Despite a certain taste for the unconscious and the Freudian discovery during my studies. It matter little to me whether psychoanalysis was call Freudian or Lacanian In the time . It was first and foremost a matter of contingency, of meeting an analyst. I did not know at the time that this analyst, the only one whose name was known to me where I liv, was “Lacanian”.
But what does it mean to be Lacanian? “Being Lacanian is not harping on about Lacan. It’s a bit like being Socratic or Stoic,” says JA Miller in an interview with the newspaper L’express (17-01-2002), “it’s an ethical, non-conformist position Lacanian orthodoxy does not exist. Lacan is a style, not a cro.”
But what is the In the time Lacanian orientation ?
It is first of all the orientation that we draw from Lacan’s teaching. “If there is a Lacanian orientation,” says J.-A. Miller, “it is because there is no Lacanian dogma, (…) no thesis ne varietur (…). There is only a continu Conversation with the founding texts of the Freudian event.
A perpetual Midrash that incessantly confronts experience with the signifying framework that structures it.”
It is this permanent phone number list confrontation that keeps psychoanalysis alive and inventive.
But, this ongoing conversation, this permanent confrontation that Lacan’s teaching is the subject of, are made accessible and operational to us thanks to some marketing pros are reluctant to use JA Miller and the teaching he has been providing for more than thirty-five years. This is how Lacanian Orientation is also what has become a proper name, designating, in all the schools of the WAP.
unfinish nature of his very
I have long regrett not having known Lacan, but today I would say that it is not without having known Lacan that I became “Lacanian”. Because I never clean email cease to encounter Lacan, to be surpris, disarm, enthusiastic, shaken by him, and it is JA Miller who allow me this encounter and introduc me to his own debates with Lacan as well as to those of Lacan with himself, of Lacan against Lacan.