Hsing-Chi Book Series ｜ Lacanians on Emotion
In the book, Claire Soleil shows you a Lacanian style version of “The Brain Agent Team.”. Pixar’s animated film only portrays five emotions (joy, sadness, fear, disgust, and anger), while Soleil examines various emotions. Her passion for Lacanian psychoanalysis corrected existing perspectives within the scope of psychoanalytic behavior and emotions. Her repositioning of emotions will have a lasting impact on contemporary unconscious theory—— Patricia GheroviciWriter and psychoanalyst
Doctor of Medicine, Psychiatrist
Psychoanalyst and member of the Toronto Psychoanalytic Society
Author Introduction:
Claire Soleil
Preface:
After rereading this work published in 2011, I once again want to do something for it. However, time flies, and the focus of debate in the psychoanalytic community has undergone a significant shift. We can hardly hear those “big shots” teaching Lacan that he is indifferent to human emotions. On the contrary, as a psychoanalyst and clinical worker, Lacan has become world-renowned. However, it is only within the circles of the “big shots” that the voices of slander gradually subside. Lacan once said that this century will be Lacan style. But to ensure the victory of psychoanalysis, we still need to make more efforts, as our era has returned to another extreme: the ancient struggle between supporters of mechanistic determinism and those who insist on making the subject take responsibility for their own impulses. The reason why we return to this ancient debate is clearly due to the progress of biological science, which has saved the so-called hegemonic postulates in neuroscience. This trend is extremely detrimental to psychoanalysis. The emotions I mentioned in “Lacanian Essays on Emotions” were passionately commented upon by Lacanian, but these emotions are not all on the same level. Among them, anxiety has a unique and dominant position. Not only because it is a shared emotion among humans, nor because Freud viewed it as a cause of trauma for symptoms in 1926, but also as a bedrock for analyzing the endpoint; But it is because Lacan once gave a year long seminar on this topic, during which he constructed the concept of object a, which is his (theoretical) main creation, defined as the “missing thing” in the three realms of imagination, symbol, and reality. Object A is a driver, not fixed, but it remains quiet, like the noise of the operation of the human machine. As Lacan said, the object brings the “whole reality” of our world. Nowadays, it has become an unprecedented “dome of society”.However, in Lacan’s exposition of these emotions, the most subtle and original views are reflected elsewhere: only Lacan values these emotions and recognizes their enlightening functions. Firstly, it is the analyzed “unpredictable emotions”. I borrowed this statement from his lecture at the É cole Freud (EFP) in Paris. I have said that those who enter an analysis all hope that in the end, they will only have emotions that match the situation. Unfortunately, experience has shown that this is not the case. Similarly, only Lacan considered this subtle situation, rather than attributing it to the recurrence of neurosis. Similarly, we must make a hypothesis that emotions are an “effect” produced by language devices in order to recognize the signals that appear in mysterious and unexpected unexpected situations. These signals do not represent the signifier chain, but represent the language of lalangue. The former’s effect has been explored in analysis, but the latter is filled with countless ambiguities, always nurturing new emotions. My so-called proof of emotion can supplement Lacan’s proof of the signifier to the unconscious.I have already mentioned that in the preface of the English version of the Eleventh Discussion Class, another original development of Lacan is also evident. This article is the last one that Lacan discusses and analyzes the end of the problem, which opposes Freud’s view on infinite analysis. Lacan mentioned a new emotion in the text, a sense of satisfaction, which is not satisfaction with something casually, but satisfaction with the end of… (analysis). This view cannot be found in other literature of Lacan. This is a therapeutic benefit that analysis itself brings, as it can offset the widespread dissatisfaction of the subject, especially those with Freudian neurosis, at the end of the analysis. It was not in that article that Lacan first mentioned the benefits brought by the end of analysis. Since “The Functions and Fields of Speech and Language”, this issue has been Lacan’s continuous contemplation. He had been exploring until he proposed the transformation of the subject. But in this article, Lacan goes further because this sense of satisfaction is a new emotion that has never been seen before, marking a transformation beyond the transformation of subjectivity.
We believe that the concept of emotion assumes an influencer and an influencer. In addition, there are two influenced individuals in the subject, as they have a body that is influenced by pleasure. And pleasure is rejected and fragmented by language, so pleasure also affects the body itself, because the body cannot avoid experiencing pleasure. This is what we often refer to as “experience”. I imitated Lacan’s statement in an article, so I could say, “As a psychoanalyst, I am vigilant about emotions…” because emotions are the initial and ultimate content that I need to deal with. The emotions associated with symptoms of pain, anxiety, and inhibition are what we initially present to the analyst, and the ultimate analysis is the emotions of resolution, mourning, agreement, and even satisfaction. The article by Lacan that I imitated clearly has another meaning, “As a psychoanalyst, I am vigilant about signals…” Signals are not signifiers, but they share a commonality with signifiers, that is, they are both related elements, but the basis of signals is numbers, and their semantic effects are completely different from the signifier order. The signal of a signal means that one is equivalent to another and can be substituted for each other, so its meaning is not semantic. The signal is about pleasure, existing both in the endless decoding process of unconscious forms and in the fixation of unshakable symptoms. Subsequently, the enjoyment affected will also be fed back into the subject’s emotions, and I remain alert to this “effect”, while also receiving a doubled “signal”. Psychoanalysis certainly operates through such signals, as it decodes the content encoded by the unconscious, but the function of emotion is more clearly reflected in the fact that emotion is a signal that, in the general sense, indicates something, rather than being an unconscious coder, it exists relative to its unconscious position.
Therefore, I would like to emphasize the content that I introduced at the end of this book, which is a new characteristic that has emerged in psychoanalysis since the 1976 preface on analysts and the end of analysis. Overall, Lacan is well aware that the dimension of the unconscious is irreducible, endlessly replacing signals that go beyond “meaning.” The Prelude states that “the unconscious understands itself.” However, according to Lacan, he also knows that focusing on this signal means extracting it, extracting its “meaninglessness,” and giving it a “meaning of truth.”. The end of the analysis is actually the end of the love for the truth, which is integrated with the so-called “free association”. In Lacan’s view, Freud was still entangled in this kind of love, and in order to create an analyst, the latter had to go through the analysis to the end. In addition, Freud’s entire interest was here, because half told truth has the effect of castration, and Freud could only lament that he refused this end. This “rock bed” essentially lies in his conceptualization of (analytical) practice.
Lacan opposed Freud’s view in 1967 with his “Proposal to School Analysts on October 9, 1967”, which proposed that the solution to the end of the analysis was a subjective recall – but not without a sense of mourning. However, people have left a question: what can be obtained in the transfer space of speaking the truth? What is obtained is only a “rock bed” covering the half said cave, and it is there that the imaginary object a emerges, which is the only thing that the de materializing subject possesses. However, the operation of the unconscious (ICS) only targets signals that go beyond meaning, and this operation is real in this regard, which is another matter. So, we should start thinking about the dual position of each of us relative to the unconscious, or in other words, relative to the dual unconscious, starting from that preface: one is the position in the subject’s signifier chain, and the other is the position in reality. The latter supplements Lacan’s summary report from the psychoanalytic action class, which focused on the conceptualization of the unconscious, transcending meaning, but related to pleasure, which is about “non subjectivity”.
However, our thinking is not a conscious “passage” towards reality. In Lacan’s view, there is no “friendship” that can prevent the erosion of transferred love. For others (Ferryman, Cartel, Witness), Lacan’s direction is only reflected in one thing: the end of the illusion of truth. When satisfied with the end, this satisfaction itself is unique and can replace love for the truth. In the preface, this sense of satisfaction leads analysts to lose interest in “free association” (including dreams). This does not mean that the subject has entered a “meaningless” unconsciousness since then, because it is impossible. However, the trend of repetition has weakened the importance of truth, but it has not been completely eliminated. Instead, truth is already sufficient, so that the “indestructible thing” – or transcendent thing – experienced by the subject can balance these two dimensions of unconsciousness… This is enough to be satisfying.
We may need to see what else we need to do to incorporate this new perspective into the “through” mechanism in psychoanalysis (practice).
Colette Soler
March 2, 2023