Extract
[...] Markos Zafiropoulos, The Feminine Question from Freud to Lacan: From Mother to Woman, Paris, PUF, 2014. Articles Pickmann, Claude-Noëlle, « The All-or-Nothing of Lacan? and that of Lou No Ramonville, Eres http://www.psychanalyseactuelle.com/textes/pastoutdelacan, consulted on 25 October 2019. Online documents Jacques Lacan, Seminar XXIV, The Nonknows not to know of the one-eyed knows how to fly to die, Session of May not published but available on http://gaogoa.free.fr/Seminaires_pdf/24-Linsu/XXIV-12-17051977.pdf, consulted on October 25, 2019. [...]
[...] We thus understand that motherhood becomes the constitutive trait of femininity in Freud's thought. But Marcos Zafiropoulos exposes the difficulty that hinders such an identification with the mother and, as a consequence, with the logic of substituting the child for the absent penis, Penisneid : « We do not see what would lead the girl to ideally identify with the object of her own disappointment, or with the object of this hatred that leads her at the beginning of Oedipus to reject the mother and seek a solution on the side of her relationship with the father12 ». [...]
[...] The female body remains in its nature of Real that cannot be assimilated by the subject: it forms a hole in the signifier, but this hole is not nothingness, it is the meaning of absence, of the non-symbolizable. The body is the Other of the woman and, thus, the Other pleasure is ecstasy, therefore beyond meaning, in the unsayable. Bibliography Works André, Serge, What does a Woman Want? Paris, Seuil, 1995. De Certeau, Michel, The Mystic Fable, Paris, Gallimard, Tel, 1982. [...]
[...] which will be the very object of the deepening of Lacan's thought on the feminine in the studied excerpt. By being barred, the signifier is 'cancelled'23 ». Thus the phallic function manifests itself at the level of the symbolic: 'The phallus is always covered by the bar placed on its accession to the domain of the signifier, that is, on its place in the Other'24». The relationship of the woman to the Other is indeed the main axis of Lacan's development in this excerpt from Seminar XX. [...]
[...] The woman has a relationship with it and, at the same time, it is inaccessible. The relationship of the woman, and what constitutes her as a feminine subject, is therefore this radical alterity, this link with the Other which is at the same time an alterity to which the subject does not have access. Lacan had explained this radical alterity of the Other from the Seminar V : « the phallus is always covered by the bar placed on its accession to the signifying domain, that is to say, on its place in the Other This is the conclusion that Lacan had previously drawn from the re-examination of the case of Dora analyzed by Freud. [...]
