拉康論移情 1123j

拉康論移情 1123j


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

There is one reason why there is no reason to begin again, because of which it is even impossible to begin again, and one of the reasons which will astonish you perhaps if I put it forward before you is that, for us, at the point that we are at, even if you have not realised it yet you will realise it if you reflect a little bit, love and its phenomenon and its culture and its dimension has for some time become disengaged from beauty.
That may astonish you, but that is the way it is.


You can verify that from both sides. From the side of beautiful works of art on the one hand, from the side of love also, and you will see that it is true. It is in any case a condition which renders difficult… and it is precisely for this reason that I make this whole detour to accustom you to what is in question… we return to the function of beauty, to the tragic function of beauty because this is what I put forward last year – the dimension – and this is what gives its veritable meaning to what Plato is going to tell us about love.


On the other hand, it is quite clear that at the present time it is not at all at the level of tragedy, nor at another level of which I will speak in a moment that love is bestowed, it is at the level of what in the Symposium is called, in Agathon’s discourse, the level of Polymnie.


It is at the level of lyricism, and in the order of artistic creations, at the level of what presents itself indeed as the most vivid materialisation of fiction as essential, namely what we call the cinema. Plato would have been delighted by this invention.


There is no better illustration for the arts of what Plato put at the origin of his vision of the world, than this “something” which is expressed in the myth of the cave that we see illustrated every day by those (16) dancing rays which are able to manifest on the screen all our feelings in a shadowy way.


It is indeed to this dimension that there belongs most outstandingly in the art of our day the defence and the illustration of love. This indeed is the reason that one of the things that I told you – which will nevertheless be the one around which we are going to centre our progress – one of the things I told you and which does not fail to arouse a certain
reticence, because I said it quite incidentally: love is a comic sentiment.


All the same, an effort is required for us to come back to the proper point of adaptation which gives it its import.


There are two things which I noted in my former discourse about love and I recall them. The first is that love is a comic sentiment, and you will see what will illustrate it in our investigation. We will complete in this connection the loop which will allow us to bring forward what is essential: the true nature of comedy.


And it is so essential and indispensable that it is for this reason that there is in the Symposium, something which since that time the commentators have never been able to explain, namely, the presence of Aristophanes. He was, historically speaking the sworn enemy of Socrates; nevertheless he is there.


The second thing that I wanted to say – as you will see – that we
rediscover at every moment, which will serve us as a guide, is
that love is to give what one does not have. This you will also
see arriving at one of the essential hinges of what we will have
to encounter in our commentary.


In any case, to enter into this subject, into this dismantling
through which this discourse of Socrates about Greek love will be
something illuminating for us, let us say that Greek love allows
us to separate out in the love relationship the two partners in a
neutral way (I mean at this something pure which is actually
expressed in the masculine gender), it is to allow there to be
articulated at first what happens at the level of this couple who
are respectively the lover and the beloved, erastes and eromenos.


What I will tell you the next time consists in showing you how, around these two functions of lover and beloved, the process of what unfolds in the Symposium is such that we are going to be able to attribute respectively, with all the rigour that analytic experience is capable of, what is in question ………


in other words we will see there articulated clearly, at a time when analytic experience as such was lacking, when the unconscious in its proper function with respect to the subject is undoubtedly a dimension which is not even suspected, and therefore with the limitation that this involves, you will see articulated in the(17) clearest fashion this something which comes to meet the summit of our experience;


that which I tried throughout all these years to unfold before you under the double rubric, the first year of Object Relations, the year which followed, of Desire and its interpretation …. you will see clearly appearing and in formulae which are probably those to which we have come: the lover as subject of desire (and taking into account all the weight that we give to the word desire) the eromenos, the beloved, as being the one who in this couple is the only one to have something.


The question of knowing whether “what he has” (because it is the
beloved who has it) has a relationship I would say even any
relationship whatsoever with that which the other, the subject of
the desire lacks.


I would say the following, the question of the relationships between desire and the one before whom desire is fixed – as you know – has already led us around the notion of desire qua desire for something else.


We arrived at it by means of an analysis of the effects of language on the subject.


It is strange that a dialectic of love, that of Socrates, which is
precisely made up entirely by means of dialectic, by a testing of
the imperative effects of questioning as such, does not lead us
to the same crossroads.


You will see that indeed far from leading us to the same crossroads it will allow us to go beyond, namely, to grasp the moment of tipping over, the moment of reversal where from the conjunction of desire with its object qua inadequate, there must emerge the signification which is called


It is impossible, without having grasped this articulation, the
conditions it involves in the symbolic, the imaginary and the real… not to grasp what is in question, namely in this effect so strange in its automatism which is called transference, to measure, to compare what is the part, the proportion between this transference and love, what there must be attributed to each one of them and reciprocally, in terms of illusion or of truth.


In this the path and the investigation that I introduced to you
today is going to prove to be of inaugural importance for us.
30.11.60 III 30



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: