264. “The one is conceivable only from the existence and the consistency that the body has
insofar as it is a vase” (ibid., p. 18 ).
265 .Le séminaire livre XVII,p. 187. Here Lacan identifies “l’achose” with what he calls “l’insub-
stance,” and says that these two notions “change completely the meaning of our mate-
rialism.”
266. Ibid., p. 93.
267. See, for example ibid., pp.92‒95.
268. Ibid., p. 57. “‘Llanguage enjoys’” (lalangue jouit)(J.-C. Milner, For the Love of Language[Bas-
ingstoke: Macmillan, 199 0], p. 131 ).
269 .Le séminaire livre X,p. 96.
270 .The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, On Feminine Sexuality, The Limits of Love and Knowledge. Book XX, Encore,
1972–1973(New York: Norton, 1999 ), p. 74.
271. Graph 5. 4 represents a synthesis of the different versions of the Borromean knot pro-
posed by Lacan in Seminar XXII, “R.S.I.,” 1974‒1975, unpublished (see lessons of Jan-
uary 21 , 1975 and January 14 , 1975 ).
272. “The feminine ‘non-All’ does not mean that there is a mysterious part of woman out-
side the symbolic, but a simple absence of totalization”( S. Zˇizˇek, The Puppet and the Dwarf:
The Perverse Core of Christianity[Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003 ], p. 68 ).
273. See Le séminaire livre XXIII,p. 55.
274. Seminar XXIII, lesson of December 16 , 1975. This passage has been modified beyond
recognition in the Seuil version of Seminar XXIII. I rely here on the version provided
by the École Lacanienne de Psychanalyse.
275. In this way, it would be easy to think of Joy-cean jouissanceas a thorough reelaboration of
the jouissanceof the mystic which Seminar XX had already paired up with feminine jouis-
sance.It then also becomes clear why Lacan’s recurrent parallelism between Joyce and a
saint is far from being gratuitous (“Joyce-the-sinthome is homophonous with sanc-
tity”; J. Lacan, “Joyce le symptôme,” in Le séminaire livre XXIII,p. 162 ).
276. See, for example, The Seminar. Book XX,p. 5.
277 .Le séminaire livre XXIII,p. 64. Lacan also unequivocally states: “I would say that nature pres-
ents itself [se spécifie] as not being one. From this then follows the problem of which log-
ical procedure [we should adopt] in order to approach it” (ibid., p. 12 ).
278. “Joyce identifies himself with the individual” (“Joyce le symptôme,” p.16 8).
279. As for the strict relation between the sinthomeand a particular form of jouissance,Lacan
writes: “Joyce is in relation to joy,that is, jouissance,written in the llanguagethat is English;
this en-joycing, this jouissanceis the only thing one can get from the text. This is the
symptom” (ibid., p. 167 ).
280. Ibid., p.16 4.
281. Ibid.
282. Ibid.notes to pages 184–192