Translation of “Words in Misdemeanours and Depression

This is precisely the viewpoint proposed by Lacan in his discussion class “The Ethics of Psychoanalysis”, in his plan to systematically examine negligence. From the beginning, he cited Freud’s moral dimensions of two paths and two moments: the dead father and the charge of death: in Freud’s early works, was it the fault of the father’s murder, a great myth placed by Freud at the origin of cultural development?

[1] However, this is not a state of soul, but rather a moral error, as Dante, and even Spinoza, have expressed: a sin, that is, a moral cowardice, ultimately exists only in thought, which is the responsibility to speak well, or to recognize one’s own responsibility unconsciously and structurally. As long as this cowardice is unconsciously rejected and evolves into mental illness, then what comes with it is the rejected thing, which is the return of language in reality; This is precisely the manic excitement that can make this return fatal. Contrary to sadness, there is joyful knowledge, which is a virtue. Virtue cannot forgive anyone’s sins, such as the well-known original sin. J. Lacan, T é l é vision, Autre é crits, Paris, Le Seuil, 2001, p.526
“Isn’t it not a more obscure and primitive mistake that he finally presents at the end of his work – the deadly impulse, which is the terrifying dialectic deeply rooted in human hearts? [2]” This theme will affect an important aspect of Lacan’s teaching, as mistakes can be returned in multiple ways and can be a punishment for “historical” events, such as what we can call mythological events, father’s murder. It can also be some kind of structural thing, such as a dead impulse. How can we say that something with a structure is flawed? Is Freud’s sense of guilt driven by the first or second category? Or, in other words, is it still the same after the beginning and the second analogy? Lacan’s reasoning first adopts a circuitous path, which is connected to the first type, because the sense of guilt is built on desire: “In Freud’s theoretical construction, the emergence of the moral dimension is not rooted elsewhere, but originates from desire itself. It is from the energy of desire that it detaches from the mechanism of censorship in its final stage of production.”

In the theories of Freud and Lacan, desire (Wunsch) is based on patriarchal prohibitions – the fear that he (she) will not die, and the sign of a rat’s desire to die remains its paradigm. Therefore, we can infer that desire exists before the law, so it does not prohibit the creation of desire, which is contrary to the situation we may have anticipated and its usual way of expression. In Lacan’s theory, desire exists in multiple states, so much so that it can only be decoded through explanation rather than existing before explanation, as indicated in the formula “Desire and its explanation: Desire is its explanation” in that discussion class. We can see that the temporal nature of desire is complex, but it holds a central position in dealing with issues of negligence.

In Lacan’s comments, he also mentioned a question about obligations: does it have moral character? Do we need to distinguish between negligence and compliance? We can feel that the fault lies not only in not strictly following a certain command, but also in other aspects. We may have obeyed, but we are at fault in other demands [4], and it is precisely in this point that depression may occur.

To clarify the viewpoint, it is only necessary to verify the obvious inconsistency that people often exhibit in the religious rituals they claim to follow. This is also the reason why Freud linked religion with individual obsessive-compulsive disorder, which involved negligence in ritual. This is not easy to understand, as it is the subject imposing such an obligation on themselves and worrying about not being able to complete it. This depends on his personal “psychological reality”, rather than the requirements of religion for believers.

Of course, we have noticed that there are at least two different forms of depression, and from their roots, the clinical structure proves that there are at least two mechanisms, two patterns of negligence. The first type is psychotic, with depression being the main condition:

[2] J Lacan, Le S é minaire, Livre VII, L ‘é tique de la psychanalyse (1959-1960), Le Seuil, 1986, p.11. [3] Ibid. [4] Cf. Executor who obeys orders.
Prohibited things exclude the subject into a state where no appropriate symbol can be found to express themselves. This is where their painful nature lies, because when the self is in a position excluded by self ideals, depression forms. Therefore, when self ideals place the subject in a position where no meaningful exclusion can be found in their real life, such a state of depression occurs. [5] Lack of meaning, rejection of all meaning, can lead to depression as a structural fault. Undoubtedly, it is in this sense that Lacan attempts to distinguish the difference between the two moments in Freudian thought mentioned earlier: the father of the primitive tribe and the instinct to die. It should be noted that in cases of depression, due to mental illness, the father is clearly excluded. The other side of depression is often associated with obsessive-compulsive neurosis. In fact, there is a gender objection to the assertion here that depression is related to behavioral deficits and concessions to desire, as according to popular beliefs, depression is more common among women. But as Lacan emphasized on anxiety disorder, although it is easier to attribute it to women, the anxiety of men, mainly related to obsessive-compulsive disorder, will be discussed in his eponymous discussion class [6]. Similarly, we suggest using male compulsive cowardice as a reference to consider one of the two aspects of depression that we are concerned about here. Therefore, these two types of faults can to some extent correspond to the two moments emphasized by Freud by Lacan, one involving the father – the rejection of the “father’s name” in depression – and the other involving the instinct for death – the “more subtle” faults of obsessive-compulsive disorder, as well as their cowardice in the face of desire, which can be manifested with a mask of depression.

Here, we give an example of a moment of depression and its causes, without much anticipation of its structure:

A man lost his father who was not in a harmonious relationship with him, especially at the end of his life when he was not in harmony. His father did not receive the expected assistance on his deathbed. This patient still felt guilty a long time later, but whether this feeling of guilt belonged to unconsciousness is unknown.

On a vacation trip back to the village, he met a long lost friend who said to him, “You’re really disgusting.” This made him very unhappy and he believed that this sentence was aimed at his mistake before his father passed away. In fact, the coherence on the logical chain requires us to understand this sentence within the entire context, which means that this friend is actually blaming him for not contacting him during his stay in China.

The third event is added to this mixed plot: on the same day, the same friend introduced him to a person he accidentally met. However, the person who only knew his name was entrusted by another intermediary to help retrieve his deceased father’s old belongings. Unfortunately, those seemingly worthless objects that may interest experts were accidentally discarded by him due to their clumsiness. This is another mistake that makes people think he deserves to be “dealt with” as everyone says; But more importantly, this person’s gaze was very unsettling, as if it was a genuine reproach, making one wonder if this friend had intentionally met him.

[5] J Lacan, Le S é minaire, Livre V, Les formations de l’inconsigent (1957-1958), Paris, Le Seuil, 1998, p. 300. [6] J. Lacan, Le S é minaire, Livre X, L’angoise (1962-1963), Paris, Le Seuil, 2004
We can see that this negligence has decayed into an insult that was wrongly “explained” and constitutes a transfer of negligence. The narrative logic that can reproduce these fragments is carried out in a specific order that I did not follow: first, offensive language, second, requests for father’s belongings, and finally, events before father’s death, which made him truly feel guilty. This narrative vividly depicts what Lacan calls the “pathological world of negligence”, but it cannot determine which structure the subject mentioned in the story belongs to, although we can speculate about it. However, guilt, as an unconscious sensation, is considered the key to defining neurosis. However, we first need to understand the true meaning of Freud’s expression of “unconscious feelings of guilt”, which is more confusing than it seems. In principle, feelings themselves are conscious, and perhaps only the motivation that triggers such feelings may involve the unconscious. This is why it is called “Verschiebang”, which Lacan has always emphasized. Indeed, depression is first and foremost an emotion, and then a state of medical diagnosis. However, this term is influenced by unconscious guilt, which means it becomes a state of being ignored by the subject. Depression, like a sense of guilt, is unconscious, but its meaning is different: in the sense of a disease that is overlooked by the subject, in our modern society, it is like Tony’s “lung” in “The Lament of Illness”, considered a problem that can be solved with just a simple name. Indeed, this requirement corresponds to an excessive supply of medication for treatment. Interestingly, it is almost always accompanied by the provision of psychotherapy, but if it implicitly identifies the existence of negligence. Perhaps we cannot immediately see that in the treatment involving the relationship between subject and negligence, it contradicts psychoanalysis because it involves the alleviation of pain, whether implicit or exposed, aimed at alleviating the burden of guilt associated with pain through a series of strategies. However, Freud believed that this reduction must be achieved through a circuitous approach. Lacan emphasized, “We cannot conclude that someone is not guilty just because they self accuse them of having malicious intentions.”

Please remember that this issue is not a matter of today, as confirmed by Lacan’s remarks in 1950:

These effects were discovered by psychoanalysis and bravely referred to by the corresponding emotions in experience – guilt.

Nothing demonstrates the importance of the Freudian revolution more than the rough, obscure, rigorous, public, or covert use of this truly ubiquitous and once overlooked category or technique in psychology since Freud’s revolution – except for some people’s strange efforts to simplify it into “genetic” or “objective” forms, with the assurance of “behaviorism” of experimentalism. If the understanding of meaning in human facts is deprived, such efforts have long been exhausted. [8] ”

Beyond guilt, the true impact of “depression” has emerged, as stated at the beginning:

[7] J Lacan, ‘R é response au commentaire de Jean Hypolite sur la’ Verneiung ‘de Freud’, dan É criteria, Paris, Le Seuil, 1966, p. 395. [8] J. Lacan, ‘Introduction th é orique aux functions de la psychanalyse en criminologie’, dan É criteria, Paris, Le Seuil, 1966, p. 129
“We tend to attribute all depression to a certain wavering and conflicting relationship between the self and self ideals, rather than to the realm of self ideals. We acknowledge that everything that occurs in the realm of depression, or conversely, everything that occurs in the realm of excitement, should be viewed from an openly hostile perspective between the two, regardless of where the hostility arises, whether it is self resistance or self ideals becoming too harsh.” This is just one aspect, which Lacan quickly corrected in “Hamlet” [10], and then delved deeper into in the following year’s discussion class “Ethics”. Indeed, negligence can have many impacts, especially according to Freud’s perspective, ideally it is repression. However, Lacan presented many other situations in the discussion class “Anxiety”, whether or not including depression, accompanied by a special abandonment caused by depression, namely the retreat of recognition of negligence, that is, the retreat of cognition of structure.

Undoubtedly, inhibition is the most appropriate description of Hamlet’s tone, and Hamlet’s withdrawal from his mission is described as depression, to the extent that depression is often used to describe him. On the contrary, we notice Antigone’s excitement, her uncompromising commitment to her perceived responsibility, as emphasized by Lacan, as well as Oedipus’s excitement when he takes that step at the end of “Oedipus in Colonus”. While accepting his own fate, he firmly refused to compromise with his sons – they failed to end the Oedipus King, and when he was freed from blindness, they respected him appropriately. Perhaps the etymology of the word “fanaticism” can explain why Oedipus was deified at that moment, and perhaps this is also why Lacan held strange respect for suicidal behavior – indeed, our attitude has been largely softened because such behavior can only succeed in very rare circumstances, and the success of suicide does not necessarily mean it is a product of action.

Undertaking one’s own destiny is actually Lacan’s guide for psychoanalysts: another way of saying “not compromising with desire” is first and foremost for the psychoanalyst himself, after which the psychoanalyst has a responsibility to convey this attitude to the analyst. Interpreting and explaining the subject’s desires in analysis means making them persist in their desires and not compromise within them.

At the end of the discussion class, this level was fully presented, and the enthusiasm stimulated by “not compromising on desire” stems from an optimistic attitude towards psychoanalysis, which Lacan will share with us less in his subsequent teaching.

However, we still need to emphasize the particularity of depression: in Freud’s view, it was not an immediate symptom that could be seen as something he understood – as evidenced by his works, which rarely used this term except for mentioning depression. We can feel that in order to be able to treat depression with psychoanalytic discourse, it is necessary to first undergo a transformation and assign it a reason that can be treated through speech therapy. At this point, theory serves the most basic clinical practice, but it is still necessary to reiterate the viewpoint presented in this article: depression should be attributed to a negligence, a withdrawal from what the subject should have accomplished, rather than the impact of the events they have experienced themselves. Trauma and mourning are only superficial reasons, and their significance is obtained based on the specific background of the subject. The objective standards quantified by mainstream discourse, such as eyewitnesses interviewing victims after a disaster, will be immediately reassessed based on their other coordinates.

[9] J Lacan, Les formations de l’insinsinsint, op. cit., p.289-90. [10] J. Lacan, ‘Le d é sir et son interpr é station’, in é dit, 1958-1959 (Les Le ç ons sur Hamlet dan Ornicar? N ° 24-28) [11] Of course, Freud also dealt with the case of Hamlet.
Therefore, after a train accident, some people feel low and depressed. When asked about the reason, what he thought of was not losing his companion, but complaining: people came to ask him and comfort him, but no one thought of giving him a cup of coffee. The example may be extreme, but it is true as it illustrates the issue involved, namely the relationship with the Other (l’Autre). The Great Other has a flaw, expressed by Lacan’s formula “The Great Other without the Great Other.”. It is precisely in the face of this unacceptable negation that depression arises and leads to the assumption of the existence of the great other, the ultimate guarantor. The retreat of depression lies in the awakening of the status of the great other, and similarly, in mourning, depression indicates a helpless loss, as if the disappearing person has taken away the foundation of this great other, that is, the great other of the great other. According to Lacan’s early statements, this is also the key to combining this function with Freud’s narcissistic theory. Lacan’s statement is partially borrowed from Melanie Klein’s view: for infants, the perception of the whole, complete mother may lead to the appearance of depression: “Regarding the mother, we are told that at a certain stage of development, that is, the stage of depression, she introduced this new element of integrity.”

However, how to reconcile this effect with the category of negligence? We can speculate that this requires some conceptual shift. Following all the steps would be too lengthy, and here we only need to emphasize the factors that may lead to the absence of a whole and the necessity of missing something. Once this defect is redefined as desire, it represents the moment to overcome depression [13]. Emphasizing this solves the paradox of depression by making the subject understand that he is an actor in reality, because anything is better than becoming a doll of events. Therefore, by definition, he is guilty, but his own self blame may be to deceive us, as it closes the discussion on the nature of the unrecognized error, which paralyzes him for some reason. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the essential errors about negligence. Just like Freud’s first explanation in the Dora case, Lacan also explored in “The Direction of Treatment”:

[12] J Lacan, Le S é minaire, Livre IV, La relationship d’objet (1956-1957), Paris, Le Soul, 1994, p.67 Lacan believes that the “depression” effect is caused by the thing he is commenting on, which is that the integrity of the mother’s body leads the child into an existence absence game, but this does not change the view that the subject function appears at this moment. [13] For Lacan, mastering the game of existence absence represents a moment to overcome depression. [14] Traumatic neurosis is characterized by the inability of the painful subject to attribute any responsibility to themselves, and the spontaneous treatment in kidnapping cases, known as Stockholm syndrome, is extremely valuable as it gives meaning to the events experienced, as if the subject has chosen all of this on their own.
“A long time ago, I emphasized Hegel’s process of reversal, that is, the reversal of the position of the beautiful soul towards the reality she (Dora) accuses. This does not involve adaptation to reality, but rather to show her that she is just too adapted because she has contributed to its construction. [15]” When it comes to depression, this principle obviously applies, but for the real level of mourning, it seems to be unrelated to any responsibility of the subject. From this, we can see the peculiar reversal of the experience of mournful resolution, like the solution of an equation, which is achieved through the placement of the subject in the death of the Other, as if the subject is involved in it. Lacan’s comments on Hamlet miraculously demonstrate how the burden of mourning can help Hamlet escape from depression – facing Leotis, who cried for his sister, Hamlet embraces Ophelia’s death on him. “The power of desire, as I have shown you before, can only be restored from an external perspective by seeing a true mourning. Hamlet has engaged in a competition for this mourning, that is, the mourning of Leotis, for his sister, the object of Hamlet’s love, and he suddenly separates from it due to the lack of desire. [16] Here, we find Lacan deriving his partial object, the” part “of a, or the object he later described under the name” alienation separation “, through the effect of the subject composed of this part captured by the Other.”. This is why when it comes to depression, this part of the object is always involved. In Freud’s view, it (a partial object) always exists first in the form of an object that falls on the self as a shadow, which devours the self, completely in depression, and partially in obsessive-compulsive disorder for Abraham. The following discussion will focus on the essence of negligence, which is the difference between partial coverage or overall coverage. This object, also known as the shadow, must be considered passively. The self responsible for this negativity is therefore negligent, but because the fault and stain originate from the outside, if this shielding is partial, then the subject will find it difficult to truly make it their own. In depression, complete “masking” actually allows for direct assimilation, and the subject can view themselves as the other to blame themselves. In other words, the relationship between depression and depression is not a simple quantitative issue, just like Freud did with Carl Abraham said that the mechanisms are not the same. This is the added significance of Lacan’s theory of mourning for Freud: “Beyond Freud’s approach and better elucidating what mourning means in the clues he questions. [17]” Correspondingly, his criticism of Abraham also remains limited to only seeing quantitative differences.

The body is the manifestation of this mistake and needs to be restored to its symbolic order. But Lacan made a real transformation in “anxiety” because he had to respond to his accusations of neglecting emotions. He distinguished the difference between neurosis and mental illness more clearly than Freud, and by commenting on the mourning effect of Hamlet in the cemetery scene, he regarded the burden of mourning as the pattern that should ultimately arise in the analysis process itself.

[15] J Lacan, ‘La direction de la cure’, dan É crits, Paris, Le Seuil, 1966, p. 596. [16] J Lacan, L’Angoisse, op. cit., p.383-388. [17] is still at the end of the ‘Anxiety’ discussion class.
In the understanding of being dead, the work of mourning, at least in an ideal situation, should paradoxically help the subject escape from a state of depression, provided that there is a clear exit, which is the moment when Lacan constantly emphasizes the conclusion. Unlike Freud, this no longer involves a series of memories that result from the absorption of the constituent elements of the object, but rather a sudden understanding, an interruption, accompanied by a change in the position of the subject’s desire. This effect takes many forms in Lacan’s discourse, one of which is the passage of fantasy. Therefore, when the body image occupies the fault, the fault will wear a mask of depression. The discourse of analysis can place the fault in its rightful position, thereby freeing it from it.