In the psychoanalytic theory of Jacques Lacan , 'objet petit a' is understood as an unattainable object of desire . It is also called the object-cause of desire. Jacques Lacan always insisted that the term should remain untranslated, "thus achieving the status of an algebraic sign" ("Écrits").
“A” refers to the French word “autre” (another). This concept is inextricably linked with the Freudian concept of "object" and the concept of "otherness" in Lacan. [one]
Content
Psychoanalytic Origin
Jacques-Alain Miller pointed to the origin of object a from Freud’s “lost object ... the function that Freud discovered in Three Essays ... and which Karl Abraham made the basis of his theory, and from which he derived the first premises of a“ partial object ”." [2]
Then, according to Miller, Melanie Klein “placed a partial object in the center of the psychic economy ... therefore Winnicott was able to see the transitional object ”. [3] This long prehistory of object relations is “that which Lacan summarizes, condenses, justifies, and constructs with the help of object a. [4]
Lacan Developments
“At the Lacan seminars of the late 1950s and early 1960s, the evolving concept of“ objet (petit) a ”is seen in the fantasy math as an object of desire, located in another ... a deliberate departure from the British object of psychoanalysis relationships.” [five]
In 1957, at the seminar "Education of the Unconscious," Lacan introduced the concept of "objet petit a" as the concept of the (Klein) imaginary partial object, an element that appears to be separable from the rest of the body. At the seminar "Le transfert" (1960-1961), he articulates the object a using the term "agalma". Just as “agalma” is a precious item hidden in a useless box, so “objet petit a” is the object of desire that we seek in another. A “box” can take many forms, all of which are unimportant, the importance is what is inside the box, the reason for desire.
In the seminars “Anxiety” (1962–1963) and “The Four Basic Concepts of Psychoanalysis” (1964), object a is defined as an unimproved remnant of the Real. This issue is discussed in more detail at the seminar "The Wrong Side of Psychoanalysis" (1969-1970), where Lacan develops his theory of four discourses . In the master’s discourse, the signifier represents the subject for all other signifiers, but in this process a surplus is always formed: this surplus is an object of small a, an excess value, an excess of fr. jouissance .
Zizek explains this object a, referring to Alfred Hitchcock ’s McGuffin: “McGuffin is a clean and simple object a: a shortage, a reminder of the Real, which produces a symbolic movement of interpretation, a hole in the center of a symbolic order, the simple appearance of which is a secret that needs explanation, interpretation etc. ("Love your symptom as yourself.")
Object Hierarchy a
Speaking about the loss of object a, Lacan noted that "the variety of forms accepted by this object of loss should be related to how the subject perceives the desire of the Other." [6] The earliest form is "what is called the breast ... this breast in its function as an object, object a causes desire." [7]
Next comes the second form: the anal object. We know that it is phenomenally given as a present, present in alarm. [8] The third form appears' at the level of sexual intercourse ... where the Freudian teachings and the tradition that supported him put a gaping chasm of castration for us. [9]
Lacan also defined the function of object a at the level of scopic attraction. Its essence is realized to the extent that the subject is, to a greater extent than anywhere else, held captive to the desire function. [ten]
Analyst and Object A
In order for the transfer to take place, the analyst must include the object of the analysand: "Psychoanalysts ... are such only as objects - objects of the subject performing the analysis." [11] For Lacan: “Being in the role of Theresa is not enough for the analyst. It is necessary, in addition, that he - as Apollinaire once said - have boobs. ” [12] In other words, the psychoanalyst must represent or enclose the absent object of desire.
Notes
- ↑ Alan Sheridan, Translator's Note, Jacques Lacan, The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-analysis (London 1994) p. 282
- ↑ Jacques-Alain Miller, Microscopia, in Jacques Lacan, Television (London 1990) p. xxxi
- ↑ Miller, "Microscopia" p. xxxi
- ↑ Miller, “Microscopia” p. xxxi
- ↑ Mary Jacobus, The Poetics of Psychoanalysis (Oxford 2005) p. 26n
- ↑ Jacques Lacan, Television (London 1990) p. 85
- ↑ Jacques Lacan, “The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis” (London 1994) p. 168
- ↑ Jacques Lacan, “Introduction to the Workshop of the Name-Father”, in the “television” section p. 85
- ↑ Lacan, “Introduction” p. 85-6
- ↑ Lacan, “Introduction” p. 86
- ↑ Lacan, “Television” p. four
- ↑ "Jacques Lacan," The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis "(London, 1994) p. 270