enjoy reading. Emilio
Granzotto
Magazine litteraire
"Every time we talk more often than the crisis of psychoanalysis. It is said that Sigmund Freud is outdated, modern society has found that her work is not man enough to understand or to play back your relationship with the world.
JL "These are stories. First, the crisis. There is no such crisis, it can not be. Psychoanalysis has not yet found its own limits. There is still much to discover in practice and knowledge. In psychoanalysis is no immediate solution, only the long and patient investigation of the reasons. Secondly, Freud.
How can I tell which is obsolete if we have not yet fully understood? What is certain is that we have released completely new things that even he would have imagined before. Since the problems of the unconscious to the importance of sexuality, from access to the symbolic to the subject to the laws of language.
His doctrine calls into question the truth is a matter that concerns each and every one personally. It's very different from a crisis. I repeat: we are far from Freud. His name is also used to cover many things, there have been deviations, the followers have not always followed closely the model, have created confusion. After his death in 1939, some of his students also tried to exercise otherwise psychoanalysis, reducing education to a banal formula: the art as ritual, practice restricted to treatment of behavior, and as a means of rehabilitation of the individual to social environment. Is the negation of Freud, psychoanalysis comfort of living.
Freud himself anticipated. He used to say that there are three untenable positions, three impossible tasks: to govern, educate and exercise in psychoanalysis. In our days, no matter who assumes the responsibility to govern and create everyone educator. As psychoanalysts, thank God, thrive, such as magicians and healers. Propose to help people means a guaranteed success, and the clientele runs over their doors. Psychoanalysis is something else.
- Exactly what?
JL-I define it as a symptom, indicative of the disease of civilization in which we live. It is certainly not a philosophy. I hate philosophy, long ago it does not say anything interesting. Psychoanalysis is not a Faith and I like to call it science. Call it a practice and dealing with what is wrong. Terribly difficult as it seeks to introduce into daily life impossible, imaginary. Has had some success so far but still has no rules and lends itself to all sorts of misunderstandings.
must not forget that this is something new, either with regard to medicine, or psychology and its annexes. It is also very young. Freud died only 35 years. His first book, The Interpretation of Dreams, was published in 1900, with little success. It sold, I think, 300 copies in several years. He had few pupils, who are took for mad, and they were not even agree on how to implement and interpret what they had learned.
- What is what is wrong with people today?
- What drives people to become psychoanalysis?
JL "Fear. When things happen, even things you want, things you do not understand, man feels fear. Suffers from not understanding and gradually falls into a state of panic. It is the neurosis. In the hysterical neurosis, the body sick with fear of being sick, without you actually are. In obsessional neurosis, fear gets weird things in mind, we can not control thoughts, phobias, in which the forms and objects acquire different meanings aroused fear.
- what?
JL-The neurotic feels compelled by a tremendous need to go dozens of times check if a faucet is really closed. Or if something is in place, yet knowing with certainty that the water is as it should be and that things are in place to be. There are no pills that will cure this. We must discover why this happens and we know what it means.
- And the cure?
JL "The neurotic is a patient who is cured with the word, and above all with their own word. You should talk, tell, explain itself. Freud defined psychoanalysis as the assumption by the subject of its own history, to the extent that it is constituted por la palabra dirigida a otro. El psicoanálisis es el reino de la palabra, no hay otro remedio. Freud explicaba que el inconsciente no es tan profundo como inaccesible a un examen profundo de lo consciente. Y decía que en ese inconsciente, el que habla es un sujeto dentro del sujeto, trascendiendo al sujeto. La palabra es la gran fuerza del psicoanálisis.
-¿La palabra de quién, del enfermo o del psicoanalista?
J.L.– En el psicoanálisis los términos “enfermo”, “medicina”, “remedio” no son más precisos que las fórmulas pasivas que adoptamos commonly. When we speak of "becoming psychoanalyze" make a mistake. Who does the real work in the analysis is the speaker, the subject under review. Although it does so in the manner suggested by the analyst who tells you how to proceed, and help through their interventions. He also provides a simple interpretación.A view, it seems to make sense of what is in the analysis. In fact, the interpretation is more subtle, tending to blur the meaning of the things that the individual suffers. The aim is to show through his own account, the symptom, say the disease is unrelated to anything, which is devoid of any sense possible. Although apparently is real, does not exist.
The ways in which this act comes from the word require much practice and endless patience. Patience and measurement are the instruments of psychoanalysis. The technique is able to measure the assistance given to individual review. Consequently, psychoanalysis is difficult.
"When Jacques Lacan speaks of this name is inevitably associated with a formula, the" return "to Freud What does this mean?
JL-Exactly what it says. Psychoanalysis is Freud. If you want to psychoanalysis, one must return to Freud, by its terms and definitions, read and interpreted literally. I founded a school in Paris, Freud precisely with this objective. More than 20 years ago I explain my point of view: Freud means simply returning to clear the ground of deviations and mistakes of existential phenomenology such as institutional formalism psychoanalytic societies, taking up teaching reading Freud as the principles defined and listed from their work. Rereading Freud means simply reread Freud. Who does not in psychoanalysis, uses a formula abusive.
JL-I know, I have a dark hiding his thoughts behind a curtain of smoke. I wonder why. A purpose of the analysis, again with Freud that it is "inter-play through which the truth comes into the real" Is not it obvious? But psychoanalysis is not just kid stuff.
My books are defined as incomprehensible But why Why? Not write for all the world to be understood by all. On the contrary, I never took care in the slightest to please any reader, whoever he is. I had things to say and I said. I just have a reading public. If you do not understand, patience. As the number of readers, I've had better luck than Freud. My books are even read, that surprised me.
I am also convinced that in ten years maximum, which I read will find all transparent, like a good glass of beer. Maybe then they will say: 'This Lacan, banality'. "
- What are the characteristics of Lacan?
JL-It is too early to tell, since the Lacanism not yet exist. Just feel your scent, like a premonition.
In any case, Lacan is a man who practice psychoanalysis from at least 40 years and that during all those years he has studied. I believe in structuralism and the science of language. I wrote in my book that "what leads Freud's discovery is the enormity of the order in which we have entered, in which we were born a second time, if it is meant well, leaving quite rightly been called infans, without a word. "
The symbolic order on which Freud based his discovery is constituted by language as a universal discourse time of concrete. Is the world a word that creates the world of things, initially confused in everything that will happen. Only words can give full meaning to the essence of things. Without the words, nothing would exist What would be the pleasure without the intermediary of the word?
My idea is that Freud, enunciated in his earlier works - The Interpretation of Dreams Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Totem and Taboo, the laws of the unconscious, was the precursor of the application of the theories with which a few years later Ferdinand de Saussure would open the way for modern linguistics. This is subject, like everything else, the laws of language. Only words can breed and give consistency. Without language, humanity would not advance a single step in the research on thinking. This is the case of psychoanalysis. Whatever role is assigned, the agent of healing, training or survey, only one through which we serve: the word of the patient. And every word deserves a response.
- then is analysis as a dialogue. There are people interpret it more as a substitute for confession.
JL-
But what denomination? He did not confess anything to the psychoanalyst. One is carried away to say things simply, everything that goes through your head. Words, precisely. The discovery of psychoanalysis is the man and animal speaker. It is for the analyst to sort the words you hear and give them a meaning, a meaning. To make a good analysis, we need an agreement, the alliance between the analysand and analyst.
Through speech one, the other trying to get an idea of \u200b\u200bwhat is and discover beyond symptom hard knot apparent truth. The other function of the analyst is to explain the meaning of the words to make the patient understand what to expect from the analysis.
- is a relationship of extreme trust.
JL "Rather an exchange where it is important that one speaks and another listens. Also silence. The analyst asks questions and has no ideas. Only gives the answers you want to give the issues raised by his desire. But in the end the end, the analysis always goes where it leads the analyst.
- Just talking about the cure Is there a chance to heal? "Overcoming the neurosis?
JL-Psychoanalysis triumphs when cleaning the ground, leaving the symptom, leaving the real. That is, when it comes to the truth.
- Can you state the same concept in a less Lacanian?
symptom JL-I call everything that comes from the real. And true to everything that is wrong, that does not work, which opposes human life and the clash of their personalities. The real thing always comes back to the same place. I always find there with the same faces. Scientists are right to say that nothing is impossible in reality. It takes a toupee sacred to say things like that, or, as I suppose, the total ignorance of what is done and said.
The real and the impossible are antithetical, can not go together. The analysis pushes the individual toward the impossible, we suggest you consider the world as it truly is imaginary, not significant. While real, like a ravenous bird, merely nurtured sense of things, actions that have a meaning.
hear again that we must make sense of this or that, to his own thoughts, their own aspirations, desires, sex, life. But we know nothing about anything about life. The scholars are striving to explain it.
My fear is that by its failure, the real, this monstrous thing that does not exist, end up taking it, and drag. Science replaces religion and is more despotic, obtuse and obscurantist. There is a god-atom, a god-space, etc. If science and religion wins, psychoanalysis is finished.
- In our days, that the relationship between science and psychoanalysis?
JL-To me, the only real science, serious, forward, is science fiction. The other officer, which has its altars in laboratories, groping, without balance. And even begins to be afraid of his shadow.
seems wise to them is reaching the moment of anguish. In its aseptic laboratories in their starched gowns, those old boys who play with things unknown, making ever more complicated devices and inventing ever more obscure ways, they begin to wonder what may come tomorrow, where his research will eventually lead us always novel. Anyway, I wonder what if it were too later? Biologists ask it today, or physicists, chemists. To me, you're crazy. Although already in the process of changing the face of the universe, only now, in this case they happen to wonder if this could not be dangerous What if all jump? If so lovingly cultivated bacteria in the white lab were transformed into mortal enemies? What if the world was swept by a horde of these bacteria with all the crap that inhabits it, starting with those sages of the laboratories?
At three positions impossible to Freud, government, education, psychoanalysis, I would add a fourth science. Unless the wise do not know their position is untenable.
- That's a pretty pessimistic view of what we call progress.
JL "No, nothing. I'm not pessimistic. Nothing will happen. For the simple reason that man is a good for nothing, not even capable of destroying itself. Personally, I think it wonderful a total disaster caused by man. That would be the evidence that has come to do something with his hands, his head, his divine intervention, natural or other species.
All these beautiful bacteria overfed for fun scattered throughout the world as the locusts of the Bible, would mean the triumph of man. But that will not happen. Through science, fortunately, a crisis of responsibility, all enter into the order of things, as they say. I announced: the real thing will take the lead, as usual. And as always we will be happy.
- Another paradox of Jacques Lacan. He complains that, in addition to the language difficulty and obscurity of the concepts, word games, language jokes, puns on the French, and precisely the paradoxes. Whoever hears or reads it who has the right to feel disoriented.
JL "Actually, no joke, I mean very serious things. I use only the word as the sages of the I've talked to use their stills and electronic facilities. I'm always looking to refer to the experience of psychoanalysis.
- You say reality does not exist. But the average man knows that the real is the world all around him, what he sees with his eyes, he touches.
JL-Deslastrémonos this man also mean that in principle exists. There are individuals, that's all. When I hear about the common man mass phenomena and things like that, think of all the patients I've seen go through the couch in forty years of listening. None, in some measure, resembles the other, neither has the same phobias, the same anxieties, the same way to relate, the same fear of not understanding. The average man who is that? Me, you, my caretaker, the president of the republic?
- We talked about the real, the world we see all.
- Exactly. The difference between the real, that is what is wrong, and the symbolic, the imaginary, is telling the truth is that what is the real world. To confirm that the world exists, there is no world, just think of all the countless banalities fools believe the world is. And I invite my friends from Panorama, before accusing me of paradoxical, to think about what you just read.
- It seems that you are always pessimistic.
- JL "That's not true. I do not classify or between or among the distressed alarmist. It will be very unhappy the psychoanalyst who has not passed the stage of distress. True, there are things around us gruesome and devouring as television through which a large part of us is phagocytosed. But this only happens because people are left phagocytose, until they invent an interest in what they see.
Then there are other schemes also monstrous eaters: the rockets that go to the moon, research in the deep ocean, etc. All things to eat. But there is no reason to dramatize. I am sure that when we are sick of the rocket, television and all the damn vacuum research, find something else to deal with. It is a revival of religion right? And what better eating monster that religion? It is a continual feast for fun for centuries as has been demonstrated.
My response to all this, is that man has always adapted well to bad. The only real thing we can conceive, we have access is just that: you must look for a reason, to make sense of things, as we say. Otherwise, man would have no anxiety, Freud would not have become famous, and I would be secondary school teacher.
- The troubles of this nature always or anxieties are linked to certain social conditions, certain historical periods, some latitudes?
JL "The anxiety of the wise afraid of their findings may seem recent. But what we know about what happened in the past? Des dramas do other researchers? The anguish of slave labor in the production chain in the industry as a galley, is the anguish of today. Or, more simply, is linked with other definitions and words today.
- But what is anxiety for psychoanalysis?
JL "Something that is beyond our body, a fear, but nothing that the body, including the spirit, can motivate. Fear of fear Brief. Many of these fears, many of these anxieties, the level that we perceive has to do with sex. Freud said that sexuality, for speaking animal called man, has no cure and no hope. One task of the analyst is found in the word of the patient the relationship between anxiety and sex, the great unknown.
- Today, when sex is being circulated everywhere, sex movies, sex on stage, television, sex, sex in newspapers, on the tracks, on beaches, it is said that people feel less anxiety about the problems linked to the sexual sphere. The taboos have fallen, they say, sex no longer scary.
JL-La sexomanía invasion is nothing more than an advertising phenomenon. Psychoanalysis is a serious thing that has to do, I repeat, with a strictly personal relationship between two individuals: the subject and the analyst. There is no collective psychoanalysis, and no mass anxiety or neurosis.
That sex is put on the agenda at every turn, treated as a detergent in the carousels televised either involves no promise of benefit. I'm not saying that's bad. Certainly not enough to treat anxiety and particular problems. The starting fashion that fake liberalization that gives us a good granted from above, for allegedly permissive society. But is not at the level of psychoanalysis.
[This text was recovered by the French magazine Magazine littéraire 428, February 2004]
0 comments:
Post a Comment