Gherovici, P.,
(2019) “Après Coup: Lacan on Nachträglichkeit”,
EJP import test 6(1).
In the interest of the integrity of scholarship, let us recall that besides Seminar 5 already discussed, Lacan addressed specifically Freud’s notion of
Nachträglichkeit many times. Often Lacan refers to this notion using, as Jonathan House notes, the adverbial form
nachträglich . Note that in 1972 this notion is not used
as retroactivity or retrospective modification and very much like Laplanche, Lacan gives to this notion a foundational status in psychoanalysis.
For those curious to know where and when, I quote the specifics:
Seminar 1, session of 2 June 1954 (reach the child by way of the adult)
Seminar 15, session of 22 November 1967 (nachträglich and symptomatic action)
Seminar 16, session of 7 May 1969 (nachträglich and the seminar)
Seminar 16, session of 25 June 1969 (nachträglich and unary trait and S1)
Seminar 19, session of 8 March 1972 (elaborated as different from retroactivity or retrospective modification)
Seminar 19, session of 10 May 1972 (nachträglich and revelation)
Best,
Patricia Gherovici
Abstract
The author stresses the extent to which analytic literature represses the issue of money and how its significance to the analytical relationship ought instead to be analyzed. Starting from a widespread fantasy among analysands, where the analyst is felt to be a prostitute, the author expands upon the limits of the analytical setting, which has been suffering from a sort of phobia of the gift since the days of Freud. To the concept of psychoanalysis “of the answering” by the analytical establishment, the author opposes a more living concept of “psychoanalysis of the questioning”.
Abstract
The author stresses the extent to which analytic literature represses the issue of money and how its significance to the analytical relationship ought instead to be analyzed. Starting from a widespread fantasy among analysands, where the analyst is felt to be a prostitute, the author expands upon the limits of the analytical setting, which has been suffering from a sort of phobia of the gift since the days of Freud. To the concept of psychoanalysis “of the answering” by the analytical establishment, the author opposes a more living concept of “psychoanalysis of the questioning”.
Abstract
The author stresses the extent to which analytic literature represses the issue of money and how its significance to the analytical relationship ought instead to be analyzed. Starting from a widespread fantasy among analysands, where the analyst is felt to be a prostitute, the author expands upon the limits of the analytical setting, which has been suffering from a sort of phobia of the gift since the days of Freud. To the concept of psychoanalysis “of the answering” by the analytical establishment, the author opposes a more living concept of “psychoanalysis of the questioning”.
Bio
Patricia Gherovici, Ph.D. is a recipient of the 2020 Sigourney Award for her clinical and scholarly work with Latinx and gender variant communities. She is co-founder and director of the Philadelphia Lacan Group and Associate Faculty, Psychoanalytic Studies Minor, University of Pennsylvania (PSYS), Honorary Member at IPTAR, and Founding Member of Das Unbehagen. Her single-authored books include
The Puerto Rican Syndrome (Other Press: 2003) winner of the Gradiva Award and the Boyer Prize,
Please Select Your Gender: From the Invention of Hysteria to the Democratizing of Transgenderism (Routledge: 2010) and
Transgender Psychoanalysis: A Lacanian Perspective on Sexual Difference (Routledge: 2017). She edited two volumes with Manya Steinkoler:
Lacan On Madness: Madness Yes You Can’t ( Routledge: 2015) and
Lacan, Psychoanalysis and Comedy (Cambridge University Press: 2016). Most recently, she published with Chris Christian
Psychoanalysis in the Barrios: Race, Class, and the Unconscious (Winner of the Gradiva Award for best edited collection and the American Board and Academy of Psychoanalysis Book Prize; Routledge: 2019.)
Publication Date
December 2, 2018
