7/28/2019 Knotting Seminar in Athens_report

1/4

1

Knotting Seminar in Athens

22th September 2012

Report

At the Knotting seminar that took place in Athens in front of a large number ofparticipants, the main speaker was Dominique Holvoet, President of the NLS. Hispresentation was an introduction to orient our work towards the 11th Congress of theNLS, which is going to take place in Athens on18 and19 May 2013.

Dominique Holvoet accomplished an association between the previous (reading asymptom) and the forthcoming (Psychoanalysis and the Psychotic Subject: FromForced Invention to Belief in the Symptom) Congress. The main points of hispresentation are summarised here:

The approach of the two terms, PsychoanalysisandPsychosisshould be based on areversal of the perspective in psychoanalysis which emerges with a sequence ofsubstitutions. The first one is the substitution ofinterpretation with the term: readinga symptom; it is indicated with a reversal in orientation. The new direction is beyondmeaning to the materiality of the letter. A re-substitution with the term statement(constat) is aiming at the mark of the signifier on the body. This mark concerns themythical moment when the signifier strikes the body1. Our work towards Athensshould take the form of a research on the following question: what consequences will

such a reversal of perspective have on psychosis?Psychoanalysis does not approach psychosis as a taxonomic category; it is ratherinterested in the way each subject - based on his symptom is integrated intocivilization. This integration presupposes ones ability to use the common language asa social link, on the one hand, and, on the other, it presupposes a private language,formed by the writing of the symptom2. In Freud the universality ofOedipusposed asa civilizing device regulatingjouissance with the assistance of prohibition. Eversince the paternal figure had already started unsettling. Psychoanalysis then movedfrom the dimension of the psychic conflict to that of the formal envelop of thesymptomas a way of handlingjouissance.

In his classical period Lacan highlights the symbolic status of the paternal figure.

The function of the paternal metaphor regulatesjouissance and stabilizes meanings,giving them a phallic value. The failure of such a function leads to a condition wherethe subject cannot find refuge in language in order to handle the phenomena of

jouissance.The consequences (of such a condition) not only afflict the body but thelinguistic code as well, transforming it to aneo-code. Jacques-Alain Millerpoints outa second metaphor, where the paternal figure gives way to theName-of-the-Father, asignifier that could be replaced by other master signifiers. Psychosis is characterized

1The bodyshould be conceived here as a set oforgans, whose function has not yet been found.

2The symptom here should be perceived as an alternative social bond.

7/28/2019 Knotting Seminar in Athens_report

2/4

2

by ajouissance which fails to be channelled as a whole underthe Name-of-the-Father. Lacan names it non-negativablejouissance.

We, therefore, draw the conclusion that the Other of the second metaphor is not

of the order of the One; he is rather barred, not coherent. Lacan suggests the

following matheme3

1

1

which can be written as / -. Dominique Holvoet gave

us a simplified version of thematheme / -as follows: /j .

From the Name-of-the-Father as a consistent Other we move on to itsmultiplication. Therefore,jouissancecan be signified in several ways, not just by thepaternal one. While in classical Lacan the handling of the Real was based on thesignifier, it is now expected from the entire field of the language. Ultimately, it seemsthat the Real is the one that regulates the signifier, a finding that will lead Lacan toconsider the language as an organ. he relevant extract fromlEtourdit reads: ananimal has a stabitat4 which is language, that inhabiting it in a labile way is

moreover what makes an organ for its body, an organ which, by thus ex-sisting fromit, determines it by its function, this even before it finds it. It is even by this that it isreduced to finding that its body is not-without other organs, and that the function ofeach of them, poses a problem for it, from which the schizophrenic said is specifiedby being caught without the help of any established discourse..

Inasmuch the Other does not exist, he is nothing but an invention; psychoanalytictreatment consists of such an invention. Psychoanalysis does not concern theproduction of meanings, but rather a reconciliation with our private language, theparticular Other we have invented. The subject is urged to render language his owntool, to tinker with it.

We can summarize the two lacanian periods (from the 1st metaphor to the 2nd), asfollows:

Classical Lacan - 1st

metaphor (On a Question Prior to Any Possible Treatmentof Psychosis)

Later Lacan - 2nd

metaphor(The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialecticof Desire)

Interpretation Desire

Statement - ConstatJouissance

The Real is being treatedby the:

Signifier

The Signifier is being treatedby the:

LetterRealSymbolic Order

Discourses Bricolage, Do-it-yourself

Semblant Symptom

Belief in the symptom is a wording of Eric Laurent about a forced invention.However, not all subjects have access to the established discourses in order to be able

3 Subversion of the subject

4 Condensing stable and habitat

7/28/2019 Knotting Seminar in Athens_report

3/4

3

to support their invention. Dominique Holvoet raises a number of questions toconsider towards our research in the field of psychosis:To what extent is it necessaryto believe in the symptom so that it can function? What about the Name-of-the-Fatherin the case of ordinary psychosis, from which we have to learn without generating itto the whole clinic? How is the Name-of-the Father transformed for the contemporary

subject? And, finally, in what way does the Name-of-the-Father, despite being moreordinary, still function?

The role of the psychoanalyst is fundamental. He should be the boundary for thewandering of the psychotic subject. And despite the fact that the analyst himself hasacknowledged the lack of the Other, he still uses him (the Other) as a tool. DominiqueHolvoet concludes that the point is not the murder of the father in an analysis thiswould no way result in the death of libido. What Lacan called pure psychoanalysisrequires, at first, the reduction of the father to the dimension of a semblant and,consequently, the discourses of the analysand to follow the same destiny. This leadsto ado-it-yourselfthat constitutes the dignity of a non-further reducible symptom.

In the clinical part of the seminar, Sharon Zvili Cohen, psychologist, member ofthe Israel Society (GIEP) of NLS, presented the first clinical case, entitled Too littletoo late time traces.

It is a case of a woman whose main symptom is her relation with time, that is herdifficulty in managing and calculating time. Being the appleof her mothers eye wassome kind of imaginary compensation for her. After her mothers death, a dog tookthe place of a phallic substitute and, thus, a rudimentary stability was maintained.

Only after the dogs death the subject suffered from something which she calleddepression. She started therapy many years later, only when she was confrontedwith the death of her second dog as well as with the loss of her ability to become amother.

Throughout her life, this subject is overwhelmed by ajouissanceof a living-dead;she is floating. Her symptomatic relation with time is related to the rivalry to herstepmother, whose presence causes something like a bleeding to the maternalinheritance, thus to the subject herself. It seems that the psychoanalyst functions as apillar for her; the sessions become some kind of punctuation to the floating of time.

The second clinical case, entitled Ulysses or the artist and his object waspresented by Helen Molari, psychiatrist, clinical tutor at the Psychiatric Hospital ofAttica and member of the Hellenic Society of NLS. The case involved a manic subjectwho was hospitalized and has been monitored by her since.

Initially, the phenomenology of the clinical case was delineated in accordance withKraepelin. Further on, the formation of the subject in relation to the problematic of theobject was presented, according to Lacan.

Until his forties the subject was stabilized; having his father as an imaginary braceas well as his art, since he is a stage designer and a painter. The invasion of the digitaltechnology into the field of art as well as a confrontation with his father struck him,

undermining the only solutions he had.

7/28/2019 Knotting Seminar in Athens_report

4/4

4

In this case, the failure of objecta to compressjouissance, leaves the subject exposedto an interminable metonymy of the signifying chain and, furthermore, to a limitlessexcitation of the body. Being an Other who does not demand, but guarantees the orderof things, the therapist accompanies the subject in his attempt to create asinthomesothat the signifier andjouissancecan coexist within the social link. Since this subject

has a repertoire of real objects available, artistic creation functions in order to restrainjouissancethrough a punctuation of naming.

Despina Karagianni

French Bibliography

Lacan, J., (1960).Subversion du Sujet et Dialectique du Dsir. Ecrits, Paris, p. 819.Lacan, J., (1966). Question Prliminaire tout Traitement Possible de la Psychose, (1958),

Ecrits, Paris, p. 557.Lacan, J., (2001). Ltourdit. Autres crits, Paris, Seuil, p. 474.Miller, J .A. (2004). Linvention psychotique. Quarto. Le march des symptoms. No. 80-81. p.

6-13.

English BibliographyLacan, J., (2006). On a Question Prior to Any Possible Treatment of Psychosis (1958). Ecrits.

Norton, pp. 464.Lacan, J., (2006). The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire (1960). Ecrits.

Norton, pp. 694.