Cartel Days of the Freudian School of Paris at the Maison de la Chimie, Paris.

This session continues the theme from the previous day of the “plus-one.”

Published 

Lettres de l’École freudienne, 1976, n°18, p. 230-247. : Cette séance reprend le thème de la veille sur le « plus une ».

Available https://psychaanalyse.com/pdf/lacan_pas_tout_lacan_1975-04-13a.pdf   or

http://aejcpp.free.fr/lacan/1975-04-13a.htm

English Translation

P13-54 of Cormac Gallagher’s translation, www.LacaninIreland.com  /Other Works (Cartel Study Days 1975),  Group meeting Sunday morning, On the ‘plus-one’ (continued)

Jacques Lacan’s interlocutors

Jenny Aubry, Christiane Bardet-Giraudom, Pierre Bastin, Jacques Crepin, Stephane di Vittorio, Annick Dreyfuss, Jean-Pierre Dreyfuss, René Ebtinger, Freda Francisco-Hugo,  Philippe Girard,  José Guey, Nicole Guillet, Francois Hanafi, Eugénie (Gennie) Lemoine-Luccioni,  Nicole Levy, Charles Melman, Pierre Martin, Huguette Menard, Jean-Jacques Moscovitz, Juan David Nasio, Nicole Pepin, Dominique Poissonier, Moustafa Safouan, Edmond Sanquer, Colette van de Poorter, Maria Velissaropoulos, Mme X, Radmila Zygouris

Citation

***

-4 PLUS ONE – The Formula of a New Mode of Social Bond : 26th June 2020 (Athens) : Frank Rollier, see this site  /Authors A-Z (Rollier)

P9-10 of NLS Cartel Newsletter – 16, Rollier states,

The cartel against the passion of ignorance

The cartel is a study device which is akin to psychoanalysis, although it is not the place where one analyses oneself, nor where one interprets a colleague. If Lacan has established a direct link between the cartel and the cure it is first of all, it seems to me, because they both create a knot between speech and the body: moving bodies to the place of the cartel – as far as possible – and speaking in one’s own name. Then, the work of the cartel requires time, the time that is necessary for each one to elaborate his singular question. A tension is created between body and word, which often resonates with one’s own analysis, sometimes deciding a member to engage in a cure. What is at stake, it seems to me, is the articulation between reading Freud or Lacan and reading ones’ own symptom. And then, the cartel is also an analytical device because it takes into account the dimension of the not-all and the impossible. This is what led me to speak in my title of a new modality of social link, which allows us not to remain always as “an isolated person”.[32] But without falling into the illusion of finding an ideal master or getting stuck in a group that sets no limits. In a cartel, not everything is possible: knowledge can be deepened, but what is obtained remains fragmented, these are bits of knowledge. A cartel fails to exhaust its working theme and the dissolution of the group is written in from the start. This does not prevent the affectio societatis and the conviviality of the meetings.

[32]. Lacan, J., “Est-ce que l’analyste doit rester un isolé ?”. Study Days of the École freudienne, session of Sunday morning, 13th April 1975, Journées d’étude des cartels de l’École Freudienne, 1975, Lettres de l’Ecole freudienne de Paris, 4, 1976, n°18.

P13 of Cormac Gallagher’s translation, www.LacaninIreland.com  /Other Works (Cartel Study Days 1975)

Group meeting Sunday morning, On the ‘plus-one’ (continued)

Possibly p29-30 of Cormac Gallagher’s translation, p245 of Lettres v18,

JL: There are obviously two points, there is on the one side organisation, the life as one might say of the cartel as such, and then what some people including (Juan David) Nasio insisted on, namely, the production.

Moustafa Safouan: But it is not each to grasp either in a subjective topology what this function corresponds to. And then the question is enlarged: I see the novelty, the unusual character of the idea of even organising like that a collaboration among several people in a work.

JL: It seems to me that there is something specific in analysis which poses this
question which is always more or less stifled when all is said and done. It seems
to me difficult that for the analyst not to ask what their work means analytically
insofar as it is a work in common; should analysts remain isolated, why not? In
practice that’s what happens. It is all the same something of a kind that makes us
ask the question: why does this happen? It is already a minimum. If you
wouldn’t mind reflecting on something for this afternoon…..