|

Abstracts:
About psychoanalysis
Madeline Andrews
Who speaks for psychoanalysis? Is it possible
to speak about psychoanalysis? Can it be pre-empted
through the dissemination of a knowledge? Given the
speaking being’s resistance to knowledge (a refusal
to know) the effects of an encounter with a psychoanalyst
supposed of knowledge, cannot be prescribed. The supposition
of the transference is an event that renders any description
of psychoanalysis as an artefact, opposed to artifice
and the act, a phallacy. To speak about psychoanalysis
is to bandy about at its peripheries. This paper considers,
at the marginal seems of this peculiar, passionate relation,
the difficulty psychoanalysis has had, in speaking for
itself.
On a Question Preliminary to Any Possible
Analysis of the Child
Ron Ingram
Theoretical constructions of what constitutes an analysis,
and exclusion criteria which determine what it is not,
only produce definitions which fail. In a similar way,
parents’ definitions of their child fail them
both as parents and their child. For any analysis of
the child to occur, the parenting discourse must be
heard to locate where the child is situated, and for
the parents to reclaim what is theirs from the child
and what is their own as parents.
The Psychoanalyst is Simple
Peter Gunn
In the locus where the unspeakable
object was rejected into the real, a word made itself
heard, in coming to the place of what has no name…
resembling in its opacity the exclamations of love,
when, running short of signifiers to call the object
of its epithalamion, it employs the crudest imaginary
means. ‘I’ll eat you up… Sweetmeat!’
‘You’ll die… Bitch!’
Lacan, ‘On A Question Prior to Any Possible Treatment
of Psychosis’
…‘in mathematics [my mathematician
friend remarked] one does not say what one is speaking
about… one quite simply speaks it… hence
a certain air of pretence [de faire semblant]’…
Lacan, Seminar XIII, lesson of 8th June 1966
What is the psychoanalyst? That is, in order that the
possibilities of an analysis not be foreclosed, but
prior to any supposition of his position in the transference,
what stance must the psychoanalyst, if he dares to declare
himself as such, take vis-à-vis the challenge
posed by the other? This paper will argue, paradoxically,
that, as a first approximation, the psychoanalyst, so-named,
can only hold up if he keeps to the order of simplicity
which the language of love imposes.
In want of a story: Being seen in the
public mental health system
Ben McGill
What place has psychoanalysis in the public
mental health system? There is transference no doubt
- patients are transferred as objects of knowledge –
transferred to the ones who know.
Can there be an intervention that cuts
the tie of the patient with their position as object
of knowledge?
For those who present to the emergency
departments, with their suffering made flesh, the body
is the object offered as enigma to a knowing look. Is
this an offer that can’t be refused?
For patients seen and not heard can there
emerge something other than more meat for the body of
knowledge?
|