Anxiety 100 Jacques Lacan

Anxiety 100

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康



1962 – 1963
Seminar 14: Wednesday 13 March 1963

Did it not strike you that I spoke to you about the breast or the eyes, making these objects o start from Zurbaran, from Lucy and Agatha, where they present themselves under what I might call a (8) positive form? These breasts and these eyes that I showed you there on the plate on which the two worthy saints carry them, or even on the bitter soil where Oedipus’ feet carry him, appear here with a sign different from the one I showed you subsequently in the phallus as specified by the fact that at a certain level of the animal order jouissance coincides with detumescence, pointing out to you that there is nothing necessary about this, necessary nor linked to the Wesenheit, the essence of the organism, in the Goldsteinien sense of the word.


At the level of o, it is because the phallus, the phallus in so far as it is, in copulation, not alone the instrument of desire, but an instrument functioning in a certain fashion, at a certain animal level, it is for this reason that it presents itself in the position o with a (-) sign.


This is essential to articulate clearly, to differentiate,
something that is important here, from castration anxiety, from what functions in the subject at the end of an analysis when what Freud designates as a castration threat is maintained there.


If there is something which allows us to put our finger on the fact that this is a point that can be gone beyond, that it is absolutely not necessary that the subject remains suspended when he is a male at the castration threat, suspended, when she is of the other sex at Penisneid, it is precisely this distinction.


To know how we could go beyond this limiting point, what must be known, this is why an analysis guided in a certain direction culminates at this impasse through which the negative which marks the physiological functioning of copulation in the human being finds itself promoted to the level of the subject in the shape of an irreducible lack. This is what will be found again subsequently as a question, as a direction of our path, and I think it is important to have marked it here.


What I subsequently contributed during our last meeting, is the articulation of two very important points concerning sadism and masochism, the essential of which I resume here for you, the essential that it is altogether capital to maintain, to sustain, in so far as by holding onto it, you can give their full meaning to the very elaborated things that are said in the current state of things about what is involved, namely sadism and masochism.


What is to be retained in what I enounced there concerns at first masochism, as regards which you can see that, if the authors have really labored a great deal to the point of taking very far, so (9) far that something I read recently here, was able to surprise me myself, I will mention later an author who took things to my surprise, I must say to my joy also, as close as possible to the point that I will attempt this year, from our own angle here, to lead to you as regards masochism.


The fact remains that this very article, whose title I will give you later, remains, like all the others, strictly incomprehensible for the simple reason that already at the beginning there is in a way elided, because it is there indeed absolutely under his nose, as one might say, from the evidence, something that I am going to enunciate in a moment. People try, people manage to avoid putting the accent on that which, at first approach, involves, collides most with our
finalism, namely the intervention of the function of pain.


This, people have managed to understand, is not the essential thing.


Also people have succeeded, thank God, in an experience like that of analysis, in seeing that the Other is aimed at, that in the transference one can perceive that these masochistic manoeuvres are situated at a level which are not without a relationship to the Other.


Naturally many other authors take advantage of it to go no
further, to jump on an insight whose superficial character can be seen at a glance, however handy it has shown itself to be in certain cases. For having only arrived at this level, one cannot say that the function of narcissism, which an author who is not without a certain talent for presentation, Ludwig
Heidelberg, has emphasised, is something that can suffice for us.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: