
alytic 'se choanalytic a
of the an hall distinguish the psy nt practice of psy-
Is this oeuvre Worth the effort? Well, isn't it a Pmof of its Vital. 1 I s I I and thecurre all in
ity that it ts able to give rise to such debates? Freud's oeuv,,, is, for n, psychoana . Iyst does as
thea psychaana
do in theystreatmen
- t and' more gener y,
at least, the site of an unfr,ithful fidelity: fidelity of translation first of all, alysts - what y . I
choan
the relationship. Wl.th anyalpatient.
tic act can be conveniently divided mo
Which alone permits the infidelity of diseussion, for one can only dJs.
euss an author if one's understanding is based very closely on what 2 The psychoan y .ch essential. . elf to
he actually says. But fidelity also to the exigency of the object that mu .
~
h d both of wh1 are This has lent its
situation and met ' . e of radical asymmetry. F czi formulated
The situahon IS on . ding what eren
practice as psychoanalysts reveals: this object Which keeps knocking try
f d tandings, me1u
at the do0r, this intruder, this other Within us Which we stil] refer to · un ers owadays this asymme
all sorts o ·mis . · We know that n sition
al hypocnsy' . of the analyst has
using the same word as Freud: 'the Unconscious'.
as ,professmn . b the idea that the po h bserver in phys-
has been swept as1deth y does the position oft e o e' refrain that
no privilege, any more 'transference-counter
an transferenc
· · the famous rs · can-
ics. This 1S nference pape . lytic situation
.
is never nussm · g from co ·
. pired invention of the led with a conception
ana
However, the ms d unless it ;s coup .
not be proper1y understoo a 2006. Response to an u, . vestigatton
- - - ; - ~.-,h,ed>li in Le Camel psy, 108, M y
l First publish . I Widlocher.
coordinated by Darue
278
279
 . and Psychotherapy
h analysts
psyc o
. . e-disSocianve'
Psychoa11alysis and Psychotherapy tbe 'assoaatlV
,..,Tate\'j ca\\ .
re aC\....... ""~'""" l refer to tbe
- bv WluU\
. o-bt f1\0 " intervretattons .i of an unusual
of the 'fundamental anthropological situation' (adult-ini . 'Ne !(\to al\a\'jS'- s . u\'. tbe presence . \I\
. . i'll'ls) as 0 . ~i~6'- \ '1\>on t\le. of 'pomun'i, o . -c..,.,,d' s "ConsttUctiotlS
nary asymmetry, another name for which 1S 'seduction'. t1~. .1.()01• \iIUf\g, • (.as U\ n~"" Toe
\\'eu• ' undet .-nconsaoUS f a defence process.
It is only in relation to infantile asymmetry that the , a¢ O\ t\\e .....· nons o d d
\\'e t, c\ose to t\ tbe reconstrUC. . cnon of tbe anal'fSat\ an
able' analytic asymmetry can be explained and justified. 'N '\ll\~-
~&6- . ")1 - al'd. ~ \..us due to tbe 1omt a
is not primarily a refusal to give the other help, counsel "-eutra.\ity aW5\S · act lS fo _,1 nc.v-
1 ~,.UOWle(\
etc. It is sustained only by what we must call the internal , ge, 1'.1' oat\a\'Jtic . tbe rnetbuu• chotberapy not any r J
1 rf~ 5t \ll\1-ted m . neitber any P5'f · ri even u it has
of the analyst: an understanding perhaps of his own unc:~
U\e a1\a\. strictly s-peaking~ anyone~ tbe la~er a ~~not forget that
mechanisms, a respect for unconscious alterity and also a sens~o~
a\'j5is \las e"Vet ~-dug exca"Vauon site. y,~t ed and reconstituted
limits, which implies a rejection of any aim to master, to fasbi:his
.. . the (:\\oat\ arance of a V:e is unceasing\.'] reorg~ t' and more generally
oth er, o f any potesis.
\rl~ai:d o\ ey.cavauon chotherapist is our -pattenhls fust days as sub-
The transfe~nce, ~ ':e wish to retain its analytic Specificity, ~ atient. The only -psy ·tutes \ultlSe\f rrorn . . b •writing'
can only be conceived within the framework of this situation that b~tbe? b . 0 w\lo constr . ,, bi\] rnernortzmg, 'f ""'_...,
basically puts the subject back as close as possible to the enigmas that
man etno . . bimSeu, 1 Toe 'suu)e\:\ ,
at1Y hit to , by tern\)Or~IDg or less coherent way. ed. or may
were offered to him in his childhood. In addition to the enigmas of the ry \..,, \..,c\:,O"l'V U\ a rnore
l•ect 0! (l S' fu\17 '\I be smo:le steuu:n • •\..~t
lUS lu.> '•J bich ma] O C se tS UUl
internal other (the unconscious), it is the 'treatment' of the enigmas O r rewn o . ~ ....a\ion, w •renort' Ol a ca
. tenor 1\cu• cly trUe r-
of the external other (adults, parents) that is, in the most favourable tnen, ot an m . i\aiDS w\ly tbe o
cases, put to work again. btancn out. ~ ~ thi (wbich one hafdlY
i tne patiet\t bil1'Se . fuing ofuet than s . ' (wbich he was
3. The method, as its name indicates, is analytic. It aims to bring
into the open elements that are hidden - unconscious or bordering o 5. freud said : \le stated fuat t~e 's~!:;one would narn~
fuese days), wb . wmse\fwith)- , tc - was not hiS
the unconscious - or defensive, in the utterances, the acts and the
\\ea:acned for not cot\cerron~ g', 'sub\ecti.va~o~ •; clements always
transference of the analysand. As such, the psychoanalytic method te? """on' 's\:tUc\:\).I\I\ . the dis\om us\y. The
has a destructuring aim. It seeks hidden elements where they are least ·• • econstrU\..'-' ' . -l.etIU5t:r)', . nontaneo
\\ r d fua\: as in u, e\ves agam Sr- . difference
expected. It undermines the coherent unities upon which an entire life -province, an ,reassemble thert\S s a formula for in . ·tation
hao. a tendency to ins -pertinent, not a f the essential de\inu
\
might have been organized (ideologies, visions of oneself and others,
k al.ways rema but as a 1:.est o
narrative schemas, personal romances, etc.), in order to identify thek remar fuSal. of \le\p, chothera?Y· d contem:poraIY
separated components. or for fue re analysis ano. psy . to the thousan choanalysis?
betweet\ psycno i\: tWS crltenon related topsy ractise
The method of psychoanalysis is based upon free association Y ,...0 t they are chas we always P . t
6· u~~0 w to app h tb,er or•· urc,sessu coe,osten .
of practice, W e ana1,ySlSofne . conl:11\uous\y
2 lEditor: 'Refusement' - this is a neologism invented by Laplanche to ~~te forms . the-psycho choana\ys\5 are
Freud's Versagung, which Strachey translates as 'frustration' in the Standard Edition. v,JiU:.othetaPY and psY
Where 'frustration' refers to the lack of an external ob1ect of satisfaction, 'refusemml' it tt)day, psY
refers to a sub1ect who refuses a desired object or mode of satisfaction, oft~ to 1s1
himseU. Here Laplanche applies the term to the analyst, whose refusal to adVJSe or
control the analysand or to know in advance the significance of his symptoms and
behaviour is sustained by a similar refusal with regard to his own internal other.1

280 ---
 Psychoanalysis al1d p
sychotherapy
Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy
A small portion of the time
analyst is aimed at 'analyzing'. I . and :ffort of the .
defences, intimately bound to th mclude m this act thPatient anc1. t0 the original text.
i;ttJe reference d number of the psychotherapies carried out by ana-
time of a psychoanalysis d 15· e uncol1Scious "'-tas·e 'treat...11 the ~ b)Agoo
h evoted to · · '<lll 1es " C!t\r into this category, because they are not equipped from the
t e analysis has discovered . d &vtng form and . }yfOst of of
- IS evoted th narra ' the 1ysts fall _h the methodological means that enable the sounding-out
A process of puttin ·int ' erefore to, live tow utset wit .
uninvolved, if neces g ~narrative in w~ch psycholh""- hat o unconsaous.
. sary proposmg £ the ""<l)ly th
P~rtial schemas - 'Oedi al' ' onns of bindin anaiYst is . of e c) 1think that the majority of so-called non-analytic psychother-
with caution. W p ' castratory or oth _g, narrati not . fall into the same category. Listening to someone with attention
. e need, however t el'Wise - Ve anc1.
'becommg conscious' of an ' o emphasise that but alwa apiesa 'containing' attitude often allows them important progress in
itself to open the way to a unconscioUs element , for Freud th}'s an~ self-narration. According to the statistics, the results are compa-
fro his ' new synth . Was Sllf6 ' e
m t physicalist' view th nks es!S. We have I think Cient in th~: to those of 'analytic' psychotherapies (carried out by analysts),
personal history, even sub· , . a . to such COnce' 'fetreat :d it would be necessary to verify this without prejudice. Let us note
tent to the F . Jectivation, Which . Pts as narra . eq
th ' reud1an notion of 'wo . give a much . tiVity, carefully that the 'evaluations' in question do not take into account the
e psychotherapeutic' rking through' be· rtcher con psychoanalyses carried out according to the 'analytic' method.
moment of th as m .
7. Let Us summarize· e treatment. g Ptecise1y d) I leave aside, of course, those (psycho?)therapies aimed at
All psychoanalysis is .d rectifying a neurotic behaviour by means of a veritable dressage or
theself-narratt f evotect Prim,,..:,
ono the sub· . =uy topsy h training (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy).
of the analyst. Ject, With the more O c Otherapy• to
r 1essar1-: · e) The psychotherapy of the psychoses and serious 'border-
. But the psychoanal . ~~-ISfance
thing else Aw k f Ytic act - someh- line' cases, as they're known, poses an entirely different precondition:
. or o unb· din . =ues quit the very problem of indication. Is it right to help 'unbind' what is
for a profound! m g, it tries to mak e rare - is so
Y renewed . e new ma . ll\e- already inadequately bound? Here the perspective changes radically:
surprised that th narration; and f tena1s s1,'"'--
his e psychoanai . o course w .... •dee the psychotherapist is apparently invited to take part 'creatively' in
work of unbindin . yst IS also cauti0 , e shall not be
g allied ·th Us and sp · construction, by bringing to bear his schemas, even his own materi-
. 8. Psychothera . Wt that of the 5exual anng: for isn't
ought not be practise:: are multiple. The fact death drive? als. His 'involvement' is maximum, to the point that one may wonder
ence to psychoanalys. ~ an~ysts, or even With that they might or whether the reported cases are not unique specimens to which the
a) There are : as little to do With the· out any e"Plicit refer- therapist has devoted the major part of his time and attention. The
psychotherapy e psychoanalyses th ~ nature. multiplicity of approaches and theorizations in the published cases
The self!:can~ simple. at nsk slipping towards shows that most of the time it is the idiosyncrasy of the therapist-
second-hand . luring or self-n",_ti analyst that is to the fore- his unconscious underpinnings, his values,
matenaI , ...,a on pers· b
the unconsaoUs ' , recycling' it The ul ISt, ut they Work o his very existence. There are as many therapists of psychoses as there
, ioundati . res t . n are individuals, and the theories carry no real weight since they can
translation', one transl ons are seldom exposectIS;ot negligible, but
ates starting from . . o put it in terms of do little but dress up a practice that is above all individual.
an eXIstin I shall add a dampener here: no one is totally insane; a neu-
282 g translation, With
rotic, repressed part always exists (cf. Freud: "The Splitting of the

283
 Psychoanalysis and p
sychotherapy Incest and Infantile Sexuality
Ego") .,.,0
· • this extent th
h ave a benefi ·a1 c e cautious anaiy .
. a •ollow-on eff, SIS of this
mg the psychotic part 4 ect for the Whole f neurotic: p
· 0 the art
Person . Can
'U\c:}lld.

Conclusion
I have sought ab
chotherapy are not ove all to show that
is ineVitably somet:ar~te fields but that in :Ychoanaiysis ¾d
'1 dress d . g o analysis and Ypsycho~ .... ~1 . Psy-
18
e him· G some~J.:_ ...... YS!sth
'1 deb . , od healed him" s '-'ung of psych ere INCEST AND INFANTILE SEXUALITY1
nded his wounds; he h . I transpose this .otherapy.
ealed them in his Into:
own way."
Introduction: It is for me a great honour to be invited to give
this Festvortrag in Vienna for Freud's 150th anniversary, and also an
occasion of great emotion.2
Freud, our master in all things!
I have just written a little article called "In Debate with
Freud" .3 1 shall define my approach with two formulas:
l am interested above all in what Freud openly formulated:
with the written work, which I, together with the entire team of the
French CEuvres completes, seek to translate as rigorously as possible.
My attitude is that of a 'faithful infidelity'. A fidelity with
respect to reading and translation, restoring to Freud what he meant-
including his contradictions and his turning points; an infidelity with
respect to the interpretation of Freud's 'goings astray', in order to try
to find what I call 'New Foundations for Psychoanalysis'.
Freud remained dominated by the exigency of his discovery:
~
the diagrarn in ,
0
f the Genera} Theo Three Meanings of th
1 Delivered at the formal meeting of the two Vienna Psychoanalytic Societies on
5 [Trans: Asa . fJ'. of Seduction" in . e Tenn 'Unconsoous' . May 6, 2006, fur Freud's 150th anniversary.
apropos of : g attributed to the / this volume. m the Framework
own successful IXteenth-1:entury F 2 lshould like to thank the organizers of this celebration, the Wiener Psychoanalytische
means of dres . rench surg Vereinigyng and the Wiener Arbeitskreis fiir Psychoanalyse, and in particular Mrs.
284 sing patients' woun:t Ambroise Pare IDaphne Stock who so attentively assisted me during the preparation for this event.
3 Essay 16 in this volume.

285
 d Ittfatttile Sexuality
incest att

Incest and Infantile Sexuality h vmg mnmate relations with

define mcest than ~- ~ooical examples show, the
. h to many ehu,O o·
bY ..,_,nic tJioreo\Ter, as essarilY involve any reference
'the unconscious'; let us follow him in this exigency\ \ act . db0 od- does not nee
Iv . c\ll\ woman
Incest and infantile sexuality: it is perilous to try to . \,et \1'i t1'a#g a f .ew France lacks a penalty for
notions - two psychoanalytic observations, each as w link Up tw0 act o'f..l)~i~· \uridica\ point o ; o~\y coherent definition is that
11 tah to se f !01'1' a . . ti.on of incest. e l lationships between a man
as the other - which, apparently at least, do not interseet C.
-es lished a defi.t\l . ary· "Sexua re . hibits
Infantile sexuality, even if it is often neglected 0 d e"en bert dicnon . . ed to a degree which pro
r Pushed · al'l bY the Ro are related or ~ licitly to matrimonial
the background and by analysts themselves, remains for \l\to ai"e!\ n who . fers mcest exp
damental acquisition that no one dare challenge; and yet~ a fun. i,· d a worna see that it re hibition relates only to
an " 4 We can te that the pro
simple chronological point of view, it is very far remov~ ~rn the af!iage .. We may also n~ civilisation, is without con·
it' f\Sideratiot\S· d these days, U\ Western
classical problem of incest. It is a given, and a theorization, ~~ cO nersot\S, an . . • dispensable,
relates primarily to the very first months and years of life. In adult r- al sancnon. ~ r;t still remains m
ticular, it emerges before any designation of the kinship categJ:· cei"ab\e pen dialogue with anthrO'P° o .
'fhe _" . throPologi·
that remain essential if one is to speak of incest father, mother, sist: \ d abo\Te cUJ.• • incest rematnS an
uncle, etc. In terms of its sources at least, infantile sexuality is consid~ at'd for freU , ntral theory regarding on adult sexuality. 1
f reud: s ce . and of course centred . th' of Totem
ered to be pregenital and related to the most diverse erotogenic zones. ed . prerostory, ed the 'foundmg my
In the first edition of the Three Essays, it corresponds to the period of ca\, \ocat U\ itulate what is call . n to amcide than to
shaft rapidly recap hit bears a stronger relatlOf the ~orde' - who has
auto-erotism, theorized by Freud on the basis of observations by the
artd Taboo, a\thoU~ " an all-pawerful 'father o 1 rights over all the
paediatrician Lindner, according to the following schema: the earli- s 1n a nutsi,eu, f all and se,roa h so
est relations with the adult, the model for which remains the act of
sucking at the mother's breast, are as it were turned back by the child
\
incest. ill and death o , . e of the sons, w o -
rigbts o\Ter the e assassinated by an alliancd - subse<\uently is5ue
woroen - is one da~ e same lawless war\ d a ain5t sexual
upon itself, for example in the form of thumb-sucking. This is what l
have previously referred to as 'auto-time', a veritable crucible where
as
not to fall back ~to t~e murder of the father, :e erred to this ref
the prohibition ~gail'S th rs and sisters, Freud o bywhichheonl~
infantile sexuality is generated, as well as a schema that is valid for far hi with mo e ,, & an O)tymoron d' 'so·
more than the 'oral drive' alone. relations ps "scientific myt~ , . e between a 'har , f
Conversely, incest (at the initiative of the child), and the taboo
from which it is indissociable, is located by Freud in later years - say,
-nstru.ction as our ff ring us the cho1c . f thiS outline o
~oubles the difficul~, owe 'mythological', ve~10; until the end
. and a soi,' --~" that ng
:p
... tific' vetsion,think it. neeess"'..vJ to reu>-»
e..
towards the ages of 2 or 3 - and is in fact regarded as contemporary QA

orlgtl\S· 'But l u. bert 2010), \l· 1199; our

with the Oedipus complex. Like the Oedipus, it presupposes the . {l'arls; Le "o ' .
lexicon, the nomenclature of the 'object-persons' within the field of ____-;::; t,ert de la tangue ~an~tse . Moses and Monothf!S'"
kinship relations. Like the Oedipus, even if it occurs in the infantile ~ Le Nouveau Pehl Ro .on of incest iS found U\ \ ~.
ttat'5\ation. thesis on the quesn h Ego(.\92.ld, SE \S, \>·
period the contents of the incest fantasy show that it is located in the 5 Freud's best syn Sl-83- a11dtheAJUIIYsis ofl e
world of adults, the very theatre where the drama of Oedipus the ,19:,9a), SE 23, PP· Group psycholo&!J 7$7
\ . und Freud,
King is played out: for marrying the mother is a much more meaning- &S1gtn

286
-
 . g treated as
Incest and Infantile Sexuality
ch as sistets, bell\ . r fofll'\ of
\cil'S\lip, su . us. 'fhe tnaJO sides,
11\o\Ted basic oediP 13ut on both
I 11\ore re ts) of the son mcest. d analysts,
(until Moses) Freud will stick constantly with the 'hard' eS to 11\en other- a1sts an
"'@le ldi&P1ace .dered to be 11': aist-etnnoloe,- hter mcest,
torical version, and with the notion of the phylogenetic' fa~, his. f ther-daug . en
\ iei~.,Giot'S
pjlfr. aiwaYS
cons1
. of an
thfopoloe,-
nrnated: a .thin any giv
of this original situation. He is thus faced with difficultitrans!X\issiol\
es-which he \ . ce5tiS 11\a)onty ·d ly underes ultip\icity WI hich are
doesn' t duck-concerning the affirmation of phylogenes·
he never gave up. The references to phylogenesis in his w k 'IIIlg
lS, SOil\et\..:_ :!1lo1'g ~il\ts are ~
W1 deabO\Te all the ctioI\S of all ~ , :ajor ele-
or are ~ajio\15 .,,,al il\ce5t, ~-bitioI\S and r~tn1atter does rernaU\ a
tiple and almost continuous, from the letter of 21 Septell\ber ~\ll- ose,-.- ~ pro1u Uu,e
where he announces the powerful resurgence of the 'heredi 8CJ7, \\O~ety of se 11\ incest - e\Ten t 1e,acon. return to mcest
tor', until Moses, where he accepts without any difficulty thtary fac- <JP different fro tiallY ab@dall . ~ ' let us . Vulgate,
e non ~te . hit\ a poten the whole P1 an @written
that the scene of the father's murder could be reproduced tho on 11\el\t w1t . order to see @derstood, as
of times, finally to be inscribed. in the memory of the Species. USands iut lJ\ . . as they are . wned, but
~b1t1on .ty· boo is main .
One of the interesting texts on this trajectory is "Ove....: al'd its pro lytic cotllll'uru '. f Totem and Ta th reference to set-
.. ,ew of
the Transference Neuroses" (1915) ,7 a manuscript originally addressed. . the ana ..:&:. tnJili o than on e
\"1\l'lll' the •saenw~C ect rather .
to Ferenczi, in which the factual and theoretical question is tackled at - is \aid on the myth asp but still less ~ it
its root: for example, given that they had no descendents, how could the streSS . rt1)· , __,n ever mvoked, ,,.~d of relic, a
brothers castrated by the father transmit the imagined scenarios? l (prerosto. J , • is DiJ.1.,,,.y h ld as a .r-u•
ettce - phylogenes~ . tnaintained, on o ,
simply quote the last sentence of "Overview": '1n sum, we are not at
ed or refuted, it JS • e of the theory; h t the mcest taboo
the end, but rather at the beginning, of an understanding ohhis phy- diSCll55 . taboo piec proof, t a d the
logenetic factor" (ibid., p. 20). dial\ capnce, a . th hardly any the sexes an
freu .t is affirmed, W1 difference between . ht rather say
If problems connected with phylogenesis create difficulties for - 1 amtenance of the . although one n:ug
psychoanalysis in relation to history and prehistory, psychoanalysis ensures the ro the generattons, n.rna1
difference between would be a 'p
is nevertheless, and of necessity, engaged in a dialogue with anthro- ds on them; d its taboo With such
pology. However, even if Totem and Taboo is a text that demands to be that it depen . analysts, incest an runal repression. . i tro-
- £or certain . known as p f .,,.;ns is mcon
debated on an equal footing with other great anthropological texts, the . t of what 1S d knight o onc,--
discussion will come to an abrupt end for lack of true common,ground. fantasy', an ~b)~ •'-e reference to th~ ar p;=t
'prun.u u, . --nves. d-r. i.,.,,myth- ... ~
The incest prohibition as far as the anthropologists are concerned terms aS . . all rnythic ncU•- e Totem an iauvv it
is a law imposed on one or more kinship groups; it bears principally
vertib\e, as it 1S m ,,.,.,n to the statuS of th QedipUS complex, and
t.etusre~ao- . tricated with the . 1n•this sense, the
upon exchange, exogamy and their social outcome: procreation. It '10reroost, it is tightly ~'-- A within phylogeneslS- . us as its ker-
is focused on sisters (or 'classificatory' sisters), who cannot marry and ch · inSCil~ f •'- Unconso0 '
. ---~.-1-ed that ea lS nstitution o u,e th in general:
within the group. In contradistinction, the psychoanalytic incest prohi- 1S =-· tral to the co .th regard to my
myth would be ce~ double option Wl . uld be absOlutely nec-
bition remains narrowly coextensive with the Oedipal triangle, the el.'fhere thUS e,asts a . ht 'prunal' (and 1t wo_ hich according to
n . . universal by ng , '-•~toric geneslS, w ,
either 1t 1S .dea of its pre1=
7 In Sigmund Freud, A Phylogenetic Fantasy: Overview of t~ Transfer~ce Ne11~ ~ to give some l 289
trans. Axel Hoffer and Peter T Hoffer, ed. Ilse Grubrich-Smutis (Cambndge, Mass
London: Harvard, 1987).

288

77
 Incest and Infn .
nti/e Sexuality
Freud, is bound to th ~· Incest and Infantile Sexuality
or - and this . e first real act• '1n
. IS my position . . . the ~ - .
mg to the multi l . - it IS a stru --&lU\ing w
LeVi-Strauss pu: :tcontingencies of kins~ that Varies
lectua1 uneasiness an: Well, a solution that relations, atl.<i tly a%~~
;::e deeq,') ..
~eiJl· we
. to thee
5
ee the drives and even the Oedipus targeting the parents,
artiest age (the paran01.d ph ase) m
.
. the child's fantasies.
sliP With Lacan, we witness a complete reversal of the situa-
The f even existential enables the " PtoV:id -
tion)has _act that a 'structure, _artxiety'.9 freueflof~,as fir5t the child is the object of the desire of the mother, and
a Widespread . . Che it the O l?\~ .uon· At t ....,anifest any indination
. to behave as an 'ego' in the above
the metapsycholo .calm~dence, does not ne edipUs, incest - doesno ... .
Hence the famous Lacaruan schema of the 'preoedipal trian-
~ongs to the do!am ~;;t of View, it is b~:~Yhnp1y:<:astra,
se:e~other--clrlld-phallus. For Lacan, incest is explicitly conceived
mto narrative the - co . e Preconscious in . 111 the l.Ulco _t, froni
the subject, and th nscious-preconsci its task of heI ~olls. Jt gl t,eing perpetrated by the mother. We know that from this point
erefore of the anal ous, unconscio Plllg to Put ~ view it would be the father who brings forth the 'cut' (between
Ysanct. Us - histo :other and child), the incest prohibition and the Law. It would take
I see that ry of
how to brin , so far, I have onl . 100
long to carry out a close criticism of this position. Let us sim-
. g together and . y sidesteppect ply say that it provides, in new terms, another formulation of what
is Called the ol articulate the . my Illain
are connectJ. Ymorphous seXUality fmthcest Prohibition ~ellle of Margaret Mahler referred to as the symbiotic phase. However, all
hard! . is to say that the o e child. To With What conceptions of primitive symbiosis or absolute primary narcissism
Ypossible if one . Y are able to c . say that th
where it could be Wishes to loeate th <>exist. Iiowev .ese are contradicted by the many modem observations of a precocious
is t conceptualised e problem of. er, this is and reciprocal communication, on the model of what is today called
. o say, at the age When . by the child in a . incest at the a e
attachment, between the adult dispenser of care (die Pflegeperson) and
mg categories of Father the child has at his dis given SOciety-U:t
the infans (literally, without language).
th In fact, the apo~Mothe~, Sister, Brother, ~osa} the correspond-
My own position is very different from Lacan's. I do not insist
e perspective of onl remams absolute for unt, etc.
do the anthro l . y one of the prota . as long as we clin on the centrality of the desire of the mother, which would encompass
l po ogists, to the char gonists. If by 'eg , g to everything from the beginning and to which the paternal 'metaphor'
P aces oneself in ord acter from. Wh o we refer, as
doubt that in th er_ to contemplate th . OSe point of View~ or function would put an end. However prevalent may be the classic
chil e classical e entire proc ne familial positions of father, mother and child, it seems necessary to
d, as much Within Psychoanalytic con . ess, there is no distance oneself from them in order to bring to the fore what I call the
nfi the oedi al ception this
co guration of incest p triangle as Within th . ego is the 'fundamental anthropological situation' . Following Ferenczi's thor-
But this . e incest/taboo
problem already be oughly innovative suggestions concerning what occurs 'between the
8 [Ed· - comes more child and the adult', I think that vis-a-vis the first years of life and
Th ztor: A quotation fro acute With Melani
tem and Taboo 0912 m Goethe's Faust (P e the sexuality connected to them, the central point to consider is not,
9 Claude Levi-Stra -13), SE 13, p.161). art 1, scene 3) that concludes Freu ' fundamentally, the relation between the child and the two parents
London: Chi USS, The Jealous p tt ds
"La cago UP 1988) o er, trans Benedi (insofar as they are related by blood) but the fact that those who raise
psychanaJyse my'th , p. 171. For further d. el cte Chorier (Chicago and
Presses u . ' es et theone. ,,, m . ev opments the child are adults ("the person in charge of [the child] ... as a rule,
Il.lVersitaires de F Entre seduction t . .' ~ Jean Laplanche
ranee, 1999). e inspiration: l'homme (Pans; [the] mother'' ["die Pflegeperson ... in der Regel doch die Mutter"],
290

_I 291

---====
 d Infantile sexuality
incest an
~- now more numerous
Incest and Infantile Sexuality ._,._, abuses Cll" • sed ·
••,nether u,ese extensively d'lsclo m
5 to v, ;n!;t more
\'iOt'S a the case, or ,-
10
Freud says in the Three Essays) , which means that the kinsh. . .r6ia~ {ortl'etlY ,.,.,., ch~es. . ..t.. a...cement of mcest as
is not determinant in the first situation in which the in.fans ~tiol\ Z CJ'. ~ <i leo....
~- te?°tts~ . art)' case, s
ttu<IDg \S u,e eucr
·ttedbyadults.ln"France,by e
th
What matters above all is the absolute difference of age and~ 1\se\f. /i~
~at \S, \!\ al crune cotnll'l d an adult daughter are
ment, together with its corollary: a fledgling child who has ev~lop. __,_A to se}(.U ,, a crune (.a iathet an ..:..g '-ctor tucked
~?~ • itsell ggravauu la 1
sexual drives (there is no proof of their existence) and an. ad~~ tnna1_e ~~ ~ cest \S {\Ot ':nabit) but merely one a. tted upan a mmor 'by a
inhabited not just by his adult, genital sexuality but also by ;;ho_18 ,,~i•:\)' ab\e to c es that ma'f be coroiro the horrible headlines
sexuality derived from his own childhood. at\tile f
vJ\~ ofr~nc p.. single exam-ple, amo:~ cbild taped at home".
In On Dreams, Freud writes: "almost every civilized i,~aj . authon'tY. __ ;,.,_ ""_. "Fout year distant rela·
~ l1'- a5S<Ul-" ....,. fu ot a more
retains the infantile forms of sexual life in some respect or oth rnanW
. . . er. e 1-fP \\ich tbe \'res~ t{\Ir\itted by the fa et r of the crilne.
can thus understand how 1t is that repressed. infantile sexuai Wish ,\<\"';et the abuse \S;es no differen~ to thee:~:.ere mto the detail
provide the most frequent and strongest motive-forces for the co:. ~ r a neigbboUI nand withoutbavmg to h to sodomy and fel-
structions of dreams" .11 Besides the dream, however, the major ~'le o Qt\ the ofuer , molestation-tbIOUg choanalytic
situation capable of reactivating (regen) the adult's dormant infantile . tted - tro!I\ . bard to tesist the psy . . in
l U\e ac\S col'.{\11\I and mu.rd.et - it 1S . that nave their ongut
sexuality is actually that of caring for a child: in this situation, reci- o ·o uo to torture ..k-nO' out of fantasies d -'·y one pamt l once
procity and asymmetry coexist. The reciprocity pertains to the adult/ \atl I ·r rverse auu•o l hall ad 01U ~--A by
\\ouon oi a~ . of the adult. s . e tnigntn't be glos:;t:U
infans exchanges on the level of self-preservation or attaclunent. The it\ianti\e sexuality h{ase 'sexual crun trom rape thrOUgh
asymmetry derives from the fact that only the adult harbours within the ed -wbefuer fue \' bich l mean tbat . crunes,
him a repressed infantile sexual unconscious, and that this uncon- wol\det ,c:rune qua sexuaY , by w. es of passion, gratu1alto:Ot mthe
scious will try to infiltrate the self-preservative communication, to the the term cnmes - crun mfantile seYJ.l
tbe most diverse . t cn:rne - tbe iked and exploredby
point of rendering it almost unintelligible. Such are what l call the to feiated or terrons ;,w,tlfiably eve
'enigmatic messages' addressed to the child. iangster- e critI\e could. be ,- . one
dult autbot of tb . as it \S evo\vmg,
But we must not overlook the following point no individual ~ anal'Yst f ur SO(!lety th underly-
is in possession of the means of translating all adult messages imbued U\e v:,'Ycbo . ·. U\l1\ the ftall\e ~ o_ being diluted in e fal1'i\ie5,
io snck Wt ~bition 15 mpc,se<1
with sexuality, and therefore of partially repressing them. In some cases, th mcest t>IO d divorce, reco childre1\ who
infantile sexuality is both translated and repressed. In others, it remains thus sees that '~t.-e tanID'f widesp~ with or without ..;,,nn not of
,. non 01 u, al UJll.Ons the ho•""' .
in the form of untranslated traces, ready to be acted out in perversions. ing evo1u . ns bomosexu .cal artifice. On reed to await
ro.ulti-ple ado1)b.O , eivedby bio~edl ene\iCS, we ~ fo 'fhe analyst
are ao.o-pted or cone ' fue evolutl01' ~f g nuniai' dotul'S·-'- ,.,rospects•
Let us leave these theoretical considerations in order to note . but 01 es\S or all suu• r wUl
science fi.c\l.Ot\ , 0 artbenogen onde~g ;.,,di\l\dual
what we see around us: the multi.plication of sexual abuses commit- .--o~TaI\ce 01 r: ;\111\g or C :pS an u• ho
ted against children by adults. l shall not here enter into historical the a-pr- ~.-s1 abOUt at>Pto t
. one day per~" , ortnother,butW
t be W=1 . e t'ha, ·cal fau,er
mus . wil\inS to nnagu" 'ha5 no biologt 193
ube \S citationwb.O
come1v ~rac0t1S
10 Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905d), SE 7, p. 223..
11 On Dreams (1901a), SE 5, p. 682.

292 \
 Incest and Infantile S .
exua/1ty Incest and Infantile Sexuality
would have been Cared , . his
1or m ear}i
Perhaps, then, we Will est days by hen ltural progress. The interpretation of the incest taboo
and become indefinable - but : : the term incest fa~VoI:nt actll.lts ~ff for ~ the direction of Levi-Strauss's theory: it would be a
from thriving. s Would not e little b . · II t head in · 13
Prevent Y Utt1 ¢1115 o he accession to the larger comrnuruty.
In order to draw tow sexual . e c:0rreJate of theme of drive renunciation will be found in almost the
reflections on major theme . ards a conclusion I . . . Cl'ittie
theoretical theme. s. an anthropological ~ lllitiate here fhe t Draft N14 in the 1908 text, "'Civilized' Sexual Morality
terJllS as
erne""'d %0 saJJle odetn Nervous Illness" .15 A text that sounds nowadays like a
"" ac1uu
The anthropo/o • eo.. and ~ cry, or even a cry of contained despair, in the face of so-called
zicht). It again tak ~ca1theme is entitled 'd..; w~g , morals. But here the renunciation, far from being limited
es support fr , ,ve renu . '\fjctonan . . . .
guiding thread thro h . om Freud, in a 1in nc,ation' ('I'n J... , rverse' sexuality, mcludes the entirety of sexual relationships,
The ki u~ out his entire oeu e of texts tha evuer.
Draft ck-off, it seems to m vre. t forni a to pet for those that aim at procreation within marriage. Yet, in spite
N. I reproduce it h e, oceurs With excep
of this manifest denuncration,· · Freud takes great care not to dictate
ereforan· astnall
lllUnediate gloss: text frotn recepts, not to recommend 'sexual freedom', and still less to aban-
May 31, 1897: 'Bolin , . ~on the idea of a necessary 'drive renunciation' (Triebverzicht).
fact that human be. ess lS something based This need for drive renunciation will henceforth run through-
communih, h mgs, for the benefit f on the
. ·J, ave Sacrificed o the b-.. out the oeuvre. By way of example, let us cite "The Acquisition and
liberty and their lib a portion of the. -.~er Control of Fire",16 where the cultural hero (Prometheus), far from
The horror of . erty to indulge in ir sexua1
on th ' mcest (something . . perversions. being a rebel mounting an attack on behalf of 'sexual freedom', is the
J:c
e ract that as a result f llllp1ous) lS • ba.,o,1 one who imposes renunciation on his subjects. And of course there's
J.Ue (even in chiI o conunllni ~
hold together ~Ood) the members ~ :f;e~a1
Civilization and Its Discontents, whose meanderings I shall refrain from
following, and finally the Moses. What emerges from all the Freudian
of contact With trananent1y and become . anu.Iy
- civilizati s gers. Thus in . incapable texts, from first to last, is that some aspect of irreconcilability (Unver-
. on consists . . cest lS antis . triiglichkeit) exists between sexuality and a human development
tion. Contran . in this progresg. ocia1
Wise the 'superman'.12 ive renuncta- towards the civilized state. It remains necessary to grasp the irrecon-
1shall under}in
cilable elements 'on both sides'.
~Plllents to come: ,, e ~nl! those Words Which . .
13 In the Three Essays we find a passage that prefigures Levi-Strauss's theses on this
li~rty and the liberty~!cidng" a portion of se::a1tiC1~ate the deveJ- point very exactly: "Respect for [the incest] barrier is essentially a cultural demand
lUty: e-ven i h • m ulge in liberty- 11
made by society. Society must defend itself against the danger that the interests
n c 1/dhood". ,, . Perversions". "th , sexual
In this ' renunczation" ' e sexua1 co which it needs for the establishment of higher social units may be swallowed up
Passage dri · nunu- by the family; and for this reason, in the case of every individual, but in particular
, ve renundati . of adolescent boys, it seeks by all possible means to loosen their connection to the
on1sa1re d
~ 'ftD r a y set forth as bein family - a connection which, in their childhood, is the only important one", op.cit.,
a N"(I950 g
[31st May, 1897]) p.225.
, SE 1,p.257 14 Did Freud keep a copy of this part of the correspondence with Fliess?
294 . 15 (1908d), SE 9, pp. 177-204.
16 (1932a), SE 22, pp. 183-93.

295
 a11tile Sexitalit'!I
t artd Inf
1nces the very start
Incest and Infantile Sexuality _,..,...on\511\g froll\ \8
the tl\erit of ~ve,-- than simply in~t.
codelier1'a5 ch fl\Ote nuil'\ero~tlon as follows: incest
On the side of the sexual, Freud is relative! _..;ce -✓ are fl\U __..-7p, his p051 the most
~a\V· f 'BP' .......mcU ....- t among
nature irreconcilable is the polymorphously perv y ~ear: ,,,.hat . - ic;~ o '-at'lS sw•~-- ~"'9 concep . f ,,:...c;hip
e'w- wd per1• r . a 'cenucu
drive. But with what is this drive irreconcilable?~ll\fantile ~
i\:iVlty O l'-U'"'
tt,ltU' ()1\e co . tabOO) 1S n...orause of the ~ - .-.Pn' (Deck), in
two answers - the one external, the other internal- bothW e ~
U'er ,-v1
·th its
C\uite d
efu\able ,v--~
ass or to serv
e as a ~---·
ch broader range
be preserved. 0 fwhich<:a
l~ pe<>P\es\U(.e\y to encotl\Pf r stlgrnatlzing a mu ch prohibitions
On the one hand, it is irreconcilable with cultu I\ Ji' # l at\d f the tertn, o th ex15tence of su .thin soci-
re, With iJatiol\s . sense o ~ that e . sexuafity WI ,
general. A fo1:11~a that has the disadvantage of gt°antin ,~ety in
,1.eff€ud1at\ codelier of reproduc\:1V~ . ty' and its 'paw~
kind of force m itself, an energy, and also an intention: ~ SOc:iety a 11
• ctice5• ,.,,lated use ce for soae that m
ducing itself. t of~ oi ?ra t\tia\ to a reo- a kiI\d of ,:everen e1echies), he fails to see_ t the
~ the_ o~er ~d,. it is i~cilable ... with itself. The . iS ~ ~ortt'ed by ' veritable ent: k above all agaiI'S
l}ut, ·..es 0 1 as 1...:'-·n· ons wor
sexual drive, with its unbinding, anarchic function, with its .11\famue ~)'· ot\ce\v to1uul
· th
tation ra er than ·
satis facti
' on, IS, so to speak, self-destructive.. Fon ""'""
· Pl.lrsuitof ~
(,~nich ~;~ual psyche the: J,cua1 death drive.
the rules of the primary process alone, it cannot in itself, after d ~
the it'~ ful\ctioning of th tapsychological, has
al\atch'c }tich is clinical and me
tend tow~ an~g oth:1: ~ a 'zero l~~', and even to thei:,~ l ..ment, w
and possibly physical annihilation of the mdividual. Here, you tna
M final detJe or-- choanalysts- ints:
lJ tance for us as -psy d firtn on several~ erversions"20
ognize our interpretation of the 'death drive' as the 'sexual death~~ 11\ore unPor tia1 that we hol - the negative o~ p tile se)(U-
But, conversely, 'renunciation' does not mean annihilation. fur lt is essen re - so to say . ed at infan
1) "The neuroses ahich is obviously d,irectf status between the
pregenital sexuality the paths are open to repl'es.5ion (which is always f ula w difference o erverse
partial) and translation, to narrativisation and being put to use-which Freudian o~ ,:es a radical . d those in the p
-a hich u:npu eurotlC an
amounts to nothing less than sublimation, if we are willing to With- ality, and w ts in the nortnal-n hUJllal\ given
draw the 'sublime' aspect and to see in sublimation the movement of al conten . ti<Jt1 is the
seXU th logical s1tua
symbolization-translation that is available to most human beings. The psychopa The _fundamental anthr~ i\15 coll\p\ex. / child relation,
primary objective of the sublimations is, quite simply, genital sexuality, 2) ond even the i,sequently, adul~ the very site
insofar as it appears able to integrate the perverse infantile components. nar excellence,bey u1 / 1'nfans and, su drive sexuality, era}isa-
r·· 3) Toe ad t olymorPhous (if out gen
I cannot finish this anthropological section without evoking birthplace of p d """rhaps even
the person of Maurice Godelier, a major French ethnologist-anthropol-
t once the c,ec:u.r, aJ\ r - al
are a e,rual crunes can . in gener · nastilY
ogist. The virtue of his principal work, Les metamorphoses de le parente,17 where s ed) the site of crunes ropriated a uttle t: 'rai way,
consists in the fact that for the first time - or one of the rare ti.mes - we tion is accept:
--- be reproach
ed for having ~ t y and, in a
- rveise ...h of the P
!ai
father.
•ch each
have an anthropologist who doesn't neglect sexuality in the Freudian ---:- can certaUUY l orphously r- ftoll\ the m,~- f the sex whi
18 GodelieT co~cent of Po ytfl ....;bution, apart ...,ultinle uses ~b'd n 419).
d)aI\ " r .J: ~n conu• the••• r ()SeS I I ., r ' . 1 •
sense - sexuality as the search for pleasure - to the exclusive benefit of the freu . the freuu-· \ 1ace am~ng metamorph 'uality, op.a t., P· 65
desexualized concepts such as reproduction, marriage and exchange. for neg\ectiJl.i!upies a cen~J,, (c;ode\ier, l.,eSthe n ieory of sex
19 " l t l ~ as \,eing ".'11 ,,
.etY "',...-- t,erratiol\S '
n,ree
EsSt!!/5
11
° 297
S()C1,....._ 5e:,cUal A
'2.0 •~,,,e
17 Maurice Godelier, , Les metamorphoses de le pamite (Paris: Fayard, 2004).

296
 Incest and Infantile sexuality
Incest and Infantile Sexuality

From saying this to saying, as the title of a recent book su _

21
gests, "All Paedophiles?" , there is of course a step that I absolutJ
refuse to take. A confusion which would quickly lead to this emi- Rea\ ·tv
i., =
the human other
nently practical, even ethical question: is it necessary to hunt down

--- -
- - -...=-'
and to condemn any intrusion of adult sexuality into the 'innocent'
being of the child, even to dedicate oneself to denying infantile sex-
cs -- - -------
uality and the Freudian discovery? We know the absurdities, the
paralogisms and the witch hunts of all kinds which have their ori-
gin in the confusion of an already difficult question: the delimitation Toe Preconscious
bet\veen messages that, through symptoms, slips or parapraxes, are
infiltrated (and inescapably so) by the unconscious infantile sexuality
of the adult, and sexual acts to which the child is forced to submit, in Toe
which the message part is increasingly thin, and unbound violence unconscious
is increased - the sign of psychopathic perversion and ultimately the Enclave
pressure of the death drive.
Here, given the wanderings and digressions of the courts,
of public opinion and of experts of all kinds, it appears imperative, The Repressed
above all for the psychoanalyst, who deliberately situates himscU Unconscious
apart from the domain of action (and apart from prescriptive speech
of whatever kind), to find some theoretical reference points to frame
his clinical views and even his therapeutic interventions.
The model suggested is thus deliberately theoretical, at once
dynamic and topographic. lt is that of the 'third topography' ini-
tially outlined by Freud in his article on ''The Splitting of the Ego
in the Process of Defence",22 subsequently refined by Christophe
Dejours23 and completed or modified by myself in 'Three Meanings
of the Term 'Unconscious' in the Framework of the General Theory of B
Seduction" .2' l present the diagrams from that text here, but can only
comment on them briefly.

21 Elsa Cuiol. Taus ptdophiles? (Paris: EdibOns de la Martiniere, 2005).

22 SE 23, pp. Z71- 2i'B.
23 Christophe Dtjours, u rorps d'abord (Paris: Payot, 2001 l 1986D. 2.99
24 Present \"OOJ.Ine, essay 10.

298
 Incest and lnftmtile Sexuality
Incest and Infantile Sexuality

The compromised and sexualized message coming from the

,idult other knows two fates once it reaches the child. Either it remains
·~claved' [enclarel - 'inserted / enclosed' ,15 in the 'amential' state,
which is to say w1treated, unsymbolized, untranslated by the small

---
- -
child (see side B, figures 1 and 2]; or it is translated (a process which
takes place after a waiting period), included in the history of the sub-
ject- In the latter case, there remains a repressed unconscious residue.
What remains permnnently in the unconscious enclave is obviously not
the same type of communication as what can be translated. With the
fonner we have something violent and unassimilable (barely a mes-
sage at all), and with the latter a type of the return of the repressed.
When the subject becomes adult, he reiterates this alternative
with respect to his own 'infans'. In the one situation, there is a con-
"' ,:,
scious-preconscious message addressed to the child and compromised.
The Repressed
by a return of the sexual repressed (the repressed 1mco,iscious), but with-
out being completely untranslatable: this is what I call the 'enigmatic
message'. In the other situation, we have the perverse, psychopathic
even psychotic acting out, itself derived from an old 'enclaved' (en~)
acting out from which all psychic elaboration has been excluded: this is
what we nowadays see appearing in the media and in the courts.
This topography is obviously only schematic and, fortu-
nately for the possibilities of psychotherapy, the two processes can~
entangled with or contaminated by each other: in my view, there 1s
no perverse acting out in which we cannot grasp some small scrap or
fragment of message. On the other hand, the fresh 'treatn~ent'_ of the
repressed. unconscious (in particular by the analysis) can gwe nse to a
forceful movement in the unconscious enclave.~
A 25 [Editor: lacking verbal forms in English for the English n_oun 'em:lil\:e· ~th~
B French has enclnvcr enclaull we have specified the double and hnkcd me.11un!c,-s o
Figure 2 'insem~n / enclosu~.' See ~ote 6, essay lOJl. Uel both in the text nod in the
2~ lEd,tor: Oearly Laplanche intends II verl>al para bet\ '/'inro11St~II nfl>ulf
diagrams in order to point to the conceptual contrast .veen ms!at-cd as
(the repressed unconscious) and 'l'i11con.scie11t en,ltn>t which \ \fl! have tr, '
300 'the unconscious enclave').
301
 Incest and Infantile Sexuality . us
Castra h·on and Ded'P

Finally, insertion-enclasun, lenc1avem,,,,1 and the Tesu11an

exclusion of any Psychic elaboration can be lransnu!ted froni ,
1
· ' to ' generation' .27 Indeed, even if we observe fonnsgen.
eratton of
lransmission of the perverse suffering-acting out lhat involve ll!i"1a.
tton Without elaboration, such a 'transgenerattDnal• "'-6, as it is
sometimes called, never Occurs in a mechanical and linear Way. 11,,
vicissitudes always temain indiViduaJ and J>articular, even though
they are marked With a common seal, and each t1'0rientatton in u,,
lineage Would only be possible by the intervention of real, fortu;1ou, 19
circumstances. A new translation of lhe unconsdOUs enclave alway,
remains conceivable.
ND OEDIPUS
CASTRATIO~TIVE SCHEMASl
AS CODES AND N
Having put all of this forward for further reflection, I should
not wish to finish without insisting on the central, Freudian Point
drive renunctation (Triebvenicht) far from being a dictat of the super. . us, which Freud to as 'complexes',
refers affects
ego is the cultural destiny of every human being, translating and Castration and Oedip . f fantasies, and drive
'
putting into narrative form for himself the messages of the other,
including their most enigmatic sexual aspects. ~
1mp Th •
. sets of representations ~
. uld be real s1tua
tion', 'sih.lation, etc.
oulses~ud also employs the terms ~nfiti~ really lived by the
'
ese situations wo dings ....
child in relation to hls human surroun
th outset 'that for Freud these
guredShu-
by
But it should be no~ed attailse are determined, p~ cl ified
°
ations, right down t certain deth fantasy
, of castration JS . assAs to
·
phylogenetic inhen · tance Thus
·. , . e 'bed through PhYIogenes broader
ch 15•
among the 'primal fantasies mscn garded as the mu . . .
the Oedipus complex, w hich can . albefantasies,
re C ongm
its phy1ogenetic lex":
· the pnm
situation encompass".'g "The Dissolution of lhe Oedipus omp
h the Oedipus
m
is explititly affirmed beings go throug henomenon
"Allhough the m:"iority of h=e.ilisneverthel":~und to pass
complex as an U\divtdual "::own
by heredity and rdained phase of
that ;,, determined and lai when the next pre-<> Ives to those
away according to programm_e use in blinding OlUSe
development sets m
• ,, ·2 There 1S no

27 Here, I am not simply speaking~~'fupn:~1:naybe. • 'but of

. arent-child 'generations
transmission-reiteration, whatever e
1 Paris, July 2006.
2 (1924d), SE 19, p. 174.
302
303

.......
 - . .. afld Oed•P
eastrauo..
. us

· ct asnPC. ts. on the one

r-- . · difference
CastTation and Oedipus
. two disbI\
, •tself coll\pnses th anatonucal
..A •castration i and reaction to - . e f this difference to a
aspects of the classical Freud that are in line with a certain develop- uidet:U nerceptlon of - d the attribution o
mental psychology. ~d, the r- the other nan , -";ct ·ca1
As regards phylogenesis and the mode of acquisition of the
,\. sexes; on lati.ve of a coiu.u · . L,._;.,. 'anatoIIU
oi u,e . U: the corre ha515 on u=> . _
complexes in question, it should be stressed that Freud never denied (Utting-otf, 1tse n ti.roe placed etn~ . chal'3.cteristlCS dear
1 nave for a lo g distino-11\Sh 1ts . lnoi.ca\
that his ideas were in conflict with the reigning theories of acquisition. es' so as to o- d not physio ~o-
According to Freud, such acquisition is accomplished neither in the dif{erence of th~ ~an' anatomical difference, an \e the 'biological'
Darwinian nor in the Lamarkian mode. These two modes are sup- \y.' first of all, it 15 ch the notion of, for exatnP ; lt relates to the
posed to bring to the species (in different ways) a survival advantage: or biological. (As ~u ~ of feroiroJUty' disappe~~rung. Moreover,
mutations and the selection of the strongest, according to Darwin; 1ounda\ion of the re and not to their functl d essentially
adaptation to the environment according to Lamarck. For Freud it is morphology of_ the o ~ ti.fie, but a purely PoP~than transition to
something else entirely: a kind of inscription in the memory of the this difference 15 not a soen th . dea that with e ns
species, conceived of as a little like the memory of the individual. A. ~ difference. l have streSsed. e 1 - , . the male external o~ .
. nuroano1ds, oiuY ·d tion vnth its
lived experience that exerts a very strong impression on the collective the upright posture U\ L1..:~ thropalogical consi era . ' what is
mind, or is repeated thousands of times (or even both), is inscribed in remained nPYN>ptible. '3ut u=> an . al L\..;.,..g What counts,
r--- . th essenO: Ulll' • • resence
the collective memory as a lived sequence of events that will subse- evolutionist overtones, lS not e d woman, 15 the p l
· f man an t deve -
quently impregnate individual memories and come back to life in the strikino about the representations O . nly the mos
o . reek statuar)' \S 0
existences of individuals. So it is, for example, for the famous 'Muroer OT absence of visible gerota\s. G .
of the father', one of the pillars of the Oedipus, which is not absent as . d'5 ..v>rception
Ol)OO example here. . ns to the chil r- - re
a desire in any of the 'children of men' . Freud returned on several occasio . th re,..,......-\ to the m o
It is remarkable that this theory of a collective memory"
ced uances wi o-- t1 . 'per-
oi difference. He often mtrodu n ed by the child to :us
uld here runf
founded on the force and the repetition of the original impression,
continues to live on in the arsenal of presuppositions kept by many
.
OT less uruversa\ consequences
ce-ption' . And yet what is perception
attribut
· f
°
, ck'? Qne wo
a 1a ·
prop<>S of e 1 .
th · dea o \
...oA b Bergson a . the idea
psychoanalysts, without ever being called into question itself. up against the aporias develor-- Y d trouble separatll\g f the
It is remarkable too that Freud allowed his admiration for nothinO'T\ess. lt can be seen that Freud ha tfu,g-off of one o
o·· that of a cu
Darwin to coexist with a theory of engrammation - of mental inscrip- of the difference of the sexes frotn . car-
tion -which is so foreign to that of natural selection. . long nrne
gerutal organs. .th ""',; who for a ly ne\'•'
\ \t {el\, however, o
t two au o,.,, . to supp
oung child.rel\, . distinction
Let us first consider separately the concepts of castration and tied out analytical obserVations on y tablishrnent of thiS nsequence
the Oedipus complex. Such a separation is conceptually possble; observations that better enable the : castration as the co
between 'castration' as difference an
I ld~11tity (New
~ "l~ ~y opinion there is an almost complete conformity in this respect_betw~ ~ " . this vo\u[l'\C- . Origins of 5£:0lG
individual and the group: in the group too an impression oi the past 15 ~ ~ Cf. "Gender, Sex and the Se,:UJIIa1.:SOn The Infontrle
23 ::, Herman Roiphe and £.\e~~r G , \ 9S\).
unconscious memory traces", Sigmund Freud, Moses and Monotheism (1939a' '
p.94. '<OTk: \ntema.tional Unive-rsiMS l>resS 305

304
 Castration and Oedipus
Castration and Oedipus
. without it and wants to have 1"t'' •6
of a removal of one of the two genital organs. To be sure, their ideas seen it and knows t~~t sh~ ; e O and the 1 is what will guide part of
are not always conceptually precise, in spite of the meticulousness of This oppcs1t1~n o tions First of all, though, I cannot move on
subseC\uent cons1dera . . f the Oedipus complex and the
their observations. ln any case, the conclusion is obvious: it Would our
be advisable to envisage, prior to the oedipal period at which a close
connection comes into play between the Oedipus and castration, an
without a mo~ t . o
pc,sition that lS given t
!
h rou ~ h di5cUss1on o
it in choanalysis as well as in myth.
a ':?nal consideration: the one to whom
'early genital' phase, unconnected to the person of the parents, where l shall start_ from . us ('e o' in the anthrop<>logical sense)
"sexual difference and the new genital sensations" (ibid., p. 285.) come ction is attributed in the Oedip_ g . Kin Oedipus; in the psy-
a . rumself: in the mythical version, g . is
into play in their own right. To this phase belongs by rights, with varia- is Oedipus . . . . -, - . the parental couple. Oedipus
tions according to both sexes, the awareness or the taking into account choanalytic version, the child dVlS fathe VlS_ F the sexual point of
d mcesL rom
of boy/ girl difference, such as Freud himself defines it presence or the initiator of the mur er an o. child mnate incestuous sex-
. ~i.:~ poses m the an •
absence of the phallus. This phase would be connected to an 'early cas- view in particular uu.:, sup "th the hytogenetic hypothesJS.
tration reaction', but where castration is perceived as a danger without ual desire, which moreover accords Wl el p the idea of a funda-
...,.,..,,..,; ns dev oped .
being ascribed to a castrating (oedipal) figure. It is certainly on this I have on several V'-......,.0 . tion in which an mfans
point regarding the 'early castration reaction' that the authora are least mental anthropological situation (FAS), a s1tu~ed with sexual drives,
50
explicit, but their observations leave no doubt about the threat that (literally, without langua~e1, who is n;: .1;:: an adult who harbours
is frequently connected to the perception of difference. Undoubtedly
this threat is explained by the authors in relation to their fidelity to the
Mahlerean theses concerning the process of 'separation-individuation'
within himself not only mature sexual
or \ess well integrated remainders (rep
1

ded moreover,
ex=-
is from the beginnings of life confront "' . ce but also the more
~bl.i,mated) of his
that this situation is
.
and its dangers. Thus "the emergence of the genital phase, including infantile sexuality. It should be a d ' d .1.:1d coIJ'Ullunicating
· t ·on adult an OIJ.l d
the pre-oedipal castration reaction, reactivates and becomes fused from the outset one of commumca 1 ' . th side of the adult, an
chm t whileon e d" all
with the earlier fears of both object and anal loss"(ibid.). on the level of care and atta en ' bl to come to light sp<>ra 1~
-----~' ·.-"1c:.area e • estton lS
t
Also extremely interesting is the divergent description of of the adult alone, seAUCU 516•~ dmitted that the adult lll qu
the way in which the boy and the girl treat castration: denial, or U, to simplify things, ,tis a that there is, so to s~a_k: a
th ther one sees 1 The uutia-
symbolization. generally the father or e mo '. .tiation of the comp ex. th
It remains the case that if one takes into account the way misattribution with respect to t~e ~ 'unquestionably the parent (~r le
• sexuality is ult. I am obvious y
in which the authors describe the experience of the difference, two tor of messages beartllg tentially, is the ad . .se some
different paths appear, just as in Freud himself: either the absenre adult). The incestuous one, Po sex11al 11V11st, which do rai
. h bout act11al ads of bout the nonnal adult or
is immediately attributed to a possible cutting-off, to a 'castration' not speaking ere a .cal rob\erns, but a
(which means, from a logical point of view, that something is sepa- complex metapsychologt p
rated from a larger totality: the penis from the body); or presence and banal neurotic.
absence coexist like two opposed terms (1 and O), as Freud will set . j)istinction Between the Sexesn
0
f the Anlltomtcal
forth in an extraordinarily abrupt formula for the little girl: "She haS nsequcnces
6 uSome Psychical C0
ll925j), SE 19, P · 252· 307

306
 ---=
castration and Oedipus
Castration and Oedipus

__,.\ by the (essenti·ally human) environment. As. such,

How could the initiation of the Oedipus - and of incest _ be
ff
assi5tance o e i ~ t iro rtance to the perception of the difference
thus turned around so as to be transferred from the adult to the child? ,~eattribute the :::~transfating and elaborating the diversi~ of th~
Obviously by the identification of the child with the aggressor: the between the sex. . lf ff red from the very outset by the unmedi-
victim of the incest makes himself its subject. hich lS itse o e f th
genders, w . T l ted into the presence or absence o e
Greek mythology gives us at least two occurrences of this ate social enVlI'Onment. rans ath ders will assert itself right up to
inversion: the Oedipus myth itself includes as a prelude a paedophilic
episode committed by the father of Oedipus, but on another child.
~· . the difference between
\he •Oedipus complex'·
e gen
. . th Freud that the Oedi-
The second episode, the 'classical' Oedipus, consequently seems like We are, however, far from affirming~ . th t .s initiated
' . . , . d till less a situation a i
the manifest reversal of the first episode, of passivity into activity. pus complex is a situation , an s . myth, from its
Consider too the myth of Phaedra. The Queen has the inten- b\! the child. The Oedipus complex was and reFm~a: versions.
} . . F dian and post- reu
tion to commit incest with her (step)son. Then seeing that she is about Sophoclean version to its reu . th ·ce of his own
· t narrative - at e pn
to be found out, she accuses Hippolytus of having courted her. The lt helps the child to put in ° sexual messages that are con-
murder of Hippolytus by his own jealous father completes the total culpability - the often much more raw aking, it propase5 a
inversion of the situation. \'e)•ed to him by the parent, the adult. Sexually spe if ·tis not with-
. f th essages even i
It is thus easy to decipher the reversal, which makes of the much watered down version o ese m '
paedophilia a desire for incest, for which the child is responsible. out a certain stimulating value in itself. h here are aimS
· g the mot er - .
It is necessary within this framework to point out again the Vanquishing the father, marrym_ affirmative value: which
double position of the castration complex: its independent position, that beyond any sexuality, have an obvious k QedipUS "the
' btitled a boO on
on the one hand, where it acts as a code based on presence/absence; is the reason Marie Delcourt once su
_.,1; . .a to the
and on the other hand, its position of intrication with the Oedipus legend o f the conquero1.JI •7 . that vary aceo1~ ' b ·tted
05
complex, where it enters into the story as principal punishment for the These romances, these scenan f culturallY traJlSlIU
O
crime. This double position, as independent code and as fragment of individual would thus be of the otder uld }lave it, of phy-
, .cal theory wo
a 'narrative schema', will be deployed when it comes to the treatment narrative schemas and not, as daSSl .
, • al' fantasies.
of the fundamental anthropological situation. logenetic, supposedly pron f th code/
validityO e
wonder about the to a restricted
The FAS is characterised by enigmatic messages sent by the To conclude, one may the first terII' refers .bing a given
1
adult, and which the child (after a period of latency) will have to narrative-schema dualistn- Oe.U: Y ') suitable for ~ e s s and the
· ca5tratiOO, f the nuu•
'treat', to 'translate'. number of elements (2 m the e,q,ense,0 to a theory of nar-
Up to now we have identified at least two types of message: message. This is, of coUJSe, at tive scheIJla refers
those bound to sexual excitation within the framework of the care fidelity of the tran5lation. 'Narra
Belles ·
....,,~-·
- 1981
given to the child; others bound to the assignment of a gender to the __,, du c;011q 11frll"'
(PariS= t.eS
la llgcr.,.t
child, where we have located 'identification by the social network'· 7 Marie Delcourt, ()tdipe 0 11 309
·th the
These two types of message are treated by the child W1 \orig. \944\).

308
 Cnsfrnr
ton and 0
rativity . ectfp115
inwh·1
niore ch the .
or less ri restricted
ever, to spea ch, Popular an code is subnti BIBLIOGRAPHY
elements nr; k about a histo d, flexible. It is tted to seen .
so that the relatively fixedry translated . Perfectly p ari?s that
'remakes'" Passage from , their relan Ulto OedipUs?ss1b1e, h ilJ-e p ychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. and
. of il fl one 'ro ons suff . ,b o\v. 11
original versi , nt are sorner ntance' to ic1ent1y p ecause its re~fati 011~ £di/ion of the Comp/; ~ndon: The Hogarth Press, 1953-74. The
4
hurnn11 fro on, sornetirnes . ~ '-Illes superj another is p l'edictabJ ~;~1tSta11da;ttacheY et al, vols.j ~er case letter after each date, which follows
lational' m trying. n-a in erior. The _or to and r· ossibJe. e, s,rt5. Jatfles Freud's works carryh a roof publication in the Standard Edition.
1r• ,es to ks for eac yea
w'th h_ypmhesis nsJauon? 'N re ts nothin Icher th 1'11e refe~\ of the wor
, out linguistic. i rernains for ll ew Version'
The id oundation (J ow the ll'l
l to Prohib:n the
. or us th t each
,~eli511 g d A na Freud with Marie Bonaparte et al, vols. 1-17,
(Sll,,1111e/le Wer~e, ~ s. C n 0-52· vol. 18 Frankfurt am Maine: Fischer
origin, corni11 ea of an 'aid to akobson). Ost reJiabJe, an: '.trans.
GI\I G
LO
ndon: maI
1968,
go publishing o., 194 '

robornted b g to the servi translation' is llot wrJ,,g, • · I

sh y the p ce of n 'd . , and of . ate appears in a given entry, the date unmed1ate y
c einas are sychoanaJ . rive to tr its soci When more than one dii; the date of first
, name · publication,
· · followed by t he d ate o f
castration relativ~Jy fixe < Yhc study of .ansJate', is furOc:ultttra1 a/lcr th~ ~utl_ior suare brackets where this is significantly d ifferent. Except for the
ily recogn .themes, just like ~hand lirnited in :mrytafes. Their ther <'or. cot11Po51 tion messqthe date of the first English translation is given at the end of the
Freud refcrenc ,
same terrn IZabJe. The child' ose related to in~lllber, their Ged~arrative reference.
of the tr s the same tales s need always t antile sexualih, 'Pal and
anslation. , supports then o hear again .,., are eas-
eed to reaf[• and in th Andre, Jacques (1995), Aux origines feminines de la sexua/ite (Paris: Presses
lrll'l the a""'. e Universitaircs de France).
---uracy
Assoun, Paul-Laurent (1976), Freud, la philosopltie et Jes philosophes (Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France).

Ualint, Michael (1935), "Critical Notes on the Theory of the Pregenital Organisations
of the Libido", in PrimanJ Love and Psychoanalytic Technique (London: The
Hogarth Press, 1952).
--(1951), "On Love and Hate", in Primary Love and Psychoanalytic Technique
(London: The Hogarth Press, 1952).
--(1952), "Early Developmental States of the Ego. Primary Object Love", in
Primary Love and Psychoaualytic Technique (London: The Hogarth Press, 1952).

de Beauvoir, Simone (1949), T/1e Second Sex, trans. H.M. Parshley (London: Picador,
1988).

Bourguignon, Andre (1968), "Neurophysiologie du reve et theorie psych-

analytique", lA Psychintrie de /'cnfa11t, vol. 11, no. 1.

~· E . in ti Butler, Judith (1990), Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (London
nghsh . . and New York: Routledge).
1eongmaJJ.
1993), Bodies thnt Maller: On the Discursive Limits of Sex, (London and
310 New York: Routledge).

311
Hua, Cai (2001), A Socie .
Hustvedt (N ty tvrt/1011t Fathers ays on the Theory of Sexuality, SE 7.
ew York: Zone Books). or liusb1111ds: The £55
9()5d), Threeth 5exual Theones · o £Children" , SE 9.
Carroy, H. 0903-1909 . .
(Paris: G. Olms 1 ), D1ctrom1aire bio~ h.
, 987). ap rque intern .
Na of China
• !rans. J\s .
ti
/2 1
1<JOSCl, ''.?tivi~sed' Sexual Morality and Modern Nervous Illness", SE 9
/ .....--{19()sdl, ''Notes Upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis", SE 10.
C be atrona/ d
or tt, Greville O991) G es tcr;lJQins / ~19()9dl, "Ps cho-Analytic Notes on an Autobiographical Account of a
, ender (Carnb .d • Vols 1 / ~19t1cl, . y(Oementia Paranoides)", SE 12.
n ge: Catnbrid /
Costes Ala. (2
d F in 003), l.acan· Le fo ge Univers·
. --4
case_,of para)no1a "On the Universal Tendency to Debasement in the Sphere of
e ranee). . urvo;ement ling11isti , •ty Press). - .--{t912d ,
De· 'I ie (Pans: p _,,,,.......
1,0ve" sEll- _ 3), Totem and Ta boo, SE 13•
)Ours, Christophe O986), Le co , Tesses lJniversilaj 19 21
~ ~4c) "On Narcissism: An Introduction", SE 14.
De! rps d abord (Pans- tes ~~: g),"Remembering, ~epea~? and ~orking Through", SE 12.
~urt, Marie 0944) Oed·
81). • rpe ou la legende d
. Payot, 2001)
. ::.-j19114sc), "lnstincts and _the~, Vioss1tudes , SE 14.
u conq11&nnt (P . .......--__;191se), "The Unconsoous , SE. 14.
Dornes M .
• artin 0996) "La
vol. 50, no. 11 R; . theone de Ma
ill'is: Les Be
Ues let
Ires,
::::=-< 19150" A Case of Paranoia Running Counter to the Psychoanalytic
Theory of the O~ase", SE 14. . . .. . "
premiere age (Paris• ~ted in Martin ~aret Mahler reco . __-(1916-17), Lecture 15: Uncertainties and Cntiasms ,Introductory Lectures
. • •-==es Universitair rnes, PsychanaI llstderee", in psyc/roanalysis, SE 16.
Feniche), Otto 0946) Th p es de France, 2oolse et Psycha:;che, 11
~1916-17), "Lecture 25: Anxiety'', Introductory Lectures 011 Psychoanalysis,
1946). , e sychoana/ytic Theo . d~
ry 0f Neurosis (Lo SE 16.
Ferenezi Sa ndon• R -<1916-17), "Lecture 26: The Libido Theory and Narcissism", Introductory
La , ndor 0933) "C . ouued Lectures on Psychoanalysis, SE 16.
nguage of Tend ' Onfusion of Ton ge,
ed. Julia Borossa erness and of Passio;:;1~ between Adult ---(1917a), "A Difficulty in the Path of Analysis", SE 17.
----<1969) ., CHannondsworth· p •~Sandor ~ ~d the chi) ---(1917d), "A Metapsychological Supplement to the Theory of Dreams",
to the n,..,.:__ Attention During the.N en~ Books, 1;;;;cz1: Selected~ ~=.l ne SE 14.
(Lond;~~Th•y ':::d Technique of Psycharration of 0reami,.. .F ritrngs, ---{1917e), "Mourning and Melancholia", SE 14.
· e oogarth 1>-_. oana/ys15
· , urther Co
----<1969) -r '•t:SS). ' trans. J llfribu · ---{1919a), "Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy", SE 17.
the r,,_ _ • ,o Whom does ane Isabel Su . lions -(1919e), "A Child is Being Beaten", SE 17.
Th .H._,,Y and Technique of p one Relate one's Dre ,,. tlie et al
e ogarth Press) sychoanalysis, trans J am. , Fi,rther c . -(1920a), "The Psychogenesis of a Case of Homosexuality in a Woman",
. . ane Isabel S . ontr1butions SE 18.
Feyerabend p Utlie et al. (Lo d lo 1920g), Beyond the Pleas11re Principle, SE 18.
, auI 0975) A . n on;
• garnst Method (Lo d ---1192lc), Group Psychology and tire Analysis of the Ego, SE 18.
Florence, Jean 0978) L'"d . n on: Verso, 2010). 1922a), "Dreams and Telepathy", SE 18.
Louis: BruSSels) • ' entification dans la the, . ----11923a), "Two Encyclopedia Articles", SE 18.
. one /reudienne (U . ---t1923b), The Ego and the Id, SE 19.
F ntvers· ----11923c), "Remarks on the Theory and Practice of Dream-Interpretation",
ox, Robin O 967) . . lies Saint-
CHa , Kinship nd SE 19.
rmondsworth: Pen . a Marriage: An ---(1924d), "The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex"
F . gum Books). Anthropological
reud, Sigmund 089 , PerspectiVe -----l1925d), An Autobiographical St11dy, SE 20.
----<1898a) ,, 6c), The Aetiology f -----l1925h), "Negation", SE 19
----<1900a, Sexuality in the Aetiol o Hysteria", SE 3. -----l1925i), "Some Additional Notes on Dream-Interpretation as a Whole",
----<1901a~• -:;en Dlnterpretation of Drea~ oSfEth4e Neuroses", SE 3 SE 19.
• rea1115, SE 5. ' and 5. · ----11925j), "Some Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Distinction
Between the Sexes", SE 19.
312 -----11930a), Civilisation a11d its Disco11tents, SE 21.
--~1932a), •~he Acquisition and Control of Fire", SE 22.

313
 0 933a), "Lecture
Analysis, SE 22 33: Femininity"
· , New I "On the Linguistic Aspects of Translation" . The
9)
(1933a), "Lecture 35· ntroducto o tllan (195 , d La u . , in
Lectures on Psyc/1011n11ly .. The Question of i., ry Lect11res Jl l'o dies Reader, e . wrence venuti <New York & L d
(1937c) "A l _sis, SE 22. a •veltansch Otz Ps., ~0bso ' tion SIU on on:
, na ys1s Te . auun,,,, -:,cho Ja 1ra11sla 2000).
---(1937d),"Constru . l"Int.nableandint o ,Neu,! - 1wutledge,
---(1939 ) Chons in An el"Inin bl titrod
a , Moses n11d M . alysis" , SE a e", SE 2 1/cto,y 5) Love Relations (New Haven and London· Yale u • .
-0940a), An Outline oonothe1sm, SE 2.3 2.3. 3. Otto (199 ' · ruvers1ty
rt't,erg,
- - - '0950 [31st May, 189t Ps¥,choan11lysis, SE ~e press>-
0950a [1895]) p . l), Draft N" Fl' 23.
---(198 ' ro1ect for S .
5119151) A Ph
, iess Pap
a c1entific p ho ers, SE 1 1
. (1952) "On Observing the Behaviour of Young Infants" • E
I
t
trans. Axel Hoffe; and ogenetic Fantasy: ~ '?gy, SE 1 .. <11eill, Mela~ ede and
r-> arrd Grall 1u
Other Works 1946-1963 (London: Hogarth 1975)
, .
'm nvy
Mass. & London· Ha eter T Hoffer ed Uervrew of the Ti
0985), The .Comn;ard). , . se Grubrich-~?~f:rence N . (1969), "La conflit intra-psychique", in IA theorie psychanalytique d
ed. and trans. J. M J'
ete Letters of Sigmund F
. asson (Cambridge l.ir reud to Wilh I
ltni.tis (Catn~l/~oSes,
tidge
t,ab~;~~acht (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France). 'e ·
G d . ,1v1ass & L e m Fl. '
o eher, Maurice (2004) Le . ondon: Ii iess: 1887, n, Jacques (19~9), "On a Qu~tion Prior to any Possible Treatment of
, s metarnorph arvard r.... 1904 t,ac; chosis", in Ecnts, trans. Bruce Fink (New York: WW Norton).
G oses de le par ue} '
olse, Bernard (2004) . ente (Paris• F . ~1966), ~crits (P~: Edi~ons du Se~).
November. , review of L' avenir de la . ayard).
psychanalyse . --(1979), Le Senunarre, L1vre XXIV: L msu que sait de l'une bevue s'aile a
, inteea mourre, 1976-1977", in Omicar? Vol. 17.
Gortais Jean "L met Psy --(2005), Ecrits trans. Bruce Fink (New York: WW Norton).
l'Universite,
, e concept de
vol. 12 n SYinbiose en psy h
no 94
'
, o. 46. c analyse" .
, in Psy L_ 1,agache, Daniel (1949), L'unite de la psychologie: Psychologie experimentale et
Granger, Bernard (2004) L' . c,llll1aly5e tl psychologie clinique (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2004).
]a A . , avenir de la ha
cques- lain Miller (Paris· Le psyc nalyse: debat - (1961), "La psychanalyse et la structure de la personnalite", in CE11vres TV
. Cavalier Bleu) entre Daniel w· (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France 1986).
d · ldlli h
e la Grasserie, Raoul (1898) "La c er and
revelee par le langage" R , ~ategorie psycho! . Laplanche, Jean (1970), Life and Death in Psychoanalysis, trans. Jeffrey Mehlman
, evue ph1losophique, vol. 45og1que de la classi . (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1977).
Green, Andre (1979) "L' nf . fication, ---(1980), Problematiques I: L'Angoisse (Paris: Presses Universitaires de
, e ant modele" . N
G . ' t.n ouvelle revue de France).
Ulol, Elsa (2005), Tous pedophiles? (P . . E . . Psychanalyse, Vol.19 ---11980), Problematiques II: Castrations-Symbolisations, (Paris: Presses
ans. dttions de la M . . . Universitaires de France}.
Gutton, Philippe (2003) Le b . artini.ere). ---11980), Problematiques III: La Sublimation (Paris: Presses Universitaires de
I pu ertaire (Pans· p France).
H . . resses Universitair
etmann, Paula (1950), "On Co es de France}. ---11987), Problematiques TV: Le baquet: Transce11dance du tmnsfert (Paris:
Analysis, vol. 31. unter-Transference", Intern ti Presses Universitaires de France.
. a onal Journal of Psycho- ----<1988) ''The Wall and the Arcade" in Jean Laplanche: Sed11ctio11, Trans-
lation, Driv~, ed. John Fletcher and Martin Stanton (London: Institute of
Hirat~, ~el~a, Laborie, Fran<;oise , Contemporary Arts, London, 1-992). . .
D1ctionna1re critique du fern . . , Led?are Helene, Senoti
D . ---11989), New Foundations for Psychoanalysis, trans. David Macey (Oxford:
rn1sme, (Pans: Presses Uni . ~r, an1hle (200())
vers1taires d F ,
Holmes, Jeremy (1996) Att h . e ranee}. Blackwell). " . Tl d . F d eds Andre
Ad 1 , ac ment Intimacy A ----tl989}, ''Terminologie raisonn~ , m ra uire r~u , . .
u t Psychotherapy (New Yo k'. J , utonomy: Using Attach .
Bourgwgnon, p·erre
1
Colet' Jean Laplanche and Fram;o1S Robert (Pans:
r · ason Aronson). ment Theory in Universitaires de France). . . ,, .
- ---,.199,
''I Jantation JntromISs1on , m
0) mp '
Essays on Otherness, ed. John
Fletcher (London: Routledge, 1999).
314
315
 • ft-'"ce), \' """ Jo11rn11l of the Anurricn11
·teS d1.: and Sexua '-, ,
. ,ctS\\l\l ) ''\den\it)'
\992), l.11 reuolution copernicienni• inadtt:'tlt.'e: tmoo 1 1 \)\\\~ t\961 I 9
96
- - - - ' \~'2.), "The Freud M,,seum Seminar", i\\ )enn ~~pl ~•9.2 {\>ans: Aub\ ) . r\C\\r)' · tioll, vo\. · b ·d e
lation, Dritx"S, ed. }oh,, Retcher and Martin Stanton n~e. Sed_ucfio11, l¼~s~ w11s\e''" 1~1ic Assoc1n . I d H111111111 Beh11vio11r, 2 vo\s. (Cam n g
Co\\ten,\">Otwry Arts). ndo1, . \nsl.'ltu~ \>'"~sfh"'1'111 7Q-\),St11dies!11A111~;~:nd 1971).
----'\9Q3), Lt> fo11rooie111e11t biologisnnt de In se:cunlih! h ot d (\9 . ts\\:)'\ teSS,
Syn\M\abo). c ct Frtud (\>af\s, iot\t•' rd \.)n1VC . Al.r' k)
,i,:11i, . \-\or"ll . F·gure
1
trans: Klm=tec .
- - - t \ 9 93) , "Exigenc imd Going Astray" , ttn'C\s. v · \.> ~\11SS·· . 71), 01scot1T'$,
Nkho\i\s Ray. Psydtoonalysis, C11lt11n! nnd Society, vol.\\ ~ \ l.adm\r\\l al\d frM'1;01s t\9 _,, 1·n Le Fait de l'nnalyse, \\O. 4.
\Q93). "Short 1'te-'\tise cm the Unco'C\sc\.ous", m Essn .'
.,1 \e"''. • t \e reveu, ,
01
"'1,,~" S) "t:nnl\\yste c
}oh\\ f\el.\'.her (Londo\'\: Rou\\ed~e. \999). ' ys I Othen1ess, l!d. \,) . t Oa"\e\\e (\99 ' d concentua\isation du rap\)Ort
. ~99<\), _" L..". r~ycha~"'l'yse dans \a conm1.U1,au\~ Stie'C\t\fi .. . entl\ • '1' · modes e r )
~11ct1ou et 111spirnho11: I homme {\>Mi.s: Quadrldge/~
France, \999).
uJ~e •. \l\ Entre
~l\a\~ de
"t,l•tV>\'
N\co\e-
C\l.\ude {\99\),' r~1s J'tinue (Patis: Cote femmes .
., . L' C1IIC1to1111e Po 1 ·1 ' •
t,\~\\hieU,se."e et i ente '\l\ I F dern une a11tre voie pour la theonedu
\9%), " La psycha'C\a\yse. mythes et tMorie", i.n Ent . e11tli! '1996' PCIII e ,
inspiration: l'homnu.• (Paris:~ U'C\iversitaires de Frn'C\ce, l ~ ) st!duct 10n et · 1eresa, '''
r ~r\l,,\\,o , MatU\I.\ ·versitai.IeS de France).
\999), "Sub\imation nnd/or lnspi:ration". ttans. }oh'C\ Reth ~e\O __... pfeSSCS l\\ )
1'hurstol\. in NL'IV Fommtious, no. 48, Winter '2.002.--3). c er and l.uke Je noi (P-'ris', . ·1ee (Paris: Le Decouverte .
I t n ps11cha11C1lyse ret)ISI !
\999), "L..'\\)<'Uubo\eChouraq_ui" in Le Pri111atdel'n11tre(Paris:F\am . ',raIO- (\9SS), "'' ~ . de In psych11n11lyse: dcbn
----1\999), ANot-es on Aftenvardsness" in Essuys on Otheniess :non). nde\, GI.! '1004) L'nveiur . 20(}\)
Hetcher (l.ondon & New 'fork: Routledge). • · lohn l-\e . d Daniel Wld\ochet ' . m ·s· Cava\ier B\eu, .
es-Ma1t\ an -Alain Miller ,, an .
-----1.2006), Problemntiques VI: l'npres-coup (Paris: Presses Unive.tsi.ta\res de t,\u\er, \acqu . I Widlocher and Jacques b no 48.
France, 2006. entrc On111e ' . Le Canict psy, Qcto er, .
----t'l006), Problt!matiques Vfl: Le fouruoiement biologisant de In sen,alit~ h "\.! ttachement' • m
et Hubert {1000), a M·nutes of the Vimnn
Freud ('Paris: Presses Universi.taires de France). cn t,,\o1'ta'bn ' £ \ n962-1975), I • &>dern, trans.
----1.2006), "1'he So-Called Death Drive: A Sexual Drive", in The British Jounial d federn, rns ~ :ind Ernst tional
of Psychotherapy, vol. 20, no. 4, 2006. t,lu1'betf., Her~an ~~ t eds. Herman Nun C \\i\\S (New York: \nterna
Psyc1ton11nlyt1c Soc•eJ\th the assistance of r\. o
l.ap\anche, Jean and Pontalis, Jean-Bertta'C\d (\973), The Language of Psychoanalysis Matiatet Nun'oe'ti \961-\975), vo\s. 1-4. . t de R.
trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (London: The Hogarth Press). ' uroversit\es \>teSS, ·b\e Aprop<>S du pro)('
mondes poss, .
es "\.e roeilleur d es.
Lavi.e, Jean-Claude (1972.),"Par\er a l'analyste", Ln Nouvelle Revue de Psychanalyse, \ Qnpenhe\roer, ~gn ' I se ii l' Unrversite, vo . '
'-afor" in Psych1111n y
r C- A
I 9 no. 35.
u . ondol\ and C\
N .., York:
vol. 5. ~• • ed. Peter
Critical Sense,
U9%) ed., A
Legendre, Pierre (1000), Le cri111e du Cnpornl Lortie (Paris: F\ammarion). Osborne, Peter d London: Yale
\ Routledge).
The Sexual Century,
(New Haven an
Levi-Strauss, Claude (\949), The Elementary Structures of Kinship, trans. }.H. 'Be\\, Ethel Spector n999), d
}.R. von Sturmer and Rodney Needham (Great Britain: Eyre and Spottiswoode, Person'. . \>feSS), tic Theories of Gen er
1969). Unwersity ) "Psychoilna\y tysis. vo\. \1.
ne\ (l9S3 • d r1u of Psychonna .
---1961), The Savage Mind, trans. John and Doreen Weightman (Chicago and d ovesey. Uo . t\Cll Cl ,
London: Chicago UP, \968).
-----1.1962), Totemism, trans. Rodney Needham (Boston: 'Beacon Press, 1963).
_ _ _,(1985), The Jenious Potter, trans. Benedicte Chorler (Chicago and l.ondon:
\ Person, Ethe\ an
\dent\\)'"• in The Jo11r1
ial of the :\111enc1111

. f Scicnll)ll
\(at\ (\935), The Logic o111l Rcfutotion~:
The Growth of u
ut\edge, 2002).
.-. o·15co,1c11J (Lo"don: R~ ··ent ific Knowledge

Popper, £.,, co11ject11res a

\
Chicago University Press, \988). ---t19=1, ed e) 317
lLondon: Rout\ g .
Levy-Friesacher, Christine (19830, Meynert-Freud, '1'111ne11ti11' tParis: Presses

316 \
I
Reiche, Reimut (1997), "Gender ohne Sex", Psyche, 9 /10.

Renard Michel (1969), "La narcissisme", in ut !Morie psychanalytique ed Sa

Nacl\t (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France). ' · cha

Robert, Paul (2.010), Le Nouveau Petit Robert de la langue frani;aise (Pans: Le Robert).

Roiphe Herman and Galenson, Eleanor (1981), Infantile Origins of Sexual Id .

(C;nnecticut: International Universities Press). entity

Simon, Bennet (1992.), "Incest: see under Oedipu~ complex: The History of an E
in Psychoanalysis", in The Journal of the Amencan Psychoanalytic Associa'-' ll'ot
~- "on, vo\
.
Spinoza, 'Benedict de (1677), Eth~c~ ~~nstrated inSamGeometrical Order in The
Essential Spinoza: Ethics ?nd Re I t'.n~, ttans. uel Shirley, ed. Mich
L. Morgan (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2006). ae\

Stoller, Robert (1968), Sex and Gender (London: The Hogarth Press).
----1.1975), Perversion: the Erotic fonn of Haired (London: Kamac 1986)·
-----1.1985), Preset1lalions of Gender (New Haven and London: 'lale u.'.uversi
~~- ~

Tarelho, Luiz Carlos (1999), Paranoia el la tlu!orie de la ~uction gmtralisee (P ..

Presses Universitaires de France). ans.
Tmbergen, Nikolaas (1951), The Study of Instinct (Oxford: Clarendon).

Viderman, Serge (1970), La construction de I'espace analytique (Paris: Dence\).

Widlocher, Daniel (2.001), Sexualite infantile et attachement ed. Daniel Widli:ich

(Paris: Presses Universitaires de France). er
\
----1.2.001), "Primary Love and Infantile Sexuality: An Eternal Debate" tra
Susan Fairfield, in Infat1tile Sexuality and Attachment (London: Karnac, 2.002.)~·
\
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (192.1), Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, trans. Brian McGuiness
and David Pears (New 'lork & London: Routledge, 2001).

318