Search

In this paper, the author takes advantage of the findings of Lacanian psychoanalytic theory in order to re-evaluate the classic Freudian interpretation of perversion. According to it, sadism and masochism are not necessarily coupled but are two different ways of finding satisfaction, which are not mutually interchangeable. Even though they are both related to the same structure defined by what the author identifies as "le suspens" (i.e. suspense), a third element is needed in order for them to be satisfied. This third element is indicated by the expression "la suspension", which denotes someone (or something) being "between sexes". Using masochism as paradigmatic of perversion, the author demonstrates that being "in suspense" and being "in suspension" are two possible ways to differentiate between perversion and psychosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal on Humanistic Ideology is the property of International Journal on Humanistic Ideology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this study, the author attempts to show how some of Jacques Lacan’s hypotheses qualified as ‘untimely’, ‘not relevant’ to the period during which he gave his seminars, were in fact used to support what he referred to as the ‘psychoanalytical act’ and the ‘current’ concepts developed in the field of psychoanalysis. The author recalls the role that the encounter with psychosis played in Lacanian theory, in fact in the various domains of psychosis, and in the female perception of sexual pleasure, and going even further, in the ‘invention’ of object a, but always with reference to Freudian theory either to use it as a basis for an argument, or in an attempt to deal with these questions over and beyond Freudian concepts, but without excluding them. Jaspers’ calling into question as ‘mirage’ of the ‘relations of comprehension’ used during the period when he developed his hypothesis is, according to the author, on a similar level to this ‘invention’ of object a that Lacan qualified as being ‘completely apart from any question of meaning’. These concepts are used by the author to test the current relevance of Jacques Lacan’s theories to ‘ultra-modern’ subjects/objects, at odds with the Alter-ego, which constitute objects of the market, ‘‘these last looks and these giggly voices’’ and the rise of segregation and racism. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]