Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Note On The Child

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Note on the Child

Jacques Lacan

It seems that if we look at the failure of utopian communities, Lacan’s


position evokes the following dimension.

The function of residue that the conjugal family supports (and thereby
maintains) in the evolution of societies highlights the irreducibility of a
form of transmission – one that is of a different order than that of life
considered as the satisfaction of needs – but one that has a subjective
constitution, implying a relationship to a desire that is not anonymous.

The functions of the mother and the father are to be judged on the basis of
such a requirement. For the mother: insofar as her care bears the mark of
an individualized interest, even if via her own lacks. For the father:
insofar as his name is the vector of the embodiment of the Law in desire.

In the conception of it developed by Jacques Lacan, the child’s symptom


is located in the position of a response to what is symptomatic in the
family structure.

In this context, a symptom, which is the fundamental fact of analytic


experience, can be defined as representing the truth.

A symptom may represent the truth of the family couple. This is the most
complex case, but it is also the one that is most open to our intervention.

The articulation is much more limited when the symptom that comes to
dominate arises from the subjectivity of the mother. In this case the child
is directly concerned as the correlate of a fantasy.

If the gap between the identification with the ego ideal and the piece
taken from the mother’s desire lacks the mediation that is normally
provided by the father’s function, it leaves the child susceptible to every
kind of fantasmatic capture. He becomes the motherʼs “object” and his
sole function is to reveal the truth of this object.

The child realizes the presence of what Jacques Lacan designates as objet
a in fantasy.

By substituting himself for this object, the child saturates the mode of
lack whereby (the motherʼs) desire is particularized, whatever her
specific structure - neurotic, perverse or psychotic.
He alienates in himself all possible access by the mother to her own truth
through giving it body, existence and even the requirement to be
protected.

The somatic symptom gives the greatest possible guarantee to this


misrecognition [méconnaissance]; it is the inexhaustible resource that,
depending on the case, may testify to guilt, serve as a fetish, or incarnate
a primordial refusal.

In short, in the dyadic relationship with the mother the child gives her, in
immediately accessible form, what the masculine subject lacks: the very
object of his existence appearing in the real. As a consequence, the child
is open to greater subornation in fantasy in a manner commensurate with
what is real in what he presents.

Translated by Russell Grigg

Published in The Lacanian Review, no. 4 (2018), 13-14.

Originally published as ‘Deux notes sur l’enfant’, Ornicar? no. 37


(1986), 13-14.

Also published as ‘Note sur l’enfant’, Autres écrits, 373-75.

You might also like