Towards the congress: Cartels work

 

“A disturbance that occurred at the innermost
juncture of the subject’s sense of life”[1]
“Un désordre provoqué au joint le plus intime
du sentiment de la vie chez le sujet”


Ahinoam Mezzer Gur


ISRAEL

 

As part of the cartel towards the NLS congress, I have chosen to study this enigmatic and poetic sentence, which contains signifiers that are rare in Lacan’s writing and teaching. In order to read this sentence I will dismantle it and re-assemble it.

A disturbance that occurred at the innermost/intime juncture of the subject’s sense of life
Intime/intimate- I will present two interesting examples of the use of the signifier intimate in the writing of Lacan. The first one is from: “The direction of the treatment…”[2] in which Lacan says that the analyst has to pay with his “most intimate judgment” that is to say – to pay with his judgment of reality, which issues from his fantasy. In the second example from the fifth seminar, Lacan says regarding Hans’ mother that by “admitting little Hans into her intimate life” she “permits him, encourages him… to embody her phallus for her”[3]. Hence we can read “intimate” as a singular relation of the divided subject with his cause of division. And indeed, the sense of life of the speaking bodies has the mark, the hue and the scent of the intimacy engendered by what has been lost.

A disorder that occurred at the innermost/intime juncture of the subject’s sense of life
Sense of life- In my opinion, Lacan, in his first as well as in his last teaching, located the “sense of life” at the juncture between the body and the language. We are exiled from our natural sense of life by the very fact that we are speaking bodies. It is interesting to note that in Seminar XI in which Lacan describes the process of alienation, he creates an identity between life and language. Lacan portrays the impossible choice with which the subject is confronted in the famous example “Your money or your life”- for if he chooses the money, he loses his life while if he chooses life, he lose something of his being. Perhaps one can say that if he chooses the money he loses his life and if he chooses life he in fact loses a piece of life. In Lacan’s words: “the schema for alienation is a choice which is not really one in this sense that one always loses something in it”[4]. The sense of life of the subject and his connection with it is returned to him by the dialectics of the signifiers, the differences between the “Yes” and “No” of the “Bejahung`”(consent). In this pulsation – established by the difference – beats the heart of the neurotic. Behind and through desire, the sense of life is woven and interwoven. The interesting expression “the passion of the signifier” which is to be found in the “The signification of the phallus” may perhaps clarify the way in which, for the neurotic, life flickers between the signifiers. I quote: “This passion of the signifier thus becomes a new dimension of the human condition in that it is not only man who speaks: in that his nature becomes woven by effects in which the structure of the language of which he becomes the material can be re-found: and in that the relation of speech thus resonates in him”[5].
In his last teaching, “life” moves from the symbolic order to the order of the real, from the subject to the parletre, from the unconscious subject to the unconscious as the speaking body. The intimate life of the subject is anchored in the juncture of language and body or perhaps in the fatal passionate stroke of language on the body, in the ub-sense, and the lalangue. “Lalangue makes us speak, laugh and cry. The fabric of the subject, its living force…”[6]. In “La Troisieme” Lacan says that life is structured as a knot. He writes “life” in the ring of the real, death in the ring of the symbolic register and the body in the imaginary. Hence, the sinthome ties together life, death, language and body.

A disorder that occurred at the innermost/intime juncture of the subject’s sense of life
Juncture/join-A juncture can occur between what is on the one hand not identical and which on the other hand is not too distant. This means that the sense of life, as I mentioned earlier, is not naturally available for the subject of speech. Therefore in order to gain access to it, some sort of connection is needed. For a juncture to occur there needs to be a right measure of difference and distance. If there is identity without a difference there will be boredom as it is accurately articulated by Lacan in “Television”. The one is identical to the other. There is no difference or a remainder. Where there is no difference and singularity `everything is the same`, life is not an option. We can also reflect on this by way of the concept of “suridentification”[7] which Tellenbach has suggested, as underlined at Antibes convention, as a way of identification in the case of ordinary psychosis. Identification without a signifier dialectic, articulation and difference. The subject is “identical” to his job or any character identifier that he identifies with. On the other hand, a juncture is not possible in a case where there is a great distance and detachment, where there is an abyss between the signifiers and where there is not a lack and difference that constructs the distance between them. J.A. Miller specifies and highlights in his lecture on ordinary psychosis[8] three dimensions of the disorder in the sense of life of the subject from the angle of the disconnection or externality: social externality, bodily externality, subjective externality.

A disorder that occurred at the innermost/intime juncture of the subject’s sense of life in ordinary psychosis
When the dialectic of the signifiers does not work and the name of the father is absent, there is room for the particular invention of every subject. A particular invention, which regulates in a particular manner the pulse of the connection of the symbolic, imaginary and the real. A knot of the body, the signifier and life. An intimate connection, juncture that is possible thanks to the implementation of some possibility of loss. An intimate re-connection that engenders through the construction of the sinthome that which one “can do with it”. A connection that has been achieved by a delicate movement that directs at the same time to the connection, the difference and the particular.

 

[1] Lacan.j, 0n the question prior to any possible treatment of psychosis, in Ecrit, p466
[2] Lacan.j. The direction of the treatment and the principles of its power, in Écrits
[3] Lacan.j.,SE Book 5, The formation of the unconscious, 1957-1958, Les 22/1/58
[4] Lacan.J., se 13, The object of psychyoanalysis 1965-1966, le 15/5/66
[5] Lacan.J, “The signification of the phallus”, In Écrits, p578
[6] Pascale Fari, Lalangu, A real for the 21 century- scilicet2014
[7] Antibes convention
[8] Miller.J.A., Ordinary psychosis revisited, in: Psychoanalytical Notebooks 19