discourse that enables something new….a newness that would come from one location of psychoanalysis speaking to other locations,
not for legitimization, not for recognition… but to spawn something radically different.
Lacan speaks clearly about the extractions that are necessary within both the sperm and the egg to generate something new. There is
never any exact replication of either. It is as if holding onto the “Other/famous” will delay what any speaking subject has to lose in order
to speak, and have elements of speech extracted… which easily conjures up catastrophic fantasies of excommunication. It is a primary
narcissicism that can’t bare producing difference. Yet, this risk within speech that speaks from a definitive location is necessary to
enable a community to thrive and mark its own location through a greater articulation of phallic jouissance. I suppose we are speaking
of castration. A castration that if complete---fosters a freeing up of speech that carves out a place within a larger psychoanalytic
exchange.
Yet, the trotting in of the “famous names” --to legitimize location by proxy does not always serve the psychoanalytic work. Because
psychoanalytic “stars” have the effect of spellbinding. Muting. Stopping the discourse that is emanating from the lower ranks. The
vulnerability to the “famed Other” promotes a powerful erotic transferential impasse that threatens psychoanalysis. Promoting and
staging “Idealized transferences” prevents the very complex speech that is fostered through the invitation of negative transference,
rebellion, incitement and acceptance of a different place within the oedipal constellation. A place that requires competition, challenge,
replacement. New speech can only be ensured through incubation, encouragement and an interest in those that are just coming into
their own. Those that might surpass us, and threaten places already established within the “community”. The bridge of the maternal
law—the direction of the mother’s gaze that is able to access entrance into the phallic economy is structured upon the direction of
desire—the break in her gaze turns desire towards the Other. Opening up a larger world to the child who would be lost in her gaze if
she didn’t look towards the Other-residing beyond the child’s gaze. It is this beyond that opens up a route for secondary narcissicism to
venture into speech production. To leave the safety of recognition, of the mirror, and the gratification of being seen. This is the desire
of the Other upon which desire is built. It appears that there is a problem with this bridging-- to the beyond of psychoanalysis. The
blank pages that wait for psychoanalysis to continue inscribing itself beyond what has already been written remain blank and are only
waiting for us. Beyond spectacle, beyond spectatorship, into production.
Gossip becomes a tempting site to channel whatever aggressive forces cannot be unleashed within the staged setting of
psychoanalysis. Gossip becomes the erotic impasse that resists psychoanalytic discourse. It is the dirt, the minutiae, the giving over to
the transgressions of the other that lock one into mindless numb shock. “Did you hear about so and so…..she’s violated or has been
violated…exclusion…excommunication….loss of power…promotion… Really…..? Oh, and guess what I talked to so and so. He
appointed so and so to the head of a committee.”
Erotic speech takes the form of gossip whispered in the hallways of classes, written on the bathroom stalls of institutions. Hidden
speech offers that animal release/defense/resistance that challenges the psychoanalytic discourse. Gossip stays whispered and
partitioned off and compartmentalized generating an inhibition of speech, regardless of the reified “theories” that are being taught.
Gossip is addictive. It’s archaic and primitive movement invites a certain paranoia, a certain censorship within the staged setting of
psychoanalysis. Speech is held hostage by primitive defenses that force one to “watch” what one says in order to avoid becoming
soiled and ruined in the eyes of the Other. We have witnessed the impact of rumors and innuendo on political aspirations. Gossip is
deadly.
Defenses in the midst of such turmoil then work to order and privilege speech by clear relationship to rank. A ranking gained through
institutional proximity, the closeness to those that are considered the “names”. Names that are made by moving carefully, by speaking
cautiously to obtain a name. The unconscious grows distant. Where does it dare speak?
Psychoanalytic discourse can promote a speaking not so hinged in by the superego—a speaking that can enable a more libidinally
charged production that demonstrates through written and spoken words what it purports to address. It is through the tenor and tone,
the writing of a psychoanalytic address that trumps gossip. Because when psychoanalytic discourse is riveting, it does stimulate, it does
transgress-- in its own way by calling attention to that which is reluctant to be spoken, moving that which is hidden into that which can be
observed, and this unveiling produces an incitement—the oedipal curtain is lifted again. And it is the repetition of this compelling lifting
of the consciousness to glimpse the unconscious that surpasses so many competing discourses. But why not lift within our own midst
and generate a language that lifts within our “location”. Why turn this lifting into a staged spectacle that invites gratification through
positioning oneself in the “scene” of psychoanalysis. Why not enable the psychoanalytic speech to resound within our own community
and location and listen to what it has to say? About us, our location, and our time.
The density of the charge of speech and where it lands within psychoanalytic training sites, speaks to where speech remains
impoverished---the places where speech is lackluster. The analytic discourse is wiley enough to travel alongside the fissures and
derailments that threaten any subject, cohorts, or cartel’s production from autoerotic tendencies that seek to reduce the intensity of
content that addresses the unconscious when followed.
Transmission occurs when the intense reverberations and effects of “reading” the unconscious through theories seeking to order it, are
handled in such a way that speech is not shutdown, but rather elicited in order to allow a discursive movement to occur that can link the
present to the past through new words. Psychoanalytic production depends on the depth, substance and capacity of words generated
from a precise location to continue the creative work of psychoanalysis into the future. The creative outbursts that tend to originate
within the intimate interactions within the cohort, the analysis, the supervision, and (with Lacan---the cartel) are the mainstay of
psychoanalytic production. Accent on “Intimate.”
It is obvious to me that the marginal spaces around the more formal training seminars and classrooms have incredible unconscious and
conscious influences in what is actually spoken in the classroom-- and those who can ferret out, and read the emotional power
dynamics outside the classroom often rise to the level of “managing” /controlling /manipulating speech—of psychoanalysis. An entire
career can be made out of obtaining “insider status.” But this really has nothing to do with psychoanalysis. This is achieving a position
within a bureaucratic discourse that distracts from psychoanalytic speech. An institution naturally is filled with competing discourses
and discourses that will ultimately threaten what it vows to preserve and protect for other generations. It is the job of psychoanalytic
settings to preserve transmission so that training, speaking, writing does not simply revolve around a bureaucratic exercise that
perpetuates recognition and upward mobility through proximity to big “names.”
The psychoanalytic work that can enable moving exchanges that invite and stimulate conversations in the classroom that then move
into the hallways, and the marginalized spaces are more likely to make it into publications and other psychoanalytic sites. It is the
relaxed places that tend to enable sorting through of problems at the level of the unconscious. It is the intensity of these conversations
sustained outside of the classroom that will determine which discourse prevails, and how those within our community will “mark” their
engagement with Other.
It is here within our very own location that something can percolate. It is here where our attention can be arrested to the point that we
can find our own intimate conversations paralleling the stimulation received by being in close proximity to a “name.” It is within the
personal, local, familiar places, that the unconscious can begin to filter through its own speech--the discomfort and tension that the
ordering through “rank and file” bureaucracy placates. By speaking to the discomfort and tensions that threaten speech, the
psychoanalytic voice is perhaps offered space and time--to find its place in the world beyond the gaze, the gossip, and the spellbinding
of the psychoanalytic “stars.”
It is only by staying on point, through intimate transmission within our analytic sites that a psychoanalytic speech can be offered local
room, within our own community, to stretch out and extend to the international community making a mark that can only reside within----
from without. Where are our shooting stars?..... The voices within our own community whose speech has the capacity to travel beyond
their beginning point. It is our capacity to hear those who speak to “our modern times” as one student so aptly puts it…..in the midst of
now…that will give rise to the voices within our San Francisco Psychoanalytic Community. After all, “names” are made by those who
have something to say.
Sincerely,
Rebecca
Email Rebecca Bauknight, Ph.D.
______________________________________________________
To read Rebecca's July 7, 2007 Newsletter click HERE
not for legitimization, not for recognition… but to spawn something radically different.
Lacan speaks clearly about the extractions that are necessary within both the sperm and the egg to generate something new. There is
never any exact replication of either. It is as if holding onto the “Other/famous” will delay what any speaking subject has to lose in order
to speak, and have elements of speech extracted… which easily conjures up catastrophic fantasies of excommunication. It is a primary
narcissicism that can’t bare producing difference. Yet, this risk within speech that speaks from a definitive location is necessary to
enable a community to thrive and mark its own location through a greater articulation of phallic jouissance. I suppose we are speaking
of castration. A castration that if complete---fosters a freeing up of speech that carves out a place within a larger psychoanalytic
exchange.
Yet, the trotting in of the “famous names” --to legitimize location by proxy does not always serve the psychoanalytic work. Because
psychoanalytic “stars” have the effect of spellbinding. Muting. Stopping the discourse that is emanating from the lower ranks. The
vulnerability to the “famed Other” promotes a powerful erotic transferential impasse that threatens psychoanalysis. Promoting and
staging “Idealized transferences” prevents the very complex speech that is fostered through the invitation of negative transference,
rebellion, incitement and acceptance of a different place within the oedipal constellation. A place that requires competition, challenge,
replacement. New speech can only be ensured through incubation, encouragement and an interest in those that are just coming into
their own. Those that might surpass us, and threaten places already established within the “community”. The bridge of the maternal
law—the direction of the mother’s gaze that is able to access entrance into the phallic economy is structured upon the direction of
desire—the break in her gaze turns desire towards the Other. Opening up a larger world to the child who would be lost in her gaze if
she didn’t look towards the Other-residing beyond the child’s gaze. It is this beyond that opens up a route for secondary narcissicism to
venture into speech production. To leave the safety of recognition, of the mirror, and the gratification of being seen. This is the desire
of the Other upon which desire is built. It appears that there is a problem with this bridging-- to the beyond of psychoanalysis. The
blank pages that wait for psychoanalysis to continue inscribing itself beyond what has already been written remain blank and are only
waiting for us. Beyond spectacle, beyond spectatorship, into production.
Gossip becomes a tempting site to channel whatever aggressive forces cannot be unleashed within the staged setting of
psychoanalysis. Gossip becomes the erotic impasse that resists psychoanalytic discourse. It is the dirt, the minutiae, the giving over to
the transgressions of the other that lock one into mindless numb shock. “Did you hear about so and so…..she’s violated or has been
violated…exclusion…excommunication….loss of power…promotion… Really…..? Oh, and guess what I talked to so and so. He
appointed so and so to the head of a committee.”
Erotic speech takes the form of gossip whispered in the hallways of classes, written on the bathroom stalls of institutions. Hidden
speech offers that animal release/defense/resistance that challenges the psychoanalytic discourse. Gossip stays whispered and
partitioned off and compartmentalized generating an inhibition of speech, regardless of the reified “theories” that are being taught.
Gossip is addictive. It’s archaic and primitive movement invites a certain paranoia, a certain censorship within the staged setting of
psychoanalysis. Speech is held hostage by primitive defenses that force one to “watch” what one says in order to avoid becoming
soiled and ruined in the eyes of the Other. We have witnessed the impact of rumors and innuendo on political aspirations. Gossip is
deadly.
Defenses in the midst of such turmoil then work to order and privilege speech by clear relationship to rank. A ranking gained through
institutional proximity, the closeness to those that are considered the “names”. Names that are made by moving carefully, by speaking
cautiously to obtain a name. The unconscious grows distant. Where does it dare speak?
Psychoanalytic discourse can promote a speaking not so hinged in by the superego—a speaking that can enable a more libidinally
charged production that demonstrates through written and spoken words what it purports to address. It is through the tenor and tone,
the writing of a psychoanalytic address that trumps gossip. Because when psychoanalytic discourse is riveting, it does stimulate, it does
transgress-- in its own way by calling attention to that which is reluctant to be spoken, moving that which is hidden into that which can be
observed, and this unveiling produces an incitement—the oedipal curtain is lifted again. And it is the repetition of this compelling lifting
of the consciousness to glimpse the unconscious that surpasses so many competing discourses. But why not lift within our own midst
and generate a language that lifts within our “location”. Why turn this lifting into a staged spectacle that invites gratification through
positioning oneself in the “scene” of psychoanalysis. Why not enable the psychoanalytic speech to resound within our own community
and location and listen to what it has to say? About us, our location, and our time.
The density of the charge of speech and where it lands within psychoanalytic training sites, speaks to where speech remains
impoverished---the places where speech is lackluster. The analytic discourse is wiley enough to travel alongside the fissures and
derailments that threaten any subject, cohorts, or cartel’s production from autoerotic tendencies that seek to reduce the intensity of
content that addresses the unconscious when followed.
Transmission occurs when the intense reverberations and effects of “reading” the unconscious through theories seeking to order it, are
handled in such a way that speech is not shutdown, but rather elicited in order to allow a discursive movement to occur that can link the
present to the past through new words. Psychoanalytic production depends on the depth, substance and capacity of words generated
from a precise location to continue the creative work of psychoanalysis into the future. The creative outbursts that tend to originate
within the intimate interactions within the cohort, the analysis, the supervision, and (with Lacan---the cartel) are the mainstay of
psychoanalytic production. Accent on “Intimate.”
It is obvious to me that the marginal spaces around the more formal training seminars and classrooms have incredible unconscious and
conscious influences in what is actually spoken in the classroom-- and those who can ferret out, and read the emotional power
dynamics outside the classroom often rise to the level of “managing” /controlling /manipulating speech—of psychoanalysis. An entire
career can be made out of obtaining “insider status.” But this really has nothing to do with psychoanalysis. This is achieving a position
within a bureaucratic discourse that distracts from psychoanalytic speech. An institution naturally is filled with competing discourses
and discourses that will ultimately threaten what it vows to preserve and protect for other generations. It is the job of psychoanalytic
settings to preserve transmission so that training, speaking, writing does not simply revolve around a bureaucratic exercise that
perpetuates recognition and upward mobility through proximity to big “names.”
The psychoanalytic work that can enable moving exchanges that invite and stimulate conversations in the classroom that then move
into the hallways, and the marginalized spaces are more likely to make it into publications and other psychoanalytic sites. It is the
relaxed places that tend to enable sorting through of problems at the level of the unconscious. It is the intensity of these conversations
sustained outside of the classroom that will determine which discourse prevails, and how those within our community will “mark” their
engagement with Other.
It is here within our very own location that something can percolate. It is here where our attention can be arrested to the point that we
can find our own intimate conversations paralleling the stimulation received by being in close proximity to a “name.” It is within the
personal, local, familiar places, that the unconscious can begin to filter through its own speech--the discomfort and tension that the
ordering through “rank and file” bureaucracy placates. By speaking to the discomfort and tensions that threaten speech, the
psychoanalytic voice is perhaps offered space and time--to find its place in the world beyond the gaze, the gossip, and the spellbinding
of the psychoanalytic “stars.”
It is only by staying on point, through intimate transmission within our analytic sites that a psychoanalytic speech can be offered local
room, within our own community, to stretch out and extend to the international community making a mark that can only reside within----
from without. Where are our shooting stars?..... The voices within our own community whose speech has the capacity to travel beyond
their beginning point. It is our capacity to hear those who speak to “our modern times” as one student so aptly puts it…..in the midst of
now…that will give rise to the voices within our San Francisco Psychoanalytic Community. After all, “names” are made by those who
have something to say.
Sincerely,
Rebecca
Email Rebecca Bauknight, Ph.D.
______________________________________________________
To read Rebecca's July 7, 2007 Newsletter click HERE
| Rebecca's Newsletter January 2, 2009 |
| Lutecium a non-school of Lacanian/Freudian Psychoanalysis San Francisco, California |
| Staying on En Pointe; A Psychoanalytic Community in rupture/rapture |
Dear Colleagues,
I have been fascinated by the politics that have mounted this season. The gossip is as good as it gets. It
is admittedly addictive. And through this oral release, multitudes of blogging about the pundits have been
generated. I was stunned to see our very own --Michael Lerner’s “eutopic” reading of psychoanalytic
view of the campaign on the front page of the Huffington Post, the only nationally/international accessible
psychoanalytic view that has been blogged in popular press regarding the current political climate. I have
also been fascinated to read our profession weigh in on the dangers of sociopathy and warnings
regarding particular candidates. We might wonder how this sort of pathology so easily moved into our
financial institutions within the last decade? Which leads us to wonder about our own psychoanalytic
institutions and our own vulnerability to the larger “deregulations” that trickle down from surrounding
institutions? Has there been a lack of caring for the “thought bank” that psychoanalytic institutes vow to
transmit to the “next generation”?
Is there an impoverishment of thought, a lack of support or concern regarding our current thinkers and
our potential psychoanalytic thinkers residing within our own community that parallels the nation’s deficit
budget? Lacan says there is no such thing as culture, perhaps no such thing as community. It is what we
take and do within our own time and our own location that enables us to appropriate culture/civilization
through our local perceptions-the social link. Through a subjectivity bound to be influenced by
geography—a place marked on a map. A place where we live, where we speak from. This community is a
community that only exists as long as there is something stirring with in vitro speech—something stirred
up within those that reside in San Francisco to address those outside of San Francisco through a local
I have been fascinated by the politics that have mounted this season. The gossip is as good as it gets. It
is admittedly addictive. And through this oral release, multitudes of blogging about the pundits have been
generated. I was stunned to see our very own --Michael Lerner’s “eutopic” reading of psychoanalytic
view of the campaign on the front page of the Huffington Post, the only nationally/international accessible
psychoanalytic view that has been blogged in popular press regarding the current political climate. I have
also been fascinated to read our profession weigh in on the dangers of sociopathy and warnings
regarding particular candidates. We might wonder how this sort of pathology so easily moved into our
financial institutions within the last decade? Which leads us to wonder about our own psychoanalytic
institutions and our own vulnerability to the larger “deregulations” that trickle down from surrounding
institutions? Has there been a lack of caring for the “thought bank” that psychoanalytic institutes vow to
transmit to the “next generation”?
Is there an impoverishment of thought, a lack of support or concern regarding our current thinkers and
our potential psychoanalytic thinkers residing within our own community that parallels the nation’s deficit
budget? Lacan says there is no such thing as culture, perhaps no such thing as community. It is what we
take and do within our own time and our own location that enables us to appropriate culture/civilization
through our local perceptions-the social link. Through a subjectivity bound to be influenced by
geography—a place marked on a map. A place where we live, where we speak from. This community is a
community that only exists as long as there is something stirring with in vitro speech—something stirred
up within those that reside in San Francisco to address those outside of San Francisco through a local
