Façons de lire, manières dêtre (NRF Essais) (French Edition)

Available for download now. Only 6 left in stock - order soon. Only 1 left in stock - order soon. Only 10 left in stock - order soon. Le savoir des genres Feb 22, Les puissances de l'imagination: Provide feedback about this page. There's a problem loading this menu right now. Get fast, free shipping with Amazon Prime.

Top Free Books

Get to Know Us. English Choose a language for shopping. Myself, though, I think we can change man. Which is a rupture, a search. His parents were Greek, they immigrated to Marseilles, where he had a relatively well-off childhood. But there has to be a biography of A somewhere out there, where you can find something about family history. It also depends on the relationship between the mother and the father, what he was like, and why.

What the relationship with the mother is. I know nothing about that.

Bibliographie

But there are those elements that you have to take into account. You have treat them very carefully. His life is his work. He has smart tools with which to do it. He was a New York-born Jew, his parents had immigrated after the war broke out, probably, or maybe a little before. So languages become his Substitution. By Substitution, you should understand something that comes to fill in the psychic hole that madness represents — that yawning gap, that anxiety, that suffering.

Because those people suffer terribly. And so he gets over it, his madness, his anguish, his psychic martyrdom, by learning languages, by using them, and by writing his autobiography. Especially the theater, no, you say, more so than writing. He tried cinema, the theater, psychedelics [xiv] , yes poetry also a bit, even writing letters. But I think that, unless Artaud was a bit confused about what he was searching for, which he was, without a doubt… But I think that his reconciliation with language is — I have in mind, now, because we were talking about psychotics and Substitution, the case of Mishima.

I read a psychoanalytic article about him, the jist of which was that he was a psychotic who was able to bring in a substitute to prevent the disintegration of his reality first off in his confessional, quasi-autobiographical writing, and then by using the sword to commit seppuku.

A kind of self-castration, if you want. And then, to find some artistic expression —. Yes… well, to make do with it. But to know it. To come into a completely different relationship with your desire —. Yes, by spotting the symptom, of course. His thing was very sublimated, to begin with. It was that subjective division between spirit and reality, between thought and reality. But so when it comes down to it, that subjective division, we all have it, more less. But more or less. Do you see what I mean?

Can one have a somewhat revolutionary vision, a vision that wants to exert a certain change, once one has gone through treatment.

Menu de navigation

Because, in a way, what you accept, when you accept treatment, is a certain law, a certain logic of desire, and that all the rest of it is nothing more than a kind of more or less, a kind of reconciliation, a means of tolerating your symptom. That work is never ending. A psychoanalyst must not abandon that. A real one, a good one. Is to aim for that. A to each his own messianic time, to be found. Which I have to say sort of bothered me, you know. But that messianic time is something that interrupts normal time. Not closed off by certainties. And, deep down, detached from oneself.

And for example, since you were talking about demand, the demand directed towards the Other is unending. Demand for an object, that appears in response to that quest. It has yet to come, this messianic time. He was addicted to opium, in a pretty weird way actually, I think that he started using it in the context of a treatment, then at some point he stopped, then got hooked again, and just kept and kept taking it… but in any event, whether it was that or something else, I think that things would have ended. Because I think that one of the solutions he tried to find for this disjunction between the two subjects, that we all have, was to create that theater that transforms immediately, and that another one, which he talks about in a quote: I only have one occupation left, remaking myself.

And I think that, for the moderns, that sort of reinvention, the act of multiplying one self into an infinity of selves, that that was also a technique for trying to overcome that falsity of the subject. Of the irreconcilability of the spirit and of the ego. Because there are other poets who tried to do that, who invented personas, and it was another way of going about it.

Instead, it invites you to know your desire. Yes, to be within desire. To be within desire but always with that permanent contradiction of not finding, of being deprived of the object. With desire, castration is key. You could almost say that psychoanalysis is a process of learning castration, that neurosis is a permanent avoidance of castration. Symptoms are there so one can have hidden, unconscious jouissance. Yes, and a discovery of that unfortunate system, and with no end in sight. Apart from the same malaise recreating itself. So might as well change positions and be in lack — or in desire, in short — with a castration that is the law.

Is the conclusion we come to. But there are possibilities. To only be in the real. It would be horrible for this dialogue of ours. And what matters to us seems to me to be just that point, there, of common ground. Our great tool, our only tool. After all, why all these speeches. Why do we talk to one another? But as a result they became friends.

That correspondence, it must have meant an enormous amount to Artaud. He remains fairly self-centered. That creates transcendence, basically. Yes, there is that aspect.

But the thing is is that, paradoxically, the roles are interchangeable. Which is to say that the analyst is also the slave, and the analysand, the master. And so what happens in an analysis — at certain moments, not all the time, if it were all the time that would be wonderful — but is still some surprise, and some good surprise. Surprise is always good.

• Nrf Essais PDF Download.
• Wie ist es, eine Fledermaus zu sein und andere Essays (German Edition)!
• Related JoVE Videos.

The subject is the subject of the unconscious. But there is no subject. That, to represent that to yourself, to never forget it, and to always be in that position, is difficult.

Nrf Essais PDF Download - Free E-Book Download

And, well, the traces left behind by Lacan, then taken up again by others, the young who come, and who live from something else, changing customs, globalization, mixes… There are plenty of things going on, on the planet, that make it so that things have to change. And there is some possible. There is an enormous potential, in man. Yes, but one can dare to dream.

All those assassinations, nuclear power…everything you see all the time. Provided we have different desires. But what happens afterwards? In terms of sociology, it is possible.

I mean, I have a hard time imagining a system flexible enough to take into account the constant displacement of desire. But one has trouble imagining it. There are only those who have nothing to lose who would be willing, potentially. The Horn of Africa, hunger, well all that stuff. But at the same time that it not be all compassionate, and that all every one is pretty, everyone is nice, that too. But another system, I think it has to be possible.

Maybe we would have to restrain ourselves materially over a long period of time. To tighten our belts. Because when you tightened your belt in periods of famine, it helped with the hunger, it pulled the stomach in close. You have to admit that prejudices have receded a little.

But I think that sexual categories are about scary. Psychosis, neurosis, perversion… phobia. But even so, it points to changes. After all, psychoanalysis has been around a hundred years. But for the time being, I mean there are small pockets, but behaviorism and neuroscience have taken the lead.

So he really wanted to arrive at a language that was, say, corporeal. In a certain way. The phenomena of seeing, suddenly, something truer. But what it tries to affect is kind of the letter of the body. That everyone would have the same desire and the same goal and the same notion of a politics. But that that common ground can be recovered through a bodily language. Yes, I do, does —. Yes, it starts off with the idea that the truth of language is in the body. That the effect of truth comes from there. That after that, the rest, is the Imaginary, is false.

If you add on too much after that. Sort of an unrelated question, but a tension in analytical logic that sort of baffled me. Is there a difference between the position of the psychotic, and the position of the woman? Because in the psychoanalytic logic, they look a lot alike. Rather than of the woman. Since femininity is just as much in men as in women. Do the woman and the psychotic…? No, I would say no. Because, well, there are psychotic women, who are caught up in that same maelstrom. Not all of what? Not all of phallus. It like that, in language. It escapes something that is caught up in the phallus, and that structures us all.

The phallus seems to be, in any case, in every society. Be they matriarchal or patriarchal. Class stuff too, you know, things you use to figure one another out, and to exchange words that are structured within this phallic system. Lacan put forth this notion that, for the psychotic, there is a foreclosure of the Name [xxii] of the Father. No, not of the phallic function, since he has speech.

But a foreclosure of the Name of the Father. Speech still functions, language still functions, but outside of the law. The signifier, language, is grafted onto the child by the mother. Above all any spiritual one. Which is to say that non-reintegration is what allows symbolization. We think, we invent, we search, we find and we desire. By making them exist if possible, or not. By writing them down, in short. Even if looks like cleaning, or cooking…. You have to lack, you know, to desire is to lack.

And when he is name supreme judge of some court, he suddenly finds himself in this extreme psychosis, in which he becomes a woman. Woman — desired by god.

He writes it and publishes it out of pocket at the end of ten years in a psychiatric clinic. And so this work, which is very well written, detailed detailed detailed, shows the unfurling of this delirium and the phases of psychic decomposition of this man. So Freud commented this work, because he never actually met Schreber, but going off of these writings on psychosis he performs an analysis of Schreber that Lacan takes up again, in the seminar on the psychosis. Why was I talking about this?

Yes, about the woman, because there is in this delirium a feminization that is extraordinary. Structuring happens only at the price of prohibition. It involves accepting a kind of prejudice. Oedipus, heterosexuality, everything that comes along with the biological, sexual difference, etc. You have to accept, in the end, an original arbitrariness, in order to function.

Yes because in fact, there are three fathers for Lacan, you know, there is the symbolic father, the imaginary father, and the real father. You get out of Oedipus. You get out of familialism. There are always parents. And then apparently it is in his as well, since he killed himself. But even still, you can invent things. There are ways out. After all, there are talented people who find them. Either in their life, or their work, or their job…. There is only the father, for Freud, who can save man.

She marries her father, under one guise or another, he marries his mother, under one guise or another. And then later on he goes even further, since he talks about names of the father. Writing was his sole activity. And Daedalus and Ulysses and…. I mean he achieved celebrity, Beckett, and was successful. But as for his personal life, like I think that he was very alcoholic. And anyways he grew up in this French hamlet, and apparently he got driven to school everyday by Beckett. And Beckett was always drunk, and all he talked about was cricket.

Anyway sort of a weird anecdote I saw recently… [xxvii]. I mean, what matters to me is especially this question of transformation. Be the first to ask a question about Styles. Critique de nos formes de vie. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Moscha Yannissi rated it did not like it May 04, Adriana rated it it was amazing Apr 11, Moscha Yannissi rated it did not like it Apr 12, Lionel Nimbus marked it as to-read Nov 04, Catherine Anne marked it as to-read Mar 24, Nelly Desmarais marked it as to-read Mar 27,