Abstract
Hysteria’s notorious history is that of the pharmakon, constantly seducing and subverting the master into the production of a knowledge destined to fall, clearing the space for a question, and this question is the beginning of psychoanalysis, the induction of the transference. Lacan’s conception of the psychoanalytic act is this hystericizing effect which induces the transference, but also of the equally hysterical fall of the subject supposed to know that marks the end and cure of a psychoanalysis. How can this same act both instantiate the illusion of the subject supposed to know in the person of the analyst and serve to analyze and undo this illusion? What does hysteria still have to teach psychoanalysts about the nature of their act and of the psychoanalytic cure? The author explores the “two acts of psychoanalysis”, hysterical disappointment, and the sinthomatic creation that is the psychoanalytic cure.
Keywords:
- Keyword: Act
- Keyword: fall
- Keyword: hysteria
- Keyword: Subject Supposed to Know
- Keyword: Transference
How to Cite:
Oyer, M., (2015) “Hysteria and the Psychoanalytic Act”, The European Journal of Psychoanalysis 2(1), 1–8.
Rights: Incopyright
Downloads
Downloads are not available for this article.