>Many
Hi every one.
I see this translation to English but there are problems
>On Mon, 11 Mar 1996, jln wrote:
>
>> An English translation follows:
>>
>>
>>
>> >YOU COULD SEND THIS FRENCH TEXT JUST ONLY TO THE ONE WHO NEEDS IT. WE DO
>> >NOT KNOW FRENCH....
>> >CETO FROM,,,,,
>>
>> "Lacan, le 'liberateur' de la psychanalyse" (from:
>> >> Dits et Ecrits 1954-1988 tome IV ed. Daniel Defert et Francois Ewald
>> >> Editions Gallimard, pp204-205) without accents via e-mail (the original
>> >> version is to be found in an Italian periodical, "Corriere della sera,"
>> >> vol. 106, no. 212, 11 Sept. 1981, p.1; it was an interview with
>> >> J. Nobecourt):
>> >>
>> >> --On a l'habitude de dire que Lacan a ete le protagoniste d'une
>> >> "revolution de la psychanalyse." Pensez-vous que cette definition de
>> >> "revolutionnaire" soit exacte et acceptable?
>> >>
>> >> --Je crois que Lacan aurait refuse ce terme de "revolutionnaire" et
>> >> l'idee meme d'une "revolution en psychanalyse." Il voulait simplement
>> >> etre "psychanalyste." Ce qui supposait a ses yeux une rupture violente
>> >> avec tout ce qui tendait a faire dependre la psychanalyse de la
>> >> psychiatrie ou a en faire un chapitre un peu sophistique de la
>> >> psychologie. Il voulait soustraire la psychanalyse a la proximite, qu'il
>> >> considerait comme dangereuse, de la medecine et des institutions
>> >> medicales. Il cherchait en elle non pas un processus de normalisation
>> >> des comportements, mais une theorie du sujet. C'est pourquoi, malgre une
>> >> apparence de discours extremement speculatif, sa pensee n'est pas
>> >> etrangere a tous les efforts qui ont ete faits pour remettre en question
>> >> les pratiques de la medecine mentale.
>> >>
>> >> --Si Lacan, comme vous le dites, n'a pas ete un "revolutionnaire," il
>> >> est, toutefois, certain que ses oeuvres ont eu une tres grande influence
>> >> sur la culture des dernieres decennies. Qu'est-ce qui a change apres
>> >> Lacan, egalement dans la facon de "faire" de la culture?
>> >>
>> >> --Qu'est-ce qui a change? Si je remonte aux annees cinquante, a l'epoque
>> >> ou l'etudiant que j'etais lisait les oeuvres de Levi-Strauss et les
>> >> premiers textes de Lacan, il me semble que la vouveaute etait la
>> >> suivante: nous decouvrions que la philosophie et les sciences humaines
>> >> vivaient sur une conception tres traditionelle du sujet humain, et qu'il
>> >> ne suffisait pas de dire, tantot avec les uns, que le sujet etait
>> >> radicalement libre et, tantot avec lees autres, qu'il etait determine par
>> >> des conditions sociales. Nous decouvrions qu'il fallait chercher a
>> >> libere tout ce qui se cache derriere l'emploi apparemment simple du
>> >> pronom "je." Le sujet: une chose complexe, fragile, dont il est
>> >> difficile de parler, et sans laquelle nous ne pouvons pas parler.
>> >>
>> >> --Lacan eut beaucoup d'adversaires. Il fut accuse d'hermetisme et de
>> >> "terrorisme intellectuel." Que pensez-vous de ces accusations?
>> >>
>> >> --Je pense que l'hermetisme de Lacan est du au fait qu'il voulait que la
>> >> lecture de ses textes ne soit pas simplement une "prise de conscience" de
>> >> ses idees. Il voulait que le lecteur se decouvre lui-meme, comme sujet
>> >> de desir, a travers cette lecture. Lacan voulait que l'obscurite de ses
>> >> "Ecrits" (My way of designating the title of L's work) fut la complexite
>> >> meme du sujet, et que le travail necessaire pour le comprendre fut un
>> >> travail a realiser sur soi-meme. Quant au "terrorisme," je ferai
>> >> simplement remarquer une chose: Lacan n'exercait aucun pouvoir
>> >> institutionnel. Ceux qui l'ecoutaient voulaient precisement l'ecouter.
>> >> Il ne terrorisait que ceux qui avaient peur. L'influence que l'on exerce
>> >> ne peut jamais etre un pouvoir que l'on impose.
>> >>
>>
>>
>> Here goes the translation from Corriere della sera (Evening
>> Courier from Milan I believe):
>>
>> C: People are in the habit of saying that Lacan was the
>> promoter of a "revolution in psychiatry". Do you think that
>> this designation as a "revolutionary" is accurate and
>> acceptable?
>>
>> F: I believe that Lacan would have rejected the term
>> "revolutionary" as well as the very idea of a "revolution in
>> psychiatry". He wanted simply to be a "psychoanalyst". In
>> his view that presupposed a violent break with all that
>> tended to make psychoanalysis dependent on psychiatry or to
>> make of it a slightly sophistical chapter in psychology. He
>> wanted to remove psychiatry from any proximity, which he
>> considered dangerous, to medicine and medical institutions.
>> He sought in it [psychoanalysis] not a process for
>> normalizing behaviors, but a theory of the subject. That is
>> why, in spite of an appearance of extremely speculative
>> discourse, his thought is not unfamiliar with all those
>> efforts that have been made to place in question the
>> practices of mental medicine.
>>
>> C: If Lacan, as you say, was not a "revolutionary", it is
>> none the less sure that his works have had a very great
>> influence on culture in these last decades. What has
>> changed after Lacan, particularly in the manner of "making"
>> culture?
>>
>> F: What has changed? If I think back to the fifties, to the
>> time when as a student I read the works of Levi-Straus and
>> the first texts of Lacan, it seems to me that the novelty
>> was this: we were discovering that philosophy and the human
>> sciences were living with a very traditional conception of
>> the human subject, and that it did not suffice to say with
>> the one side, that the subject was radically free, nor with
>> the other that it was determined by social conditions. We
>> were discovering that it was necessary to seek to liberate
>> all that was hidden behind the apparently simply use of the
>> pronoun "I". The subject: a thing complex and fragile, of
>> which it is difficult to speak, and without which we cannot
>> speak .
>>
>> C: Lacan had many adversaries. He was accused of hermeticism
>> and "intellectual terrorism". What do you think of these
>> accusations?
>>
>> F; I think that the hermeticism of Lacan results from the
>> fact that he wanted the reading of his texts to be not just
>> a simple "awakening of consciousness" about ideas. He
>> wanted the reader to discover himself, as a subject of
>> desire, by means of this reading. Lacan wanted the
>> obscurity of his "Writings" to be the very complexity of the
>> subject, and the work necessary for understanding to be work
>> to be accomplished on oneself. As for the "terrorism", I
>> would simply note one thing: Lacan did not exercise any
>> institutional power. Those who listened to him wanted
>> precisely to here him. He only terrorized those who were
>> afraid. The influence that one wields can never be a power
>> that one imposes
>>
Problems.
1) P and others (French)Psychanalyse English (Psychiatry)
Psychoanalisis and Psychiatry are different things. In fact
psychoanalysys is revolutionary in relation to psychiatry an
psychology. But as the french version sustains Lacan didn't want to
be a revolutionary in psychoanalysis. He intends "return to
Freud". To offer a reading of Freud contrary to the reading of Ego psychology.
Questions:
Which is the original one, French or italian version?
Which word is used in the Italian version Psychoanalysis or Psychiatry?
Which word is the original one?
Thanks
Hector Escobar
"Gracias a la vida, que me ha dado tanto"
Hector Escobar Sotomayor
hescobar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------
Hi every one.
I see this translation to English but there are problems
>On Mon, 11 Mar 1996, jln wrote:
>
>> An English translation follows:
>>
>>
>>
>> >YOU COULD SEND THIS FRENCH TEXT JUST ONLY TO THE ONE WHO NEEDS IT. WE DO
>> >NOT KNOW FRENCH....
>> >CETO FROM,,,,,
>>
>> "Lacan, le 'liberateur' de la psychanalyse" (from:
>> >> Dits et Ecrits 1954-1988 tome IV ed. Daniel Defert et Francois Ewald
>> >> Editions Gallimard, pp204-205) without accents via e-mail (the original
>> >> version is to be found in an Italian periodical, "Corriere della sera,"
>> >> vol. 106, no. 212, 11 Sept. 1981, p.1; it was an interview with
>> >> J. Nobecourt):
>> >>
>> >> --On a l'habitude de dire que Lacan a ete le protagoniste d'une
>> >> "revolution de la psychanalyse." Pensez-vous que cette definition de
>> >> "revolutionnaire" soit exacte et acceptable?
>> >>
>> >> --Je crois que Lacan aurait refuse ce terme de "revolutionnaire" et
>> >> l'idee meme d'une "revolution en psychanalyse." Il voulait simplement
>> >> etre "psychanalyste." Ce qui supposait a ses yeux une rupture violente
>> >> avec tout ce qui tendait a faire dependre la psychanalyse de la
>> >> psychiatrie ou a en faire un chapitre un peu sophistique de la
>> >> psychologie. Il voulait soustraire la psychanalyse a la proximite, qu'il
>> >> considerait comme dangereuse, de la medecine et des institutions
>> >> medicales. Il cherchait en elle non pas un processus de normalisation
>> >> des comportements, mais une theorie du sujet. C'est pourquoi, malgre une
>> >> apparence de discours extremement speculatif, sa pensee n'est pas
>> >> etrangere a tous les efforts qui ont ete faits pour remettre en question
>> >> les pratiques de la medecine mentale.
>> >>
>> >> --Si Lacan, comme vous le dites, n'a pas ete un "revolutionnaire," il
>> >> est, toutefois, certain que ses oeuvres ont eu une tres grande influence
>> >> sur la culture des dernieres decennies. Qu'est-ce qui a change apres
>> >> Lacan, egalement dans la facon de "faire" de la culture?
>> >>
>> >> --Qu'est-ce qui a change? Si je remonte aux annees cinquante, a l'epoque
>> >> ou l'etudiant que j'etais lisait les oeuvres de Levi-Strauss et les
>> >> premiers textes de Lacan, il me semble que la vouveaute etait la
>> >> suivante: nous decouvrions que la philosophie et les sciences humaines
>> >> vivaient sur une conception tres traditionelle du sujet humain, et qu'il
>> >> ne suffisait pas de dire, tantot avec les uns, que le sujet etait
>> >> radicalement libre et, tantot avec lees autres, qu'il etait determine par
>> >> des conditions sociales. Nous decouvrions qu'il fallait chercher a
>> >> libere tout ce qui se cache derriere l'emploi apparemment simple du
>> >> pronom "je." Le sujet: une chose complexe, fragile, dont il est
>> >> difficile de parler, et sans laquelle nous ne pouvons pas parler.
>> >>
>> >> --Lacan eut beaucoup d'adversaires. Il fut accuse d'hermetisme et de
>> >> "terrorisme intellectuel." Que pensez-vous de ces accusations?
>> >>
>> >> --Je pense que l'hermetisme de Lacan est du au fait qu'il voulait que la
>> >> lecture de ses textes ne soit pas simplement une "prise de conscience" de
>> >> ses idees. Il voulait que le lecteur se decouvre lui-meme, comme sujet
>> >> de desir, a travers cette lecture. Lacan voulait que l'obscurite de ses
>> >> "Ecrits" (My way of designating the title of L's work) fut la complexite
>> >> meme du sujet, et que le travail necessaire pour le comprendre fut un
>> >> travail a realiser sur soi-meme. Quant au "terrorisme," je ferai
>> >> simplement remarquer une chose: Lacan n'exercait aucun pouvoir
>> >> institutionnel. Ceux qui l'ecoutaient voulaient precisement l'ecouter.
>> >> Il ne terrorisait que ceux qui avaient peur. L'influence que l'on exerce
>> >> ne peut jamais etre un pouvoir que l'on impose.
>> >>
>>
>>
>> Here goes the translation from Corriere della sera (Evening
>> Courier from Milan I believe):
>>
>> C: People are in the habit of saying that Lacan was the
>> promoter of a "revolution in psychiatry". Do you think that
>> this designation as a "revolutionary" is accurate and
>> acceptable?
>>
>> F: I believe that Lacan would have rejected the term
>> "revolutionary" as well as the very idea of a "revolution in
>> psychiatry". He wanted simply to be a "psychoanalyst". In
>> his view that presupposed a violent break with all that
>> tended to make psychoanalysis dependent on psychiatry or to
>> make of it a slightly sophistical chapter in psychology. He
>> wanted to remove psychiatry from any proximity, which he
>> considered dangerous, to medicine and medical institutions.
>> He sought in it [psychoanalysis] not a process for
>> normalizing behaviors, but a theory of the subject. That is
>> why, in spite of an appearance of extremely speculative
>> discourse, his thought is not unfamiliar with all those
>> efforts that have been made to place in question the
>> practices of mental medicine.
>>
>> C: If Lacan, as you say, was not a "revolutionary", it is
>> none the less sure that his works have had a very great
>> influence on culture in these last decades. What has
>> changed after Lacan, particularly in the manner of "making"
>> culture?
>>
>> F: What has changed? If I think back to the fifties, to the
>> time when as a student I read the works of Levi-Straus and
>> the first texts of Lacan, it seems to me that the novelty
>> was this: we were discovering that philosophy and the human
>> sciences were living with a very traditional conception of
>> the human subject, and that it did not suffice to say with
>> the one side, that the subject was radically free, nor with
>> the other that it was determined by social conditions. We
>> were discovering that it was necessary to seek to liberate
>> all that was hidden behind the apparently simply use of the
>> pronoun "I". The subject: a thing complex and fragile, of
>> which it is difficult to speak, and without which we cannot
>> speak .
>>
>> C: Lacan had many adversaries. He was accused of hermeticism
>> and "intellectual terrorism". What do you think of these
>> accusations?
>>
>> F; I think that the hermeticism of Lacan results from the
>> fact that he wanted the reading of his texts to be not just
>> a simple "awakening of consciousness" about ideas. He
>> wanted the reader to discover himself, as a subject of
>> desire, by means of this reading. Lacan wanted the
>> obscurity of his "Writings" to be the very complexity of the
>> subject, and the work necessary for understanding to be work
>> to be accomplished on oneself. As for the "terrorism", I
>> would simply note one thing: Lacan did not exercise any
>> institutional power. Those who listened to him wanted
>> precisely to here him. He only terrorized those who were
>> afraid. The influence that one wields can never be a power
>> that one imposes
>>
Problems.
1) P and others (French)Psychanalyse English (Psychiatry)
Psychoanalisis and Psychiatry are different things. In fact
psychoanalysys is revolutionary in relation to psychiatry an
psychology. But as the french version sustains Lacan didn't want to
be a revolutionary in psychoanalysis. He intends "return to
Freud". To offer a reading of Freud contrary to the reading of Ego psychology.
Questions:
Which is the original one, French or italian version?
Which word is used in the Italian version Psychoanalysis or Psychiatry?
Which word is the original one?
Thanks
Hector Escobar
"Gracias a la vida, que me ha dado tanto"
Hector Escobar Sotomayor
hescobar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------