506-507 / 536
THE SPEAKING BODY
Xth Congress of the WAP,
Rio de Janeiro 2016
507
506
as the
parlêtre’s
sinthome
, holds to the body of the
parlêtre
. The symptom arises
from the mark that speech hollows out when it takes the figure of saying and it
forms an event in the body. The
escabeau
stands on the side of the jouissance of
speech that includes meaning. On the other hand, the specific jouissance of the
sinthome
‘excludes meaning’.”
p. 127-128
“Joyce turned the symptom itself–in so far as it lies outside meaning, in so
far as it is unintelligible–into the
escabeau
of his art. (…) Joyce, Schoenberg
and Duchamp are creators of
escabeaus
that are designed to make art with the
symptom, with the opaque jouissance of the symptom. We would be hard
pushed to judge the nature of the
escabeau–symptom
according to the clinic.
Rather, we should let it be an example to us. (…) To do an analysis is to practice
‘the castration of the
escabeau
’ in order to bring to light the opaque jouissance
of the symptom, but to do the Pass is to play on the symptom that has been
uncluttered so as to turn it into an
escabeau
, to the applause of the analytic
group. (…) To be frank, I invented a public
monstration
of the Passes because I
knew, I thought, and I believed, that this was the very essence of the Pass. The
escabeaus
are there to produce beauty, because beauty is the last defense against
the real.”
p. 128
4.
Authors of the Freudian
Field
IV /a.
Parlêtre
/ Speaking-Being
Alemán, Jorge.
Gays and Culture: Foucault and ‘Constructionism’
.
Trans.: J. Stone [RT 7, 2014]
“Are we to understand Foucault’s quarrel with psychoanalysis in the light of
the unfortunate treatment the IPA has given to homosexuality, in treating it
exclusively as a perverse pathology, which must exclude the practitioners of
this choice? Regarding this, we should remember that Lacan’s teaching works
a progressive deconstruction (
démontage
) of “neurocentrism,” of the attempt
to think of neurosis as a center of assignation of meaning for other clinical
structures of the “speakingbeing” (“
parlêtre
”). Likewise, heterosexuality as
“
norme-mâle
” no longer constitutes, in Lacan’s teaching, the ultimate starting
place for explaining the other sexual practices, thematized in pre-Lacanian
teachings as deviations or fixations in development.”
p. 105
Assef, Jorge.
The Zombie Epidemic: A Hypermodern Version of the
Apocalypse
. [LCE, 2(7), 2013]
“As you know, the central point of Lacan’s ideas in his first teaching was
the symbolic, the unconscious structured as a language. Thus, the center of
subjectivity was $, the barred subject. In Lacan’s last teaching, the notion of
parlêtre
—speaking being— took the place of that of the barred subject. This
means that jouissance is added to the $ constituted by language.”
p. 7
Bourlez, Fabrice.
Psychoanalysis and the Phoenix
. Trans.: N. Teste
[PN 29, 2015]
“Psychoanalysis subverts a discourse of this kind. Instead of making the absence
of ‘sexual relation’ in reality into a banner, or a motif for occupying a narrowly
Authors of the Freudian Field