精神病 203

精神病 203



I would like to finish by pointing out to you those texts by Freud that justify

what I said to you last night.




My own work is to understand what Freud did. Consequently, to interpret

even what is implicit in Freud is legitimate in my eyes. I say this to tell you

that I’m not backing away from my responsibilities in asking you to refer to

what certain texts have powerfully expressed.




Refer to those years, around 1896, when as Freud himself tells us he was

assembling his doctrine – he took a long time to state what he had to say. He

stresses the time of latency, which always lasted three to four years, between

the composition of his major works and their publication. The Traumdeutung

was written three or four years prior to its publication. The same goes for

The Psychopatkology of Everyday Life and the Dora case.




One can observe that the twofold structuring of the signifier and signified

doesn’t appear after the event. As early as Letter 46, for example, Freud

states that he is beginning to see the stages of the subject’s development

appear in his experience, how to construct them, and also to show its relationship

to the existence of the unconscious and its mechanisms. One is struck

by seeing him employ the term Ubersetzung to designate a given stage of the

subject’s experiences, according as it’s translated or not. Translated – what

does that mean? It’s a question of what happens at levels defined by the

subject’s age – from one to four years of age, then from four to eight years of

age, then the prepubertal period, and finally the period of maturity.2




It’s interesting to note the stress Freud places on the signifier. Bedeutung

can’t be translated as specifying the signifier in relation to the signified. Likewise,

in Letter 52, I’ve already pointed out that he says this -I am working

on the assumption that our psychic mechanism has come into being by a process of

stratification: the material present in the form of memory traces being subjected

from time to time to a rearrangement in accordance with fresh circumstances to

a retranscription. Thus what is essentially new about my theory is the thesis that

memory is present not once but several times over, that it is laid down in various

kinds of indications}




I’m pointing out to you the kinship between what is said here and the

schema I gave a commentary on for you the other day. Freud emphasizes

that these different stages are characterized by the plurality of mnemic










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: