relation of speech between the subject and the Other, the big Other, insofar as it is
another subject.”^27 In other words, here inversion means that the subject can receive
the message of the Other only as an ego founded on an alienation in the imaginary
counterpart.
Having said this, I believe that inversion does not necessarily have to be nega-
tive. According to Lacan, there is a positiveform of inversion, one that has to be re-
lated to the specific context of the psychoanalytic setting. In parallel, I would claim
that positive inversion should be associated with the formula of the message in the
precise wording which Lacan gives to it: “The sender receives his ownmessage back
from the receiver in an inverted form.” Positive inversion applies to an intrasubjective
interpretation of this formula.
But let us proceed with order. Let us be more precise as to what occurs in the
psychoanalytic setting. Why can inversion also be considered as positive? Briefly,
the analyst enables the analysand to receive his own unconscious repressed mes-
sage (his desire) back by suspending the “wall of language.” This can be achieved
by the analyst’s refraining from occupying the position of the imaginary counter-
part. The analyst sends back to the analysand the latter’s own (initially empty)
message in an inverted, full form—that is, he makes the analysand assume his full
speech. One could thus suggest that, for Lacan, successful analysis manages to
invert imaginary inversion: the analysand’s own message as empty, imaginary, inverted
speech is itself inverted by the analyst who places himself in the position of the
Other. It is important, however, to underline how the (analyzed) subject will still
receive his own message with his ego. This is the only way in which the subject, as
an individuated subject, can receive any message whatsoever. Despite this, analysis
achieves the temporary suspension of the alienating mediation provided by the
imaginary counterpart. The subjectqua ego receives his message directly from the
Other, to be understood as the subject’s own unconscious embodied and refracted
back by the analyst due to the suspension of the latter’s own ego during analytic
treatment.
To recapitulate: I have attempted to show how the fact that, according to Lacan,
all messages are invariably received by the subject in an inverted form has to be in-
terpreted in two different ways:( 1 ) at an intersubjectivelevel, the message ofthe Other is always received in an inverted
form. This corresponds to negative inversion;
( 2 ) at an intrasubjectivelevel, thanks to psychoanalytic treatment, the sender is able
to receive back, to assume, his ownunconscious message. This corresponds to posi-
tive inversion.the unconscious structured like a language