Accueil

 

Is psychoanalysis a defendable cause?

MELMAN Charles
Date publication : 28/06/2019

 

Is psychoanalysis a defendable cause?
 
It is noteworthy that Freud was too alone to be able to sustain it, in the face of the exacerbation that it could provoke in patients with traditional, ethnic and national passions, like for Jung, or just ordinarily egoistic for anyone. What about me, what about me, that was the slogan of Lacan’s disciples, it was a bit short-sighted, let’s admit. In the first case it was a question of putting an end to the puerility of the species, alienated by an ideal bounced around between the totalitarian One and excrement.
Cultural change was our master’s doorstep, which finally demonstrated the cause of the symptom—with stupidity [la connerie]—our dependence regarding language. But this programme could not be defended without denaturing it by inscribing it with a collective watchword—arise the damned of life—disagreeable and with the individual determination that it requires.
It seems that it was necessary for Lacan to get old and start stammering for the last of his believers to wag their tails and line up behind he who asserted himself to have the biggest, legitimised moreover by a notary, by the title of “testamentary executor”.
He effectively did execute, reducing it to a training camp for a war that will never take place, an exceptional teaching.
Does it leave our group in peace? The answer might be touched upon in Lisbon.
Ch. Melman
5 June 2019
 
Traduction en anglais par Michaël Plastow

Espace personnel