拉康論移情 1123i

拉康論移情 1123i


Transference 論移情

1960 – 1961
Translated by Cormac Gallagher from unedited French typescripts
Cormac Gallagher 根據未編輯的法語錄音英譯

Seminar 2; Wednesday 23 November 1960

Here, schoolboys are acneed and cretinised by the education they receive and these conditions are not really favourable for them to become the
object of our homage; it seems that one has to go searching for objects in out of the way places, the gutter, that is the whole difference.


But there is no difference in the structure itself. (14) Naturally this causes scandal, given the outstanding dignity with which we have invested the Greek message.


And then there are the fine sentiments with which one surrounds oneself for this purpose, namely that we are told: all the same you must not
believe that for all that women did not receive appropriate homage.


Thus Socrates, do not forget, precisely in the Symposium, where, as I told you, he says very little in his own name – but what he speaks is extraordinary – only he makes a woman speak in his place: Diotima.


Do you not see that the testimony, that the supreme homage comes back, even in the mouth of Socrates, to the woman?


Here at any rate is what right thinking people never fail at this point to highlight for us; and in addition, you know that from time to time he would go to visit Lais, Aspasia – historians collect all sorts of gossip – Theodota who was Alcibiades’ mistress.


And as regards the famous Xanthippes, about whom I spoke to you the other day, she was there the day he died as you know, and she even gave out the most deafening cries.


There is only one problem… this is attested for us in the Phaedo, in any case, Socrates suggests that she should be put to bed immediately, that she should be got out at quickly as possible so that they can talk calmly, there are only a few hours left.


Except for this, the function of the dignity of women will be preserved. I have no doubt in fact about the importance of women in antique Greek society, I would say even more, it is something very serious whose import you will subsequently see.


It is that they had what I would call their true place. Not alone did they have their true place, but this means that they had a quite outstanding weight in love relationships and we have all sorts of testimonies of this.


It appears in fact, provided always that one knows how to read – one must not read the antique authors with wire netting on one’s glasses – that they had this role which is veiled for us but nevertheless is very
outstandingly their own in love: simply the active role, namely that the differences between the antique woman and the modern woman is that she demanded her due, that she attacked the man.


This is something that you can, I believe, put your finger on in
many cases. In any case when you have woken up to this point of
view on the question you will notice many things which otherwise,
in ancient history, seem strange. In any case Aristophanes who
was a very good music-hall producer, did not dissimulate from us
how the women of his time behaved.


There has never been anything more characteristic and more crude concerning the enterprises – as I might say – of women. And it is precisely
for that reason that learned love – as I might call it – took refuge elsewhere.


We have here in any case one of the keys for the question which
should not astonish psychoanalysts too much.


(15) This may appear perhaps quite a long detour to excuse the fact that in our enterprise (which is to analyse a text whose object is to know what it means to know about love) we take something obviously, we take what we know, that it refers to the time of Greek love, this love as I might say of the school, I mean of schoolboys.


Well, it is for technical reasons of simplification, of example, of a model which allows to be seen an articulation that otherwise is always elided in what is too complicated in love with women, it is because of this that this love of the school can be of use to us, can legitimately be of use to all (for our object) as a school for love.


This of course does not mean, that this is something to be relaunched. I would like to avoid any misunderstanding, because soon people will be saying that I am setting myself up here as a proponent of Platonic love.


There are many reasons why this can no longer serve as a school for love. If I were to tell you about them, this would again be a question of giving great sword thrusts through curtains when one does not know what there is behind – believe me – in general I avoid it.



Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: