33. Lacan still talks about the aim of analysis in terms of “reintegration and harmony, I could
even say of reconciliation” as late as 1957 (see Écrits: A Selection,p. 171 ).
34. “The fact that the subject relives, comes to remember, in the intuitive sense of the word,
the formative events of his existence, is not in itself very important. What matters is what
he reconstructs of it.... When all is said and done it is less a matter of remembering than
of rewriting history” (The Seminar. Book I,pp.13‒14; emphasis added; see also Écrits: A Selection,
pp.51‒56).
35. Evans, An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis,p.19 2(emphasis added).
36. See The Seminar. Book III,p. 113.
37. The old refrain according to which, in psychosis, the unconscious becomes conscious is
certainly a simplistic way to express Lacan’s theory of psychosis as expounded in Semi-
nar III, but it is not completely incorrect....
38. To be frank, Lacan seems to be aware of this problem when, as early as 1955 , he admits
that there is an “essential”—that is, structural and unsurpassable—level of resistance
against recollecting repressed signifiers (even after undergoing psychoanalytic treat-
ment) (see The Seminar. Book II,p. 321 ). But his continual call for a complete emancipation
of full speech points in the opposite direction. The reader should also be reminded that
the very denomination “full speech” is almost completely absent from Lacan’s elabora-
tions of the 19 6 0s and 197 0s.
39 .The Seminar. Book III,p. 224 (my translation).
40. Ibid., p. 54 (emphases added).
41. Ibid., p. 36.
42. A. Lemaire, Jacques Lacan(London: Routledge, 197 9), p. 13. Lemaire’s outline of Saussure’s
linguistics is generally accurate. However, the author repeatedly confuses Lacan’s writing
of the sign (signifier over signified) with Saussure’s (signified over signifier).
43. I owe the outline of the following threefold Lacanian subversion of the Saussurian
notion of the sign to A. Di Ciaccia and M. Recalcati, Jacques Lacan. Un insegnamento sul sapere
dell’inconscio(Milan: Bruno Mondadori, 2000 ), pp.50‒51.
44 .The Seminar. Book III,p. 260.
45. However, the notion of the signified is not always clearly distinguished from that of
signification.
46 .The Seminar. Book III,p. 119.
47. See especially ibid., pp.114‒115.
48. See ibid., p. 263.
49 .Écrits: A Selection,p. 153 (my translation).
50 .The Seminar. Book III,p. 261.
51. M. Safouan, Lacaniana: Les séminaires de Jacques Lacan, 1953–1963(Paris: Fayard, 2001 ), p. 53.
52 .Le séminaire livre IV,p. 47.notes to pages 44–53